What if we accepted each others Religion?

[Trailblazer]

Baha’is have accepted their scriptures by accepting their own Promised One. By rejecting their Promised One, other religions are rejecting their own scriptures.

Baha’is have accepted their scriptures by accepting Baha'u'llah, 'who they believe' is the Promised One of all the religions.

Certain Baha'is say that other religions are rejecting their own scriptures by rejecting Baha'u'llah, 'who Baha'is believe' is the Promised One of all the religions. I used to say the same thing, but I want no part of it anymore.

.a large multitude of people will arise against you, showing oppression, expressing contumely and derision, shunning your society, and heaping upon you ridicule. (Abdul-Baha)

The truth has always been opposed. Nothing new here.

My truth is the truth. I used to think that way but I no longer do, since I realized how arrogant that is.

Being on this forum has taught me a few things.

 

[CG Didymus]

Baha’is have accepted their scriptures by accepting their own Promised One. By rejecting their Promised One, other religions are rejecting their own scriptures.

.a large multitude of people will arise against you, showing oppression, expressing contumely and derision, shunning your society, and heaping upon you ridicule. (Abdul-Baha)

The truth has always been opposed. Nothing new here.

Yes... that's exactly true... If Baha'u'llah is who he claims to be. The bridge of any of the other religions to the Baha'i Faith is for them to realize that he, Baha'u'llah, is the promised one of their religions. He is Kalki, Maitreya and so on.

On one side of that bridge is their old beliefs and interpretations of their own Scriptures. On the other side of the bridge is what Baha'u'llah, and apparently, whatever Abdul Baha' says is really true about that religion.

...The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.​

​

Such is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ, and this was a true resurrection....
"Some Answered Questions", rev. ed. (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1984), p. 104​

​

From letters written on behalf of the Guardian​

​

We do not believe that there was a bodily resurrection after the Crucifixion of Christ, but that there was a time after His Ascension when His disciples perceived spiritually His true greatness and realized He was eternal in being. This is what has been reported symbolically in the New Testament and been misunderstood. His eating with His disciples after resurrection is the same thing.
9 October 1947 to an individual believer​

So, a Christian would leave behind the belief in the physical resurrection of Jesus on one side of the bridge. And on the other side come to believe that all four gospel stories were symbolic... No empty tomb. No seeing, touching, eating, or talking with Jesus. And to that you can add most all of the other beliefs and doctrines of Christianity. They got it all wrong... except the virgin birth. Baha'is are okay with that.

Baha'is completely gut Christianity. But don't feel bad. If people listened to me, the same thing would happen. I'd tell them that I think it's all a bunch of made-up myths and legends. But I'd include the virgin birth.

To be like you and some Baha'is, after I did that to them, I'd go to their Church service and tell them how wonderful and beautiful their religion is.

Just tell them the truth... Baha'is don't believe in Christianity. And that goes for how Baha'is feel about all the other religions. But Baha'is don't want to be that blunt. Or actually, as strange as it might seem, I think Baha'is really do think they believe in Christianity and all the other religions.

 

[CG Didymus]

Baha’is have accepted their scriptures by accepting their own Promised One. By rejecting their Promised One, other religions are rejecting their own scriptures.

.a large multitude of people will arise against you, showing oppression, expressing contumely and derision, shunning your society, and heaping upon you ridicule. (Abdul-Baha)

The truth has always been opposed. Nothing new here.

Lots of false Mahdi's, Christs/Messiahs, and all the other "promised ones". Even Baha'is reject them. Like... Why do Baha'is reject Mirza Ahmad Ghulam? Probably because you believe he's a fake and a liar. Yet, he has more followers than Baha'u'llah.

Only in the minds of some Baha'is have they accepted the Scriptures of the other religions. They have accepted parts of the Scriptures. Cherry-picked verses, that are then interpreted to mean what Baha'is want them to mean.

And still, who knows, Baha'is might be right. This invisible God might really have had such a strange plan... to send multiple messengers that didn't write down anything but let others write things down. So, who knows what was truly said. Then... this God has the religious leaders interpret those writings and even pick which writings are going to be called "Scripture". Then... after hundreds of years, send a messenger that tells us... they got things wrong. They misinterpreted some of the stuff, important stuff. Stuff that completely changes everything.

