• 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!

Is Christ superior to other Prophets/Founders

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
the truth is always better than what is not true.

Yes, but there seems to be some discrepancy between the faithful and the critical thinking community regarding what truth is and how it is decided. To the critical thinker, none of the religions can be called true if they're faith-based, since faith is not a path to truth.

eventually religions become muddied with man made ideas and become superstitious
I'd say they begin with those (my definition of religion requires a supernatural element). You probably think that your scriptures are neither manmade nor contain superstition, but to the skeptic, they are both. And you probably consider them truth. To the skeptic, they are full of unfalsifiable claims, which he does not call truth or knowledge.
 

Pete in Panama

Well-Known Member
Yes, but there seems to be some discrepancy between the faithful and the critical thinking community regarding what truth is and how it is decided. To the critical thinker, none of the religions can be called true if they're faith-based, since faith is not a path to truth.


I'd say they begin with those (my definition of religion requires a supernatural element). You probably think that your scriptures are neither manmade nor contain superstition, but to the skeptic, they are both. And you probably consider them truth. To the skeptic, they are full of unfalsifiable claims, which he does not call truth or knowledge.
What piqued my interest was your definition of religion --it's quite a contrast to what u get when u internet search key words define religion. Seems most folks don't see it your way --but I digress. Pse share what u mean by "supernatural". Are us refering that which cannot be observed by others? Something not physical? Please tell us what u mean.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
What piqued my interest was your definition of religion --it's quite a contrast to what u get when u internet search key words define religion. Seems most folks don't see it your way
The first two definitions I found for religion on the Internet were, "The belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods" and "the service and worship of God or the supernatural."

Pse share what u mean by "supernatural". Are us refering that which cannot be observed by others? Something not physical? Please tell us what u mean.
The usual, as in the definition above. According to believers, gods are supernatural, meaning that they're said to not be part of nature and to exist outside of it. This excludes what others call atheistic religions. I don't call them religions if there's no magic or gods in their worldview.
 

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”

Is Christ superior to other Prophets/Founders? Just keep saying yes until it goes in. I know I’m lucky to know before I pass on. To shake people by the shoulders would be unChristian but it is the truth.​

 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Yes, but there seems to be some discrepancy between the faithful and the critical thinking community regarding what truth is and how it is decided. To the critical thinker, none of the religions can be called true if they're faith-based, since faith is not a path to truth.


I'd say they begin with those (my definition of religion requires a supernatural element). You probably think that your scriptures are neither manmade nor contain superstition, but to the skeptic, they are both. And you probably consider them truth. To the skeptic, they are full of unfalsifiable claims, which he does not call truth or knowledge.
I think that a major difference between non-believers and believers is that believers consider the human being to be a spiritual being whereas the nonbeliever considers men to be just mind, reason, intellect, and a physical body, but does not acknowledge the spiritual part of man
 

Palehorse

Active Member
This question to me has been a huge cause of strife, disunity and even war. All the great Teachers/Prophets (Buddha, Muhammad, Krishna etc) in history taught spirituality. So in my mind They are all equal with regards to this purpose.

But many Christians , clinging to one or two verses, fanatically assert Christ’s superiority and that other religions are ‘Satan inspired’ and their founders - false prophets. Do you agree with this?

Krishna and Buddha are revered by their followers and were well before the time of Christ yet no mention is made in the Bible that Krishna or Buddha are from Satan. And as the Bible is claimed to be God’s Word and God is All Knowing, no mention either that Muhammad, the Bab or Baha’u’llah are false Prophets. So where is the Bible stating all these other religions are false according to Christians.

There are verses where Christ says He is the beginning and the end but so too did Krishna say the same thousands of years before Christ appeared. So why the insistence on Jesus being superior when if anything Jesus taught love above anything else. Why is supremacy so important to so many Christians?
This is an easy one....to answer your question....GOD....don't have a dick....GOD. has a *****....."do not use thy word GOD.....in vaine[out of context]........do not switch ur words from CHRIST....to jesus......
This question to me has been a huge cause of strife, disunity and even war. All the great Teachers/Prophets (Buddha, Muhammad, Krishna etc) in history taught spirituality. So in my mind They are all equal with regards to this purpose.

But many Christians , clinging to one or two verses, fanatically assert Christ’s superiority and that other religions are ‘Satan inspired’ and their founders - false prophets. Do you agree with this?

Krishna and Buddha are revered by their followers and were well before the time of Christ yet no mention is made in the Bible that Krishna or Buddha are from Satan. And as the Bible is claimed to be God’s Word and God is All Knowing, no mention either that Muhammad, the Bab or Baha’u’llah are false Prophets. So where is the Bible stating all these other religions are false according to Christians.

There are verses where Christ says He is the beginning and the end but so too did Krishna say the same thousands of years before Christ appeared. So why the insistence on Jesus being superior when if anything Jesus taught love above anything else. Why is supremacy so important to so many Christians?
Ummm...because the old testament repeats it's self...IDK....
 

