Makes sense.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How are these Great Beings explained?
- Thread starter loverofhumanity
- Start date
Makes sense.
siti
Well-Known Member
That's not what I said but the idea that Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha were uneducated and had access to no books on the subjects they wrote about is rubbish. You can find that out from sources in your own Bahai Library - I quoted and cited a few of them much earlier in this thread - I'm not going to recycle them here - you need to go back about 500 pages.
It is not a copy and paste document and it was there bottom page 16 where the discussion starts under a new heading; "The Judgement of Contemporary Religious Studies"
The Vatican Reference was 97 and referenced what the Encyclopedia Cattolica Listed the Babi Faith as "New Religion" and Baha'i Faith as "Religion Developed by Babism".
There is numerous works cited in this paper. From 96 to 112.
Regards Tony
Carlita, you continue to offer back, what is offered. Unity in Diversity. I understand why you keep offering a Unity in Diversity without God.
The common foundation which a Bahai talks about and that has the potential to unite us all, is God and His Messengers. No other effort made by man will succeed long term.
It would not be just of me to offer you any hope that man will find his way on his own, without considering the advice given of God. The more mankind considers God, the greater chance we have.
Regards Tony
Sorry, I do not have the download capacity to watch many Videos online and I do it very sparingly.
Regards Tony
The book that removes the Paradox is "The Kitáb-i-Íqán – The Book of Certitude".
The Kitáb-i-Íqán | Bahá’í Reference Library
Regards Tony
Well done as it is each person that must do this for their own selves. This Quote from Baha'u'llah might explain it better; "This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future."
It is taken from this passage and this passage shows that it is our free will that is required;
"..THE world’s equilibrium hath been upset through the vibrating influence of this most great, this new World Order. Mankind’s ordered life hath been revolutionized through the agency of this unique, this wondrous System—the like of which mortal eyes have never witnessed.
Immerse yourselves in the ocean of My words, that ye may unravel its secrets, and discover all the pearls of wisdom that lie hid in its depths. Take heed that ye do not vacillate in your determination to embrace the truth of this Cause—a Cause through which the potentialities of the might of God have been revealed, and His sovereignty established. With faces beaming with joy, hasten ye unto Him. This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures.
Say: This is the infallible Balance which the Hand of God is holding, in which all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth are weighed, and their fate determined, if ye be of them that believe and recognize this truth. Say: Through it the poor have been enriched, the learned enlightened, and the seekers enabled to ascend unto the presence of God. Beware, lest ye make it a cause of dissension amongst you. Be ye as firmly settled as the immovable mountain in the Cause of your Lord, the Mighty, the Loving."
Notice that Faith can never become a "cause of dissension amongst you". If it does, we are told by Abdul'Baha In one of His talks in Paris,
"..Religion should unite all hearts and cause wars and disputes to vanish from the face of the earth; it should give birth to spirituality, and bring light and life to every soul. If religion becomes a cause of dislike, hatred and division it would be better to be without it, and to withdraw from such a religion would be a truly religious act. For it is clear that the purpose of a remedy is to cure, but if the remedy only aggravates the complaint, it had better be left alone. Any religion which is not a cause of love and unity is no religion" - Remainder of quote - Bahá'í Reference Library - Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, Pages 158-160
That is a great goal. I hope for you, that you find this goal.
Regards Tony
Last edited:
This is worth exploring, there has never in the History of Religion been so much Revelation from God through a Manifestation, that streamed from the Pen of Baha'u'llah. If you get a chance, consider a read of this;
The Writings of Baha'u'llah
This is an opening extract;
"The mightiest proof of the greatness of Bahá'u'lláh and of the transcendental character of His divine mission lies in His Writings which streamed from His Pen like a torrential rain during a period of no less than forty years of uninterrupted revelation.
History clearly shows that Bahá'u'lláh never attended a school and that the tuition He received at home after the fashion of the nobility at that time was but rudimentary. In His Epistle to the Sháh of Persia, Bahá'u'lláh writes these challenging words:
"The learning current amongst men I studied not; their schools I entered not. Ask of the city wherein I dwelt, that thou mayest be well assured that I am not of them who speak falsely."
