• 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!

True faith teaches by Itself.

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
You learn why it is ethical to “love thy brother/neighbour/enemy” when you understand the following fact: The evil you encounter in others, is their expression of pain… anger… hatred… desire for revenge.
I am not inflicting any pain, nor I hate them.
Nor I am into retributive justice. Not at all. I abhor the death penalty, and I would also abolish life sentences, like in Norway.

But that does not entail I love them. I don't see the dichotomy love/hate. Actually, I don't feel any of those emotions for the vast majority of people.

Ciao

- viole
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
I am not inflicting any pain, nor I hate them. Nor I am into retributive justice. Not at all. I abhor the death penalty, and I would also abolish life sentences, like in Norway.
But that does not entail I love them. I don't see the dichotomy love/hate. Actually, I don't feel any of those emotions for the vast majority of people.
Ciao
- viole


I understand viole.
The term “love” in context of what I was saying is not the Eros type; it’s more like the Ágape sort and, more specifically, as in a sincere will to comprehend another. That’s all.


Humbly
Hermit
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
What is there to debate on this topic?

Well I guess that is the entire debate about God and Religion.

I have done some interesting reading from talks given by Abdu’l-Baha early on, before the first world war in America. What I have been reading is all the press releases of that time and how he was seen by the reporters and the public.

What I have found is that my view of faith and how to share it has been very wrong, in fact I feel as a Baha'i we have got it wrong in many ways.

I now consider that True Faith, given by God actually teaches itself. The written Word is proof of what we will and can become, only if we become that Word in our own lives and that and only that is the ultimate teacher.

Thus Abdul'baha offered no one needs to change their Faith, as a True Christian, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a Buddhist is already true to God.[

This is from my Faith, I am sure yours also has writings that will give the same thoughts.

"When asked on one occasion: “What is a Bahá’í?” ‘Abdu’l-Bahá replied: “To be a Bahá’í simply means to love all the world; to love humanity and try to serve it; to work for universal peace and universal brotherhood.” On another occasion He defined a Bahá’í as “one endowed with all the perfections of man in activity.” In one of His London talks He said that a man may be a Bahá’í even if He has never heard the name of Bahá’u’lláh. He added:—
The man who lives the life according to the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh is already a Bahá’í. On the other hand, a man may call himself a Bahá’í for fifty years, and if he does not live the life he is not a Bahá’í. An ugly man may call himself handsome, but he deceives no one,.... not even himself."
/quote]
Your major dilemma here is no open hand to non-believers. Your views are idealistic and appealing to those with certain attitudes, but clearly there are serious problems with many assumptions. There's a major flaw with most all theistic appeals, and that is the assumption of a divine. This tends to exploit, but also overlook, the very real flaws with the human mind.

Thus I am thinking that God has a plan, our lives are directed by our obedience to that plan, or our ignorance, or even rebellion against it.
Yeah, here's a good example of flawed thinking. Where is there an actual, independent God telling any mortal what their personal plan is? Or even a plan for humanity? There is none, so we are left with loads of people with their own beliefs and interpretations, and competing in many ways (like in online debate forums) over these ideas.

Can you argue against that? If the intent of your Faith is to be the best you can and become one with all others, would you still argue with others of another faith that have the same goal?

I am seeing the argument over doctrinal differences only feeds the fire of disunity.

It may be that we are to find a unity in our diversity of Faiths, only when we practice what those Faiths offer in personal conduct.
Your dilemma is that you are part of this diversity of faith. Your words are trying to be above it, but that conflicts with the many beliefs that are tribal in nature.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
From what I have come to understand is that all those differences are the changes that Faith undergoes. If each was to meditate on precious Faiths, they would see that their Faith was built on such changes.

But building a new faith means there were irreconcilable differences with the present faith.


No one likes change, especially those that hold fast to one view of doctrine.

No. People who have one view of doctrine that is different from the "mainstream" view of doctrine are the ones who initiate change: Martin Luther, The Bab, Mohammed, Russell, Smith.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
This is really how all Faith begins. It is the way it works and God has not changed that way from the beginning of time.

