Muffled
Jesus in me
BTW The Bible says Image which suggest a schematic.
-
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 there such a thing as a universal religion?
- Thread starter Rival
- Start date
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Thanks for the links. I will take a look as soon as I have time.
WonderingWorrier
Active Member
Have you found the time to listen to Baha'u'llah yet?
With the search tool that I showed you it is simply a matter of minutes to listen to everything Baha'u'llah said in all his writings about the Biblical words: Bread, and Oil, and Wine.
So do you have the answers to the Biblical words? Tell me what you think.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, but I saved the link to your post in a document, so I would not forget to go back to it.
WonderingWorrier
Active Member
It's been a while. Have you had time to listen to Baha'u'llah yet? Did you find any answers?
I would like to hear if you have the answers to the Biblical words bread, oil, and wine.
You could also use these other Biblical words in your search for answers given by Baha'u'llah. As the Bible speaks of bread oil and wine, it also speaks of corn olives and grapes. And it also speaks of fields oliveyards and vineyards.
They are clearly connected to the original words because the bread is of the corn of the field, the oil is of the olive of the oliveyard, and the wine is of the grape of the vineyard.
Consider in the Bible (Hosea 2) there is a saying "and the Earth shall hear the corn, and the wine, and the oil". Which could be important because then it says "I will say to them which were not my people, thou are my people, and they shall say thou are my God".
So can you hear the corn (bread), the wine, and the oil? I would like to know what you think.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, I still have not had time but I still have the link to your post saved in a document so I will hopefully get to it eventually.
WonderingWorrier
Active Member
I'm interested to know what you can hear. I could show you an example of how I listen to Baha'u'llah. Like I notice Baha'u'llah has his wine with stream. But I also notice he has his wine with sea, and that's a problem.
The Biblical sea, river, and stream are as three different positions of height. The corn, the oil, and the wine are as the same three different positions of height.
As clearly stated in the Bible the corn is as the sand of the sea, and the river is as oil.
So Baha'u'llah speaking wine and stream together would have been acceptable. But it seems Baha'u'llah doesn't know where to put his word. Hence the problem.
Do you know what I mean? When I hear the word, I hear the position. So if I say words like corn, or oil, or wine can you understand what I am talking about? Their positions.
Every word of a messenger has its place, which is shared with other certain words of the same place.
Like other different Biblical words can also be heard as the same corn, oil, and wine. Even the spears, swords, and bows. Same places.
Humans are creatures of preparing the future. That's why we need a pension for our retirement, or else a government may force you to contribute to your own pension (i.e., forcing you to take your own responsibility). The question is rather, which future is to be prepared. The minimum is our life span. That begs the question what would happen after death, do we need to prepare such a future?
Science is basically lab based, it's out of human capability to go beyond death to look for the truth. If on the other hand, it's within human capability to search beyond death, we can conclude based on evidence. If it's beyond our capability then "no evidence" is not a result of searching but a certainty of lacking ability. We thus can't draw a conclusion that life won't go beyond death due to the lack of evidence (not to mention that this is a known fallacy).
The only way remained for humans to get to the truth beyond death is through a God who knows and is willing to tell. Primarily, a religion serves as a mass media for a God to tell a future to humans, as long as this God has a good reason not to show up publicly. The good reason for the God of Christianity not showing up is that both God and humans are bound by a Covenant which specifies that humans need faith to be saved. So if God shows up, men are no longer savable. The next is, if God has a good reason not to show up, He must choose the next most efficient and viable way to convey His truth, that is, to inform humans of a future which only God knows.
An analogy is, when the US government has a crucial message for its citizens, it should broadcast it through a US-facing mass media. By the same token, if a God has a crucial message for all mankind, it should broacast/preach it through a religion in a human-facing manner. The gospel (God's news) must be preached (i.e., broadcast) to all nations (making it human-facing). It's an explicit command from only one of the many gods.
idea
Question Everything
I think the only universal religion would have to have no hierarchy, no leader, no dogma, "by the people" not by any single leader - perhaps humanism comes closest?
Humanism has Christian roots.
idea
Question Everything
It is a philosophy from ancient Greece and Rome - Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Why do you think that?
Hierarchies aren't a human norm.
