Do people often turn discussions that you’re in into debates about your religion?

[TransmutingSoul]

I came to RF to find out about Bahai, because I read 1 book of Bahaullah I liked, but the Bahai followers in Holland were very belittling to other Religions (they said all Religions are good, but you need finally accept Bahai as the latest and most accurate to "make it"), which I found strange after reading Bahaullah's Book. So I wanted to check out if it was just the Dutch Bahai. I asked Adrian very specific about this and Tony also. And they assured me, that they do not think this way. For me that is enough, as I trust them. But I have seen others who don't have that trust towards Bahai.

I do not want to give you a wrong impression stvdv. There is no doubt that Baha'u'llah says that the God given elixer for the Unity of the entire human race is in excepting there is only One God and embracing Faith in One God under the Laws given in this age. There is no doubt about that in those writings and it is what all Baha'i share.

What I have been saying is that no one is compelled to accept that. I am not here to convince anyone that they have to accept that.

There are many that post here that accept the oneness of the human race and the Oneness of God, in many diverse ways.

I see in the end we are all of the same human mind and to me this mind is connected, how do we heal all the wrong in the world without a Unity based on a set of common goals? This can only be achieved by a divine physician.

"The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements... " Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Page 213

All the best, regards Tony

 

[stvdv]

Bahai followers in Holland were very belittling to other Religions (they said all Religions are good, but you need finally accept Bahai as the latest and most accurate to "make it")

I asked Adrian very specific about this and Tony also. And they assured me, that they do not think this way

I do not want to give you a wrong impression stvdv.

Oh, so I got it wrong then, it seems to me

There is no doubt that Baha'u'llah says that the God given elixer for the Unity of the entire human race is in excepting there is only One God and embracing Faith in One God under the Laws given in this age

What I have been saying is that no one is compelled to accept that. I am not here to convince anyone that they have to accept that.

Just to get it clear now.

Do you say here, that everyone does need to finally accept Bahai as the latest and most accurate Religion "to make it". And the other Religions are insufficient on their own?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Oh, so I got it wrong then, it seems to me




Just to get it clear now.

Do you say here, that everyone does need to finally accept Bahai as the latest and most accurate Religion "to make it". And the other Religions are insufficient on their own?

Well, together, we have proved Jim's post.

Happy to discuss if you start an OP

Regards Tony

 

[MonkeyFire]

No.

In my experience, this happens more with religions whose adherents tell others what they should believe or do, or religions whose views stand in opposition to or conflict with science.

Eastern philosophy is largely based on the order of duties, rites, and conduct, it's called the dharma. Why should religion be asinine for teaching and spreading pacifism, the second greatest quality that all living things can share in?

 

[stvdv]

Well, together, we have proved Jim's post.

No.
Jim asked about "does this happen to you?". I said "no not to me". And as he put it in debate forum, I just gave my opinion why it happens IMHO, and that I decided to stay far away from it. I did not start to debate. I'm fine with others believing whatever they want.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Eastern philosophy is largely based on the order of duties, rites, and conduct, it's called the dharma. Why should religion be asinine for teaching and spreading pacifism, the second greatest quality that all living things can share in?

Wanna try again, this time without the straw man?

 

[stvdv]

Happy to discuss if you start an OP
Regards Tony

Thanks for the offer, but I discussed it last year already. Got it clear now.

You corrected my specific reply, hence I knew I got it wrong last year.

You did not correct this reply, so I feel safe to assume I got it correct this time. That is all I wanted to know. So, Thanks for clearing this out.

Namastee

 

[MonkeyFire]

Wanna try again, this time without the straw man?

Pacifism is metaphysics, which is synonymous to the dharma.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Pacifism is metaphysics, which is synonymous to the dharma.

I see words, but I'm not sure what you are trying to communicate here. You statement makes no sense to me.

If you're trying to say that pacifism is "the dharma," then I afraid you really don't understand dharma.

 

[MonkeyFire]

I see words, but I'm not sure what you are trying to communicate here. You statement makes no sense to me.

If you're trying to say that pacifism is "the dharma," then I afraid you really don't understand dharma.

Pacifism (ahimsa) is the first principle of things, thus pacifism is metaphysics. Maybe you need a refreshment of the definition of metaphysics: "the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space." And the dharma: "the eternal and inherent nature of reality, regarded in Hinduism as a cosmic law underlying right behavior and social order."

 

[Jim]

There are certain people on this forum who never miss a chance to take a swipe at Mormonism. It doesn't matter what the thread topic is, if I so much as make one comment, they hop on their soap box and start bad-mouthing my religion. They know who they are.

I suspected that your religion would be one of the targets.

 

[Jim]

Once certain posters become aware, that someone is a JW, they target the religion, and the group as a whole, rather than the poster's comments... especially, when it relates to the theory of evolution.

I saw that too, when I was posting in that forum.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Pacifism (ahimsa) is the first principle of things, thus pacifism is metaphysics. Maybe you need a refreshment of the definition of metaphysics: "the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space." And the dharma: "the eternal and inherent nature of reality, regarded in Hinduism as a cosmic law underlying right behavior and social order."

Ahimsa is not pacifism. It literally means not to injure, i.e. do no harm. It is nonviolence, not pacifism.

"Ahimsa is not meant to imply pacifism."

Ahiṃsā - Wikipedia

I would think you have realized this since you appear to like copy/pasting definitions.

So, is there some sort of point that you would like to make with regard to my response to the OP now that I've demonstrated that your implication that Eastern philosophy and "the dharma" is not about "teaching and spreading pacifism?"

 

[MonkeyFire]

So, is there some sort of point that you would like to make with regard to my response to the OP now that I've demonstrated that your implication that Eastern philosophy and "the dharma" is not about "teaching and spreading pacifism?"

Passive is a onmonapia for peace, and you need it in order for nature to occur. It is both happy and equanimous while remaining non-violent, creating a miracle. With inner peace we can destroy our own suffering and transgressive emotions like hate and anger

 

[SalixIncendium]

Passive is a onmonapia for peace, and you need it in order for nature to occur. It is both happy and equanimous while remaining non-violent.

I'll take this as a "no." Thanks.

 

[Jim]

Well, together, we have proved Jim's post.

Happy to discuss if you start an OP

Regards Tony

Exactly. And just before I saw this post, I reported both of you, stvdv for off-topic debating about a poster’s religion, and Tony for off-topic preaching. That was hard for me to do, because I like both of you, and I didn’t think that either one of you meant any harm.

 

[MonkeyFire]

I'll take this as a "no." Thanks.

In my religion we are founded upon the dharma, and one of our metaphysic is pacifism.

 

[Jim]

No.
Jim asked about "does this happen to you?". I said "no not to me". And as he put it in debate forum, I just gave my opinion why it happens IMHO, and that I decided to stay far away from it. I did not start to debate. I'm fine with others believing whatever they want.

You went off topic to stab at some other people’s religious beliefs, and I reported that. I also reported Tony for responding to that with off-topic preaching.

 

[Jim]

I’m also reporting off-topic debating about eastern religions, which came totally out of nowhere, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the OP.

 

[Jim]

I see now that my topic needs clarification. It’s about people with opposing views derailing threads, together, with their feuding. One person goes off topic to jab and stab at some group or category of people, which sometimes includes someone who is posting in the thread. Then someone who feels targeted goes off topic to defend themselves and people they identify with, and sometimes they go beyond that into preaching. Then together those two people, and sometimes others, flood the discussion with their off topic debating.

Later, I’ll post examples of that from this thread.