If that's what happened, then how can you say the religions are "beautiful"? They were man-made and then interpreted by man, and by the admission of Baha'is themselves, those interpretations were wrong. Yes, but I do see how it can be beautiful... a beautiful mess. Or... each religion is beautiful... just the way it is. They are different. And they reflect the culture in which they came from. Are any of them absolutely true? Who knows? But I still believe that they are true enough for those that believe in them.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What if we just accepted each other?

If we do not accept certain beliefs, does that mean we can’t be tolerant of those who have them?

And I’m speaking of beliefs that aren’t violent, and don’t call for violence.

Overall, the value of people are much more than their beliefs.

 

[Truthseeker]

Baha’is have accepted their scriptures by accepting their own Promised One. By rejecting their Promised One, other religions are rejecting their own scriptures.

I like the first sentence. The second is too combative, not building bridges. You know better than that.

The truth has always been opposed. Nothing new here.

We don't possess all the truth.

 

[Truthseeker]

Baha’is have accepted their scriptures by accepting Baha'u'llah, 'who they believe' is the Promised One of all the religions.

Certain Baha'is say that other religions are rejecting their own scriptures by rejecting Baha'u'llah, 'who Baha'is believe' is the Promised One of all the religions. I used to say the same thing, but I want no part of it anymore.

Well, they don't reject their scriptures, I agree. They understand them differently from Baha'is. To say to them straight out that they interpret them wrong is too combative, and not building bridges.

My truth is the truth. I used to think that way but I no longer do, since I realized how arrogant that is.

Being on this forum has taught me a few things.

Yes, that is at least not thinking carefully about the other person's point of view. They may have something to contribute to the discourse that I may learn from.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Yes... that's exactly true... If Baha'u'llah is who he claims to be. The bridge of any of the other religions to the Baha'i Faith is for them to realize that he, Baha'u'llah, is the promised one of their religions. He is Kalki, Maitreya and so on.

On one side of that bridge is their old beliefs and interpretations of their own Scriptures. On the other side of the bridge is what Baha'u'llah, and apparently, whatever Abdul Baha' says is really true about that religion.

...The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.​

​

Such is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ, and this was a true resurrection....​

"Some Answered Questions", rev. ed. (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1984), p. 104​

​

From letters written on behalf of the Guardian​

​

We do not believe that there was a bodily resurrection after the Crucifixion of Christ, but that there was a time after His Ascension when His disciples perceived spiritually His true greatness and realized He was eternal in being. This is what has been reported symbolically in the New Testament and been misunderstood. His eating with His disciples after resurrection is the same thing.​

9 October 1947 to an individual believer​

So, a Christian would leave behind the belief in the physical resurrection of Jesus on one side of the bridge. And on the other side come to believe that all four gospel stories were symbolic... No empty tomb. No seeing, touching, eating, or talking with Jesus. And to that you can add most all of the other beliefs and doctrines of Christianity. They got it all wrong... except the virgin birth. Baha'is are okay with that.

Baha'is completely gut Christianity. But don't feel bad. If people listened to me, the same thing would happen. I'd tell them that I think it's all a bunch of made-up myths and legends. But I'd include the virgin birth.

To be like you and some Baha'is, after I did that to them, I'd go to their Church service and tell them how wonderful and beautiful their religion is.

Just tell them the truth... Baha'is don't believe in Christianity. And that goes for how Baha'is feel about all the other religions. But Baha'is don't want to be that blunt. Or actually, as strange as it might seem, I think Baha'is really do think they believe in Christianity and all the other religions.

All we don’t follow is the man made interpretations. Why should we follow that a priest says the Bible is literal? Hes human. He makes mistakes. I would feel much safer following what a Manifestation teaches than an ordinary person. We know the earth is 4.5 billion years old so the creation story is referring to something else. Literally it’s false for the world to be created in seven days. But if we treat them as divine days then we have the 7,000 year cycle approximately of the Adamic Cycle with seven Manifestation's of God. So the Bible needs to be viewed not in a superstitious manner but in a rational way. The resurrection is easily made sense of when we examine the disciples ‘vision’ on Mount tabor. They saw Moses and God but it was a ‘vision’ so why not the resurrection. It seems the majority prefer a drop of superstition to an ocean of truth.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Well, they don't reject their scriptures, I agree. They understand them differently from Baha'is. To say to them straight out that they interpret them wrong is too combative, and not building bridges.

Yes, that is at least not thinking carefully about the other person's point of view. They may have something to contribute to the discourse that I may learn from.

Sorry I should have said Messengers.