Consider also, Baha'u'llah did not have to pause and think about anything he Revealed, nor did he have to look up references. At one time scholars thought they had caught Him out with a wrong reference, in the end they found Baha'u'llah was right.
Regards Tony
I do recall that discussion sometime ago.
Here is the relevant link
The childhood of Bahá’u’lláh - The Life of Bahá'u'lláh
Whatever His education as part of His nobility, and His Own testimony, I would hope we can agree that he had a very modest level of education by today's standards.
Religious scholar or evangelical Christian fundamentalist or both!
John Ankerberg photos - Google Search:
John Ankerberg is an American Christian evangelist and TV presenter. He is an ordained Baptist minister and has written 91 books focusing on religious subjects. Wikipedia
I'm suprising your are resorting to referring to the Christian fundamentlaists.
I see he has written about Hinduism too.
The Facts on Hinduism in America, by John Ankerberg | Christian Book Reviews And Information | NewReleaseToday
I doubt if i'll be reading it, or recommending it to anyone, anytime soon.
Lets consider the mission statement MarketFaith missionaries
Mission Statement
MarketFaith Ministries provides Radical Disciple Training to help believers become more knowledgeable of and confident in their Christian faith.
It is our purpose to challenge, teach and encourage Christians to clearly understand and faithfully live out their Christian faith in the marketplace based on a worldview perspective. We work to accomplish this by producing materials and providing training opportunities to equip believers to be more effective in their Christian life and witness.
http://www.marketfaith.org/about-us/mission-statement/
Hmmm
A little biased perhaps?
Last edited:
I read the articles you asked me look at and commented. I don't know if you actually read what I posted by it wasn't all from Baha'i online.
If you want material from non-Baha'is there is excellent material included in the paper Tony posted:
The Bahá'í Faith
The Judgment of Contemporary Religious Studies
Whereas the Bahá'í religion is mainly referred to in older works as a sect, more recent literature demonstrates a clear shift of opinion in the direction of the Bahá'í Faith's self-understanding as an independent religion. In his 1949 book about the Bahá'ís, the Protestant theologian and religious scholar, Gerhard Rosenkranz, made it quite clear, despite his own personal critical distance, that the Bahá'í Faith "from a religious-historical point of view, was in its earliest stages a true prophetic movement," a "new religion" growing out of Islam. Rosenkranz stresses "that with Bahá'ísm we are confronted not with one of those modern pseudoreligions such as one encounters in the West, but a genuinely original religious movement."[96] In the Enciclopedia Cattolica, published by the Vatican, the Bábí religion is described by Alessandro Bausani under the keyword Babismo as "nuova religione," whereas the Bahá'í' religion is described as "religione sviluppatasi dal Babismo."[97] Rudolf
94. Resignation from the Church, which is impossible in Catholic Church law, first became possible through the secular State. Cf. Eichmann-Mörsdorf, Lehrbuch des Kirchenrechts aufgrund des Codex luris Canonici 1:183-84; 3:282-389; Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche 6:197-98, "Kirchenbann"; Münsterischer Kommentar zum Codex luris Canonici, Can. 1086 "Religionsverschiedenheit," no. 9.
