Should the oneness of humanity be taught in all schools worldwide

[ppp]

I agree with both of you. There is no way to rule the existence of a god in or out. The critical thinker understands that that means to remain agnostic on the matter and not guess either way. So how shall he life his life - with religion or without it?

Now substitute a vampire for a god and the superstitions surrounding them (garlic, stakes through the heart, can become bats, are nocturnal, sleep in coffins in the daytime) for religion. Since we can't rule them in or out, how shall we live? Shall we hang garlic on our doors? We have no reason apart from not being able to find a vampire to believe they don't exist. Is that enough? No, as your answer affirms: "There is no reason to conclude otherwise," since we have no test or observation or algorithm that can do that. So, vampires remain a logical possibility. Should that matter to us?

In case you can't tell, I'm an agnostic avampirist, meaning that I answer no to the question of whether I believe in vampires, but don't claim to know that they do or don't exist. And I treat the matter of gods in the same way.

While I agree with you , we are not quite talking about the same thing. You are talking about the conclusions about the actual existence of a god/vampire. Whereas, I am saying that even if there were a god evidenced today, as @TransmutingSoul claims, I would still have no reason to conclude that he knew or was capable of knowing about it. This, of course, is not special to @TransmutingSoul, but is the case with all of the supernatural-style claims that have been presented to me to date.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

vanishing dim odds.

Agreed. I have no real doubt about vampires as in the psychological sense of feeling uncertain, as if I might actually encounter one someday. This is philosophical doubt, which has to be understood, since it is not felt.

But I find it valuable to write about it in this way. First, it's wrong to say that vampires don't exist rather than that it is highly unlikely, the difference being that one must take a leap of faith, which is never justified however tiny, and one has made an existential claim and assumed a burden of proof.

While I agree with you , we are not quite talking about the same thing. You are talking about the conclusions about the actual existence of a god/vampire. Whereas, I am saying that even if there were a god evidenced today, as @TransmutingSoul claims, I would still have no reason to conclude that he knew or was capable of knowing about it.

I'm not sure what the distinction between our positions is. Your comment was, "There is no reason to conclude that you know, or are capable of knowing that there is a god to give anything." Why wouldn't TransmutingSoul be able to draw conclusions about an actual god if one existed and he had evidence of its existence? I'm assuming that he has no such evidence and that that is likely because none exists. He'll likely say that he has such evidence, but what the believer generally has as I understand it is a compelling intuition, not empirical knowledge of a god as they claim.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I'm assuming that he has no such evidence and that that is likely because none exists. He'll likely say that he has such evidence, but what the believer generally has as I understand it is a compelling intuition, not empirical knowledge of a god as they claim.

I see it is incorrect to conclude there is no evidence.

The better path is to determine if God exists, what evidence is provided by God for us to consider. That also opens the path to many questions we seek answers for, such as, "Why are we here?

I have found God does provide evidence and that evidence is the Messengers. Their person and their life are the proof that they are more than Human and their Message is proof of innate knowledge, a knowledge given to us relative to our given capacity.

The issue we have, is one of the most fundamental virtues required to embrace God, is humility, it is the realisation that we are created as servants, created to know and love God. This is a difficult choice in a very materialistic world.

I am sure you would agree, that some of our best memories come from letting go of self to assist in preserving our planet, being kind to animals and helping other humans.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You seem happy to go with just saying things.

It appears you like judging people, I am more than willing to help if you need anything, and I will also not ask for any reward.

Regards Tony

 

[Audie]

It appears you like judging people, I am more than willing to help if you need anything, and I will also not ask for any reward.

Regards Tony

Maybe you're happy, maybe you're sad.
Maybe you're just a little bit mad.

Who knows or cares?

All we see is what you present to the public.

What we see is a person who just says things.

That being the so often demonstrated case I judge
that you are lacking any capacity to " help" me
with anything.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I see it is incorrect to conclude there is no evidence.