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
God instructing it’s authors?
And what is the 'proof' that any of those authors were instructed by God rather than just writing from their human minds?

I could make the same argument for my religion. The history of the Baha'i Faith is too elaborate and intricate for the human mind to invent and so must be true.
It was written by 40 authors over 1400 years with the prophecy of events coming true. The Bible is a history book that also tells the future accurately. You will be able to see this future come true shortly. Your religion is derived from Islam. Satan was the angel that spoke to Muhammad. From what I’ve seen put up prophetically about your religion it is nonsense.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Yes, but there seems to be some discrepancy between the faithful and the critical thinking community regarding what truth is and how it is decided. To the critical thinker, none of the religions can be called true if they're faith-based, since faith is not a path to truth.

True, we do evaluate things differently but to say that a religion is not true since faith is not a path you would take to truth, is illogical.
Saying you would not believe a religion to be true because you do not use faith as a path to truth is more logical.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I think that a major difference between non-believers and believers is that believers consider the human being to be a spiritual being whereas the nonbeliever considers men to be just mind, reason, intellect, and a physical body, but does not acknowledge the spiritual part of man

You likely have a different understanding of what spiritual means than I do, which not tied to literal spirits such as souls, angels, demons, and gods like the believer conception. Spirituality is a state of mind and is contained in your list above under mind. My sense of the spiritual is like other intuitions I have - what is good, what is valuable, what is beautiful, and what is funny. The evidence of the senses is interpreted twice - first, what it signifies about our reality, and second, how we feel about it.

The spiritual experience is a pleasant one experienced as connection to one's world, of belonging, of things being good and right, and of reality being mysterious awesome, and of gratitude to be a participant. It occurs when contemplating a garden or the night sky, and understanding one's connection to each.

This is the opposite of a sense of alienation or disconnection, which is what the Abrahamic religions often teach. You are not of this world, one is told. You don't belong here, the world of base matter and flesh, where your soul is imprisoned and trying to escape to be somewhere else rather than this world which he is admonished to not be a part of. That's pretty much the opposite of my definition, and much closer to alienation from than connection to our world.

to say that a religion is not true since faith is not a path you would take to truth, is illogical.

Disagree. In logic, a non sequitur, which is a belief not supported by what preceded it, is considered fallacy (illogical). Faith generates nothing but non sequiturs - insufficiently supported claims to justify belief.

Is Christ superior to other Prophets/Founders? Just keep saying yes until it goes in.

That's a pretty good description of self-indoctrination.

it is the truth.

Just as I commented that the poster above must have a different definition of spirituality if he applies it to Abrahamic religious beliefs about spirits, you use a different definition of truth than I do. I don't call an idea correct unless it is demonstrably correct and can be used to anticipate outcomes in reality. For the believer, truth often means any comforting opinion which has been accepted uncritically.

the prophecy of events coming true

Biblical prophecy is very human. There is nothing there to suggest divine prescience. It's weak prophecy, lacking specificity, and often predicting the likely, sometimes after the fact, is generally not useful "foreknowledge," and sometimes leading to self-fulfillment.

Scientific prophecy, which outperforms biblical prophecy in specificity and usefulness, is also human, although unlike scripture, represents the vanguard of human thought. Biblical prophecy can't compete with that, yet it doesn't cause us to invoke gods.

The Bible is a history book

The Egyptian captivity and the exodus are contradicted by the archeology. It turns out that some of scripture refers to real people, places, and events, but you can't tell which from the words. You need empirical support for the claims to believe they were history, which means the scriptures aren't useful for learning history.
 

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
I don't call an idea correct unless it is demonstrably correct and can be used to anticipate outcomes in reality. For the believer, truth often means any comforting opinion which has been accepted uncritically.

Scientific prophecy, which outperforms biblical prophecy in specificity and usefulness, is also human, although unlike scripture, represents the vanguard of human thought. Biblical prophecy can't compete with that, yet it doesn't cause us to invoke gods.
It seems you have been indoctrinated with something other than the truth. You have nothing to go by to disprove prophecy and the existence of God. In other words you’re scratching around in the dark thinking you know reality which, having no facts, is self denial.

Regarding ”human thought”. There was an old north of England phrase/proverb commonly used in the middle of the last century which went: You know what thought did? He followed a muck cart and thought it was a wedding.
 

Pete in Panama

Well-Known Member
The first two definitions I found for religion on the Internet were, "The belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods" and "the service and worship of God or the supernatural."
Just did another search (to prove u wrong) and ended up w/ the same first two --and then there was the third than did NOT hinge on the word "supernatural". The reason my thinking is that the word supernatural doesn't fit is because if you do a search key words (list world religions) you end up w/ several that do NOT fixate on a supernatural being --Buddhism, Scientology, Taoism, etc. Demanding a supernatural will end up ruling out a log of the world's religions.