Be thou assured in thyself that verily, he who turns away from this Beauty hath also turned away from the Messengers of the past and showeth pride towards God from all eternity to all eternity. (Baha’u’llah)

 

[loverofhumanity]

Lots of false Mahdi's, Christs/Messiahs, and all the other "promised ones". Even Baha'is reject them. Like... Why do Baha'is reject Mirza Ahmad Ghulam? Probably because you believe he's a fake and a liar. Yet, he has more followers than Baha'u'llah.

Only in the minds of some Baha'is have they accepted the Scriptures of the other religions. They have accepted parts of the Scriptures. Cherry-picked verses, that are then interpreted to mean what Baha'is want them to mean.

And still, who knows, Baha'is might be right. This invisible God might really have had such a strange plan... to send multiple messengers that didn't write down anything but let others write things down. So, who knows what was truly said. Then... this God has the religious leaders interpret those writings and even pick which writings are going to be called "Scripture". Then... after hundreds of years, send a messenger that tells us... they got things wrong. They misinterpreted some of the stuff, important stuff. Stuff that completely changes everything.

If that's what happened, then how can you say the religions are "beautiful"? They were man-made and then interpreted by man, and by the admission of Baha'is themselves, those interpretations were wrong. Yes, but I do see how it can be beautiful... a beautiful mess. Or... each religion is beautiful... just the way it is. They are different. And they reflect the culture in which they came from. Are any of them absolutely true? Who knows? But I still believe that they are true enough for those that believe in them.

When we clear away the man made doctrines and interpretations there is a beautiful essence remaining. I think I’ve already mentioned some. The Dhammapada, the Beautitudes, the Ten Commandments and the Bhagavad-Gita, the Quran are filled with verses of wisdom . I believe the essence of all religions are true.

 

[Secret Chief]

I didn't know Baha'u'llah said that about the Buddha. What is the quote?

Don't hold your breath.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Don't hold your breath.

It;s very clear cut. Baha'u'llah in His Most Holy Book appointed His Eldest Son as the Interpreter of His teachings and He stated that Buddha was included as a Manifestation of God.

 

[Secret Chief]

It;s very clear cut. Baha'u'llah in His Most Holy Book appointed His Eldest Son as the Interpreter of His teachings and He stated that Buddha was included as a Manifestation of God.

Quote from a Buddhist text?

 

[Vinayaka]

We have a lot of good friends with many religions and they like us and accept us.

Which proves my point that people of other faiths address your OP as well, or better, than Bahai's do.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Here's what I found... Two paragraphs in the "Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta".

"And in that time of the people with an eighty thousand-year life-span, there will arise in the world a Blessed Lord, an Arahant fully-enlightened Buddha named Metteyya, endowed with wisdom and conduct, a Well-Farer, Knower of the worlds, incomparable Trainer of men to be tamed, Teacher of gods and humans, enlightened and blessed, just as I am now. He will thoroughly know by his own super-knowledge, and proclaim, this universe with its devas and maras and Brahmas, its ascetics and Brahmins, and this generation with its princes and people, just as I do now. He will teach the Dhamma, lovely in its beginning, lovely in its middle, lovely in its ending, in the spirit and in the letter, and proclaim, just as I do now, the holy life (brahmacarya/celibacy) in its fullness and purity. He will be attended by a company of thousands of monks, just as I am attended by a company of hundreds.​

​

"Then King Sankha will re-erect the palace once built by King Maha-Panada and, having lived in it, will give it up and present it to the ascetics and Brahmins, the beggars, the wayfarers, the destitute. Then, shaving off hair and beard, he will don yellow robes and go forth from the household life into hermit life under the supreme Buddha Metteyya. Having gone forth, he will remain alone, in seclusion, ardent, eager and resolute, and before long he will have attained in this very life, by his own super-knowledge and resolution, that unequalled goal of the holy life (brahmacarya), for the sake of which young men of good family go forth from the household life into hermit life, and will abide therein.​

Then this...