The evidence believers offer for gods does not support belief in gods. That evidence includes prophecy, the world itself, and some medieval arguments that have been rebutted.

I have found God does provide evidence and that evidence is the Messengers. Their person and their life are the proof that they are more than Human and their Message is proof of innate knowledge, a knowledge given to us relative to our given capacity.

I find the words and lives of all prophets and messengers to be mundane, not evidence of divinity. These people say and do the kinds of things that people everywhere say and do continually.

The issue we have, is one of the most fundamental virtues required to embrace God, is humility

That's not an issue here unless by being humble you mean putting aside critical thought, which is likely what you do mean, as in skepticism about gods being arrogance or blasphemy or rebellion.

it is the realisation that we are created as servants, created to know and love God. This is a difficult choice in a very materialistic world.

It would be an arbitrary choice made for no good reason. The world has much to offer. I have tasted of as much of it as I could - its museums, restaurants, concerts, and its ports of call. You probably disapprove. I'm glad that I chose to participate in the world. I was not created to know or love an idea.

And I wince at the use of the word servant in the hands of the religious.

I am sure you would agree, that some of our best memories come from letting go of self to assist in preserving our planet, being kind to animals and helping other humans.

I agree that making the lives of others better is a noble ambition. I'm not sure why you tell me such things, but I suspect you think I need to hear them. It's not just memories that benefit from being a good neighbor. It benefits everyday life today. Man benefits psychologically from making a constructive difference to the lives of others.

Is that what you mean by being a servant? If so, I'd change that to a friend. Be a friend, not a servant.

 

[Audie]

The evidence believers offer for gods does not support belief in gods. That evidence includes prophecy, the world itself, and some medieval arguments that have been rebutted.

I find the words and lives of all prophets and messengers to be mundane, not evidence of divinity. These people say and do the kinds of things that people everywhere say and do continually.

That's not an issue here unless by being humble you mean putting aside critical thought, which is likely what you do mean, as in skepticism about gods being arrogance or blasphemy or rebellion.

It would be an arbitrary choice made for no good reason. The world has much to offer. I have tasted of as much of it as I could - its museums, restaurants, concerts, and its ports of call. You probably disapprove. I'm glad that I chose to participate in the world. I was not created to know or love an idea.

And I wince at the use of the word servant in the hands of the religious.

I agree that making the lives of others better is a noble ambition. I'm not sure why you tell me such things, but I suspect you think I need to hear them. It's not just memories that benefit from being a good neighbor. It benefits everyday life today. Man benefits psychologically from making a constructive difference to the lives of others.

Is that what you mean by being a servant? If so, I'd change that to a friend. Be a friend, not a servant.

Re words of the alleged prophets, those who
self identify as being prophets of god-


IF one found they produced soaring prose,
powerful profound complex majestic writings
such as might come from a "god", that would be
pretty interesting.

Here and there the bible touches on it, but most is
dull as ditchwater.

Joseph Smith, though, and this " bahai" guy
are just painful to attempt to read. 4th rate.
Calling it "Mundane" is to compliment it.

If evidence it is, it's sure not supporting of the
" god inspired" side.

 

[ppp]

I'm not sure what the distinction between our positions is. Your comment was, "There is no reason to conclude that you know, or are capable of knowing that there is a god to give anything." Why wouldn't TransmutingSoul be able to draw conclusions about an actual god if one existed and he had evidence of its existence? I'm assuming that he has no such evidence and that that is likely because none exists. He'll likely say that he has such evidence, but what the believer generally has as I understand it is a compelling intuition, not empirical knowledge of a god as they claim.

You are speaking to an evaluation of reality and your ability to assess an existential proposition. Your process above is, do *I* have the ability to assess the truth or the falsity of Proposition X.

I am speaking to an evaluation as to whether the person, @TransmutingSoul or otherwise, demonstrate the capacity to evaluate their own claim. I do not know if there are living microbes beneath the ice of Europa. I don't have the tools to know or to even have an informed opinion on the matter. But I am capable of recognizing when some guy down at my corner bar does not demonstrate the tools to know either. Even if he affirms said microbes with bombastic certitude.

