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!
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
Religion already is one, there are many books explaining people's concepts of our reality, each is partially right, and together we can be scientific about the data.One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
What say you?
No mention of the people who try so hard to get others to convert?One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
What say you?
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
What say you?
I suppose I am curious as to how one can miss the glaring logic.
Believers tend to state all the time that there is only one true religion and it usually happens to be the one s/he is following at the time. If someone is to convert from one religion to another, does it not reasonably discredit the concept of the one true religion? Seems to me the obvious answer is yes regarding the given situation, because the believer has stopped believing in the one true religion for an entirely new religion that s/he will then unreasonably refer to the same way as the previous religion.
I suppose I am curious as to how one can miss the glaring logic.
Believers tend to state all the time that there is only one true religion and it usually happens to be the one s/he is following at the time. If someone is to convert from one religion to another, does it not reasonably discredit the concept of the one true religion? Seems to me the obvious answer is yes regarding the given situation, because the believer has stopped believing in the one true religion for an entirely new religion that s/he will then unreasonably refer to the same way as the previous religion.
All religions should be allowed to evolve from within their own traditions. They don't need replacement religions. And that evolution should occur continuously, not just once in a thousand years or so. That's not sufficient to keep up with the changes. God is not static, nor only active upon special occasion with static periods in between. Evolution is constant.I think all religions have truth that reflects the time and culture from where they emerged. So the truths are framed in the language and concepts of a particular era. Jesus taught a Jewish audience amidst the Roman Empire. Buddha emerged from a privileged background in India at a time when Hinduism that had particular challenges. Muhammad united a disparate group of nomadic tribesmen on the Arabian peninsula. Religion is like a tree with seasons. Eventually it loses its vitality and the old gives way to the new. There’s no harm in abandoning outworn traditions for that which is suited to the modern era.
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
What say you?
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
What say you?
I say there is no one "True" Religion. Only what is TRUE for the individual, and that varies, and can change many times throughout one's life.
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
What say you?
Yes, there is one true Religion irrespective of if people convert or do not convert.One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.
What say you?
The sad truth is some religions are too far gone and simply unable to reform to an extent to meet the needs of their communities. There are large sections of both the Christian and Muslim community that are unable to move beyond theologies that have clearly outlived their usefulness. The problem isn't outsiders preventing reform, but Christians and Muslims within who refuse to move beyond strict orthodoxy.All religions should be allowed to evolve from within their own traditions. They don't need replacement religions. And that evolution should occur continuously, not just once in a thousand years or so. That's not sufficient to keep up with the changes. God is not static, nor only active upon special occasion with static periods in between. Evolution is constant.
While on a personal level I might say I agree, I have to also recognize that these groups do in fact serve a need at some level for those who choose to participate in them. Many people simply are not ready for more updated, progressive forms of religion. Ideally, a religion should be able to accommodate all levels of faith, not just one.The sad truth is some religions are too far gone and simply unable to reform to an extent to meet the needs of their communities. There are large sections of both the Christian and Muslim community that are unable to move beyond theologies that have clearly outlived their usefulness.
Yes, it is those within in positions of power who set the highest floor the escalators go to. While there may be 15 floors in the building, they put under construction barriers at the 2nd floor, and so everyone gets crowded into tight spaces all looking out the same windows. If someone tells the people there are many floors higher they can go up to, leadership will typically throw them out the window, rather than allowing anyone to explore any higher.The problem isn't outsiders preventing reform, but Christians and Muslims within who refuse to move beyond strict orthodoxy.
I'm not sure what you mean by reformed. In my understanding reformed Christianity is another term for Calvinism. I'm definitely not that.Tell me, if you don't mind, do you see yourself as a reformed Christian?
I kinda get what you're saying.I suppose I am curious as to how one can miss the glaring logic.
Believers tend to state all the time that there is only one true religion and it usually happens to be the one s/he is following at the time. If someone is to convert from one religion to another, does it not reasonably discredit the concept of the one true religion? Seems to me the obvious answer is yes regarding the given situation, because the believer has stopped believing in the one true religion for an entirely new religion that s/he will then unreasonably refer to the same way as the previous religion.