Why learn about other faiths?

[Dawnofhope]

Curiosity is my main motivation.
What I like about is, is that I find out more and more that all faiths or paths share elements in their views and practices which I can discover as being similar.
I discover more and more that there are only two main types of path, one is more introspective or mystic and the other type is more exoteric or theoretical.
But a number of paths will mix both these types.

Another thing I like about it, is that it makes me realize more and more that my own path is quite unique (but by no means in the way like e.g. scientology is unique) and that it fits me perfectly.
What I sometimes miss though is real feedback about my path from outsiders. I don't mean the mudslinging type of feedback but from people who are really knowledgeable about the ins and outs of different types of paths including mine.

Thank you. It’s good you have found the path that works for you. In regards feedback the main difficulty I have with your path is clarifying what is a neohumanist tantric yoga mystic. Yoga, mysticism and humanist I get. Combine the three and I really struggle to picture it. At least I know you’re a vegetarian from another thread and you look down on those who aren’t. That’s easy to visualise and says a lot about your beliefs positive and negative. Good to hear your views.

 

[Dawnofhope]

And thats the reason Adrian i have slid into music. Tom waites has a verse i like and i like how music can convey in really compact quirky ways.. Philosophy talk pretty rapidly annoys and bugs me like some tick on my neck! The gospel comes in many forms but we often turn it into nonsense. I think waites paints that rather nicely.

"But there's one thing you can't do
Is lose that feel
You can throw it off a bridge
You can lose it in a fire
You can leave it at the altar
But it will make you out a liar
You can fall down in the street
You can leave it in the lurch
Well you say that it's gospel
But I know that it's only church

And there's one thing you can't lose
And it's that feel
It's that feel"

Thank you. That puts it all into perspective better than any of my mediocre philosophical musings. I haven’t heard Tom Waites for a while.

His distinctive deep gravelly voice was described by critic Daniel Durchholz as sounding as though "it was soaked in a vat of bourbon, left hanging in the smokehouse for a few months, and then taken outside and run over with a car"

I think I’ll go have that bourbon now...

 

[Dawnofhope]

I hold no animosity either, although I know you don't believe me. It's not animosity, more just distrust. Going on my previous statement about observing individuals, I've generally had reasonable discussions with you. I can't say the same for all Baha'i though. Religiously, I know I would disagree with Katzpur philosophically almost as much as I do with the Baha'i philosophy, but it's actions that speak. In looking at the distortion of numbers, for example, in my neighbouring province an unincorporated hamlet with a population of 10 people was listed as a place to contact Baha'i. So that sort of stuff, and the condescending attitude I got did a number on my personal tolerance, and I since regret entering the 'debates' at all. It wasn't conducive to healthy interfaith. Better, in retrospect, to have dropped out much much sooner.

As you say it’s actions that speak louder than words. It’s good to have insight, even in retrospect. Let’s avoid ‘debating’ Baha’i for a while. It’s probably not good for either of us.

Out of curiosity how do you know there isn’t a Baha’i in that hamlet?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That sounds like a really dark place to be as so many of us have spiritual beliefs. It’s not atheism that’s darkness but viewing another’s worldview with contempt. I view ISIS and any extremist with contempt.

FWIW, the contempt I’m describing is generally no worse than what I reserve for homeopaths.

But most Muslims, Christians and people of other worldviews including atheism I like and respect.

Same here. In my experience, most religious people don’t actually take their religion that seriously.

I wonder if it’s better to avoid talking about religion completely if those discussions may lead to complete contempt?

If only that were possible. Have you met the “it’s freedom OF religion not freedom FROM religion” crowd?

 

[Dawnofhope]

FWIW, the contempt I’m describing is generally no worse than what I reserve for homeopaths.


Same here. In my experience, most religious people don’t actually take their religion that seriously.


If only that were possible. Have you met the “it’s freedom OF religion not freedom FROM religion” crowd?