And if next Wednesday, said microbes were discovered, I would still be unconvinced that *he* knew. Or if I had agreed with him that *I* knew.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You are speaking to an evaluation of reality and your ability to assess an existential proposition. Your process above is, do *I* have the ability to assess the truth or the falsity of Proposition X.

I am speaking to an evaluation as to whether the person, @TransmutingSoul or otherwise, demonstrate the capacity to evaluate their own claim. I do not know if there are living microbes beneath the ice of Europa. I don't have the tools to know or to even have an informed opinion on the matter. But I am capable of recognizing when some guy down at my corner bar does not demonstrate the tools to know either. Even if he affirms said microbes with bombastic certitude.

And if next Wednesday, said microbes were discovered, I would still be unconvinced that *he* knew. Or if I had agreed with him that *I* knew.

The problem is what reality is.
Now as a global skeptic I don't know what reality is as such. I don't have to as there are already people who can't agree on what reality is or what truth is.
So if you claim as such that you know in the general sense what reality is, I wiil just answer that I don't know and it doesn't seem that it is need to be in what reality is.

 

[CG Didymus]

I have found God does provide evidence and that evidence is the Messengers.

Baha'is make this claim, but who are these "messengers" or "manifestations" And what is a "manifestation"?

The Bahá’í Faith refers to what are commonly called Prophets as Manifestations of God, or simply Manifestations who are directly linked with the concept of Progressive revelation. Not all the individuals who would be called prophets in other religions are known as Manifestations of God, some are called lesser prophets, who receive their revelations from the Manifestations of God.​

​

In expressing God's intent, these Manifestations are seen to establish religion in the world. Thus they are seen as an intermediary between God and humanity.​

​

The Manifestations of God are not seen as an incarnation of God, but they are also not seen as an ordinary mortal.​

​

In essence, the Manifestations of God are seen as Divine Educators, who are raised up by God with the purpose of uplifting mankind and expressing His will. In expressing God's intent, these Manifestations are seen to establish religion in the world and each one brings a book, and reveals teachings and laws according to the time and place which they appear.​

​

Bahá’u’lláh referred to several historical figures as Manifestations. They include Adam, Noah, Zoroaster, Krishna, Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad. The Báb, as well as Himself, were included in this definition. Thus religious history is interpreted as a series of dispensations, where each Manifestation brings a somewhat broader and more advanced revelation, suited for the time and place in which it was expressed.​

​

"Is the Divine Manifestation, God? Yes, and yet not in Essence. A Divine Manifestation is as a mirror reflecting the light of the Sun. The light is the same and yet the mirror is not the Sun.​

​

Yes, for Baha'is, your prophets, the Bab and Baha'u'llah, fit these descriptions very well. But do all these people that the Baha'i Faith call "manifestations" fit that description?

I don't think so. What "book" and what religion did Adam bring? How about Noah? Or even Abraham? Were they perfectly polished "mirrors" reflecting God? No, the stories in the Bible show them to be very much ordinary people with several faults.

None brought a book or started a religion. Rather, they were characters in a book, the Bible. And the Baha'i Faith does not even believe that the stories about them were literally true. Yet, Baha'is people they were literally true? And that's part of your "evidence"

Then the problem with Krishna. The claim is that he was an incarnation of one of the many Hindu Gods, and that he taught about reincarnation. Baha'is don't believe any of that. Plus, Krishna was only one of several "incarnations" of the God, Vishnu. Why don't the Baha'is mention them?

I think it's because the Baha'is are being selective on who they put on that list. Did Baha'u'llah ever mention Krishna? I don't think so. It wasn't until later that Krishna got added to the list. But Krishna isn't followed and believed in by other sects of Hinduism. Who founded those other sects of Hinduism? Who wrote those Scriptures? Scriptures that pre-dated Krishna. And again, Krishna is a character in one of the Hindu Scriptures. Do Baha'is believe those Scriptures are true?

