Uumm
Why would Christians deliberately want to incorporate pagan beliefs into their faith?
They don't. It was forced conversion because the native Pagans in rome, some, didn't want to convert to christianity. Catholics killed them because of it. Then, as years went on, more pagan teachings became embedded in Catholicism (aka
Roman Catholic Church). Christianity is in part Roman. Even the Church was the one who decided which books are inspired not the apostles.
What is belittling about the phrase 'indigenous beliefs'?
I don't know. Never liked the term. Most Native Americans I've met want you to call them by their tribal name. Cherokee, Blackfoot, etc. I don't know them all, though.
The reformation came about for a many reasons. The Catholic church was not in good shape. It seems to be doing well these days, perhaps because the protestants are doing so badly.
Ha. Don't know. Protestants are out numbered.
What was the Roman Influence you feel the protestants took from the Catholics?
Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian still have Catholic teachings. Robes, Colors. Things that are not Jewish. Southern Baptist still "Stand up, sit down" like Catholics. White robes. Different mannerisms that stuck from Catholicism. Jehovah's Witness interestingly enough have rituals even though they say they don't. Every religion has culture. Protestants
branched off from Catholicism.
Wouldn't it make sense some of their practices are still Catholic even though they don't admit it?
But God can not steal from Himself
Don't think so. I just don't think you and especially loverofhumanity are understanding what it means to cross one's boundaries and respecting beliefs.
What do you mean? Can't see the connection.
There is nothing negative in separating the teachings from the sacraments. It is just identifying customs and traditions that are either not necessary or not universal. Is there harm in deconstructing traditions within religion?
You can't separate teachings from sacraments. That's deconstructing religion.
I don't understand your question. Please rephrase it, and I'll answer it the best I can.
If there are the same goals in all religions, wouldn't all the religions be the same as yours?
Why would we need Bahuallah? That's religion. Take out religion and focus on the goals.
I'm not entirely certain what you mean here either. Would you clarify?
Dogma/Doctrine doesn't cause harm. People cause harm in the name of their doctrine
Jesus taught not to put dogma/doctrine over the father. He didn't teach not to have dogma/doctrine all together. That's disregarding a lot of practices that are embedded in the teachings of the prophets, christ, and apostles.
There is no cultural misappropriation as both the Baha'i Faith and Christianity are revelations from God. Besides the term is usually used when a larger more powerful movement negatively affects the smaller one. The Baha'i faith is smaller in number than Christianity. The relative potency of each religion is a different story.
Can't figure out a better word. You are putting, I''ll say Muhammad, into your teachings when Islam does not support Bahai. I honestly don't see scripture supporting Bahai (as in Bahaullah's teachings) but that's me. The Hindu one shocked me to tell you honestly. But that's my isolated comment on that.
Some Jews hate Christians, in part because of the Christians have taken the Hebrew bible as their own. However it never belonged to the Jews. It was God's gift to us all.
Not all Bahai are Christian. I notice other Bahai who aren't christian feel that Bahaullah is promised from other religions, christianity included. Just saying that and practitioners correcting Bahai is cultural appropriation. You are appropriating teachings of another religion, saying that religion does X when it does Y, and saying because of Y (though it's X) you guys have the same foundation without mutual agreement between both parties.
Can't ask you to have mutual agreement with yourself. Though scripture doesn't support Bahuallah.
Unless you know and study the Bible by what standard can you determine that Baha'u'llah does not form part of the bible?
Because I know and studied the Bible. I'm not an academic and bad memory. I experienced the Bible. Experiencing is a lot better than studying, I tell you.
It is exactly the same relationship between Christianity and Judaism.
I don't understand. Bahai has the same relationship as these religions?
I don't believe there is anything wrong with an adherent from one Faith making statements about another. You do it, I do it. It is an inevitability of interfaith discussion. I don't have a problem with people of one faith studying another's faith and even to interpret. There is probably no interpretation that a Baha'i has made of another religion, that an adherent of the same faith has not made previously. There's is no obligation for an adherent of one Faith to accept one interpretation over another. Faith is personal after all. Where are all these rules coming from?
That's the heart of my disagreement. I don't care for religious to interpret other religions
and incorporating their interpretations into their own.
Foundations may not be universal but eventually faith needs to adapt to the modern world or be swept away.
I agree with the first part. Your friend Loverofhumanity doesn't quote agree
the latter is an opinion. Some like modern others like traditional. Why do they need to adapt? That's disrespecting other religious need for tradition.
Perhaps that is because you emphasise diversity over unity.
Yes.
I would argue we all need to be saved whether we know it or not.
lol of course. I won't fuss over that.
You ask me why I separate the sacraments from the teachings. Then you separate the founder from the message.
Huh?
I said that you put the founder
and the message into your religion as a Bahai. I mean, if you just had the founder, that's odd in itself but understandable. Since you put their message and their message contradict, you're kind of contradicting them both. They can't be separated.
Gotta give me an example.