95. Wach, Sociology of Religion 30.
96. Rosenkranz, Die Bahá'í l, 56.
97. Vol. 2: 640, 692.
Jockel[98] and Joachim Wach[99] come to the same conclusion. Even Kurt Hütten, former head of the Evangelische Zentralstelle für Weltanschauungsfragen [Protestant Centre for Ideological Concerns] in Stuttgart, treated the Bahá'í religion as a religion rather than as a sect in his book,[100] despite an otherwise sharply critical stance. The late Helmut von Glasenapp, renowned scientist, who in 1957 had already treated the Bahá'í' religion as a religion rather than a sect,[101] gave the following expert testimony on 3 October 1961:
It is true that the religion of the Bahá'ís has its roots in Islam, but it represents an independent form of worship, not an Islamic sect. Otherwise one would have to consider Christianity to be a Jewish sect on the grounds that it has grown out of Judaism.[102]
In his statement of 10 October 1961, Gerhard Rosenkranz elucidated his earlier stated position once again:
In the recent history of religion, Bahá'ísm stands as an example of how a movement can arise out of an existing world religion — in this case Islam — which not only raises the claim of itself being a world religion, but which in addition has all the religious-phenomenological characteristics of one. ...It was the singular achievement of Bahá'u'lláh that he succeeded in extracting the basic elements from the independent religion already present from the time of the Báb. He succeeded in freeing these elements from their connection with the Shi'ite Faith and built upon them the structure of the Bahá'í' religion, which makes the claim of being the fulfilment of, indeed of surpassing, all other religions. With this claim, through which it incorporates rather than rejects the other religions, Bahá'ísm cannot but be recognized as a self-sufficient religion.[103]
The Protestant theologian Friedrich Heiler also judged the Bahá'í Faith to be a religion:
...Bahá'u'lláh is the creator of a new religion. On the one hand, the relationship [of the Bahá'í Faith] to Islam is comparable to that of Islam to Judaism and Christianity. Categorizing the Bahá'í religion among the Islamic sects or sub-communities is as inappropriate as describing Islam as a Jewish or Christian sect. The very fact that Bahá'u'lláh, as bearer of the latest and most exalted revelation, assumes the station which in Islam is reserved for Muhammad, clarifies the independence of the Bahá'í' religion with respect to Islam....As an historical phenomenon, the Bahá'í religion therefore stands in equal status with the other universal religions: Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, Sikhism and Christianity.[104]
98. Jockel, Die Lehren der Religion-Religion 104.
99. Wach, Sociology of Religion 132.
100. Hütten, Seher, Grübler, Enthusiasten 317ff.
101. von Glasenapp, Die nicht-christlichen Religionen 60ff.
102. Published in Briefe-Briefe 14 (October 1963): 340.
103. Quoted from unpublished material.
104. Expert opinion of 4 Dec. 1961, published in Bahá'í-Briefe 29 (July 1967): 735.
This point of view has in the meantime found general acceptance. Rainer Flasche treats the Bahá'í religion as being based on a self-sufficient revelation [eigenständige Offenbarungsreligion][105] Ernst Dammann cites the interpretation of classical texts, the presence of a new Scripture, and the self-interpretation of a community [Selbstverständnis der Gemeinschaft] as criteria for recognition of the quality of originality of that religious community.[106] The Bahá'í religion fulfils these requirements. It possesses its own scripture, in the form of the revealed writings of Bahá'u'lláh; it interprets the holy writings, in particular those of the Old and New Testament and of the Qur'án, with respect to the coming of Bahá'u'lláh, seeing in Him the fulfilment of all the promises of earlier religions; and according to its theology, it is a new message of salvation from God to mankind.
Carsten Colpe calls the Bahá'í religion a "world religion."[107] Peter Meinhold treats the Bahá'í religion similarly.[108] In justifying the application of this term, he appeals to the following criteria: the religion in question must itself lay the claim of representing a world-encompassing mission;[109] the modern experience of world unity must be part of its self-concept;[110] it must pose itself the question as to what part it can play in the solution of the world's problems;[111] and finally, the religion must come to terms with the plurality of religions "and resolve this question in a manner which does justice to today's world view."[112]
All these criteria are met by the Bahá'í religion: The universalistic nature of the Bahá'í religion has already been discussed. The Bahá'í religion also provides an explanation for the plurality of religions. The annoying rivalry between competing claims to truth loses much of its poignancy when the various religions are understood, as Bahá'u'lláh teaches, to be manifestations of a progressive, cyclically recurring, and essentially indivisible divine revelation, in which the light of God is presented anew at each recurrence in a manner appropriate to the concrete cultural conditions of society at that time, to the state of spiritual development of that society, and to the powers of comprehension of its members: "Know of a certainty that in every Dispensation the light of Divine Revelation hath been vouchsafed unto men in direct proportion to their spiritual capacity."[113] "For every age required! a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared."[114] "There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive
105. Flasche, Die Religion der Einheit und Selbstverwirklichung der Menschheit 188ff.
106. Dammann, Grundriss der Religionsgeschichte 101.
107. Colpe, "Drängt die Religionsgeschichte nach einer Summe?" 221.
108. Meinhold, Die Religionen der Gegenwart 317-38.
109. Meinhold, 20.
110. Meinhold, 22ff.
111. Meinhold, 23.
112. Meinhold, 24.
Those are your words, not mine.
