• 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!

What if we accepted each others Religion?

F1fan

Veteran Member
Humanism is good and has done good things and will definitely play a major role in improving the world. But I think humanism and religions working together is much more effective.
What can religions add that makes Humanism more effective? Use facts.

Since you acknowldge humanism is good, why not work with that as the core unifying message? It has the advantage of not including religious assumptions and bias, so superior in that respect.
The more of the different elements of society work together the sooner we will have peace.
Yet you express your spiritual violence (as Krishnamurti would phrase it) and contribute to division yourself. I would think your approach is better if you don't assert your religion is uniquely virtuous and advantageous. It clearly lacks the foundation to be influential in its ideals and hopes.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Not really. By accepting the promised messiah we have accepted the religion.
Accepting a religion means accepting its core tenets... i.e. the tenets that the religion itself proclaims as fundamental, not the ones that you as an outsider deem important. You've consistently said that this isn't something you're willing to do.

Those who have not accepted the messiah are In fact the ones that have rejected their religion not us.

It's pretty arrogant of you to presume that you know someone's religion better than they do.

So a Christian rejects Christ when He returns means he is no longer a Christian in fact although he may still call himself one.

But we weren't talking about Christians; we were talking about Buddhists. The fact that one fringe group of Buddhists believe in something akin to a messiah doesn't mean that the whole rest of Buddhism are somehow "no longer Buddhists."
 

SalixIncendium

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
Staff member
Premium Member
The thing I understand is that every people were given guidance regarding future messiahs. For India that guidance came from the Bhagavad Gita and Mahabharata but not to my knowledge in the Upanishads. I can provide the one from the Gita but there is none from the Upanishads.
Kalki is not mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita and only once in the Mahabharata. While the Bhagavad Gita is my secondary scripture to the Upanishads, the Mahabharata as a whole is not a part of my school of Hinduism, and therefore, Kalki is not relevant to my views.

So your suggestion that...
It’s all true and can be found in their respective scriptures.
...turns out to not be true at all.

But the people of India did receive guidance in other sources regarding the tenth avatar Kalki.
What other sources?
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
The thing I understand is that every people were given guidance regarding future messiahs.
You understand no such thing. This is something you believe, and you believing this gives you a position to judge those who don't believe as you do. This the the trap religions create. You are especially trapped because you also believe your religion is an evolution of all others, so you have to judge elements of these other religions where Baha'i dogma differs. So you judge as a consequence of disagreeing with other dogmas.

To believe in messiahs is a Jewish idea. Christianity borrowed the idea. And it seems Baha'i has borrowed it too, but from the Christian version of Messiah, not the Jewish idea. But back to what you claimed about "every people being given guidance regarding future messiahs" it does not aplpy to anyone other than Abrahamic religions. It's irrelevant to Hindus, and none of your creative misdirection works.
For India that guidance came from the Bhagavad Gita and Mahabharata but not to my knowledge in the Upanishads. I can provide the one from the Gita but there is none from the Upanishads. But the people of India did receive guidance in other sources regarding the tenth avatar Kalki.
And here you go, working hard to make it work. It doesn't.

And let's not ignore atheists who don't assign meaning to any religious ideas, what about these "people"?

This is why Humanism is superior. Your idealistic dogma inevitably creates division and disagreement.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Not really. By accepting the promised messiah we have accepted the religion. Those who have not accepted the messiah are In fact the ones that have rejected their religion not us. So a Christian rejects Christ when He returns means he is no longer a Christian in fact although he may still call himself one.
This and the previous post show that you are not even attempting to accept other people's religions, or even to respect them.

So much for your professed goal of mutual acceptance between religions, then.

What you are truly proposing is that everyone should accept a new Messiah to come, even if that makes no sense whatsoever to their own beliefs, creeds and religions.

That would be fair enough in itself - even though most people are not lacking in opportunity to expect a new Messiah.

But you should not use false pretense. You are not interested in accepting other people's religions; you are instead trying to present them as flawed because they won't point towards yours.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
You understand no such thing. This is something you believe, and you believing this gives you a position to judge those who don't believe as you do. This the the trap religions create. You are especially trapped because you also believe your religion is an evolution of all others, so you have to judge elements of these other religions where Baha'i dogma differs. So you judge as a consequence of disagreeing with other dogmas.

