Supersessionism and beyond - Can Christianity meaningfully address religious pluralism?

[e.r.m.]

Thanks for your post. Christianity is a diverse religion and as noted there is a spectrum of beliefs that would view pluralism as completely consistent with Biblical theology to those like yourself who see a fundamental contradiction. It is easy for those on either side of the spectrum to state those on the opposing side of the spectrum have both rejected and departed from Biblical theology though neither side would view themselves in this light. As you may appreciate I firmly identify with those who believe in biblical religious pluralism.

I respect your thoughts.
They who would view pluralism as completely consistent with Biblical theology would be wrong. This is not ike we're deciding preferences such as whether broccoli tastes good or broccoli tastes bad. That's up to each individual, there is no standard or absolute on that. Biblical theology however has written texts which are not up to preference.
Exodus 20:5, Deuteronomy 5:9, John 3:16-18, Acts 4:12, Acts 17:23-31.
There is a lot of love there, which these passages don't go into, they're found elsewhere.
They would have to avoid such passages to promote pluralism within Christianity, in which case they would be partially misrepresenting Biblical Christianity.

 

[CG Didymus]

This is the critical point CG, that I have been offering. We do not in any way control how any person sees the Baha'i Faith and reacts to it. We are responsible only for our own selves.

A person can be respectful, humble, loving etc. and be of most any religion. And a person can push their beliefs on others and barely listen to the other person. Don't be like that person.

It is prophecy in the Baha'i Writings that a time will come when the Churches and Synagogues and Mosques and other Holy places will have the Baha'i Faith condemned from the pulpits.

What I see as being the main thing being condemned here is that some Baha'is are close to being proselytizing.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

A person can be respectful, humble, loving etc. and be of most any religion. And a person can push their beliefs on others and barely listen to the other person. Don't be like that person.

I would ask if you see a platform like RF, in the debate sections, is a place where views are being pushed? What is the point of a debate, is it not to prove the side one is presenting?

Definition of DEBATE

I would also ask if there is God and God has said an old veiw is not correct, that it needs to be considered in a new way, how can the old veiw be considered in any other way?

The respect is, that I am happy that no one is obligated to consider the new view, but RF is a place to offer them and it is that simple, no one needs to respond to what is offered.

It also may be that when a person finds a slight difference in their Frames of Reference, that they may see that the new was not such a bad thing after all.

What I see as being the main thing being condemned here is that some Baha'is are close to being proselytizing.

Go to any debate on RF, I am more than sure most posts can be seen in the same light, in fact I see many a post that go way beyond where I would take my view of my Faith in discussion with others. But then I have been here a while and learn not what to say to some people.

Could it be that the issue is the argument has a strong foundation in Truth and many are just not yet ready? That would be inclusive of the person offering, as if people are not ready, then it should not have been offered in wisdom.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

I would ask if you see a platform like RF, in the debate sections, is a place where views are being pushed? What is the point of a debate, is it not to prove the side one is presenting?

Definition of DEBATE

I would also ask if there is God and God has said an old veiw is not correct, that it needs to be considered in a new way, how can the old veiw be considered in any other way?

The respect is, that I am happy that no one is obligated to consider the new view, but RF is a place to offer them and it is that simple, no one needs to respond to what is offered.

It also may be that when a person finds a slight difference in their Frames of Reference, that they may see that the new was not such a bad thing after all.



Go to any debate on RF, I am more than sure most posts can be seen in the same light, in fact I see many a post that go way beyond where I would take my view of my Faith in discussion with others. But then I have been here a while and learn not what to say to some people.

Could it be that the issue is the argument has a strong foundation in Truth and many are just not yet ready? That would be inclusive of the person offering, as if people are not ready, then it should not have been offered in wisdom.

Regards Tony

I don't mind people pushing their views sometimes. But sometimes people, even Baha'is, have to lighten up and try and reconcile some of our differences.

Like with the Christian that just posted. He's here. He's friendly. Find out what he believes and why? Then, find out what he thinks of the Baha'i Faith. I'm sure he'll give you some very Bible-based Christian answers. What you going to do? Tell him that his interpretation is wrong? Of course you believe it is wrong, but is their a kinder, gentler way of saying it without pushing him away and keeping him as a friend?

 

[Muffled]

The problem with Supersessionism is not that Christianity is not embracing religious pluralism. It is that it is laying the groundwork for hatred of Jews and 2000 years of our persecution, torture, and murder. Replacement Theology is the manure that fertilizes the soil in which anti-Semitism grows. We aren't talking about some pie in the sky religious multiculturalism. We're talking about people dying.

