Archie00000
Member
They can't tell where their imagination ends and reality begins.
-
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!
Religions found their origins on fear of the unknown?
- Thread starter haribol
- Start date
They can't tell where their imagination ends and reality begins.
BruceDLimber
Well-Known Member
Only in your not-so-humble opinion.
Further, my religion accepts ALL the great religions as legitimate and God-sent!
No need whatever to be "special."
Peace,
Bruce
Great is a subjective POV. Also, it is your pluralistic view that is the greatest downfall. If all paths lead to god it makes yours much less important. So which is it: is your religion important and right, or do all paths lead to god?
horizon_mj1
Well-Known Member
No matter what spiritual path you choose, Truth and Fact cannot and will not possibly (no logically) be altered
This much debated issue never takes into account the words of those who first had the idea or concept of gods. Theories are based on assumptions in spite of the fact that there are archaic texts almost 5,000 years old which deal exclusively with gods and with what people believed about their gods.
Well, there are no ancient peoples that thought in this way about nature. Nature was connected to religion by philosophers and theologians who have nothing to do with the origins of religion because both philosophers and theologians borrowed the idea of gods/God from mythology.
I quite agree that it is fascinating to discuss the origins of religion, but in order for the discussion to be productive it should be based on some evidence and not on philosophical theories.
To start with, Ill point out that most of the ancient peoples attribute the making of mankind to the gods and not to the nature and that although the creation of the universe is also attributed to the gods, that is not a popular idea. Theologians extended anthropogony (the making of humans after theogony the origin and descent of the gods) to include cosmogony (the making of the universe). In other words, they were informed by oral traditions that the gods created humans and they preached that the gods created the universe too.
To arrive at the core of the myth and know what information oral tradition was originally conveying, the additions of philosophers and theologians have to be discarded. This task is not easy but it is feasible, especially for cultures which recorded their traditions in the antiquity.
If everything leads to god, why would one religion be more important that the other? Pluralism takes the meaning out of following a specific religion, as it makes doing so unimportant. If a person were every truly pluralist, they would not call themselves one specific religion, at least not logically.
I hope you are not expecting me to actually debate you anymore. Disagreeing with what I say does not make my logic invalid, falsely believing you are enlightened cannot automatically make what you say right, and redefining words is not an ok way of debating. I am finished with you.
No matter what spiritual path you choose, Truth and Fact cannot and will not possibly (no logically) be altered
I know that haha. That is my point. If there is truth, you cannot change what it is no matter what you think or do. People can lie, redefine, manipulate all they want. But nothing changes what is true.
horizon_mj1
Well-Known Member
I take it you dislike or do not understand science? Energy altars, it does not die; as far as UFOs IMO you would once again not have a true concept of what it is you are seeking; there are billions of galaxies, the one in which we occupy being the Milky Way; within our galaxies we live in our Solar System on a tiny planet called Earth; it is not statistically even probable not to accept there are other intelligent beings within the Universe (this is not a reputable physicist that would argue this by the way); point being intelligent life exists in our Universe aside from Humanity, we have not been introduced quite yet
I take it you dislike or do not understand science? Energy altars, it does not die; as far as UFOs IMO you would once again not have a true concept of what it is you are seeking; there are billions of galaxies, the one in which we occupy being the Milky Way; within our galaxies we live in our Solar System on a tiny planet called Earth; it is not statistically even probable not to accept there are other intelligent beings within the Universe (this is not a reputable physicist that would argue this by the way); point being intelligent life exists in our Universe aside from Humanity, we have not been introduced quite yet
I like you
horizon_mj1
Well-Known Member
Exactly, think how you want, manipulate all you want, but it is what it is no matter how hard you think you try and that you have won:angel2:
The problem is none of us fully know Truth, otherwise we would not be here. I doubt an enlightened (generic term here) being would hardly even bother arguing on a religious forum haha. However, the search for such truth is rendered meaningless when one says "everyone is right", is it not? The all paths lead to god thing does not make any logical sense. Even the major religions have extreme contradictions from each other, ones that does not allow both to be completely true. These contradictions are pluralism's greatest problem.
Archie00000
Member
Actually Christians can't have it but one way:
John 14
6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
A Christian could make inclusivism pass even with that, but not pluralism.
horizon_mj1
Well-Known Member
Maybe seeking Truth is the reason for existence
Few are right, rarely everyone is and yes quite meaningless if believing "everyone is right".
What people seek in Religion can have pluralisms and why should it not? As far as being completely true, no, pertaining to an intricacy part of Truth, absolutely Hyes:yes::angel2:
horizon_mj1
Well-Known Member
Really!? What am I if I believe Christ and Muhammad were correct in their core teachings?
You have to look at the big picture. From one little piece of information it cannot be seen if you are inclusivistic or what. There are infinity possibilities of what you can be while believing those things. However, if salvation is only through Christ, a Christian can be inclusivistic by saying all Christians of all denominations will be saved, but non Christians will not reach salvation.
horizon_mj1
Well-Known Member
Maybe the "only" is the acceptance of the what and why of the things quoted in the Christian Bible by Christ. May I ask you a personal question: If you meet someone for the first time do you judge them immediately by a part of society in which they may belong or do you maybe see what the person is like as an individual? Personally I see the person for who they are, why would any other relationship be much different rather it is pertaining to God/Buddha/Allah etc.?
BruceDLimber
Well-Known Member
All the great religions do (and were right as originally revealed).
My religion is no more important than any other; its only distinction is that it is the most recent and therefore has the most current social teachings. (This, too, will someday change.)
Peace,
Bruce