• 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!

Pantheism - a foundation for unity?

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
it seems to me that the Baha'i "end game" is to gradually subsume all the members of other faiths into one new all-encompassing theocratic empire.

Baha'i is in no way the end game. That would refute all light of the future, that the sun will never rise again. A great mistake of the past.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
In any case, if you are arguing that 2000 years of Christian tradition is "darkness" that "comes from man and has diminished the light of Christ" - how on earth do you hope to reconcile your religion with theirs?

Better explained like this. It is like me as a Baha'i. There is the Message of Light by Baha'u'llah and then there is my take on it. If I offer a view it is not a view that comes from light, I will alter the intensity with my human limitations. If I offer a quote, I give the light in its pure form for another to consider.

I see Christianity made doctrine. The passages attributed to Christ are Light, our take on them will alter its intensity, not take away all the light.

Regards Tony
 

siti

Well-Known Member
I see Christianity made doctrine. The passages attributed to Christ are Light, our take on them will alter its intensity, not take away all the light.
How can you know that any of the passages attributed to Christ were really from Christ? Isn't that, at least in part, why (according to Baha'i claims) there was a need of not one, but two, subsequent Manifestations?

And I still don't see how disparagingly referring to the religions of others as "darkness" and man-made "doctrine" is going to promote "unity"?
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And I still don't see how disparagingly referring to the religions of others as "darkness" and man-made "doctrine" is going to promote "unity"?

One great step from adolescent to maturity is taking responsibility for our mistakes and learning from them and not repeating them.

No Message from God has been any different in the fact that it came to show people they needed to change. Those that accept, try to make that change.

I see that the message given by Baha'u'llah brings the promised peace and unity only when we embrace the elixer of that Message. It is the same Message given to suit each age. In this age that promissed the world will see the 'Glory of God', it has gone global and will embrace the world. As to How? As to When?

We will find our unity in our diversity, albeit may be with a great deal less people and maybe infrastructure.

Regards Tony
 

siti

Well-Known Member
One great step from adolescent to maturity is taking responsibility for our mistakes and learning from them and not repeating them.
And yet here we are, still making unfounded religious claims and calling them "evidence"...here we are, still making disparaging remarks about other faiths whilst claiming to pursue religious "unity"...

I really have nothing more to add to this side track, Tony - as far as I can tell, you have just proved that your kind of monotheism is, in principle, far less likely to provide as accommodating and conciliatory a basis for inter-religious acceptance and dialogue than a pantheistic/panentheistic theology. In practice it might bamboozle some - so as you say - some, perhaps even many, may claim "unity in diversity" whilst all sticking to the exact same story as one another and excluding those who differ, but I don't think its can really cut the mustard as a genuinely universal force for unity - global in distribution - maybe - but sufficiently influential to change the world? I think not.
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
maybe - but sufficiently influential to change the world? I think not.

Thus I have seen it said, that you to yours, me to mine and as what is divine, that will unfold in time. :D

Actually, I think that poem was mine :p

Meanwhile, lets live the virtues and in them find our unity.

Regards Tony
 

Ancient Soul

The Spiritual Universe
Sydney Religious Studies Lecturer, Raphael Lataster, suggests that a pantheistic model of deity may be a more fertile basis (than, for example, a monotheistic revealed religion) on which religious "unity" and cooperation might be founded. In a recent paper he writes:

"The clear lack of dogmatic adherence to a particular god in many pantheistic models may foster more religious
tolerance, and could lead to wider acceptance of non-theistic and possibly more tolerant religions such as Buddhism, Daoism, or indigenous animisms. Pantheistic worldviews tend to be relatively inclusive, and could thus have many positive societal impacts.

For example, ... pantheists understand that “all are one.” Everything that exists is part of the one divine reality. The divine does not choose one people/species ... all people are divine. All species are divine. And all that is, from the glorious mountain, to the lowly ball of dung, is divine. Worldviews that encourage reverence for humanity and nature may increase the chances of cooperation, egalitarianism, and unity..."


What do you think? Does pantheism really provide a better foundation than theism for tolerance, cooperation and unity among the the human family?

Good question but moot since the concept of pantheism requires one to actually THINK and try to understand such a complex belief, but most people are too lazy so just like to sit back and let some religious leader(s) spoon feed them a bunch of lies about their version of what they think "god" is.

Now I think you are on the right track, but for the above mentioned reason I don't think most people will ever have what it takes to figure out what God and the universe is really all about on their own.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I disagree particularly with your first and last statement. Monotheism is not superior except in the mind of a monotheist. Pantheism is a monotheistic religion thus even with a monotheistic prejudice it is still not lesser under that context. The second statement is flawed because religion does not evolve it changes with social context. As human culture became less influenced and dependent on the surrounding environment and as social structures and political structure the religion changes. God becomes more human like in time with the extreme is seen in Christianity where god becomes human. As our environment changed recently along with advances in our understanding of the natural world we see changes again developing with an increase in atheism, pantheism, and polytheism. There has also been a resurgence in First Nations beliefs. So all religion does not evolve to monotheism.
You are welcome to believe that Pantheism is superior or equal. It's a free country and we can believe as we wish (and thank goodness for that!!!) Why is wrong of you to do is to say I didn't answer your question when I did.

I'm quite familiar with contemporary Native American religion, and it tends to be panentheistic, not pantheistic -- you have Wakan Tanka, the Great Spirit, who is more than just the sum total of the universe, my friend.

I agree with you that monotheism, including Panentheism, comes with more sophisticated cultures -- as I have said numerous times already, the key difference is literacy, which means the capacity to build on the wisdom of the wisest minds that came before.
 
Top