I believe people who harass Jews are being totally stupid. There is no sense in beating a dead dog.

 

[Harel13]

I believe people who harass Jews are being totally stupid.

At first I thought: here's someone who gets it.
Then I read this:

There is no sense in beating a dead dog.

 

[Muffled]

I don't mind people pushing their views sometimes. But sometimes people, even Baha'is, have to lighten up and try and reconcile some of our differences.

Like with the Christian that just posted. He's here. He's friendly. Find out what he believes and why? Then, find out what he thinks of the Baha'i Faith. I'm sure he'll give you some very Bible-based Christian answers. What you going to do? Tell him that his interpretation is wrong? Of course you believe it is wrong, but is their a kinder, gentler way of saying it without pushing him away and keeping him as a friend?

I believe I can be friendly to everyone but agreement is not something we are likely to achieve. A person may actually understand the reasoning and yet deny it because it would mean losing their religion.

 

[Muffled]

At first I thought: here's someone who gets it.
Then I read this:

I was also at one time:

Eph. 2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ

 

[Harel13]

I was also at one time:

Eph. 2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ

And that makes your previous answer all the more better, how exactly?
Whichever way you look at it, thy name is Supersessionism.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I respect your thoughts.
They who would view pluralism as completely consistent with Biblical theology would be wrong. This is not ike we're deciding preferences such as whether broccoli tastes good or broccoli tastes bad. That's up to each individual, there is no standard or absolute on that. Biblical theology however has written texts which are not up to preference.
Exodus 20:5, Deuteronomy 5:9, John 3:16-18, Acts 4:12, Acts 17:23-31.
There is a lot of love there, which these passages don't go into, they're found elsewhere.
They would have to avoid such passages to promote pluralism within Christianity, in which case they would be partially misrepresenting Biblical Christianity.

Thanks for your post. Exodus and Deuteronomy have traditionally been ascribed to the that which was revealed to Moses by HaShem. Its important to note there are other religions beyond Judaism including Christianity that are monotheistic and believe in the God of Abraham.

There is no agreement about the authorship of the Gospel of John though it is traditionally ascribed to John the Apostle. There are religions beyond Christianity that believe in Jesus. The concept of the Sonship of Jesus is accepted by Baha’is and the Virgin birth accepted by Muslims.

Acts is traditionally ascribed to Luke the companion of Paul though biblical scholarship over the last century raises serious questions about this. Chapters 4 and 17 concerns preaching to a Jewish audience and the concept of Salvation (redemption) needs to be considered in the context of the circumstances of that time for the Jews being subject to the Romans and the expectation of a Messiah that like King David would conquer their enemies.

The concept that only Christians are saved is problematic. It implies God’s guidance to the Jews before Jesus had no affect on the spiritual progress and redemption of the Jews prior to Christ. It implies the Christian God is monstrous in that He would condemn all people to hell who weren’t Christian. That’s not very fair, especially for those who have never heard of Jesus. Besides, such a presentation could reasonably be rejected.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe people who harass Jews are being totally stupid. There is no sense in beating a dead dog.

It cannot be denied that Christians systematically persecuted Jews for 2000 years, and that it was doctrinally justified. Since the holocaust, most Christians have altered their doctrines, which is why, with the exception of white supremacists, Christian anti-Semitism has gone way down.

 

[metis]

It cannot be denied that Christians systematically persecuted Jews for 2000 years, and that it was doctrinally justified. Since the holocaust, most Christians have altered their doctrines, which is why, with the exception of white supremacists, Christian anti-Semitism has gone way down.

But we also need to remember that many Christians, including some Christian leaders, actually defended and sometimes hid Jews. Christian theology does not allow for persecution of any group, but unfortunately not all Christians, nor all Christian leaders, read that "memo".

When in Poland in 1991, sponsored by our local Holocaust Center, we met with both Catholic and Jewish leaders, and they were adamant that this can never be allowed to happen against any group in the future-- "Never Again".

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I don't mind people pushing their views sometimes. But sometimes people, even Baha'is, have to lighten up and try and reconcile some of our differences.

The Key here CG is what will reconcile the differences.

If it is the solutions given by Baha'u'llah, do you see that I should stop offering them?

Personally I am trying to live them, but as you would know, an old dog takes more time to learn new tricks. If only all the children had different education! Many old dogs do not want that change.