I wonder if it’s a cultural thing? In the USA religion appears to have become enmeshed with politics so religion has become a negative force. That’s the way I see it as an outsider. In my country (New Zealand) politicians avoid mentioning religion as it’s not helpful to the political discourse. One of the underlying themes for both countries is the Christianity versus atheism debate that’s become tired and divisive. That’s why I’m not keen on theist verses atheist debates. They are usually unproductive. Better to avoid mentioning religion at all.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I just can't figure out why you do. Why is it so important that we all have the same worldview?

I’m not saying that we should; just that if I’m not able to respect someone’s beliefs, then I’m not going to respect their beliefs.

I’m not talking about taking away anyone’s legal rights (though it would be nice if I didn’t have to subsidize religion). I’m fine with letting people believe as they wish; it’s just that if those beliefs cross a certain line, I certainly won’t be praising those beliefs, which leaves me with either not engaging with the beliefs at all or engaging with them in a negative way.

I can be friendly enough in the context of whatever I’m doing - I know plenty of very religious people through my volunteering and we get along fine. There’s still a difference between “getting along fine” and friendship, though. Religion is often central to a person’s life, so not engaging with it can often mean not being able to get close enough for a friendship.

And it’s not like this is a one-way thing on my part, either. The people around me can see that I don’t bow my head with everyone else for grace at a banquet, that I don’t write anything about “prayers” in office sympathy cards, that I don’t say things like “thank God,” etc. I’m not exactly inundated with invitations to social events from heavily religious people.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Yes we do. Are you telling me that another practicing LDS person told you we don't believe in the Bible, rely on it heavily, or study it? Or am I misunderstanding you?

Here's what our leadership has said about the Bible: The Miracle of the Holy Bible. We even offer to send people a free Bible (the KJV), no strings attached. Of course, we're always happy to send them a copy of The Book of Mormon, too, but that's not part of this offer. And in our adult Sunday School classes, we study the Bible for two out of every four years.

Thanks for that.

One of your associates on my ‘Is Muhammad a Messenger of God’ thread made the following statement:

Yes, I remember how nothing you shared changed the fact that Muhammad denied the divinity of Christ and that your attempt to wield Biblical verses as a sword showcased your ignorance of the teachings of the LDS Church.

The doctrines of the LDS Church are not bound by the Bible.

Was Muhammad a Messenger of God?

I had to trawl through a great deal of negative comment to find that lol.

So are the doctrines of the LDS church not bound by the Bible? How about the Divinity of Christ?

The discussion if you can call it that didn’t go well and that’s a lesson to be learned in itself. Interfaith discussions can be great but they can be acrimonious too.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I wonder if it’s a cultural thing? In the USA religion appears to have become enmeshed with politics so religion has become a negative force. That’s the way I see it as an outsider.

I’m in Canada, not the US... though I cross the border frequently, so my personal experience these days is a mix of both countries.

In my country (New Zealand) politicians avoid mentioning religion as it’s not helpful to the political discourse.

Traditionally, at least in national politics, that was the approach here in Canada, too. Historically, Quebec was very Catholic and the other provinces were mostly very Protestant, so national unity required people to set aside religious differences.

At the provincial level, though, religion was always a major force. Until about maybe the 1920s, the Orange Lodge was a major influencer in politics here in Ontario and, except for a handful of rural ridings with a Catholic majority, it was effectively impossible for a Catholic to get nominated for office.

This has gotten better over time and the 20th century saw Canada become one of the most multicultural countries on Earth, but in the past couple of decades, the religious right has started to push back.

One of the underlying themes for both countries is the Christianity versus atheism debate that’s become tired and divisive. That’s why I’m not keen on theist verses atheist debates. They are usually unproductive. Better to avoid mentioning religion at all.

Easier said than done. Outside of RF, I’m never the one to bring up religion.

 

[Vinayaka]

As you say it’s actions that speak louder than words. It’s good to have insight, even in retrospect. Let’s avoid ‘debating’ Baha’i for a while. It’s probably not good for either of us.

Out of curiosity how do you know there isn’t a Baha’i in that hamlet?

