Is there Really only one True Religion?

[painted wolf]

From what I've seen there is no "one true" anything.... creator thrives on variety.

wa:do

 

[Sunstone]

There is no ideal type in nature. Why would there be one true religion?

 

[prometheuspan]

no, all religions from that angle can only be viewed as equally false.

There is the objective reality and there are the subjective descriptions of reality.

Any subjective description that wants to be "on top" is just another form of idolotry.

 

[prometheuspan]

yes, the one true religion is that all religions are composed of both true and false axioms.

we can rescue the true ones and frame the false ones.

other than that, its whatever i say it is. BRUHAHAHAHAHAH!

(lol)

 

[Smoke]

Well is there?

There are certainly religions that claim to be the One True Faith, but I wouldn't call their claims credible.

A religion may be "true" as a novel or a symphony or a painting may be "true," but I don't believe there's any religion that's true in the sense of being factual, much less in the sense of being the Authentic Way to the Ultimate Truth. There is no religion that is divinely revealed or that has solved the mystery of the Universe.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Greetings!

In the Baha'i view, ALL the great religions are legitimate and God-sent, and our scriptures state this!

So when Islam declares that Muhammad was the final prophet, it does so with authority?

 

[Zadok]

Perhaps some of you over decorate your thoughts with meaningless adjective to truth. Does truth exist? I am thinking that partial truth does not really constitute truth. As I have said already – I see no point in trying to learn mathematics from someone that does not believe mathematics can or does exist. Likewise, I see no reason to pursue religious truth from someone that does not believe it can or does exist.

Zadok

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Well Zadok it's just that I kind of view it like you. The ancients all strove for enlightenment. To me that's what Jesus taught as well, was just another path to enlightenment. So that being said, if various paths can lead one to enlightenment, are they untrue and only one of them true?

 

[Zadok]

Well Zadok it's just that I kind of view it like you. The ancients all strove for enlightenment. To me that's what Jesus taught as well, was just another path to enlightenment. So that being said, if various paths can lead one to enlightenment, are they untrue and only one of them true?

I am glad we find much to agree about. I am convinced that the path to enlightenment can only be one path but there may be many ways to wonder off into less enlightened trails and likewise means to return to the path of enlightenment.

This is my way of saying that un-enlightenment is divergent and enlightenment is convergent. I am convinced that enlightenment is always learning. Learning implies changing one’s point of view. If we only appreciate those that agree with us we will never learn. It is possible that we learn more from our enemies than from our friends. It is also possible that we can learn more from our failures than from our successes.

All this said there are some things I have observed on the internet:

1. One can get more attention being silly and foolish that by being intelligent and enlightened.
2. Most people say things to get attention.
3. Enlightenment requires discipline.
4. Most people do not enjoy the rigors (effort) of discipline
5. Most people abandon discipline because it requires effort before reward and most think they are an exception or that G-d will reward them regardless of their effort or lack of it.

And so it is that some can be enlightened and others wandering in foolishness sitting next to each other at a place of learning claiming to believe the same religion.

Zadok

 

[Renji]

Some Christian sects use this verse to prove that there is only one, "true" religion."There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God” (Ephesians 4:4,5,6) And they also say that this oneness of "faith" is found in their sect/ church. However, there are many sects (actually, almost all christian sects, i think) who claim this, which gives people much confusion.....

 

[zenzero]

Friend HM,

Is there Really only one True Religion?
Well is there?
__________________
"I am the one who comes from what is whole. I was granted from the things of my Father. For this reason I say, if one is whole, one will be filled with light, but if one is divided, one will be filled with darkness."- Jesus (Gospel of Thomas)

RELIGION itself means a PATH or a WAY.
And where does this PATH lead to?
Back to the *WHOLE*, from where this individual form came out from.
In that case though PATHS /WAYS are innumerable but the source remains one.

Thank you for that quote from Jesus as never knew that the word *WHOLE* has been used by him as personally use the same label at all times.

Love & rgds

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

In the Baha'i view, ALL the great religions are legitimate and God-sent, and our scriptures state this!

So when Islam declares that Muhammad was the final prophet, it does so with authority?

No, that's not the case for several reasons:

There are in fact several different explanations of the verse in the Qur’an saying Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets (a statement we Baha’is accept, please note!):

• First off, there is a sense in which EVERY Divine Messenger is the First and the Last, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, and the Seal!

• Next, there are multiple Arabic words that all translate into English as "prophet."

One of these is "nabi," which refers to a minor prophet such as Jeremiah or Amos.

Another is Ras'ul, which means a major, religion-founding Divine Messenger like Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, or Baha'u'llah (our Founder). (And yes, Muhammad was a major--not a minor--Prophet.)

But the word actually used in the Qur'an is "nabi," meaning Muhammad was the Seal of the minor prophets! This says nothing whatever about the great Divine Messengers.

• Muhammad is also the Seal in the sense that He was the last Messenger during the Prophetic Age, which began with Adam and ended with Him. The Bab then closed out that Age and opened the Age of Fulfillment, of which Baha'u'llah is the first major Messenger.

• Finally, there is a sense in which the word commonly translated as "seal" also means "ornament," so that this verse of the Qur'an may simply be saying that Muhammad is the Ornament of the prophets! (Nothing whatever about any sort of finish.)

