Is there Really only one True Religion?

[Zardoz]

Until some day when we know which one is true,
only agnosticism can be be certainly "not false".

Quoted for truth.

 

[joea]

True religion is without the FAITH.

 

[Danmac]

We seem to forget that religion is man made not God made:yes:

Man made, but spiritually influenced. You will find that out one day.

 

[BruceDLimber]

Here's what I mean: you put forward an inclusive message: something like "I think your religion is God-given, too!"

However, when we look closer, we see it's more like "My interpretation of what your religion is supposed to be is God-given, but what you actually think and believe is a distortion of the truth." IOW, your message is exclusionary, not inclusive.

On the contrary, I neither said nor meant such a thing--and our scriptures explicitly state otherwise!

Peace,

Bruce

 

[LyricalDutchess]

There's only one true God. There are many religions. But it comes down to relationship.

 

[Cosmos]

We Baha'is believe that there is only one true religion of God and that all the plurality of religions are merely varying aspects of the same divine revelation. A corollary of Baha'i theology is our teaching of "progressive revelation". I would absolutely agree with sister LyricalDutchess on the principle of relationship with the Creator as the essential feature in every divinely revealed religion. As a matter of criticism... I'd like to correct Joea on faith, particularly in Buddhist thought, which according to the Buddha, faith (saddha) is an important element of the Buddhist Faith itself!

Christ and the Buddha both spoke of a Kingdom to come and They described this more vividly than any other Prophet in any other account. All of the Prophets of God alluded to a kingdom (i.e. government) to come that would bring Peace, Justice, and Harmony to the planet.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

On the contrary, I neither said nor meant such a thing--and our scriptures explicitly state otherwise!

It seems to me that you've left yourself with a contradiction. You cite a number of religions as God-given, but these religions all pretty much portray themselves as the one and only religion of God. If you want to reconcile all of them into some sort of cohesive whole, then you can't help but declare these other religions to be wrong or distortions to some degree.

Reading your posts in this thread, I see a strong parallel between your position and the Mormon idea of the "Great Apostasy". The main difference I see is that Mormons generally don't pretend that they aren't declaring these other "apostate" denominations to be in error.

I don't know what your scriptures say on the subject, but I do recognize that there's a logical problem when you declare something both right and wrong at the same time.

 

[BruceDLimber]

I don't know what your scriptures say on the subject....

Heres a great new concept for you: Try ASKING!!

Answers are easily available, even on your own; and I'll be more than happy to provide you web addresses if you'd like them.

I quote the Baha'i scriptures:

"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you."

—(The Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, p. 114;
also Gleanings, CXI, pp. 217-8)

I'm well aware that many (not all) religions state they're the only way (in some wording or other); indeed, I have online a list of these "only way" statements if you'd like to see them!

But IOV each is indeed The Way for the duration of its Age, and is then replaced by another religion with newer teachings ideally suited to THAT Age! So in fact, they all form a consistent and harmonious pattern.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Heres a great new concept for you: Try ASKING!!

Answers are easily available, even on your own; and I'll be more than happy to provide you web addresses if you'd like them.

I would ask if I cared what Baha'i scriptures have to say on the subject. I don't.

My point was just that you presented something that, fundamentally, is a logical contradiction, and adding your scriptures to the discussion wouldn't make it any less of a contradiction.

I quote the Baha'i scriptures:

"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you."

—(The Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, p. 114;
also Gleanings, CXI, pp. 217-8)

I'm well aware that many (not all) religions state they're the only way (in some wording or other); indeed, I have online a list of these "only way" statements if you'd like to see them!

But IOV each is indeed The Way for the duration of its Age, and is then replaced by another religion with newer teachings ideally suited to THAT Age! So in fact, they all form a consistent and harmonious pattern.

See... this is exactly what I was talking about: using terms like "vain imaginings" and "sowers of dissention" to describe other people's religions doesn't exactly encourage harmony. Same with your claim that other religions were appropriate for some other age... implying that they're now obsolete, having been "replaced". It's just another version of the "our religion is the one true faith" line.

