Unification Of World Religions For World Peace

[dattaswami]

If anyone says that his/her religion is the only path to God and that other paths lead to hell, I have one humble question. The question is for every religion without any trace of partiality. The simple question is: Today I have heard your Religion and if I follow that, I reach God and if I refuse I will go to the hell for my own fault. This is very much reasonable. But before your ancestors discovered our country, the literature or even the name of your religion was not known to our ancestor and he could not reach God for no fault of him. But your ancestor reached God through your religion at that time.



Even if I assume that my ancestor will take rebirth now and will follow your religion to reach God, such possibility is ruled out because you say that there is no rebirth for the soul. Thus my ancestor suffered forever for no fault of him and the responsibility for this falls on the partiality of God. Had the God been impartial, He could have revealed your religion to all the countries at a time. Had that happened, my ancestor might have also reached God as your ancestor. Therefore your statement proves your own God partial.



The only way left over to you to make your God impartial is that you must accept that your God appeared in all the countries at a time in various forms and preached your path in various languages. The same form did not appear everywhere and the same language does not exist everywhere. The syllabus and explanation are one and the same, though the media and teachers are different. Can you give any alternative reasonable answer to my question other than this? Certainly not! Any person of any religion to any other religion can pose this question.



Moreover every religion states that their God only created this world. Unfortunately this world is one only and every God cannot create the same world. There are no many worlds to justify that each God created His own world. Therefore any human being with an iota of commonsense has to agree that there is only one impartial God who created this one world and He came in different forms to different countries and preached the same path in all the languages simultaneously at one time.



Let this logic sword of the divine knowledge cut the rigid conservatism of the religious fans in this world to establish the Universal Peace. I need not beg all these religious followers to be united and harmonious to each other for the sake of world peace. Such begging appeals are made enough in the past. The religious fans feel that there is no unity really in the religions but they have to be united since their kind hearts melted by these appeals. Thus a temporary change was only brought. At the maximum one generation of the followers got united. The next generation fights with each other because they feel that there is no real unity in them due to lack of the real unity in their religious scriptures.



A permanent solution for this does not lie in the begging appeals, which may or may not unite the followers. Even if the appeals unite such unity is not permanent. If the real unity in all the religious scriptures is exposed through the logical divine knowledge, the followers have to be united for generations together. Therefore, My attack is not on the hearts of the followers through love and kindness. My attack is on all the religious scriptures through intellectual logical analysis of divine knowledge. The unity of hearts through love can be only temporary. The unity of brains through intellectual analytical divine knowledge will be permanent. Hearts agree but brains realize. Agreement is temporary, but realization is permanent. Thus this is My first blow of My divine Conch shell for the permanent unity of all the religions aiming at eternal Universal Peace.

 

[Watcher]

Hey dattaswami. Are you following me?:biglaugh: You are on all three of the boards I post at, too funny. Welcome to the board, feel free to start a thread in the Introductions Section.

I agree with a lot of the points you made.

 

[Aqualung]

I, however, do not agree with most of the points. Instead of explaining all the different religions as God having come and given religion to all different people at one time, I say that he gave his religion first to Adam and Eve, and then their children kept distorting it, each in a different way, until it became a "new" religion. This is how they all seem similar, but it means that they aren't all "right." They all have their bits of truth in them, but then they are all interspersed with bits of false-ness, too.

I also disagree with this statement:

Even if I assume that my ancestor will take rebirth now and will follow your religion to reach God, such possibility is ruled out because you say that there is no rebirth for the soul. Thus my ancestor suffered forever for no fault of him and the responsibility for this falls on the partiality of God. Had the God been impartial, He could have revealed your religion to all the countries at a time. Had that happened, my ancestor might have also reached God as your ancestor. Therefore your statement proves your own God partial.

I beleive that some things just aren't meant to be known at certain times, but that does not mean that the people who happened to live before those things were made known are lost forever. I beleive that if a person would have accepted the knowledge if it had been available to him, he will be save like the people who accept it now that it is there.

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

[E]very religion states that their God only created this world. Unfortunately this world is one only and every God cannot create the same world. There are no many worlds to justify that each God created His own world.

Quite simple:

There IS only one God, known by many different names in the various languages, faiths, and cultures! Any "plurailty" is just different aspects of this same One God....

