• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does conversion damage the concept of "one true religion"?

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
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.
 

rocala

Well-Known Member
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.

Why??? Is there one subject humanity has agreed on? Is there anything which is immune from opinion change? The nature of the universe, the origin of life? I would expect a few debatable ideas to crop up.
 

Phaedrus

Active Member
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.
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
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.

So if we look for consensus in findings, we can already show that many ancient religions believed similar, until people started creating things that fit their own understanding of our reality.

The idea of converting people was chastised by Yeshua, as when we're down near Hell (Matthew 23:15), the only way to free ourselves of our hypocrisies is to become wiser in all understanding.

In my opinion. :innocent:
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.

What say you?

Conversion takes place because much like in civil debate between two parties, the actual truth is likely somewhere in between everything.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.

What say you?

Since many if not most religions believe that they represent the one true and final religion in one form or another, your question is not easily answered. Also the reason most people convert, or by far the 95%+ accept the religion they inherit, is the desire of the sense of community and belonging, and not the search for the illusive one true religion. If such a thing could possibly exist from the fallible human perspective.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
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.

Not all religions have that as a core belief. Some religions believe all religions are good, and that diversity is needed in order to suit everyone. So it's more 'my religion is the best for me' than 'my religion is the best for all'. But of course if all you've ever seen is the 'my way is THE way' it's logical to conclude what you concluded. I personally don't for a moment think my religion would suit all of humanity. In some cases, I'd chase people away from it.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
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.

Yes. I hope that true believers honestly think that their beliefs are indeed TRUE, and that if they come to believe that they are not, they will go find the beliefs that they think ARE true, and convert to them. Anything else is hypocrisy.

But the thing about truth (including religious truth) is this: it is utterly independent of what people think it is or perceive about it. People convert to, or change, to different beliefs to FIND that truth, not to establish it....unless you think that having a single religious truth means that the knowledge of it should be hard wired into our brains? I have to admit, that would be a new idea, one I haven't heard before. The most hidebound believer in predestination doesn't think that the True Religion is downloaded, full bore, into our synapses at birth.

I have to wonder why you would think it should be?
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
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.
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.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.

What say you?

That is hard to establish rigorously, but it is worth reflecting about.

Related and also worth of consideration are matters such as what a "one true religion" would even be, and what it means if it exists alongside others (presumably less one and/or less true) religions.

Perhaps even specifically the question "if there is one true God, he is all-powerful, and approves of exactly one religion, then how come there are so many others?"
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
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.
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
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.

I say the same thing. It probably goes without saying that this includes the idea of respecting others' religions as equally valid.

Gandhi said:

"I believe that there is no such thing as conversion from one faith to another in the accepted sense of the word. It is a highly personal matter for the individual and his God. I may not have any design upon my neighbour as to his faith, which I must honour even as I honour my own. Having reverently studied the scriptures of the world I could no more think of asking a Christian or a Musalman [sic], or a Parsi or a Jew to change his faith than I would think of changing my own."

"I came to the conclusion long ago . . . that all religions were true and also that all had some error in them, and whilst I hold by my own, I should hold others as dear as Hinduism. So we can only pray, if we are Hindus, not that a Christian should become a Hindu … But our innermost prayer should be a Hindu should be a better Hindu, a Muslim a better Muslim, a Christian a better Christian."
 

1213

Well-Known Member
One would think that if there was one true religion, some people would not convert from one religion to another.

What say you?

If people don’t like the one true religion, they obviously can quite easily reject it and choose something that pleases them. Not all like the truth.

This is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light, and doesn't come to the light, lest his works would be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his works may be revealed, that they have been done in God."
John 3:19-21
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
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.
And the true Religion does not stop one's search, research and exploring for Truth where-ever one finds it and joins it.
And I agree withe friend @Jainarayan "that this includes the idea of respecting others' religions", but that doesn't stop one from giving reasonable and arguments in peaceful dialogue and listening to others in the same spirit. Right, please?

Regards
_____________
[1:5]اِیَّاکَ نَعۡبُدُ وَ اِیَّاکَ نَسۡتَعِیۡنُ ؕ﴿۵﴾
Thee alone do we worship and Thee alone do we implore for help.
[1:6]اِہۡدِ نَا الصِّرَاطَ الۡمُسۡتَقِیۡمَ ۙ﴿۶﴾
Guide us in the right path
[1:7]صِرَاطَ الَّذِیۡنَ اَنۡعَمۡتَ عَلَیۡہِمۡ ۬ۙ غَیۡرِ الۡمَغۡضُوۡبِ عَلَیۡہِمۡ وَ لَا الضَّآلِّیۡنَ ٪﴿۷﴾
The path of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings, those who have not incurred Thy displeasure, and those who have not gone astray.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 1: Al-Fatihah
 
Last edited:

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
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.
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.

Tell me, if you don't mind, do you see yourself as a reformed Christian?
 

Marcion

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma
There is only one spiritual path and the rules which are to be followed are roughly the same for everyone.
Religions are based on irrational assumptions and fantasies that create artificial boundaries and divisions between people.
One should follow the spiritual path and not any religion.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
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.
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 problem isn't outsiders preventing reform, but Christians and Muslims within who refuse to move beyond strict orthodoxy.
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.

This phenomenon is particularly noticeable in Protestant Christianity where new cults are formed nearly every day under some charismatic personality, a new prophet to tell them the truth from a top-down hierarchy under their name. Very rarely will you hear, "The truth is within you". To do so, would undermine their authority, in their eyes.

Tell me, if you don't mind, do you see yourself as a reformed Christian?
I'm not sure what you mean by reformed. In my understanding reformed Christianity is another term for Calvinism. I'm definitely not that. ;)

If you mean progressive, I suppose that might work if I choose to identify with a religion. I don't like to identify as following a tradition, even if it is progressive. Christianity is my background, and as I continue to evolve I find many deep truths hidden within the sands of its scriptures, and it becomes a useful language for me at times.

I've yet to find a form of Christianity that truly offers what it needs to for where I am at, even in its more progressive, postmodern forms, which I have participated in. My path is very much an inner path, and Christianity provides a language at times to express that well for me. It's hard to explain. If I found that right community, that could perhaps happen.

But I would probably still feel uncomfortable identifying as anything. I'm kind of at that place where the things that speak to me from faith, transcend religion. As it should. I always like to say, God doesn't have a religion. I practice the religion God does. ;)
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
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 kinda get what you're saying.

It's like how the guy who's on his fifth marriage and described every one of his exes as "the love of my life" should probably stop and reflect on whether a single "love of his life" really exists.
 
Top