The way that all faith begins is that someone gets an idea and pushes it forward on a gullible public. Man has not changed that way from the beginning of time.

A faith is born grows to maturity, declines and dies spiritually, a new seed is planted amongst the decay which feeds its growth.

So, according to you Christianity has died spiritually and is decaying. Two and one-half billion Christians would disagree with your assessment.
According to you Islam has died spiritually and is decaying. Over one billion Muslims would disagree with you.

Especially your assessment that Bahai, which many Christians and Muslims consider a cult, is better than their religion.

All the Bab did was to say what you are practising in moral and virtues, though some of the outer cloths remained, was not what Muhammad taught, some. Laws remained, but the spirit was gone.

Over one billion Muslims would disagree with The Bab.


Many millions embraced that message, things were changed for the better, that is why radical doctrine becomes the issue.

Billions did not embrace that message.


Why is it the normal everyday people can grasp the change but those in power can not?

Billions of normal people do not embrace that message.

What I like was that the vast majority that embraced that message of the Bab thought that they had embraced the right way to practice Islam, they were at that time unaware that it was a new message, Therin lays a great meditation.

Therein lies a great deception. Understand what you wrote: They thought the message of The Bab was a better Islam: The real teaching of The Bab was a new message.

All faiths have these same birth pains, why is it we see we are exempt from making the same mistakes?
Why do you think Bahai is exempt from making the same mistakes. I could show many parallel mistakes. One example is asking people to believe writings that are clearly not based on reality or facts,
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yeah, here's a good example of flawed thinking. Where is there an actual, independent God telling any mortal what their personal plan is? Or even a plan for humanity? There is none, so we are left with loads of people with their own beliefs and interpretations, and competing in many ways (like in online debate forums) over these ideas.

That is what Faith is all about, and without realising it you are supporting the comment you have replied to. Would you not be an individual with their own opinion?

I can offer you Names of people that have told us of God's plan, but I am happy to leave it with your comment and wish you all the best, unless you wish to explore all faiths to find God in them all? I am happy to explore that with you.

What I have read, is that God's plan is inclusive of all people and allowing all people at some time, the choice of knowledge and acceptance, and that if by circumstances that does not happen, like the death of an infant, then they are under the mercy and bounty of God.

I would suggest this is one such opportunity.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Your dilemma is that you are part of this diversity of faith. Your words are trying to be above it, but that conflicts with the many beliefs that are tribal in nature.

The Great thing is that Faith is not my Words, it is my understanding of the Word given by God.

That word to me supports ancient belief when viewed in new Frames of References.

You are supporting the concept that to argue over dogma is useless. It all Faith there is core values that we can live by that will foster and build unity in our diversity, let's start with those, and then the differences will over time become clear.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
But building a new faith means there were irreconcilable differences with the present faith.

To me there is elements of truth in what you say. I think any irreconcilable differences are not of God, so that is what is offerd by God to the world.

It's like going through school, we build on past knowledge, it should not be irreconcilable.

History has shown that we do find it hard to embrace new Faiths, but again this gets into doctrinal differences and they can be argued until the end of time, nothing will change.

If we turn to faith, read the books about personal conduct towards each other and act towards each other as asked, then the differences of doctrine are sorted over time.

As examples we can use, let's say the trinity in Christianity, the Seal of Prophets in Islam, or Reincarnation for many Hindu.

These have been one cause of Division, but why? I will leave it at that, because in the end all 3 Faiths and more want to live in peace, so let's embrace the virtues that build that peace and over time we may even discuss the differences and find common ground.

No. People who have one view of doctrine that is different from the "mainstream" view of doctrine are the ones who initiate change: Martin Luther, The Bab, Mohammed, Russell, Smith.

I personally see what you offer here is Faith in our ability to change for the better.

Also you have shown what it is to have Faith by the names you have chosen to present.

All the best and Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The way that all faith begins is that someone gets an idea and pushes it forward on a gullible public. Man has not changed that way from the beginning of time.