Piece of cake.

Bruce

 

[Lloyd]

And there are other sheep I have
that are not of this fold,
and I must lead these too.
They too will listen to my voice,
and there will be one flock,
one sheperd.

John 10:16

Go Go Gadget, Unity of Religions!

 

[hartlandcat]

As a Unitarian, I certainly agree more or less with that. I certainly do not claim to have a clear picture of what 'God' is, thus I believe that the attempts made by people of many different religions to reach 'God' are just as valid as mine, in most cases.

 

[Valjean]

You raise a very good (and perennial) question, Sri Dattaswami, but most religions have already contrived a response.

I'm happy to see the Baha'is responding to this. Progressive revelation is one of the tenets of Baha'i, and Bahai's do not disparage the teachings of previous Manifestations of God.

 

[dattaswami]

Bible says that Jesus is the God in flesh, but Gita says for a Hindu,
That Krishna is the God in flesh, let us analyse both these views?
I am not touching Buddhism and Islam in this topic because Islam believes
That Mohammad is not God in flesh and He was only messenger of God.
Buddhism keeps silent on the God and no question of God in flesh for them.
If the Bible told that Krishna was not God in flesh or if Gita told that
Jesus was not God in flesh, then both Bible and Gita are valid.
When the scriptures does not mention like this in complete version
How can you interpret your own scripture in the other way?
More over all of you whether Christians or Hindus have to accept
The concept of one God, there is no other alternative way in this.
You say that your God created this entire world and Hindus say that
Their God created this same entire world, unfortunately my dear friends!
I do not find two worlds and I find only one world! Now tell me

Whether this single entire world is created by Christian God or Hindu God?
One of you or both should be wrong and in that case who is wrong?
Either you should have two separate worlds or you should have single God.
If both the scriptures are wrong and both Gods did not create this Universe
Then the vote goes to Science, which says that the world exists by itself.
They say that no body created this world and it is self-existent.
Since both are sacred scriptures, let us solve this problem by analysis.
If you are rigid of your own scripture, I am not touching you at all.
If one is rigid where is the place for logical analysis and judgement?
In the court if one party says that what ever it says is the only truth
What is the necessity of the court, advocates, arguments and judgement?
If you leave rigidity and become flexible to accept the truth
After analysis only, you are most welcome to my Universal Spirituality.

Even in the small worldly matters, we apply open mind and analysis,
I wonder why you are not applying the same open mind and analysis
In such most important spiritual knowledge which decides everything.
The word Jesus stands for Human Incarnation and similarly the word Krishna.
In scriptures, we have to take the internal meanings and not simple external
Meanings for the sacred words, each word is ocean of divine knowledge.
Bible says that the lamb will come in red robe, here what is the meaning
For the word lamb? Is it simple animal with four legs and one tail.
Does this mean that Jesus will come again as animal? Here you say
That the word lamb stands for the Lord who is pure and innocent
Like the lamb, at one place you take the inner meaning and at other place
You take the external meaning! Therefore, the word Jesus means God in flesh,
Which means that the Lord comes in human form with blood and flesh.

This is a great concept, which Jesus tried to establish to the devotees.
Till then the Islam believed only in the formless God called Allah.
Islam does not treat Mohammad as God in flesh even today.
Jesus told that He and His father are one and the same, what does this mean?
Here the word father does not mean Joseph, the husband of His mother Mary.
If you take the meaning of the word of father in the external sense only
It is impossible because two human beings cannot be one and the same.
That Creator is indicated by the word father and human incarnation by the word Jesus
Both are one and the same since God pervaded all over the human incarnation.
If you take the meaning of the word Jesus as a particular human body only,
Then the meaning of the word father should also mean another particular human body.
In that case both the human bodies cannot be one and the same because
We are seeing the father and the son represented by two separate human bodies.
Similarly Jesus told that one could reach His father only through Him.