The prophecy of the arrival of Maitreya is found in the canonical literature of all Buddhist sects (Theravāda, Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna)​

​

While a number of persons have proclaimed themselves to be Maitreya in the years following the Buddha’s death, none have been officially recognized by the sangha and the mass of lay Buddhists. A particular difficulty faced by any would-be claimant to Maitreya's title is the fact that the Buddha is considered to have made a number of fairly specific predictions regarding the circumstances that would occur prior to Maitreya's coming, including the notions that the teachings of the Buddha would be completely forgotten, and that all of the remaining relics of Sakyamuni Buddha have been gathered in Bodh Gaya and cremated...​

​

• Budai, the Chinese monk who lived during the Later Liang Dynasty (907–923 C.E.) mentioned above, is likely the most popular claimant to the mantle of Maitreya (despite his utter refusal involve himself in worldly politics). His depiction as the Laughing Buddha continues to be very popular in East Asian culture.
• Gung Ye (ruled 901–918), a Korean warlord and king of short-lived state of Taebong during the tenth century, claimed himself to be a living incarnation of Maitreya and ordered his subjects to worship him. His claim was widely rejected by most Buddhist monks and later he was dethroned and killed by his own servants.
• In 613 the monk Xiang Haiming claimed himself Maitreya and adopted an imperial title.[10]
• In 690 Empress Wu Zetian inaugurated the Second Zhou dynasty, proclaimed herself an incarnation of the future Buddha Maitreya, and made Luoyang the "holy capital." In 693 she replaced the compulsory Dao De Jing in the curriculum temporarily with her own Rules for Officials.[11]
• Lu Zhong Yi, the 17th patriarch of I-Kuan Tao, proclaimed himself to be an incarnation of Maitreya.
• L. Ron Hubbard (1911 – 1986), founder of Dianetics and Scientology, suggested he was "Metteya" (Maitreya) in the 1955 poem Hymn of Asia. His editors indicated, in the book's preface, specific physical characteristics said to be outlined—in unnamed Sanskrit sources—as properties of the coming Maitreya; properties which Hubbard's appearance reportedly aligned with.
• Raël, founder of the Raëlian church, claims to be Maitreya based on an idiosyncratic interpretation of the Agama Sutra (Japanese: Agon Sutra),[12] an ancient text said to be written by Buddha himself. Raël has claimed directly to people attending Asia Raëlian Church seminars, that someone born in France, a country which is often symbolized by the cock (or rooster), west of the Orient, meets the criteria of the Maitreya. Rael himself claims to be this individual.[13]
• Bahá'ís believe that Bahá'u'lláh is the fulfillment of the prophecy of appearance of Maitreya. Bahá'ís believe that the prophecy that Maitreya will usher in a new society of tolerance and love has been fulfilled by Bahá'u'lláh's teachings on world peace.[14]

Have you found anything that supports your claim that Baha'u'llah is the Maitreya?

​

His Person, Life and teachings. How was Christ or Buddha or Muhammad vindicated? The Jews still don’t accept Christ after 2,000 years so people can always reject a Manifestation. Proof means different things to different people. One of the qualities Gautama said Maitreya would possess is innate knowledge which Baha’u’llah had. But in the end it’s up to people to decide. I’ve looked at what Buddha has stated and I believe Baha’u’llah fits the description perfectly but you may disagree . That’s your prerogative.

8. The Arising of the Buddha Metteyya​

And the Blessed One named Metteyya will arise in the world—perfected, a fully awakened Buddha, accomplished in knowledge and conduct, holy, knower of the world, supreme guide for those who wish to train, teacher of gods and humans, awakened, blessed—just as I have arisen today. He will realize with his own insight this world—with its gods, Māras and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, gods and humans—and make it known to others, just as I do today. He will teach the Dhamma that’s good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, meaningful and well-phrased. And he will reveal a spiritual practice that’s entirely full and pure, just as I do today. He will lead a Saṅgha of many thousand mendicants, just as I lead a Saṅgha of many hundreds today.

SuttaCentral

Early Buddhist texts from the Tipitaka (Tripitaka). Suttas (sutras) with the Buddha's teachings on mindfulness, insight, wisdom, and meditation.

suttacentral.net

 

[loverofhumanity]

Quote from a Buddhist text?

8. The Arising of the Buddha Metteyya​

And the Blessed One named Metteyya will arise in the world—perfected, a fully awakened Buddha, accomplished in knowledge and conduct, holy, knower of the world, supreme guide for those who wish to train, teacher of gods and humans, awakened, blessed—just as I have arisen today. He will realize with his own insight this world—with its gods, Māras and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, gods and humans—and make it known to others, just as I do today. He will teach the Dhamma that’s good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, meaningful and well-phrased. And he will reveal a spiritual practice that’s entirely full and pure, just as I do today. He will lead a Saṅgha of many thousand mendicants, just as I lead a Saṅgha of many hundreds today.