I think the basic problem is you are reading what others who are negative or hostile to the Baha'i Faith are saying, without investigating what Baha'u'llah has actually said. I could be wrong.
The problem with Syncretism as highlighted in one of the papers you sent me, was that its usually used prejoratively and there is duplicity of meanings. For example it could mean that Baha'u'llah wrote absolutely nothing and just took quotes and writings from other religions.
The paper I provided from Robert Stockman summarised this problem well:
In conclusion, the question whether the Bahá'í Faith is syncretic needs to be discussed at a more sophisticated level than it has been previously. If by "syncretism" a scholar means the Bahá'ís themselves believe their religion is a blending of the best from other religious traditions, this understanding of Bahá'í self-identity is incorrect. If by "syncretism" a scholar means the Bahá'í Faith is a simplistic mixture of ideas from other religions, with no core of truths that are its own, this is a hasty generalization, and often is partly based on inadequate explanations of the Bahá'í religion by its members. If by "syncretism" a scholar means the Bahá'í Faith is a complex product of original thought and original recombination of ideas already present in the world, then all religions are syncretisms and nothing new is being said about the Bahá'í Faith. If by "syncretism" a scholar — consciously or unconsciously — means the Bahá'í Faith is an epiphenomenon unworthy of study, then such a label impedes scholarship and interreligious dialogue.
He did finish positively by indicating that the use of the word syncretic could be an opportunity to examine the Baha'i Faith at a deeper level and to consider the nature of religion.
Hence use of the term "syncretism" highlights the need for deeper thought about the Bahá'í Faith in particular and the nature of religion in general.
That sounds like progress then...
its good too, that you agree the Baha'i Faith is an independent religion.
What this discussion has highlighted for me, is that there is still a great deal of misunderstanding about what the Baha'i Faith is. Initially the work was to view the Baha'i Faith as an independant religion rather than as a sect of Islam. A lot of progress has been made but I'm sure there will be a few papers floating round on the internet to argue the contrary.
Next we need to address this idea of fusion and/or syncretism. We need to be agreed on what the term means first. If it means that there are ideas and concepts common to the baha'i faith and other religions such as Islam and Christianity, then thats fine, but then most religions become syncretic.
I am neither ignorant of the roots of my faith, nor do I disdain religious scholarship. We wouldn't be having this discussion if that were true.
I am aware that you do not have a religious faith, but like us all you do have a world view with particular ideas and assumptions along with the rest of us. To imagine you are independant and unbiased because you are not a religious adherent seems niave IMHO.
You speak of recycled religious ideas as new revelation. It is simply recognising the universal truths in all religions, as well as better understanding what is unique to each faith and why. That's certainly a discussion worth having.
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Our offers, if you like, do no work. JW offers me things all the time. They offer me words, their magazine, and attending their hall sermons and conventions. I had two friends that actually discussed about religions in general. They asked me my faith. Regardless the intent, the different approach was refreshing. They even said they would research it to get back with me.
Finally. Thank you. Now do you understand what that means to me and why to me it would make sense?
I know. I'm trying to think of more questions to ask you since I know what you believe, read your sites, and quotes.
What is your definition of offering?
The best we can do online is to be interested in the topic and each other's viewpoints.
I cannot do anything with you to help solve for greater peace to end our world's problems. Since it starts with humanity, we can discuss what we could do if you like.
The better way for mankind to consider god (The Buddha's Way to enlightenment, Orin, Olumadare, or Christ himself) is to build actions towards this goal. Building actions is my point not the goal-that comes with mutual agreement.
What you're doing is offering goals and beliefs on crumpled paper, throwing them in a jar in the middle of the table, and hoping every thousand years we all will finally accept and greater peace will happen.
Offers are not actions.