This again should mean that nobody could see or meet Joseph without Jesus.
But it is not so because several people have seen Joseph even before Jesus was born.
You are taking the inner meaning for the word father and say that father means God.
But for the word Jesus you are taking a particular human body only.
This is not justified and even a child will contradict this different approach.
When it is said that Jesus will baptise by fire, does it mean Jesus will sprinkle fire?
In such case the baptized person will be burnt with fire, therefore, the word fire
Means Knowledge as said in Gita “Jnanaagnih”, moreover if you stick the word
Jesus to a particular human body only and if you say that Jesus exists even now,
Please show Me Jesus as the same human body to My eyes also, in the past
When Jesus was alive everyone could show Jesus as human body to anyone.
Whether a believer or a non-believer saw Jesus as human body in the past.

 

[arthra]

I think the concept of incarnation of God in flesh is common to some believers in both Christianity and Hinduism but I think it is based on misunderstanding that later became a dogmatic article of faith. I believe the Sun of Reality was reflected in Jesus and before that in Krishna, but God did not descend into them.

 

[Popeyesays]

I think the concept of incarnation of God in flesh is common to some believers in both Christianity and Hinduism but I think it is based on misunderstanding that later became a dogmatic article of faith. I believe the Sun of Reality was reflected in Jesus and before that in Krishna, but God did not descend into them.

Hi, Art - how are you doing? Bruce, too - how are things going. Here's the direct quote:
"To every discerning and illuminated heart it is evident that God, the unknowable Essence, the Divine Being, is immensely exalted beyond every human attribute, such as corporeal existence, ascent and descent, egress and regress. Far be it from His glory that human tongue should adequately recount 47 His praise, or that human heart comprehend His fathomless mystery. He is, and hath ever been, veiled in the ancient eternity of His Essence, and will remain in His Reality everlastingly hidden from the sight of men. "No vision taketh in Him, but He taketh in all vision; He is the Subtile, the All-Perceiving."...
The door of the knowledge of the Ancient of Days being thus closed in the face of all beings, the Source of infinite grace, according to His saying, "His grace hath transcended all things; My grace hath encompassed them all," hath caused those luminous Gems of Holiness to appear out of the realm of the spirit, in the noble form of the human temple, and be made manifest unto all men, that they may impart unto the world the mysteries of the unchangeable Being, and tell of the subtleties of His imperishable Essence.
These sanctified Mirrors, these Day Springs of ancient glory, are, one and all, the Exponents on earth of Him Who is the central Orb of the universe, its Essence and ultimate Purpose. From Him proceed their knowledge and power; from Him is derived their sovereignty. The beauty of their countenance is but a reflection of His image, and their revelation a sign of His deathless glory."
(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 46)

Regards,
Scott

 

[nutshell]

I suspect we all worship the same God, we just know this perfect being with different names.

 

[Popeyesays]

I suspect we all worship the same God, we just know this perfect being with different names.

And that is the whole thing in a "nutshell", Nutshell :clap :dan: Now all we have to do is get to the understanding that if all these Messengers were from the same God we all worship, maybe we can all put down the bricks and bats and treat each other like cousins at least, if not siblings.

Regards,
Scott

 

[No*s]

I cannot agree, obviously. My view of "Hell" differs from the one that you use as a premise, and thus, the premise is different. My pagan ancestors can repent after their death, but it is simply less likely as the soul darkens itself in rejection of God (and that isn't the only response for this I have, simply the most potent). I outlined this in brief in your other thread. This deals effectively with the first premise.

The biggest counter to your argument is that it is internally contradictory, not in its premises, but in its application. Religious exclusivity is a foundational tenet of some religions, including mine. What you are arguing is that we accept your "logic sword" and abandon our own religious about the relation of the various religions for your own. In essence, you argue "All religions teach basically the same thing through this logic, and if your religious tenets do not teach this, I ask you to accept the logic and accept the unity of all religions."

You cannot deal with exclusivity by labeling us as "fans." This inconsistency in logic has to be worked out, but it cannot be worked out while trying to accept all religions. What, then, happens to religious understandings that do not accept your view of religion and truth? Are we excluded from the realm of religion (true or false)? If so, then how? If not, then your logic is inconsistent in its application. After all, had this mutual exclusivity not existed, there would be no arguing, no wars, no violence. Such things evidence very real differences.

I can't speak for all religions, but I can for mine. Orthodox Christianiaty has exclusivity built into it from the beginning. It is foundational to our view of God and man. If the foundations, though, are invalid, then the religion cannot be valid. If the religion is not valid, then one cannot say that all religions are equally valid and thus able to be united.