SuttaCentral

Early Buddhist texts from the Tipitaka (Tripitaka). Suttas (sutras) with the Buddha's teachings on mindfulness, insight, wisdom, and meditation.

suttacentral.net

 

[Secret Chief]

8. The Arising of the Buddha Metteyya​

And the Blessed One named Metteyya will arise in the world—perfected, a fully awakened Buddha, accomplished in knowledge and conduct, holy, knower of the world, supreme guide for those who wish to train, teacher of gods and humans, awakened, blessed—just as I have arisen today. He will realize with his own insight this world—with its gods, Māras and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, gods and humans—and make it known to others, just as I do today. He will teach the Dhamma that’s good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, meaningful and well-phrased. And he will reveal a spiritual practice that’s entirely full and pure, just as I do today. He will lead a Saṅgha of many thousand mendicants, just as I lead a Saṅgha of many hundreds today.

SuttaCentral

Early Buddhist texts from the Tipitaka (Tripitaka). Suttas (sutras) with the Buddha's teachings on mindfulness, insight, wisdom, and meditation.

suttacentral.net

No - my request for text from a Buddhist (NOT Bahai) source was in regard to "Buddha did teach the oneness of God are true because the information came from the latest Revelation from God." (from your post #822).

 

[Vinayaka]

No - in reference to post 823. The Buddhist text in regard to "Buddha did teach the oneness of God are true because the information came from the latest Revelation from God."

An important point about every single religion that suggests some kind of return of a prophet, Maitreya, etc. is that absolutely none of the adherents of said faiths point to Baha'ullah, which of course further illustrates the point that Baha'is think every other religion is wrong.

 

[loverofhumanity]

An important point about every single religion that suggests some kind of return of a prophet, Maitreya, etc. is that absolutely none of the adherents of said faiths point to Baha'ullah, which of course further illustrates the point that Baha'is think every other religion is wrong.

Baha’is are former adherents of theses religions who believe He is the the return of their prophet/teacher. Their religion is not wrong but it will take time for people to accept Baha’u’llah. It took centuries with Jesus so it’s not an instant overnight mass acceptance. Anyway thanks very much for pointing that out .

 

[loverofhumanity]

No - my request for text from a Buddhist (NOT Bahai) source was in regard to "Buddha did teach the oneness of God are true because the information came from the latest Revelation from God." (from your post #822).

I apologise if I misunderstood your question. I’ll try again. My understanding is that from the scriptures we do have, that Buddha did not deny the existence of God. There is this passage which I believe refers to God. I have come across this statement by Buddha and personally believe it refers to God so I’m quoting it here .

The Absolute. The Buddhas have assured us that behind this impermanent world and its illusion, there is a reality, the Absolute Reality. Because of this, it is possible for us to escape from the sorrow caused by the chances and changes of this world. Gautama Buddha speaks of the Supramundane (lokuttara, lokottara) or Unconditioned (asankhata, asamskrita). Being beyond this world, we have no adequate words to speak of the Absolute.

The following is the Buddha's description of it in the famous Udana passage in the Khuddaka Nikaya: "There is, O monks, an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. Were there not, O monks, this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, there would be no escape from the world of the born, originated, created, formed. Since, O monks, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, therefore is there an escape from the born, originated, created, formed. What is dependant, that also moves; what is independent does not move" (Udana 8:3).

Nagarjuna, the founder of the Madhyamika school of Buddhism, argues from this passage that without the acceptance of an Ultimate Reality (Paramartha) there can be no deliverance (nirvana) (Madhyamika Karikas, cited in Murti 235).

Bahá'í Library Online

Baha'i articles, books, translations, and historical materials

bahai-library.com

 

[John Hilton]

Actually, there is a template already for the religions accepting each other's Messengers. My wife and I lived in Trinidad. Soon after arriving we attended a very large meeting that included the religious leaders of every religion there. To my amazement, they seemed to accept each other's prophets as valid. Then I noticed there were Muslims whose favorite holiday was Diwali and Hindus who liked observing Christian and Muslim holidays and Christians observing Hindu and Muslim holidays, etc. Not everyone accepted the other's Messenger as true, but in talking with people, it seemed that was the predominant thought of people there. Not surprisingly, Trinidad has more holidays than just about any place on earth. Trinidad is roughly 50% African heritage, 30% from India and 20% Chinese heritage, but in many parts if the island, the intermarrying is so common that it's hard to tell who is who - a true rainbow country. There are problems with crime and corruption like in most of the world, but much less stratification than in the US. People there will tell you they are happy and I think all this may be the reason why.