Why learn about other faiths?

[ajay0]

Fact?????
This is not a fact. It is your belief. Please don't conflate your beliefs with facts. You're entitled to your beliefs.

How can you state these are beliefs instead of facts without investigating. That is a beliefset in itself.

Lots of people have done as much study on religions, and arrived at opposite conclusions. That also is their belief.

This is also a mere belief. Just because ' Lots of people have done as much study on religions, and arrived at opposite conclusions.'. this need not be the overall trend.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why the bold letters?

For emphasis.... why not?
Why not answer my questions?

 

[Trailblazer]

If you criticize someone's faith even through the teachings of your own faith you can expect some nastiness back.

I totally expect that, but they can attack the beliefs without attacking the person who has them, unless of course they are unable to present a "reasoned argument" against my faith.

 

[Marcion]

I totally expect that, but they can attack the beliefs without attacking the person who has them, unless of course they are unable to present a "reasoned argument" against my faith.

You cannot "reason" against a faith that is basically fundamentalist. Reason means little to them, it has no authority in their life so they think they can ignore it.

 

[Trailblazer]

You cannot "reason" against a faith that is basically fundamentalist. Reason means little to them, it has no authority in their life so they think they can ignore it.

What do you mean by fundamentalist? Why do you think that the Baha'i Faith is fundamentalist?
Why do you think that reason means little to Baha'is?

 

[Marcion]

What do you mean by fundamentalist? Why do you think that the Baha'i Faith is fundamentalist?
Why do you think that reason means little to Baha'is?

By fundamentalist I mean that there is little to no logical or reasoned consideration about why things are to be done or not done in your tradition. The main focus is on "divine" revelation or instruction such as with discriminating against homosexually active Bahai members.
I have not heard any reasoning in this matter other than of the fundamentalist type which isn't actual reasoning but following religious dogma.

Now that is nothing special for Abrahamic faiths but I cannot support it in any way.
In that sense your faith seems to me no improvement on fundamentalist Islam.

 

[Trailblazer]

By fundamentalist I mean that there is little to no logical or reasoned consideration about why things are to be done or not done in your tradition. The main focus is on "divine" revelation or instruction such as with discriminating against homosexually active Bahai members.
I have not heard any reasoning in this matter other than of the fundamentalist type which isn't actual reasoning but following religious dogma.

Now that is nothing special for Abrahamic faiths but I cannot support it in any way.
In that sense your faith seems to me no improvement on fundamentalist Islam.

So you are going to say that all religions are unreasonable just because of their laws on homosexuality?

Do you think humans can know more than God about what is best for them? This is the crux of the matter. If Baha'u'llah spoke for God then whatever He wrote is the Will of God. It is not fundamentalist to accept that without question; it is reasonable and logical, since no human can know more than an All-Knowing God. What is unreasonable and illogical and arrogant is to question God's Will and think one knows more than God.

Why should God kowtow to what humans want? If God did that, He would not be God anymore.

Active homosexual members of the Baha'i Faith are not discriminated against.

 

[Marcion]

Do you think humans can know more than God about what is best for them?

You yourself are an illustration of someone with a fundamentalist way of thinking. You have no desire to understand the reason for a certain prescribed behaviour and are perfectly satisfied with blindly or dogmatically following the thoughts of others on the subject.
Jehova's Witnesses will talk in petty much the same way. Their only allowed reasoning is the meaning of the text in their Bible, but even that is prescribed by their higher authorities so they need only confirm that they agree (or probably get reprimanded).

The underlying main dogma is of course that "God has spoken" so any kind of reasoning becomes quite "unnecessary".
In other paths there are also respected higher authorities but you are never asked to follow things blindly (such as in Buddhism). This is a huge difference in approach which has possible to do with the history of the people who live in the Middle East.