I don't. It's just chances are incredibly slim. Maybe next time I'm through there I'll knock on the 3 doors and ask. In my city of 1.3 million, there are 200 active Baha'is. It's just mathematical logic. But go ahead, believe what you want to too.

I see what you did there. You say, 'Let's avoid debating Baha'i, and then immediately afterward you ask me a question looking for more debate. Sneaky, and the kind of doublespeak I'm used to.

 

[Vinayaka]

People who use knowledge to sow hate and division based on carefully massaged half-truths are professional sophists. Folks who believe what these sophists are saying are falling victims since they do not know better. Knowing of both kind (other beliefs and the people who have them) helps against such propaganda.

It all has to be filtered with your own insight, logic, and wisdom. Carefully massaged half-truths, as you put it, have any source, both detractors, and adherents.

 

[Vinayaka]

This is also important in religions like Christianity where we would like to share our faith and teachings with others - you need to be able to understand your audience in order to properly reach out to them.

As a member of a non-proselytizing religion, and personally objecting to it because of the damage it does to established cultures, this is one reason we can certainly do without. When I see pamphlets like, "How to convert a Muslim" I just cringe. In my view, there is only one way to properly reach out to them, and that is to leave them alone. Religious conversion is unnecessary and pompous. That's why there is a trend to ban it, thank goodness.

So I would urge you to think twice. Do you want to be responsible for breaking up a marriage?

 

[sayak83]

It all has to be filtered with your own insight, logic, and wisdom. Carefully massaged half-truths, as you put it, have any source, both detractors, and adherents.

Yes.

 

[sealchan]

One of the strengths of religious forum is the diversity of Faiths represented. That presents an excellent opportunity to learn about the faiths of others. This opportunity doesn’t readily present itself to the same degree where I live as religion has become a risky topic of conversation and so best avoided. This year I joined my cities Interfaith council so that’s been helpful.

But why learn about the religion of another in the first place? What is your motivation and what is mine? It’s a personal question really. For me I like to see the bigger picture of ‘world history’ with civilisations that have come and been, and ideologies and beliefs that inspired the masses. It helps me better understand the world as it is today and others in an increasingly multicultural world. It also brings coherence to my own faith and worldview I can not deny.

Obviously there’s other agendas too. We can learn about another faiths so we can make our own beliefs look good and demean others. Many of us know that illusory satisfaction in our worldview as we build our straw man as to what we imagine another’s faith is about. Ego trips are part of the human condition and whose really immune?

Anyway thoughts and reflections? Thanks for listening and discussing if your interested.

For me what I love is story. The Bible tells an amazing story about God and a peoples' relationship to Him. My faith now lies in that story.

But I must confess that I am falling in love with another story: the Mahabharata. This is a story about another peoples' relationship to God.

There is so much to learn, so much to study. It's an ecstasy of opportunity, a lifetime of bliss for me.

 

[Katzpur]

Thanks for that.

One of your associates on my ‘Is Muhammad a Messenger of God’ thread made the following statement:

Yes, I remember how nothing you shared changed the fact that Muhammad denied the divinity of Christ and that your attempt to wield Biblical verses as a sword showcased your ignorance of the teachings of the LDS Church.

The doctrines of the LDS Church are not bound by the Bible.

Was Muhammad a Messenger of God?

I had to trawl through a great deal of negative comment to find that lol.

So are the doctrines of the LDS church not bound by the Bible? How about the Divinity of Christ?

The discussion if you can call it that didn’t go well and that’s a lesson to be learned in itself. Interfaith discussions can be great but they can be acrimonious too.

Oh, yes. I do believe I know who you are referring to.

Our belief is that The Book of Mormon is "another testament of Jesus Christ." In the Bible, Jesus Christ tells His disciples, "And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." We believe that the people He was referring to were descendants of Lehi, who had taken his family from Jerusalem to the New World six hundred years earlier. Since He had previously stated that His personal mission was solely to the House of Israel, we believe that He was telling them that others of the House of Israel would also hear His voice and that He would make them part of His fold. The Book of Mormon foretells His coming to those people and is an account of His visit. So the two books are both intended to testify of Him. They are about different groups of people, but they are intended to go hand in hand. While The Book of Mormon does speak of various doctrines the Bible makes no mention of, it does not contradict the Bible in any way.