From what I can see this fuss about God or no god is a western fetish. The western belief includes a dichotomy between the physical/natural and other realities, and this is not a big eastern direction. Buddhist for example are not involved in the holy war that many deeply orthodox religious states have gone --including the former Soviet Union. The Buddhists live right, they pray, but their sacred texts simply don't mention "God".
The usual, as in the definition above. According to believers, gods are supernatural, meaning that they're said to not be part of nature and to exist outside of it. This excludes what others call atheistic religions. I don't call them religions if there's no magic or gods in their worldview.
Right, that's as you stated before. However the question I was hoping you'd answer was
...Pse share what u mean by "supernatural". Are us refering that which cannot be observed by others? Something not physical? Please tell us what u mean.
My thinking is that there's a lot I could learn in your beliefs.
 

Secret Chief

Vetted Member
Why start in the middle? Christ existed long before Buddha.

Christianity comes from Abraham of ancient Hebrews, which goes back to Melchizedek of the ancient Canaanites and the god they called Elohim /El which goes back to the ancient Sumerians and one of their gods they called Enlil / El.

Christians agree with Abraham is the Father or the Israelites and the beginning of the worship of who later became Yahweh. Christians agree with Melchizedek being the king and high priest of the most high God, that he had no beginning and no end. But Christians have a hard time accepting Melchizedek was a high priest and king of Salem a Canaanite City.

Christians have a hard time accepting that Abraham was from the city of Ur which was a city of ancient Sumeria.

Christians will not accept the ancient writings of the Sumerians concerning the gods - yet they are all the same people - Abraham, Sumerians, Canaanites, all lived in the same areas. And some of the gods written in the Bible as false gods are also written in the ancient literature of the Canaanites and Sumerians.


Christ is much, much older than any Buddha just according to ancient history.

Buddhism originated 2500 years ago

Hinduism originated 4,000 years ago

Hebrew scrolls written history over 4,000 years ago (which Jesus come from)

Sumerian writings of their gods 4,500 plus years ago. The Sumerian king/god list goes back over a hundred thousand years ago which is ignored.

Don't just start at Christianity go back to the beginning. Like Jesus said before Abraham was I Am _ like Thomas said to Jesus my Lord and my God just before Jesus ascended to the sky _ Jesus is all through the Old Testament.
I understand that from what limited archaeological evidence that there is, that Jesus and Gautama were broadly contemporaries of each other, at approximately 4-6 century BCE.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
It was written by 40 authors over 1400 years with the prophecy of events coming true. The Bible is a history book that also tells the future accurately.
And that future is now unfolding right before our faces.
You will be able to see this future come true shortly.
I do not have to wait and see it come true. We are living in the Age of Fulfillment, since all the prophecies for the return of Christ were fulfilled by Baha'u'llah, who came in the 19th century and ushered in the new age.
Your religion is derived from Islam. Satan was the angel that spoke to Muhammad. From what I’ve seen put up prophetically about your religion it is nonsense.
My religion grew out of Islam only in the sense that Baha'u'llah was a Muslim, just as Christianity grew out of Judaism since Jesus was a Jew.
However, my religion is not derived from Islam, it is derived from a Revelation from God.

From what I’ve seen put up prophetically about my religion, all the Bible prophecies for the return of Christ have been fulfilled.

Those prophecies and exactly how they were fulfilled are elucidated in this book: Thief in the Night by William Sears
 
Last edited:

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
How about any evidence outside of the Bible? What corroborating evidence do you have that others do not?
There isn’t any evidence on creation only supposition. The corroborating evidence I have is the level and quality of prophecy with a wealth of archaeology and extra biblical documents that conclusively support the Biblical timeline. Others have nothing remotely of this quality of evidence.
 

Apostle John

“Go ahead, look up Revelation 6”
And that future is now unfolding right before our faces.

I do not have to wait and see it come true. We are living in the Age of Fulfillment, since all the prophecies for the return of Christ were fulfilled by Baha'u'llah, who came in the 19th century and ushered in the new age.

My religion grew out of Islam only in the sense that Baha'u'llah was a Muslim, just as Christianity grew out of Judaism since Jesus was a Jew.
However, my religion is not derived from Islam, it is derived from a Revelation from God.

From what I’ve seen put up prophetically about my religion, all the Bible prophecies for the return of Christ have been fulfilled.

Those prophecies and exactly how they were fulfilled are elucidated in this book: Thief in the Night by William Sears
Your religion has a peculiar, fictional slant on Bible prophecy. Christ has not returned yet.
 

Pete in Panama

Well-Known Member
Your religion has a peculiar, fictional slant on Bible prophecy. Christ has not returned yet.
How about "you're not aware of any return of Christ? Or maybe, so far you haven't seen any evidence that you're willing to accept that Christ has returned? Then again, if you've decided to believe what you believe no matter what then we're done, but if you're willing we can talk about it.
 
Top