What if we accepted each other's religion?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No. The message was about not being hypocritical.

Then what did you mean?

I asked you why you insist on labelling religious and non-Baha'i people "religious" and "Baha'i"; you said that you do it "to emphasize deeds over words." This didn't make a lot of sense.

I have a feeling that you misunderstood my question, so if you want to re-read it and give a new answer, please feel free.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Then what did you mean?

I asked you why you insist on labelling religious and non-Baha'i people "religious" and "Baha'i"; you said that you do it "to emphasize deeds over words."

This didn't make a lot of sense. I assume from you calling your own position "hypocritical" that you agree.

I have a feeling that you misunderstood my question, so if you want to re-read it and give a new answer, please feel free.

The message was written to Baha'is for Baha'is emphasising that just having the name Baha'i but not acting accordingly was of no value and in that context even a non believer were a better Baha'i if he acted as we should. It's just saying that we cannot take only the name without the responsibilities. And that anyone whose deeds match what we are taught may be better Baha'is (figuratively speaking) than us.

So let's say for instance many non Christians are better Christians than Christians. Can you grasp the intent here? It's not saying non Christians are Christians.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The message was written to Baha'is for Baha'is

Your post was written to me, a non-Baha'i.

emphasising that just having the name Baha'i but not acting accordingly was of no value and in that context even a non believer were a better Baha'i if he acted as we should. It's just saying that we cannot take only the name without the responsibilities. And that anyone whose deeds match what we are taught may be better Baha'is (figuratively speaking) than us.

So let's say for instance many non Christians are better Christians than Christians. Can you grasp the intent here? It's not saying non Christians are Christians.

In that case, I'm glad you changed your position. I hope you can understand how you arguing for several pages that all love is religious would give me the impression that you were trying to argue that all love is religious.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Your post was written to me, a non-Baha'i.


In that case, I'm glad you changed your position. I hope you can understand how you arguing for several pages that all love is religious would give me the impression that you were trying to argue that all love is religious.

Thanks for being so patient and understanding. I apologise for not being clear enough.