Regards Tony

 

[IndigoChild5559]

But we also need to remember that many Christians, including some Christian leaders, actually defended and sometimes hid Jews. Christian theology does not allow for persecution of any group, but unfortunately not all Christians, nor all Christian leaders, read that "memo".

When in Poland in 1991, sponsored by our local Holocaust Center, we met with both Catholic and Jewish leaders, and they were adamant that this can never be allowed to happen against any group in the future-- "Never Again".

I agree with you metis. In Christian history, there were always a few scattered Christians who dealt justly with us.

Poland today is a great concern to us. I'll take your word about what you said. But also, Poland in general is a Catholic country, and is in the midst of quasi-holocaust denial and a nationwide turn against Jews. It is against the Law to suggest that Poland cooperated with the Holocaust. I suggest you Google "Poland antisemitism."

The Catholic Church in general I agree is definitely changed in its attitudes towards Jews. Bless you for that.

 

[e.r.m.]

It cannot be denied that Christians systematically persecuted Jews for 2000 years, and that it was doctrinally justified. Since the holocaust, most Christians have altered their doctrines, which is why, with the exception of white supremacists, Christian anti-Semitism has gone way down.

More like, they have restored their doctrines back to the Bible. In the Bible the Christians did not persecute the Jews. Those throughout the centuries who did persecute the Jews may have touted Christ's name in this endeavour, but they certainly were not following Him.

 

[CG Didymus]

I believe I can be friendly to everyone but agreement is not something we are likely to achieve. A person may actually understand the reasoning and yet deny it because it would mean losing their religion.

In the past, there was little need to be "friendly" with people in the other religions. One group believed their interpretation and that the other people in their religion was wrong. People in that religion thought most all others in all the other religions were wrong.

Now, we live and work together and have to learn to understand each other and get along. "Losing" ones religion is a good thing if that old religion is wrong. But then, which religion is right? Is it something like the Baha'i Faith that says that all the major religions are true? But have now been replaced with a new message? My problem with some of the Baha'is here is that they are still promoting their religion in ways that are not making friends with the people in the other religions but are pushing them away. For me, if they can't bring people together here on the forum, how is peace and unity going to happen out in the world?

 

[CG Didymus]

The Key here CG is what will reconcile the differences.

If it is the solutions given by Baha'u'llah, do you see that I should stop offering them?

Personally I am trying to live them, but as you would know, an old dog takes more time to learn new tricks. If only all the children had different education! Many old dogs do not want that change.

Regards Tony

Who will "reconcile" the differences? An arbitrator. Is Baha'u'llah that arbitrator that can reconcile the differences between the people of different religions? Who is his representative? That's you. I believe you will get better at it... if I give you a treat after every time you do something good will that help? No, you're already getting better. We all are.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Who will "reconcile" the differences? An arbitrator. Is Baha'u'llah that arbitrator that can reconcile the differences between the people of different religions? Who is his representative? That's you. I believe you will get better at it... if I give you a treat after every time you do something good will that help? No, you're already getting better. We all are.

God's plan unfolds as God knows and Wills

I see It works like this;

1 Timothy 2:5 "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" Those Mediators give the Faith to others to Live by.

Notice it says the 'Annointed One' Jesus and Jesus promised to come in a new Name in the Glory of the Father.

It is when we turn our heart to the possibilities that are of God, to me, that is when reconciliation can happen.

I see if we try, yes we all improve over time, much like a good wine.

Regards Tony

 

[metis]

Poland today is a great concern to us. I'll take your word about what you said. But also, Poland in general is a Catholic country, and is in the midst of quasi-holocaust denial and a nationwide turn against Jews.

And they ain't the only one as Hungary is also headed by another right-wing lunatic, and then there's Italy, Brazil, and oh, the U.S.

The Catholic Church in general I agree is definitely changed in its attitudes towards Jews. Bless you for that.

Hey, I need all the blessings you can muster, and back at ya!

 

[IndigoChild5559]

More like, they have restored their doctrines back to the Bible. In the Bible the Christians did not persecute the Jews. Those throughout the centuries who did persecute the Jews may have touted Christ's name in this endeavour, but they certainly were not following Him.

This is more an issue for Christians to discuss among yourselves. However, I do find is somewhat of an incredible claim to say that for 2000 years the Church didn't follow the doctrines of the Bible and suddenly in the latter half of the 20th century it discovered them.