 

[Trailblazer]

You yourself are an illustration of someone with a fundamentalist way of thinking. You have no desire to understand the reason for a certain prescribed behaviour and are perfectly satisfied with blindly or dogmatically following the thoughts of others on the subject.
Jehova's Witnesses will talk in petty much the same way. Their only allowed reasoning is the meaning of the text in their Bible, but even that is prescribed by their higher authorities so they need only confirm that they agree (or probably get reprimanded).

We do not follow the thoughts of others. We follow Baha'u'llah and we do so because we believe that His Will is identical with the Will of God. That is not following blindly, because we know who we are following and why we are following Him.

“Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures. This is the true meaning of Divine unity. He Who is the Eternal Truth is the one Power Who exerciseth undisputed sovereignty over the world of being, Whose image is reflected in the mirror of the entire creation. All existence is dependent upon Him, and from Him is derived the source of the sustenance of all things. This is what is meant by Divine unity; this is its fundamental principle...

The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable Essence as one and the same. By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth, should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with the Will of God Himself. This is the loftiest station to which a true believer in the unity of God can ever hope to attain. Blessed is the man that reacheth this station, and is of them that are steadfast in their belief.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 167​

God either spoke through Baha'u'llah or he didn't. Why would any rational person question the Will of God and think they can know more or have a better way?

The hundred-dollar difference between Jehovah's Witnesses and Baha'is is that they do not have ANY original writings of Jesus as we have for Baha'u'llah, so they have no way to really know what The Will of God is. So in their case what they believe is dogma, doctrines made up by the Church.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Question: Why do you think “certain people” on this forum talk about me so much? What benefit do you think they derive from that?

Answer: Looking at me is a lot easier than looking at themselves. This is psych 101 stuff.

I have a wonderful dialogue going on with a Christian on this forum and even though we completely disagree about beliefs. She never said she felt insulted by my beliefs and she knows exactly what they are. She never criticizes me or even my beliefs and I extend her the same respect... I wonder why that is?

Sheesh, maybe it is because she is a Christian:

Matthew 7:1-5 Do not judge, or you will be judged. For with the same judgment you pronounce, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. ​

As for certain people on this forum who “think” they have me pegged they are not only highly arrogant but they are also wrong. Oh no, it is not about me as a person. Just look at how many times the words “you” and “your” was used.

The entire post below was referring to me as a person.

Unveiled Artist said:

“Trailer. Actually, this is the heart of your conversation with everyone.

We are not calling you a liar or referring to you as a lier (I hope) just because your belief says a christians faith is outdated.

Thats an insult in and of itself. It has nothing to do with you as a person. It specifically has to do with your religion.

So, if you are angry, insulted, or fustrated or ignore (over) people because they tell you, you insult them they are just expressing their belief, just as you. And probably, just as you, they think you telling them they area lier because of it.

It works both ways.

We each have differing opinions. No one is lying. Catholics claim they love LGBT but want to fix us in the middle of that love. People have very funky ways of defining peace, salvation, and love. But thats just you guys religion.”

Then after talking about ME as a person, we have this...

Unveiled Artist said:

“It has nothing to do with you as a person. You are not lying just we are both, on both sides, perceiving it that way when we feel our opinions are not heard and addressed.

Its basic psychology. Even the word -you are, you this, you that-provokes feelings because it makes you automatically assume we are referring to you as a person.

We are not. Just RF gives us the freedom to challenge your logic and beliefs. It gets hot but only when we take it that way. Others, like myself, are eating a lemon pie, watching the clouds, and wondering what why the heck people think the way they do.

Anyway, whether you read this or not is not my deal. When you do charity or speak peace it has no strings attached. So, I hope this gives you something. It did me so Im smiling. Take it our leave it.”

Clearly, this entire post was about ME as a person just like all the previous posts posted by this poster during the last two days. It just does not stop. NONE of this post or the others were about my beliefs. They were all about ME an how I insulted people for believing what I believe.