So, according to you Christianity has died spiritually and is decaying. Two and one-half billion Christians would disagree with your assessment.
According to you Islam has died spiritually and is decaying. Over one billion Muslims would disagree with you.

Especially your assessment that Bahai, which many Christians and Muslims consider a cult, is better than their religion.

Over one billion Muslims would disagree with The Bab.

Billions did not embrace that message.

Billions of normal people do not embrace that message.

Therein lies a great deception. Understand what you wrote: They thought the message of The Bab was a better Islam: The real teaching of The Bab was a new message.

Why do you think Bahai is exempt from making the same mistakes. I could show many parallel mistakes. One example is asking people to believe writings that are clearly not based on reality or facts,

Therin I have found lays the issue with discussing doctrine, or having an intent to push one's doctrines on to another, it turns to a pointless debate.

The answer to all this seems to be simple in that we can say you to yours me to mine.

What this OP is focused on is that with mine, I will only offer to you that I will be the best neighbour I can for you. I will be honest and reliable and trustworthy.

The OP offers that all other faiths also have that capacity.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I stated a fact of life. What may really help in bringing peace and harmony to the world, IMHO, is abandonment of religions. :D

Ha ha, another doctrine.

Since that will not happen, I guess the OP offers that we put aside that difference and work on what can build unity in that diversity.

All the best Regards Tony
 

ecco

Veteran Member
If we turn to faith, read the books about personal conduct towards each other and act towards each other as asked, then the differences of doctrine are sorted over time.
If that were true, there wouldn't be so many different versions of Christianity or of Islam. In reality, the differences are not "sorted over time". They get exaggerated.

I will leave it at that, because in the end all 3 Faiths and more want to live in peace, so let's embrace the virtues that build that peace and over time we may even discuss the differences and find common ground.

Protestants kill Catholics. Christians kill Christians.
Sunnis kill Shiites. Muslims kill Muslims.

Where are you getting this rose-colored view of the world, past or present?

I personally see what you offer here is Faith in our ability to change for the better.

That would be a lot easier without religions.

Also you have shown what it is to have Faith by the names you have chosen to present.

How so?
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Therin I have found lays the issue with discussing doctrine, or having an intent to push one's doctrines on to another, it turns to a pointless debate.

Actually, you are lending support to my argument which is that doctrinal differences do not get reconciled.

The answer to all this seems to be simple in that we can say you to yours me to mine.

Yes. No reconciliation.

What this OP is focused on is that with mine, I will only offer to you that I will be the best neighbour I can for you. I will be honest and reliable and trustworthy.
...

To me that says more about you as an individual than your, or anyone else's, religious beliefs.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Actually, you are lending support to my argument which is that doctrinal differences do not get reconciled.

What you have to consider is that they can and do get reconciled.

A good majority of those that became Christians in the history of the growth of Christianity, did not have that doctrine, but reconciled their past with the new.

It is all about our perspective on relative truth and how much we can let go of what we think and grasp what was offered.

Of course, again many tangents.

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
To me that says more about you as an individual than your, or anyone else's, religious beliefs.

The Bahai me is far from the temperamental Pro Golfer me, Faith has the power of great change.

Many people of many Faiths can vouch to the change their faith provides.

If one is afraid of hard inner reflection and change, then choosing to be an atheist, to do what one wants, that is an option.

When people do not want change, but also want a faith and mould a faith the way they want it, well really they are not in it for the required change that is needed.

Regards Tony
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I understand viole.
The term “love” in context of what I was saying is not the Eros type; it’s more like the Ágape sort and, more specifically, as in a sincere will to comprehend another. That’s all.


Humbly
Hermit
I love my kids. What category of love is that? Eros or Agape?

Ciao

- viole
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Where are you getting this rose-colored view of the world, past or present?

I get that from the potential of all the Messages given and not necessarily from those that say they follow those teachings.

If we look back there are many that have indeed lived the required life and they become our inspiration.

Regards Tony
 
Top