To believe in messiahs is a Jewish idea. Christianity borrowed the idea. And it seems Baha'i has borrowed it too, but from the Christian version of Messiah, not the Jewish idea. But back to what you claimed about "every people being given guidance regarding future messiahs" it does not aplpy to anyone other than Abrahamic religions. It's irrelevant to Hindus, and none of your creative misdirection works.

And here you go, working hard to make it work. It doesn't.

And let's not ignore atheists who don't assign meaning to any religious ideas, what about these "people"?

This is why Humanism is superior. Your idealistic dogma inevitably creates division and disagreement.
Humanism can't be superior. Because humanism is about humans and its long established that cats are superior....
1705258586369.png
 

ChieftheCef

Well-Known Member
Firstly I am only referring to the major religions.

Next I’m speaking of accepting the Founder and the spiritual teachings such as virtues and prayer etc not the laws. The administration of each faith would remain.

So Christians would accept Buddha and Muhammad, Buddhists would accept Christ and Baha’is etc

And instead of segregating ourselves in our own churches, pagodas, temples and synagogues, we would visit each others places of worship to meditate and pray together. We Baha’is already do this and read from all the sacred scriptures of each religion in all our services.

In this way we can celebrate our diversity. I think in many places this is happening and also interfaith breaking down barriers. I myself I accept all the major religions and their Founders and Holy Books and find this enriches me greatly. So I read something Christ or Buddha said and it’s a great experience. Christ says to love and Buddha says to fight hate with love and that the greatest of all conquerors is he who conquers his own self. So much wisdom from all these faiths. Why should we deprive ourselves.? If you have any favourite verses please feel most welcome to share them.
WHy all the big trouble about personification? I think it's great that the religions can all talk about the same things, albeit with fabrication and made up or exaggerated stories. I like the plurality that comes with it.

Either way soon it will be that way. I hope nothing is truly lost.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
So for Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Jews and so on they have arrived at the conclusion from their own religious background that He has come and it all points for them each to the same Person - Baha’u’llah.
Yeah, and some Buddhists have become Christians. Some Baha'is have become Hindus. Some Jews have become Buddhists.
It’s all true and can be found in their respective scriptures.
So, why do we need to accept the other religions? All we need to do is go to our own religion and see that it's true... that Baha'u'llah is the return of the guy we were expecting.
As I've said close to 100 times before, in Hinduism, it applies to one sect only.
But who's counting. And, unfortunately, who cares? If not for you, who would have known? And if you didn't keep coming back, they'd keep claiming it as if it is fact.
Any Gaudiya Vaishnavism, or any sect believing in Kalki. In Saivism, we don't believe in prophets, period, so Kalki isn't part of it. But nobody at all believes Baha'ullah matches that description whatsoever.
Oops, only one sect has is right? It is the only one that believes Krishna will return as the Kalki Avatar? So, what do Baha'is believe about the other Hindu sects? Are they wrong and hold false teachings?
You know you are talking about minority groups. You cannot use the minority groups to represent the whole. You cannot use unitarian Christians to represent the majority of Christians. Please stop using this dishonest tactic.
Yes, Baha'u'llah doesn't say much, if anything, about Krishna, then suddenly Krishna becomes an important link in the Baha'is concept of "progressive" revelation. But what about the Hindu sects that pre-dated Krishna?
Throughout this thread, you've told us about how you don't actually accept other religions. I'd also say that your attitude of "I only accept parts of what you are, not your whole essence" is pretty intolerant.
Yes, they accept the "truth" in each. Not the stuff that's not true.
And that "only one evolving religion" just happens to be your own, right? Funny, that.
How does Hinduism and Buddhism evolve to Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith? And somewhere in there is Zoroastrianism. And again, it leaves out so many other religions.
The Baha'i have no solutions.
They do offer suggestion, maybe solutions? Like they suggest as a solution to war that every nation disarm and elect a World Tribunal to judge between the nations.
Humanism is good and has done good things and will definitely play a major role in improving the world.
But it's almost exactly what you want. Get rid of the dogmas of religions and just keep the good stuff, the virtues.
I can provide the one from the Gita but there is none from the Upanishads. But the people of India did receive guidance in other sources regarding the tenth avatar Kalki.
Again, even the "guidance" you do have, where did it come from? Was it from a person you believe was a manifestation? Or from a man writing about the manifestation?
Those who have not accepted the messiah are In fact the ones that have rejected their religion not us. So a Christian rejects Christ when He returns means he is no longer a Christian in fact although he may still call himself one.
Baha'i do reject the religion by saying they have added in man-made traditions and have misinterpreted their own Scriptures. People within the religion might have accepted the Baha'i interpretation and have joined the Baha'i Faith believing that Baha'u'llah is the one promised in their religion.
What can religions add that makes Humanism more effective? Use facts.