I do not care if people challenge my beliefs, but clearly that is not what this post above or the others were about. Do you see anything about my beliefs in this post? No, all we see are the words you, you, you, repeated over and over again. The question is why people can’t mind their own business and look at their own behavior.

26: O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me.”
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 10

66: O EMIGRANTS! The tongue I have designed for the mention of Me, defile it not with detraction. If the fire of self overcome you, remember your own faults and not the faults of My creatures, inasmuch as every one of you knoweth his own self better than he knoweth others.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 45​

No, it is no big deal if I read it. The mission of humiliating me on a public forum has been accomplished, not that I care because people who criticize other people only humiliate themselves.

This is what happens when people lack self-awareness, but I do not CARE if people are aware of what they are doing or not. They are still responsible for their behavior. Probably the worst thing is how they do it with subterfuge, hoping nobody will spot how critical they are, but most people are not that dumb.

Oh, thank God I am a Baha’i and I have some “Guidance” about Justice. That is the only reason I called this behavior out.

2: O SON OF SPIRIT! The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 3-4​

What some people on forums do not like about me is that I am honest. I will not pussyfoot around and lie about what the Baha’i Faith teaches just so people won’t be uncomfortable. If they want to come to a religious forum they are going to read things they do not like or agree with. The most important thing is how they handle that, with grace as most Christians handle it, not with criticism.

You gotta quote me.

Thats MY opinion. Im not talking about you as a person. Every other person on RF has had their opinions, worldview, religions, or faith challenged. Some people are offended (you put down my belief, you put down me. I.e.) others are not (you put down my belief, okay, this is a counter approach to your statement. I.e..)

Personally, I dont attack people. People ignore or fuss with me because I question their Beliefs and they cannot tell the difference between the two.

Also, when I talk in generals I am not talking about you (guys individually) but you guys as a whole. I notices bahai like christians have defense mechanisms I dont see in Islam, Hindu, nor Pagan. To me, it's very distinct.

But yes, bahai belief insults religions because it (not you nor believers), takes multiple religions core beliefs and changes its focus to follow their view of god. The bahai belief also (like JW as well) misinterpret and reinterpret religions like christianity based on the people not the religious text. That means they (people who chooses which text is right) the original teachings to fit what they as a group (fundamentalist, JW, bahai, etc) so it can fit the laws spoken by their prophet or interpreted by their organization or both.

That. Is the insult.

Whether you see it or not is how you view life. I don't understand it, we dont, but it is what it is. The thing that bothers us too is to say "if they want to take it as an insult that's on them"PARAPHRASED.

By strict definition, that is playing the victim. I don't know your personality but in regular everyday speech that is like telling a victim of abuse that his opinion of being beaten is on him even though he says it' it's on the abuser.

That's an analogy.

I'm sure you, yourself, trailer are not defined by insults. We are not always defined by what we say. But others don't understand that because we are so attached to our opinions (Capitol punish is good for instance) that people look at us as if our nature doesnt value life.

It's all in context.

But this is for anyone really. Since you mentioned me I wanted to clarify. Again. This is MY opinion. Whether you take it that way is on you. I felt I was honesty so that's what's important. Not how others conduct themselves about me but how I conduct myself around others.

 

[Vinayaka]

For emphasis.... why not?
Why not answer my questions?

I forget what your questions even were, or even if you asked any questions. Besides, often dialogue goes nowhere, or it just causes the other person to get defensive. So I 'fold 'em' once it's obvious to me there is a very poor chance of either party learning anything.

 

[Trailblazer]

I forget what your questions even were, or even if you asked any questions. Besides, often dialogue goes nowhere, or it just causes the other person to get defensive. So I 'fold 'em' once it's obvious to me there is a very poor chance of either party learning anything.

Okay, fair enough.

 

[CG Didymus]

We do not follow the thoughts of others. We follow Baha'u'llah and we do so because we believe that His Will is identical with the Will of God. That is not following blindly, because we know who we are following and why we are following Him.

“Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures. This is the true meaning of Divine unity. He Who is the Eternal Truth is the one Power Who exerciseth undisputed sovereignty over the world of being, Whose image is reflected in the mirror of the entire creation. All existence is dependent upon Him, and from Him is derived the source of the sustenance of all things. This is what is meant by Divine unity; this is its fundamental principle...

The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable Essence as one and the same. By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth, should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with the Will of God Himself. This is the loftiest station to which a true believer in the unity of God can ever hope to attain. Blessed is the man that reacheth this station, and is of them that are steadfast in their belief.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 167​

God either spoke through Baha'u'llah or he didn't. Why would any rational person question the Will of God and think they can know more or have a better way?

The hundred-dollar difference between Jehovah's Witnesses and Baha'is is that they do not have ANY original writings of Jesus as we have for Baha'u'llah, so they have no way to really know what The Will of God is. So in their case what they believe is dogma, doctrines made up by the Church.

Do you believe the Bible and the New Testament that we have today are accurate? If not, when and who changed them? And, how would you know unless you listened and trusted to what others thought about the issues?

 

[Marcion]

We do not follow the thoughts of others. We follow Baha'u'llah and we do so because we believe that His Will is identical with the Will of God. That is not following blindly, because we know who we are following and why we are following Him.

You use the religious dogma of "God speaking through the medium of Bahaullah" to try and hide your blind faith. As a real fundamentalist (just like JW's) you become upset when I explain this to you.
You are no-ones slave! God does not expect from anyone that they follow anything blindly through a religious dogma, yet you do so willingly. Perhaps the teachings of Bahaullah make sense, but you need him to explain to you how it makes sense. If that is not done then you are a slave of dogma.

 

[Trailblazer]

Do you believe the Bible and the New Testament that we have today are accurate? If not, when and who changed them? And, how would you know unless you listened and trusted to what others thought about the issues?

I do not believe that the Bible and the New Testament were ever fully accurate, as I have told you before.

From: The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

From Letters Written on Behalf of the Guardian:

...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh.
(28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)

...we cannot be sure how much or how little of the four Gospels are accurate and include the words of Christ and His undiluted teachings, all we can be sure of, as Bahá'ís, is that what has been quoted by Bahá'u'lláh and the Master must be absolutely authentic. As many times passages in the Gospel of St. John are quoted we may assume that it is his Gospel and much of it accurate.
(23 January 1944 to an individual believer)

When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet.
(11 February 1944 to an individual believer)

We cannot be sure of the authenticity of any of the phrases in the Old or the New Testament. What we can be sure of is when such references or words are cited or quoted in either the Quran or the Bahá'í writings.
(4 July 1947 to an individual believer)

From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:

You ask for elucidation of the statement made on behalf of the Guardian in this letter of 11 February 1944, "When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet." Is it not clear that what Shoghi Effendi means here is that we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Moses and Christ in the Old and New Testaments are Their exact words, but that, in view of the general principle enunciated by Bahá'u'lláh in the "Kitab-i-Iqan" that God's Revelation is under His care and protection, we can be confident that the essence, or essential elements, of what these two Manifestations of God intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in these two Books?
(19 July 1981 to an individual believer)

In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet. A striking example is given in the account of the sacrifice which Abraham was called upon to make. The Guardian of the Faith confirms that the record in the Qur'an and the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, namely that it was Ishmael, and not Isaac as stated in the Old Testament, whom Abraham was to sacrifice, is to be upheld. In one of His Tablets 'Abdu'l-Bahá refers to this discrepancy, and explains that, from a spiritual point of view, it is irrelevant which son was involved. The essential part of the story is that Abraham was willing to obey God's command to sacrifice His son. Thus, although the account in the Torah is inaccurate in detail, it is true in substance....