This logical sword cuts against yours, and both lines of logic cannot both be true. We must all give up something if someone else is right, because truth, by its nature, is exclusive (something we both rely on in our argument).

 

[Steve]

I suspect we all worship the same God, we just know this perfect being with different names.

Why would you embrace any theology that explicitly denies your savior and the sacrifice he made for you? For example do you think Christ really regards mohummed as a true prophet when he denied that Christ was even crucified?

 

[Ori]

Why would you embrace any theology that explicitly denies your savior and the sacrifice he made for you? For example do you think Christ really regards mohummed as a true prophet when he denied that Christ was even crucified?

How can we even be sure that he was crucified?

 

[Steve]

How can we even be sure that he was crucified?

You know if people cant be sure that such a huge historical event like Christs crucifixion ever took place, then how can we claim to know anything regarding human history?
Christianity started somewhere, do you suppose the apostles preached Christ crucified and ressurected to Jews and others knowing that Christ wasnt even Crucified, let alone resurected?
Do you really think there message would have taken off the way it did if the crucifixion never even took place, the apostles would have just been laughed at and Christianity would never have got started if such a central theme and at the time easily verifiable event never took place.

This is one reason i believe that islam can be so easily regarded as simply wrong, it denies such a key historical event and it tries to do it around 600 years after the event took place - all at the word of one man. This alone for any reasonable enquirer should raise serious questions.

 

[Mike182]

******Mod Post******
this thread has been moved to the religious debates forum, as it is becomeing more of a debate than a discussion
-
a gentle reminder for people to stay respectful of the oppinions/beliefs of other as well please
​

 

[Popeyesays]

Why would you embrace any theology that explicitly denies your savior and the sacrifice he made for you? For example do you think Christ really regards mohummed as a true prophet when he denied that Christ was even crucified?

Steve, this is really a matter of interpreting the Qur'an. There are interpretations that some Muslims would say Christ did not die, but lived - why? Because God would not allow His Prophet to be so demeaned.

However, when I read that section of the Qur'an, I interpret it quite differently - the way many moderate Muslims might.

Here's the relevant section from the Surah of the Family of Imran (Rodwell, trans.)

"She (Mary) said, "How, O my Lord! shall I have a son, when man hath not touched
me?" He said, "Thus: God will create why He will; When He decreeth a thing,
He only saith, 'Be,' and it is."
And he will teach him the Book, and the Wisdom, and the Law, and the
Evangel; and he shall be an apostle to the children of Israel. "Now have I
come," he will say, "to you with a sign from your Lord: Out of clay will I
make for you, as it were, the figure of a bird: and I will breathe into it,
and it shall become, by God's leave, a bird. And I will heal the blind, and
the leper; and by God's leave will I quicken the dead; and I will tell you what
ye eat, and what ye store up in your houses! Truly in this will be a sign for
you, if ye are believers.
And I have come to attest the law which was before me; and to allow you
part of that which had been forbidden you; and I come to you with a sign from
your Lord: Fear God, then, and obey me; of a truth God is my Lord, and your
Lord; Therefore worship Him. This is a right way."
And when Jesus perceived unbelief on their part, He said, "Who my
helpers with God?" The apostles said, "We will be God's helpers! We believe in
God, and bear thou witness that we are Muslims (those who "submit to the will of God are "Muslims", recall).
O our Lord! we believe in what thou hast sent down, and we follow the
apostle; write us up, then, with those who bear witness to him."
And the Jews plotted, and God plotted: But of those who plot is God the
best.
Remember when God said, "O Jesus! verily I will cause thee to die, and
will take thee up to myself and deliver thee from those who believe not; and I
will place those who follow thee above those who believe not, until the day of
resurrection. Then, to me is your return, and wherein ye differ will I decide
between you.
And as to those who believe not, I will chastise them with a terrible
chastisement in this world and in the next; and none shall they have to help
them."
3:50 But as to those who believe, and do the things that are right, He will
pay them their recompense. God loveth not the doers of evil.
These signs, and this wise warning do we rehearse to thee.
(The Qur'an (Rodwell tr), Sura 3 - The Family of Imran)

Christ was hung up on the cross (by the Sanhedrin's plotting) and God took the Spirit of Christ up to Himself (which after all is what happened when Christ expired on the cross) this rescue of Jesus' spirit being the counter-plot of God.

