ppp
Well-Known Member
That a god, any god, exists to be a part of the foundation for mutual tolerance.What lie?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
That a god, any god, exists to be a part of the foundation for mutual tolerance.What lie?
How do you know that is a lie?That a god, any god, exists to be a part of the foundation for mutual tolerance.
Same way we know covid did not come fromHow do you know that is a lie?
You don't get that discussion until you can demonstrate a satisfactorily robust epistemology. At least, you don't get that discussion with me.How do you know that is a lie?
The Greater Peace is NOT contingent upon what people believe so nobody will be excluded on that basis.You don't get that discussion until you can demonstrate a satisfactorily robust epistemology. At least, you don't get that discussion with me.
The fact is that I think it's a lie, and as a result would never accept it as a foundation. With a foundation of even the most generic god, you still would exclude a large chunk of the non-dualists from your Greater Peace. Not to mention all of the religious people that disallow for any gods but their specific one. Not to mention all of the non-religious groups that you exclude from full social franchisement. And by you, I am referring to the Baha'i Faith; not necessarily to you in particular.
Consider Rawls' Veil of Ignorance. Or don't.
Do you mean that we knew that covid did not come from Batboy's secret moon- lab because of someone's big ego?Same way we know covid did not come from
Batboy's secret moon- lab.
Could the Greater Peace occur in a world that looks like our, but where there was no god of any type and no Baha'i beliefs?The Greater Peace is NOT contingent upon what people believe so nobody will be excluded on that basis.
Then this will continue.But Baha'is aren't connecting with most people here on the forum. And a lot of them are a certain type of people... People that don't believe in the claims made by religious people about their Gods and prophets. And I keep saying that I believe that Baha'is have more in common with Atheist than trinitarian Christians. Both agree that the trinitarian God is not real. Yet, Baha'is say their God is real.
As long as Baha'is make it mandatory to believe in their version of God, then they will never connect with them. Now if you don't bring up religion... or politics and which sports teams you like, then sure, you can probably work together. But that's not what's happening here. Lots of religious people think that their beliefs are the absolute truth. And they love to tell others all about it. How do work with people like that
No, I don't think it could, since it was God's purpose to usher in the Greater Peace by means of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.Could the Greater Peace occur in a world that looks like our, but where there was no god of any type and no Baha'i beliefs?
You don't get that discussion until you can demonstrate a satisfactorily robust epistemology. At least, you don't get that discussion with me.
The fact is that I think it's a lie, and as a result would never accept it as a foundation. With a foundation of even the most generic god, you still would exclude a large chunk of the non-dualists from your Greater Peace. Not to mention all of the religious people that disallow for any gods but their specific one. Not to mention all of the non-religious groups that you exclude from full social franchisement. And by you, I am referring to the Baha'i Faith; not necessarily to you in particular.
Consider Rawls' Veil of Ignorance. Or don't.
This makes it sound like it is necessary to believe in the "counsels" of the most high.".......This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded." — Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, CXXXI
So it depends on what people believe.[shrug]No, I don't think it could, since it was God's purpose to usher in the Greater Peace by means of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.
“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it............” The Promised Day is Come, p. 116
God’s Purpose
How so?This makes it sound like it is necessary to believe in the "counsels" of the most high.
It is not a a thing yet, obviously.By whose figuring is "The Greater Peace "
a thing?
".......This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded." — Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, CXXXIHow so?
Nope. It depends upon what people do.So it depends on what people believe.[shrug]
You just said that it couldn't happen without your god and the Baha'i [the people who believe in your god].Nope. It depends upon what people do.
The Baha'i Faith carries the seeds of disunity in itself.With a foundation of even the most generic god, you still would exclude a large chunk of the non-dualists from your Greater Peace. Not to mention all of the religious people that disallow for any gods but their specific one. Not to mention all of the non-religious groups that you exclude from full social franchisement. And by you, I am referring to the Baha'i Faith; not necessarily to you in particular.
Way to dodge the question in my viewWhat lie?
Your view is incorrect since I was asking a sincere question.Way to dodge the question in my view
They means that you dodged my question as to whether you would support a social contract based on a lie.Your view is incorrect since I was asking a sincere question.