Since you acknowldge humanism is good, why not work with that as the core unifying message? It has the advantage of not including religious assumptions and bias, so superior in that respect.
Yeah, dump the dogmatic beliefs.
Accepting a religion means accepting its core tenets... i.e. the tenets that the religion itself proclaims as fundamental, not the ones that you as an outsider deem important. You've consistently said that this isn't something you're willing to do.
Baha'is can't do that, because they believe most of those core tenets are wrong.
It's pretty arrogant of you to presume that you know someone's religion better than they do.
The claim for some of these is that "the books were sealed". Then Baha'u'llah unsealed them and gave us their true meaning.
The fact that one fringe group of Buddhists believe in something akin to a messiah doesn't mean that the whole rest of Buddhism are somehow "no longer Buddhists."

Kalki is not mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita and only once in the Mahabharata. While the Bhagavad Gita is my secondary scripture to the Upanishads, the Mahabharata as a whole is not a part of my school of Hinduism, and therefore, Kalki is not relevant to my views.
Who is Kalki? Where did those prophecies come from? Why is Buddha included as one of the Avatars but not Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab, but it jumps from the Ninth Avatar to the Tenth Avatar? And that, for the Baha'is, is Baha'u'llah.
This and the previous post show that you are not even attempting to accept other people's religions, or even to respect them.

So much for your professed goal of mutual acceptance between religions, then.

What you are truly proposing is that everyone should accept a new Messiah to come, even if that makes no sense whatsoever to their own beliefs, creeds and religions.
That's the key. We should all accept each other's religions. That's step one. Next, see that the Scriptures in a religion, or some Scriptures in some sects of some religions, talks about some divine prophet coming back. Who could this be? Next step is to investigate the Baha'i Faith and see that Baha'u'llah is that person.

The Baha'is claim, believe, assert, or are the opinion of.... that Baha'u'llah has fulfilled all the prophecies of all the religions, at least all the major ones. Last step... join the Baha'i Faith and leave behind your old corrupted and wrong beliefs of your old religion. But see how "originally" it was the truth. That there is but one God who sent many messengers/manifestations to guide humanity. In this day we are to follow Baha'u'llah's teachings and laws. It is the true medicine from the true physician that can cure the ills of the world.

Why don't some of us believe them?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Jews believe no such thing. Nor Buddhists nor Hindus, as far as I know.
If you read @loverofhumanity's whole post you can see that what he meant in context.

When he said "So for Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Jews and so on they have arrived at the conclusion from their own religious background that He has come and it all points for them each to the same Person - Baha’u’llah" he was referring to Baha'is who used to be Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Jews and so on. In other words these are Baha'is who come from those religious backgrounds.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Not really. By accepting the promised messiah we have accepted the religion. Those who have not accepted the messiah are In fact the ones that have rejected their religion not us. So a Christian rejects Christ when He returns means he is no longer a Christian in fact although he may still call himself one.
With all due respect, not really.

By accepting who Baha'is believe is the promised messiah they have accepted the religion called the Baha'i Faith.
Those who have not accepted who Baha'is believe is the promised messiah are in fact the ones that have rejected the Baha'i Faith.

So a Christian rejects who Baha'is believe is the return of Christ when He returns is still a Christian, since he believes in Jesus Christ.
If that Christian believed that Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ he would be a Baha'i.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Every time I sign on to post my cat disinformation I am clever to put out wet food for my superior beings so they can't rwad over my shoulder. Our secret.
I did not know you were a cat lover but now I know, but I'll bet you don't love cats as much as I do. ;)
 
Top