"Çatalhöyük, in what is now central Turkey. Inhabited by 5-8,000 people from around nine-and-a-half thousand years ago, excavations have revealed a society without gender inequality, but also without much inequality of any kind. ‘Aggressive egalitarianism’ they called it – no-one was allowed to lord it over anyone else, and all houses were of a similar size. They buried their dead underneath their houses, and incredibly, DNA testing found that bodies in ‘family’ graves were often not blood relatives. It seems that they shared their children around! Mum and dad weren’t necessarily biological parents. The ‘family’ was the entire community."
Ancient settlements show that commoning is ‘natural’ for humans, not selfishness and competition
Humans have been and are still very resourceful and imaginative when it comes to working out how to live together in peace, democracy and abundance. I believe that commons ideas can deliver those things.
www.resilience.org
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
But what does that have to do with a religion being universal?
Any universal religion (IF it were to exist) would be ultimately non-hierarchical, and egalitarian.
Edited: to add caveat
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I was asking why that would be the case.
Also how do you define 'universal religion?'
Maybe we have a different definition.
And I provided an example of why I would think that's the case. Our earliest societies were egalitarian. And we were egalitarian well before we were settled societies. It's just the Nature of things
I define universal as: Applying in a more or less general manner ie applying to a large proportion of people (up to and including the universe itself).
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Is there such a thing as a universal religion?
Science has its limitations/chains not fixed/put by the truthful Religion but by its mother/father aka the Scientific Method so it will never enter the realm ( ethical, moral and spiritual) that belongs to the truthful Religion, one must say, please, right?
The truthful Religion is already universal and serving the humanity excellently, so there in no need also, right?:
3:20
Surely, the true religion with Allah is Islam (complete submission). And those who were given the Book did not disagree but after knowledge had come to them, out of mutual envy. And whoso denies the Signs of Allah, then surely, Allah is quick at reckoning. | Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search
Regards
___________________
Original Arabic narration/text from Muhammad's time is below:-
3:20
اِنَّ الدِّیۡنَ عِنۡدَ اللّٰہِ الۡاِسۡلَامُ ۟ وَمَا اخۡتَلَفَ الَّذِیۡنَ اُوۡتُوا الۡکِتٰبَ اِلَّا مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِ مَا جَآءَہُمُ الۡعِلۡمُ بَغۡیًۢا بَیۡنَہُمۡ ؕ وَمَنۡ یَّکۡفُرۡ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ فَاِنَّ اللّٰہَ سَرِیۡعُ الۡحِسَابِ ﴿۲۰
It will never, ever happen, rest assured as:-
Science has its limitations/chains not fixed/put by the truthful Religion but by its mother/father aka the Scientific Method so it will never enter the realm ( ethical, moral and spiritual) that belongs to the truthful Religion, one must say, please, right?
The truthful Religion is already universal and serving the humanity excellently, so there in no need also, right?:
3:20
Surely, the true religion with Allah is Islam (complete submission). And those who were given the Book did not disagree but after knowledge had come to them, out of mutual envy. And whoso denies the Signs of Allah, then surely, Allah is quick at reckoning. | Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search
Regards
___________________
Original Arabic narration/text from Muhammad's time is below:-
3:20
اِنَّ الدِّیۡنَ عِنۡدَ اللّٰہِ الۡاِسۡلَامُ ۟ وَمَا اخۡتَلَفَ الَّذِیۡنَ اُوۡتُوا الۡکِتٰبَ اِلَّا مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِ مَا جَآءَہُمُ الۡعِلۡمُ بَغۡیًۢا بَیۡنَہُمۡ ؕ وَمَنۡ یَّکۡفُرۡ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ فَاِنَّ اللّٰہَ سَرِیۡعُ الۡحِسَابِ ﴿۲۰
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe Chritianity is the real Islam and Muslims worship legalism instead.
WonderingWorrier
Active Member
Ultimately? Or assumably? As a universal religion of different positions of judgements would be hierarchical. A universal religion would still be a universal religion even if you didn't like it. Liking it is not a criteria for universalism. A universal religion could be ultimately undeniable hierarchy.
So I don't understand your reasoning of why it would have to be non-hierarchical, and egalitarian.
But history shows one group fights another group to get what they have, while the other group fights to keep what they have.
But is it possible that all the houses being similar in size just means the same building method was repeatedly used, rather than meaning a public display of community equality? And could it be possible they just buried the people they ate under their houses?
Sometimes stated facts can be just assumptions connecting unconnected things.