Peace,

Bruce

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Greetings!





No, that's not the case for several reasons:


There are in fact several different explanations of the verse in the Qur’an saying Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets (a statement we Baha’is accept, please note!):

• First off, there is a sense in which EVERY Divine Messenger is the First and the Last, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, and the Seal!

• Next, there are multiple Arabic words that all translate into English as "prophet."

One of these is "nabi," which refers to a minor prophet such as Jeremiah or Amos.

Another is Ras'ul, which means a major, religion-founding Divine Messenger like Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, or Baha'u'llah (our Founder). (And yes, Muhammad was a major--not a minor--Prophet.)

But the word actually used in the Qur'an is "nabi," meaning Muhammad was the Seal of the minor prophets! This says nothing whatever about the great Divine Messengers.

• Muhammad is also the Seal in the sense that He was the last Messenger during the Prophetic Age, which began with Adam and ended with Him. The Bab then closed out that Age and opened the Age of Fulfillment, of which Baha'u'llah is the first major Messenger.

• Finally, there is a sense in which the word commonly translated as "seal" also means "ornament," so that this verse of the Qur'an may simply be saying that Muhammad is the Ornament of the prophets! (Nothing whatever about any sort of finish.)

Peace,

Bruce

Ah... so when you say that the religion is legitimate and God-sent, you really mean that it's only the religion's scriptures that were God-sent, but illegitimacy and human creations exist in the religion itself.

 

[Zadok]

The way of enlightenment is the way of truth and as Jesus said truth is the means of freedom. There is also pseudo enlightenment or shall I say anti-enlightenment. This is the way of deception which renders a person confined, limited or the classic term so often misused and misunderstood – damned.

In essence there really are only two ways and paths. One is a path of discipline and enlightenment, the other is a path or enticements and gratifications. There are many ways to become enraptured by the path of enticements and gratifications. Even the lure of personal gratification of eternal happiness or personal salvation will blind a person to truth and freedom.

Because of the difference between the two paths one of the first enlightenment is the warning associated with following the wrong path. But even the lure of enlightenment can become a path leading to bondage and limitations. I therefore seek wisdom not so much what is wrong and what should be avoided but what is enlightenment and worthy of sacrifice. There are many religions that have lists of sins and teachings critical of things. But for me I seek that path of discipline and sacrifice not for myself and my salvation but for all to have access to truth and freedom.

I do not pretend that my journey or search is complete or whole – I feel as though I am at the beginning rather than the end. I have found one way of discipline and enlightenment that is the way of G-d that embraces all enlightenment. That teaches and disciplines by covenant and sacrifice the enlightenment whereby one learns the compassion, mercy and even the forgiveness of G-d.

Zadok

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings redux!

Ah... so when you say that the religion is legitimate and God-sent, you really mean that it's only the religion's scriptures that were God-sent, but illegitimacy and human creations exist in the religion itself.

What I mean is that the religion AS ORIGINALLY REVEALED is legitimate and God-sent!

Unfortunately, humans have a tendency to tamper with religions and all too often alter or insert man-made corruptions into various teachings. Thus like it or not, no religion over a millenium old is exactly what it started out to be!

And indeed, IOV this is one of the reasons why God periodically sends a new Divine Messenger: in addition to providing the updated teachings and laws best suited to the circumstances of the Age, this can also renew religion and get it "back on the rails," so to speak.

Best regards,

Bruce

 

[Storm]

And indeed, IOV this is one of the reasons why God periodically sends a new Divine Messenger: in addition to providing the updated teachings and laws best suited to the circumstances of the Age, this can also renew religion and get it "back on the rails," so to speak.

Hmmm. Does this mean Martin Luther was a Divine Messenger?

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

Does this mean Martin Luther was a Divine Messenger?

No, though I'd stipulate he endeavored in his day to introduce reforms to correct perceived errors in theology and practice.

Messengers tend to introduce entirely new religions as well as producing a "book" of new religious teachings.

Regards,

Bruce

 

[tarasan]

Well is there?

I sincerely hope so if there isnt then someone somewhere is definately screwing with us.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What I mean is that the religion AS ORIGINALLY REVEALED is legitimate and God-sent!

But the version of Islam that includes things like the idea that Muhammad is the final prophet is the "great religion", not this other version of Islam that you think is the "legitimate" one but that nobody actually follows. I think your original statement was a bit disingenuous.

I sincerely hope so if there isnt then someone somewhere is definately screwing with us.

Even if there is one true religion, it's entirely possible that someone somewhere is screwing with you. In fact, if there really is one true religion, then this introduces the possibility that the one screwing with you is God himself.

 

[tarasan]

Even if there is one true religion, it's entirely possible that someone somewhere is screwing with you. In fact, if there really is one true religion, then this introduces the possibility that the one screwing with you is God himself.

ohhhh nice but i would say it was the other way round. if there was a god that accepted everyone and made up all these religions in which we could all recieve spiritual attunement then why make some exclusive? why say to some you can worship no God except me? people have died for thier religious beliefs of this God!

so in my eyes at least if God was like that he has definately been messing us about something shocking.