Move beyond consideration. We have everything we need even just by reading Bahaullah's words online and talking to people at the their temple. It goes beyond that.
When I went to our buddhist temple the first time, after taking refuges, the monks invited me to spend the night to help them before ceremonies if it were my choice. They didn't offer words but suggest actions. That is what The Buddha taught: actions. The Lotus Sutra is the only sutta I know that offers dialogue. The Pali Canon so far I read offers actions.
Unless offering is an action, I totally disagree with that approach; try something different.
Since we are online, discussion about our actions and experiences (maybe with each other's religions) would be better than going back and forth with what Bahulluah taught since you've discussed it for months already.
Finally. Thank you. Now do you understand what that means to me and why to me it would make sense?
I know. I'm trying to think of more questions to ask you since I know what you believe, read your sites, and quotes.
What is your definition of offering?
The best we can do online is to be interested in the topic and each other's viewpoints.
I cannot do anything with you to help solve for greater peace to end our world's problems. Since it starts with humanity, we can discuss what we could do if you like.
The better way for mankind to consider god (The Buddha's Way to enlightenment, Orin, Olumadare, or Christ himself) is to build actions towards this goal. Building actions is my point not the goal-that comes with mutual agreement.
What you're doing is offering goals and beliefs on crumpled paper, throwing them in a jar in the middle of the table, and hoping every thousand years we all will finally accept and greater peace will happen.
Offers are not actions.
Move beyond consideration. We have everything we need even just by reading Bahaullah's words online and talking to people at the their temple. It goes beyond that.
When I went to our buddhist temple the first time, after taking refuges, the monks invited me to spend the night to help them before ceremonies if it were my choice. They didn't offer words but suggest actions. That is what The Buddha taught: actions. The Lotus Sutra is the only sutta I know that offers dialogue. The Pali Canon so far I read offers actions.
Unless offering is an action, I totally disagree with that approach; try something different.
Since we are online, discussion about our actions and experiences (maybe with each other's religions) would be better than going back and forth with what Bahulluah taught since you've discussed it for months already.
Last edited:
Carlita, I am not aware on many Baha'i's that will want to talk about their deeds in Faith. I for One will not offer this information.
It is what we do, not what we need to talk about, unless it is with someone that is working with us towards that goal, then the exchange of information is needed. To be true to the Call of Baha'u'llah a Baha'i Changes their life and at times gives up many worldly goals to pursue what Baha'u'llah has asked of us. This is a daily choice, to give to self or to give to others.
If you wish to know what is offered in your area, that you could join and participate in, then google will be your friend and give you a contact to the required information.
You have forgotten I am in Australia, at least in a post not far back you thought I was in America.
That brings us to your question;
Baha'u'llah gave the definition we are asked to become, to be one that truly offers;
"Be generous in prosperity, and thankful in adversity. Be worthy of the trust of thy neighbor, and look upon him with a bright and friendly face. Be a treasure to the poor, an admonisher to the rich, an answerer of the cry of the needy, a preserver of the sanctity of thy pledge. Be fair in thy judgment, and guarded in thy speech. Be unjust to no man, and show all meekness to all men. Be as a lamp unto them that walk in darkness, a joy to the sorrowful, a sea for the thirsty, a haven for the distressed, an upholder and defender of the victim of oppression. Let integrity and uprightness distinguish all thine acts. Be a home for the stranger, a balm to the suffering, a tower of strength for the fugitive. Be eyes to the blind, and a guiding light unto the feet of the erring. Be an ornament to the countenance of truth, a crown to the brow of fidelity, a pillar of the temple of righteousness, a breath of life to the body of mankind, an ensign of the hosts of justice, a luminary above the horizon of virtue, a dew to the soil of the human heart, an ark on the ocean of knowledge, a sun in the heaven of bounty, a gem on the diadem of wisdom, a shining light in the firmament of thy generation, a fruit upon the tree of humility."
(Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh) - Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Page 285
Working on this advice is our challenge.
I love your kind and compassionate heart.