Anyway, it's a fine theory. If believed in, it can unite all people from all religions. But are these teachings and beliefs of the Baha'i Faith true?

For Baha'is, yes. But it's only because Baha'is ignore or find ways to explain away the contradictions in their claims. Which, instead of supporting their evidence, kind of discredits it. But yeah, yeah, it's all for a good cause... The cause of God.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Humanity currently is plagued with so many prejudices. We see some as racial, national and religious causing never ending wars. It seems that treaties and pacts cannot stem the tide of global conflicts and humanity seems lost as to how to solve this age old dilemma and finally establish lasting peace. But since there is no temporary solution what if there is a permanent one? However a slow fix not a quick one. There is I believe a way - through education or rather reeducation.

Let’s take religious prejudice as an example as it is the most powerful force in our world. Let me at the outset state that I believe that all the major religions are true and were revealed progressively to meet the spiritual and social needs of people at the time they were revealed. They all teach virtues and the golden rule. But over time religious leaders seeking power and control have desynchronised the religions which are all part of one unfolding process and turned them into opposing factions. “This is the changeless faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future” (Baha’u’llah) But now as a result of indoctrination, religionists reject the subsequent Teacher leading to a desynchronisation of the unfolding process of progressive revelation and evolutionary nature of religion and prejudices against the new faith.

However, now in this modern age most can investigate truth for themselves unlike past times when there was a need for clergy due to illiteracy and lack of literature, and verify that all religions are from the same source and are connected to each other not separate entities and equal, thus ending centuries of misinformation leading to prejudice, hatreds and wars.

This huge step requires courage. For us to step out of the comfort zone that only our religion is true. That all are sinners or infidels and that only our way leads to salvation. Instead, to be replaced with the mature notion that all of us belong to one human family and are of the same human DNA and that all these divisions were due to our immaturity. Otherwise it’s far better to do away with religion completely if it only causes bloodshed and war, division and prejudice. Isn’t this what is needed today to put aside our differences and put our common humanity first and teach the oneness and equality of all humankind in all the schools of the world? Would not this pave the way for a generation of well wishers of all? Although theoretically we could try and get rid of religion, eliminating racial and national prejudices would require reeducation towards oneness and equality.

So I believe all schools in the world from infancy should have included in their course the subject of the oneness and equality of all humanity and that we all belong to one human family there being NO superior race, religion, nationality or group of people. Thank you. If you agree please try and teach this concept in your school.

So you want your idea of god taught worldwide. No thanks.

 

[Eddi]

Humanity currently is plagued with so many prejudices. We see some as racial, national and religious causing never ending wars. It seems that treaties and pacts cannot stem the tide of global conflicts and humanity seems lost as to how to solve this age old dilemma and finally establish lasting peace. But since there is no temporary solution what if there is a permanent one? However a slow fix not a quick one. There is I believe a way - through education or rather reeducation.

Let’s take religious prejudice as an example as it is the most powerful force in our world. Let me at the outset state that I believe that all the major religions are true and were revealed progressively to meet the spiritual and social needs of people at the time they were revealed. They all teach virtues and the golden rule. But over time religious leaders seeking power and control have desynchronised the religions which are all part of one unfolding process and turned them into opposing factions. “This is the changeless faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future” (Baha’u’llah) But now as a result of indoctrination, religionists reject the subsequent Teacher leading to a desynchronisation of the unfolding process of progressive revelation and evolutionary nature of religion and prejudices against the new faith.

However, now in this modern age most can investigate truth for themselves unlike past times when there was a need for clergy due to illiteracy and lack of literature, and verify that all religions are from the same source and are connected to each other not separate entities and equal, thus ending centuries of misinformation leading to prejudice, hatreds and wars.