 

[painted wolf]

Exactly... When I disagree on a point with Baha'i (for example the nature of the soul) my religions view is automatically discarded as "vain imaginings".... after all it's not what Baha'i teaches... when I point this out I become one of the "sowers of dissention". (sic)

My faith is valid, so long as it agrees with Baha'i.

wa:do

 

[Duck]

Well is there?

Sure there is only one true religion...for each person. YOUR religion is true for YOU. The guy sitting beside you during mass/blot/prayer/meditation/sumbel/sabbat/(insert your rites nomenclature here) hearing the exact same words has HIS religion which is true for HIM (and might be entirely different than yours). MY religion is true for ME.

The problem comes when YOU think that YOUR religion is not only the one true religion for YOU but also for ME, and then you try and pass laws or what not to force me to follow your religion and its rules.

 

[Willowmina]

Man made, but spiritually influenced. You will find that out one day.

Danmac...please do tell ....what is you take on spirituality?

 

[DeitySlayer]

No true religion. They all contradict each other. For example, the Eucharist cannot be literal flesh and blood in Catholic Ireland but metaphorically representative in England. There can only be one objective standard. Sure, religion can be right 'for you', but you cannot claim that the same religion is a valid way of explaining the mechanisms of the world.

 

[tarasan]

No true religion. They all contradict each other. For example, the Eucharist cannot be literal flesh and blood in Catholic Ireland but metaphorically representative in England. There can only be one objective standard. Sure, religion can be right 'for you', but you cannot claim that the same religion is a valid way of explaining the mechanisms of the world.

well you could make the claim so long as you said the others were false.

 

[painted wolf]

Trouble no one about their religion;
respect others in their view and demand that they respect yours.
~Chief Tecumseh~

wa:do

 

[Just_me_Mike]

wa:do

Isn't the word demand, out of character here? How can respect and demand co-exist? Isn't being respected by demand a mask for something other than respect?

 

[Walkntune]

No true religion. They all contradict each other. For example, the Eucharist cannot be literal flesh and blood in Catholic Ireland but metaphorically representative in England. There can only be one objective standard. Sure, religion can be right 'for you', but you cannot claim that the same religion is a valid way of explaining the mechanisms of the world.

No, but they are a valid way of touching and sensing the creative force behind the mechanisms of the world instinctively and intuitively through which we gain wisdom.Sure they contradict each other but many also share common traits. Only through our own interpretations do the conflict exist.The fact that a lot of religions share common traits is evidence for me that what we sense may be interpreted differently intellectually(or how we rationalise our intuition), but intuitively there is something out here!

 

[painted wolf]

Isn't the word demand, out of character here? How can respect and demand co-exist? Isn't being respected by demand a mask for something other than respect?

i think of it as more of a necessity. We may respect your right to believe as you see fit, but we won't allow you to use that as an excuse to seek the destruction or debasement of another.

I suppose it makes more sense if you know the history behind the quote.

wa:do

 

[DeitySlayer]

No, but they are a valid way of touching and sensing the creative force behind the mechanisms of the world instinctively and intuitively through which we gain wisdom.

I realize that religion can be a positive force in the world, but the multitude of religions and the multitude of excellent people who span these religions demonstrates that the good is coming from a pyschological and emotional source inherent in all (peaceful) religions, rather than demonstrating the truth of what the religion is claiming, e.g. Jesus rose from the dead. They're just stories to illustrate an underlying message of peace, unity and brotherhood.

 

[Storm]

No true religion. They all contradict each other. For example, the Eucharist cannot be literal flesh and blood in Catholic Ireland but metaphorically representative in England. There can only be one objective standard. Sure, religion can be right 'for you', but you cannot claim that the same religion is a valid way of explaining the mechanisms of the world.

Non sequitur. The fact that they contradict one another does not exclude the possibility that one is true.