Regards Tony
I don't really like the word hybrid anymore than syncretic or fusion. However if it is helpful to better understand the process of how a religion from one country establishes in another with a very different culture then thats fine. How do you think Buddhism would be practiced differently in the USA compared to countries in Asia? The Baha'i Faith emerged from Persia and then the Ottoman Empire and then established firm roots in the West. If there is one country that has championed the worldwide growth and development of the Baha'i Faith it is the USA. So somehow the Baha'i Faith went from Islamic roots to being right at home with Christian roots. Baha'is in your country and mine are completely comfortable conversing with Christians and those with no Faith, because thats what our countries have become. So when a Buddhist or Baha'i discusses spirituality with another we need to find a common language. Inevitably the language, concepts, symbols, and even faith practices of two cultural groups influence each other. This does not mean Baha'is become Hindus and Hindus become Baha'is, but it is like two souls coming together for the progress and betterment of each other.
Perhaps Catholicisms capacity to adapt to so many cultures and communities is testimony to the influence of Christ's message and sincere souls that took the time to converse as we are now.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Interesting. Jehovah Witness has interesting approaches as well. It's foreign to Dharmic followers cultural or converts (since I've been a Dharmic follower for years).
You have completely (and probably accidentally) misread what I said.
We-humanity-needs to discuss our actions together.
It is a collaboration and working towards the same goal not yours and not mine.
You talk about humanity a lot then say "we bahai". Who calls the shots? Humanity or Bahai. I'm confused.
If you're talking about humanity, the solutions come from humanity.
If you're talking about Bahaullah, the solutions come from Bahaullah.
If you want greater peace with humanity, humanity has to be involved. We won't accept an offer we have no part in contributing to.
I looked up Bahai temples (guess you did no believe me?) in our area. We have a lot, actually. I rather go to the Buddhist temples, though. If I knew Bahai in person, eating and chatting is fine. Doing community projects etc is cool. Going to your house of worship is defeating my point.
It starts with humanity not Bahai and not Bahaullah. Why would I go to your temple to discuss Bahai views when I rather talk about humanity's views?
You have completely (and probably accidentally) misread what I said.
We-humanity-needs to discuss our actions together.
It is a collaboration and working towards the same goal not yours and not mine.
You talk about humanity a lot then say "we bahai". Who calls the shots? Humanity or Bahai. I'm confused.
If you're talking about humanity, the solutions come from humanity.
If you're talking about Bahaullah, the solutions come from Bahaullah.
If you want greater peace with humanity, humanity has to be involved. We won't accept an offer we have no part in contributing to.
I looked up Bahai temples (guess you did no believe me?) in our area. We have a lot, actually. I rather go to the Buddhist temples, though. If I knew Bahai in person, eating and chatting is fine. Doing community projects etc is cool. Going to your house of worship is defeating my point.
It starts with humanity not Bahai and not Bahaullah. Why would I go to your temple to discuss Bahai views when I rather talk about humanity's views?
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I don't know. Catholics don't like the word hybrid too. To me, hybrid is okay. Synchronism reminds me of splish splashing religions rather than one emerging from another. Pagan (native) religions say Shinto-Japan or Hinduism-India mixing with Buddhist teachings don't both me. Each country has their own way of understanding enlightenment and how to get there. The only common denomination of practice is meditation. Of course the main beliefs are a must. Outside of that, Vietnamese Buddhism is mixed with a couple other faiths that Tibetan Buddhist, for example, does not have. Mahayana Buddhism, people have written whole books just on one school in one country in one area in that country.
This doesn't bother me. Catholics stealing and killing people for being Pagan bothers me. Cultural appropriation as a minority bothers me. Things that affect other people bothers me. Not the people themselves-I love my Catholic friends and I don't mind talking to Bahai who are willing to converse with me-I just don't like the way you guys go about solving humanity's problems.
Nothing wrong with that. I don't know about others but I can't think of another word other than synchronism. I'll think it while I get ready for work now.
The beauty and power of the teachings of Christ to be reflected in the lives of His followers, regardless of their denomination. Beyond that the Holy Bible.
Of course but it didn't matter.
They accepted the light of Jesus's teachings regardless of denomination, and I think their love for their new found faith transcended denominational concerns.
Christianity as a religion of God has universal teachings that have truth for any day.