This huge step requires courage. For us to step out of the comfort zone that only our religion is true. That all are sinners or infidels and that only our way leads to salvation. Instead, to be replaced with the mature notion that all of us belong to one human family and are of the same human DNA and that all these divisions were due to our immaturity. Otherwise it’s far better to do away with religion completely if it only causes bloodshed and war, division and prejudice. Isn’t this what is needed today to put aside our differences and put our common humanity first and teach the oneness and equality of all humankind in all the schools of the world? Would not this pave the way for a generation of well wishers of all? Although theoretically we could try and get rid of religion, eliminating racial and national prejudices would require reeducation towards oneness and equality.

So I believe all schools in the world from infancy should have included in their course the subject of the oneness and equality of all humanity and that we all belong to one human family there being NO superior race, religion, nationality or group of people. Thank you. If you agree please try and teach this concept in your school.

I would sooner die than become a Baha'i and I wouldn't want them indoctrinating my children, if I had any

If they want to join when they are adults then fine but I wouldn’t want them exposed to any of that stuff before then

 

[Secret Chief]

Bahá’u’lláh referred to several historical figures as Manifestations. They include ... Buddha ....

and of course, once again.... Siddhartha Gautama was not a messenger of an Abrahamic deity. Tiresome, isn't it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I would sooner die than become a Baha'i and I wouldn't want them indoctrinating my children, if I had any

If they want to join when they are adults then fine but I wouldn’t want them exposed to any of that stuff before then

One is able to consider that their request is already granted, in the Bible Jesus said let the dead bury the dead.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes, for Baha'is, your prophets, the Bab and Baha'u'llah, fit these descriptions very well. But do all these people that the Baha'i Faith call "manifestations" fit that description?

They are what the are CG. We get to choose and none of them need us.

We can carry on, business as usual, same old, same old and how is that working out around the world?

Now you can see why, the majority do not want to embrace humanity as an organic whole, with far too many content to sit on the fence, but every day we will have a fresh calamity, every day civil strife will increase, every day we are moving closer to the day when the limbs of mankind will quake.

It appears then and only then.

The warnings have been grossly neglected and the Baha'i are not exempt from that statement.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

They are what the are CG. We get to choose and none of them need us.

We can carry on, business as usual, same old, same old and how is that working out around the world?

Now you can see why, the majority do not want to embrace humanity as an organic whole, with far too many content to sit on the fence, but every day we will have a fresh calamity, every day civil strife will increase, every day we are moving closer to the day when the limbs of mankind will quake.

It appears then and only then.

The warnings have been grossly neglected and the Baha'i are not exempt from that statement.

Regards Tony

And some people do want a better, more united world, but they don't believe the Baha'i Faith is the best way to get there.

 

[MayPeaceBeUpOnYou]

Should the oneness of humanity be taught in all schools worldwide​

No it should be start before that, by the parents

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And some people do want a better, more united world, but they don't believe the Baha'i Faith is the best way to get there.

The Lesser Peace will not be driven by the Baha'is, so their wish is granted already.

Regards Tony

 

[loverofhumanity]

Baha'is make this claim, but who are these "messengers" or "manifestations" And what is a "manifestation"?

The Bahá’í Faith refers to what are commonly called Prophets as Manifestations of God, or simply Manifestations who are directly linked with the concept of Progressive revelation. Not all the individuals who would be called prophets in other religions are known as Manifestations of God, some are called lesser prophets, who receive their revelations from the Manifestations of God.​

​

In expressing God's intent, these Manifestations are seen to establish religion in the world. Thus they are seen as an intermediary between God and humanity.​

​

The Manifestations of God are not seen as an incarnation of God, but they are also not seen as an ordinary mortal.​

​

In essence, the Manifestations of God are seen as Divine Educators, who are raised up by God with the purpose of uplifting mankind and expressing His will. In expressing God's intent, these Manifestations are seen to establish religion in the world and each one brings a book, and reveals teachings and laws according to the time and place which they appear.​