And yes, we absolutely believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. We believe He was with His Father "in the beginning" and that He was responsible, under His Father's direction, of creating our earth. We believe He was the divine Son of God and shared in His Father's attributes, knowledge and power. But we also believe that He looked to His Father as His God. So He is and always has been subordinate to His Father.

I hope that wasn't too much to trawl through! (Brevity is not among my strong suits.)

 

[David T]

Thank you. That puts it all into perspective better than any of my mediocre philosophical musings. I haven’t heard Tom Waites for a while.

His distinctive deep gravelly voice was described by critic Daniel Durchholz as sounding as though "it was soaked in a vat of bourbon, left hanging in the smokehouse for a few months, and then taken outside and run over with a car"

I think I’ll go have that bourbon now...

Ha!!!!!

 

[CG Didymus]

I’m not saying that we should; just that if I’m not able to respect someone’s beliefs, then I’m not going to respect their beliefs.

I’m not talking about taking away anyone’s legal rights (though it would be nice if I didn’t have to subsidize religion). I’m fine with letting people believe as they wish; it’s just that if those beliefs cross a certain line, I certainly won’t be praising those beliefs, which leaves me with either not engaging with the beliefs at all or engaging with them in a negative way.

I can be friendly enough in the context of whatever I’m doing - I know plenty of very religious people through my volunteering and we get along fine. There’s still a difference between “getting along fine” and friendship, though. Religion is often central to a person’s life, so not engaging with it can often mean not being able to get close enough for a friendship.

And it’s not like this is a one-way thing on my part, either. The people around me can see that I don’t bow my head with everyone else for grace at a banquet, that I don’t write anything about “prayers” in office sympathy cards, that I don’t say things like “thank God,” etc. I’m not exactly inundated with invitations to social events from heavily religious people.

Since some sects and cults within a religion are false and dangerous, it is a good thing some people call them out for what they are. But, where do we draw the line as to where a religion stops being false and dangerous? Baha'is themselves have pointed out the "false" beliefs Christians hold. Protestants point out the false beliefs Catholics hold, along with every other religion in the world.

I question the Baha'i's belief in a progression of spiritual knowledge that is supposedly from a one true God... that can be seen and traced through all the major religions. But all the major religions have contradictory beliefs? But besides them, Baha'is also believe no people were left without guidance. But some religions believed in many gods, and that those gods had to be appeased, sometimes by human sacrifice. So where is the one true God in those sorts of beliefs?

Someone I don't see mentioned much is Joseph Campbell. The little I've seen of him in his TV shows, it seems like he looks more at how the beliefs of a people fit into their particular culture. But not as having come from a God, but more how it came from those people and how it made sense of their world and helped keep them together as a people. So do we believe in the religion of some tribal society as being true? Most of us don't. We see it as mythology and superstition... but it worked and made sense to those people for hundreds of years. Until, usually, European colonial powers took over their land and "taught" them Christianity. Which, of course, was taught as being the absolute truth. With things like Jesus being part of a Trinity.

Now Baha'is have to go to those tribal people in the different countries and tell them that the belief that Jesus is God, and that he physically rose from the dead, are false... and are superstitious beliefs held only by Christians. So where is the "respect" in that?

And, since we have Hindus in this thread also. Same thing, Christians came to India and took over and told them that their beliefs were wrong. That they are following a false religion. That they need Jesus and Jesus only. But now the Baha'is come in and tell them "no". Their old Hindu beliefs were true and what the Christians told them is wrong. Yet, somehow, they say that Christians are correct also... but only in the "original" form? Which got changed by the followers of Jesus into what is called Christianity today. And I don't think Baha'is believe any of them to be correct, even the LDS, even though they'll say nice things about them. But, ultimately, do Baha'is believe the Book of Mormon? I don't think so. And is not telling a religion how they really feel respect?