Islam has far too much respect for Christ to contend that the Gospel is THAT wrong in its account. And Jesus is elevated above Muhammad in the judgement of the dead on the Day of Resurrection.

Steve, some of us might resent your attitude taking this thread from discussion to debate. By doing that you have kicked interfaith discourse in the *** severely.

"At Ridvan 2002, we addressed an open letter to the world's religious leaders. Our action arose out of awareness that the disease of sectarian hatreds, if not decisively checked, threatens harrowing consequences that will leave few areas of the world unaffected. The letter acknowledged with appreciation the achievements of the interfaith movement, to which Bahá'ís have sought to contribute since an early point in the movement's emergence. Nevertheless, we felt we must be forthright in saying that, if the religious crisis is to be addressed as seriously as is occurring with respect to other prejudices afflicting humankind, organized religion must find within itself a comparable courage to rise above fixed conceptions inherited from a distant past.
Above all, we expressed our conviction that the time has come when religious leadership must face honestly and without further evasion the implications of the truth that God is one and that, beyond all diversity of cultural expression and human interpretation, religion is likewise one. It was intimations of this truth that originally inspired the interfaith movement and that have sustained it through the vicissitudes of the past one hundred years. Far from challenging the validity of any of the great revealed faiths, the principle has the capacity to ensure their continuing relevance. In order to exert its influence, however, recognition of this reality must operate at the heart of religious discourse, and it was with this in mind that we felt that our letter should be explicit in articulating it.
Response has been encouraging. Bahá'í institutions throughout the world ensured that thousands of copies of the document were delivered to influential figures in the major faith communities. While it was perhaps not surprising that the message it contained was dismissed out of hand in a few circles, Bahá'ís report that, in general, they were warmly welcomed. Particularly affecting has been the obvious sincerity of many recipients' distress over the failure of religious institutions to assist humanity in dealing with challenges whose essential nature is spiritual and moral. Discussions have turned readily to the need for fundamental change in the way the believing masses of humankind relate to one another, and in a significant number of instances, those receiving the letter have been moved to reproduce and distribute it to other clerics in their respective traditions. We feel hopeful that our initiative may serve as a catalyst opening the way to new understanding of religion's purpose."
(Commissioned by The Universal House of Justice, One Common Faith)


Regards,
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

<SNIP>

I can't speak for all religions, but I can for mine. Orthodox Christianiaty has exclusivity built into it from the beginning. It is foundational to our view of God and man. If the foundations, though, are invalid, then the religion cannot be valid. If the religion is not valid, then one cannot say that all religions are equally valid and thus able to be united.

This logical sword cuts against yours, and both lines of logic cannot both be true. We must all give up something if someone else is right, because truth, by its nature, is exclusive (something we both rely on in our argument).

But Orthodox Christianity is not exclusive in that way at all. True you elevate Christ above the other Prophets of God, but you DO accept Abraham, Noah, Moses, so it is intrinsically an interfaith approach. You STOP abruptly at Christ and say no more, but Orthodox Christianity works quite well in interfaith dialogue with other Christians, Jews, Muslims, Baha`i's, Parsees, Hindus, etc throughout the United States at least. One form of Orthodoxy (Syrian Orthodox) administers the Christian Holy sites, for instance in Israel under a Jewish government cooperating with Jewish AND Muslim clerics.

So, orthodoxy, is not so opposed to interfaith cooperation as you would have others believe.

Regards,
Scott

 

[may]

And there are other sheep I have
that are not of this fold,
and I must lead these too.
They too will listen to my voice,
and there will be one flock,
one sheperd.

John 10:16

Go Go Gadget, Unity of Religions!

yes and here they are those other sheep
After these things I saw, and, look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes; and there were palm branches in their hands. And they keep on crying with a loud voice, saying: "Salvation [we owe] to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb. revelation 7;9 these are the other sheep that were not part of the little flock of 144,000

​

(Luke 12:32) "Have no fear, little flock, because YOUR Father has approved of giving YOU the kingdom.................. the little flock is 144,000 , the other sheep are a great crowd that no man is able to number ,and they are being gathered right now in this time of the end but some of them are asleep in death waiting for the resurrection into a paradise earth.