​

Bahá’u’lláh referred to several historical figures as Manifestations. They include Adam, Noah, Zoroaster, Krishna, Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad. The Báb, as well as Himself, were included in this definition. Thus religious history is interpreted as a series of dispensations, where each Manifestation brings a somewhat broader and more advanced revelation, suited for the time and place in which it was expressed.​

​

"Is the Divine Manifestation, God? Yes, and yet not in Essence. A Divine Manifestation is as a mirror reflecting the light of the Sun. The light is the same and yet the mirror is not the Sun.​

​

Yes, for Baha'is, your prophets, the Bab and Baha'u'llah, fit these descriptions very well. But do all these people that the Baha'i Faith call "manifestations" fit that description?

I don't think so. What "book" and what religion did Adam bring? How about Noah? Or even Abraham? Were they perfectly polished "mirrors" reflecting God? No, the stories in the Bible show them to be very much ordinary people with several faults.

None brought a book or started a religion. Rather, they were characters in a book, the Bible. And the Baha'i Faith does not even believe that the stories about them were literally true. Yet, Baha'is people they were literally true? And that's part of your "evidence"

Then the problem with Krishna. The claim is that he was an incarnation of one of the many Hindu Gods, and that he taught about reincarnation. Baha'is don't believe any of that. Plus, Krishna was only one of several "incarnations" of the God, Vishnu. Why don't the Baha'is mention them?

I think it's because the Baha'is are being selective on who they put on that list. Did Baha'u'llah ever mention Krishna? I don't think so. It wasn't until later that Krishna got added to the list. But Krishna isn't followed and believed in by other sects of Hinduism. Who founded those other sects of Hinduism? Who wrote those Scriptures? Scriptures that pre-dated Krishna. And again, Krishna is a character in one of the Hindu Scriptures. Do Baha'is believe those Scriptures are true?

Anyway, it's a fine theory. If believed in, it can unite all people from all religions. But are these teachings and beliefs of the Baha'i Faith true?

For Baha'is, yes. But it's only because Baha'is ignore or find ways to explain away the contradictions in their claims. Which, instead of supporting their evidence, kind of discredits it. But yeah, yeah, it's all for a good cause... The cause of God.

I believe the contradictions come from man not God. All through the ages man has not been able to write so many valid traditions were passed down orally and could only really be verified when a Manifestation appeared with written Words distinguishing truth from falsehood. So only in recent history has humanity had any verifiable written and recorded Words of God with which to verify oral traditions handed down the centuries.

Baha’is are forbidden to interpret and so refer to the Written Word of God and the Manifestation’s interpretations. So whether some beliefs are right or wrong or true or untrue is the judgement of the Manifestation.

The teaching brought today by Baha’u’llah is the belief in oneness of humanity which includes all people believers or non believers, all regardless of their nation, class, religion or race. To each of us to accept others unconditionally.

One doesn’t have to be a Baha’i to accept all humanity and try to serve it. But to believe we are one means we cannot have wars. We must outlaw war and demilitarise the world. Belief that we are one family means equal distribution of the world’s wealth so there are none living in extreme poverty. Believing in all humanity means the funds from war go to universal free education, universal free Medicare, a universal minimum wage for those who are poor, universal free academic education. And so on. All humanity must live in comfort not just the privileged few.

This is a condition that can be brought about by making the oneness of humanity legal. Just as nationhood has become an institution, so world unity and oneness but be on a universal legal level not just nice words and beliefs. As people become more broad in their outlook and their vision world embracing, which is happening now, this unity will become established. Baha’is are just giving it a nudge but we cannot establish it. It’s up to the people of the world.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

There is no such thing as human "oneness" as humans are inherently tribalistic and instinctively compete with each other. Sure, we're the same species and I guess you can argue we have some basic rights and dignity (as all living entities should, I believe), but it really stops there. We constantly make up ways to divide ourselves and it even approaches parody to the extent of it. I'm certainly not experiencing any "oneness" with a psychopathic rapist, torturer or serial killer. Lol