But the same thing with Hinduism. With all those things, the Vedas, Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, and I'm sure many other Sacred Scriptures... what do Baha'is believe is "true" Hinduism? One thing for sure, they don't believe in the reincarnation beliefs. So where is the respect? They aren't taking the teaching of any religion and accepting them as truth. And in fact, they are saying that many of the main teachings of most all religions are false. And it may be. So why does a religion that believe it is the only one that is right need to study the other religions? Part of it is to know how to guide the people out of those old false beliefs into the new religion that has the real truth form God.

So, although I like much of what the Baha'i Faith teaches, and I really like and appreciate Adrian's threads and yes, I really like Tony too, I agree with you and others like Vinayaka for your ability to see beyond appearances and read between the lines of what people are saying.

 

[iam1me]

As a member of a non-proselytizing religion, and personally objecting to it because of the damage it does to established cultures, this is one reason we can certainly do without. When I see pamphlets like, "How to convert a Muslim" I just cringe. In my view, there is only one way to properly reach out to them, and that is to leave them alone. Religious conversion is unnecessary and pompous. That's why there is a trend to ban it, thank goodness.

So I would urge you to think twice. Do you want to be responsible for breaking up a marriage?

Do you disagree with the idea of teaching people truth, to teaching them right from wrong, to saving people? If the idea of doing so makes you cringe, then there is something seriously wrong with you and your current beliefs.

And sharing the faith does not equate to breaking up a marriage. To the contrary, the scriptures teach that one who converts should ideally remain as they are. If they are married, even to a non-believer, they should remain married. Or is it perhaps your beliefs that demand that a marriage be broken if the partner changes religions?

 

[paarsurrey]

One of the strengths of religious forum is the diversity of Faiths represented. That presents an excellent opportunity to learn about the faiths of others. This opportunity doesn’t readily present itself to the same degree where I live as religion has become a risky topic of conversation and so best avoided. This year I joined my cities Interfaith council so that’s been helpful.

But why learn about the religion of another in the first place? What is your motivation and what is mine? It’s a personal question really. For me I like to see the bigger picture of ‘world history’ with civilisations that have come and been, and ideologies and beliefs that inspired the masses. It helps me better understand the world as it is today and others in an increasingly multicultural world. It also brings coherence to my own faith and worldview I can not deny.

Obviously there’s other agendas too. We can learn about another faiths so we can make our own beliefs look good and demean others. Many of us know that illusory satisfaction in our worldview as we build our straw man as to what we imagine another’s faith is about. Ego trips are part of the human condition and whose really immune?

Anyway thoughts and reflections? Thanks for listening and discussing if your interested.

It is a positive, peaceful and interesting activity. It creates unity and increases love of G-d and love of humanity, especially when one learns that G-d even spoke to the nomadic people who remained cut off from the civilizations for a long long times.

Regards

 

[CG Didymus]

Do you disagree with the idea of teaching people truth, to teaching them right from wrong, to saving people? If the idea of doing so makes you cringe, then there is something seriously wrong with you and your current beliefs.

And sharing the faith does not equate to breaking up a marriage. To the contrary, the scriptures teach that one who converts should ideally remain as they are. If they are married, even to a non-believer, they should remain married. Or is it perhaps your beliefs that demand that a marriage be broken if the partner changes religions?

When most Christians say "truth" they usually mean the beliefs of their version of Christianity. So which Christianity is the truth when each one can tell me why theirs is correct and someone else's is wrong?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So, although I like much of what the Baha'i Faith teaches, and I really like and appreciate Adrian's threads and yes, I really like Tony too, I agree with you and others like Vinayaka for your ability to see beyond appearances and read between the lines of what people are saying.

That is good advice. The old saying we have two ears and one mouth so we can listen twice as much as we speak rings true.

It is one of the hardest lessons to learn

Regards Tony