...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

 

[Trailblazer]

You use the religious dogma of "God speaking through the medium of Bahaullah" to try and hide your blind faith. As a real fundamentalist (just like JW's) you become upset when I explain this to you.

I am not the slightest bit upset. My faith is not blind because I investigated the claim of Baha'u'llah thoroughly. There is NOTHING blind about that.

You are no-ones slave! God does not expect from anyone that they follow anything blindly through a religious dogma, yet you do so willingly. Perhaps the teachings of Bahaullah make sense, but you need him to explain to you how it makes sense. If that is not done then you are a slave of dogma.

I am not following anyone blindly. I am following with full knowledge of WHO I am following and WHY I am following Him. I am not a slave, I am a believer.

Think about it. How could Baha'u'llah explain to me how His Writings makes sense? He is not here. I just read them and they made sense. I do not need Baha'u'llah to explain to me why His Writings make sense. They just make sense. That is the ONLY reason I became a Baha'i in the first place. I was never searching for God or ANY religion. I just stumbled upon the Baha'i Faith and it made sense. I do not even like religion but I cannot deny what is obviously true.

The first principle Baha’u’llah urged was the independent investigation of truth. God certainly does not expect anyone to follow anything blindly through dogma, but He wants us to follow His Messengers. That is why God sends Messengers, not just because God got bored one day.

But God will NEVER force anyone to follow His Messengers. If people want to reject them that is their choice because God gave everyone free will. God does not give a rip if anyone believes in Baha'u'llah. It is no skin off God's nose because God does not NEED anything. God is fully self-sufficient.

“Consider the mercy of God and His gifts. He enjoineth upon you that which shall profit you, though He Himself can well dispense with all creatures.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 140​

“Your Lord, the God of mercy, can well dispense with all creatures. Nothing whatever can either increase or diminish the things He doth possess. If ye believe, to your own behoof will ye believe; and if ye believe not, ye yourselves will suffer.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 148​

“He who shall accept and believe, shall receive his reward; and he who shall turn away, shall receive none other than his own punishment.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 339​

 

[CG Didymus]

I do not believe that the Bible and the New Testament were ever fully accurate, as I have told you before.

From: The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

From Letters Written on Behalf of the Guardian:

...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh.
(28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)

...we cannot be sure how much or how little of the four Gospels are accurate and include the words of Christ and His undiluted teachings, all we can be sure of, as Bahá'ís, is that what has been quoted by Bahá'u'lláh and the Master must be absolutely authentic. As many times passages in the Gospel of St. John are quoted we may assume that it is his Gospel and much of it accurate.
(23 January 1944 to an individual believer)

When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet.
(11 February 1944 to an individual believer)

We cannot be sure of the authenticity of any of the phrases in the Old or the New Testament. What we can be sure of is when such references or words are cited or quoted in either the Quran or the Bahá'í writings.
(4 July 1947 to an individual believer)

From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:

You ask for elucidation of the statement made on behalf of the Guardian in this letter of 11 February 1944, "When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet." Is it not clear that what Shoghi Effendi means here is that we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Moses and Christ in the Old and New Testaments are Their exact words, but that, in view of the general principle enunciated by Bahá'u'lláh in the "Kitab-i-Iqan" that God's Revelation is under His care and protection, we can be confident that the essence, or essential elements, of what these two Manifestations of God intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in these two Books?
(19 July 1981 to an individual believer)

In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet. A striking example is given in the account of the sacrifice which Abraham was called upon to make. The Guardian of the Faith confirms that the record in the Qur'an and the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, namely that it was Ishmael, and not Isaac as stated in the Old Testament, whom Abraham was to sacrifice, is to be upheld. In one of His Tablets 'Abdu'l-Bahá refers to this discrepancy, and explains that, from a spiritual point of view, it is irrelevant which son was involved. The essential part of the story is that Abraham was willing to obey God's command to sacrifice His son. Thus, although the account in the Torah is inaccurate in detail, it is true in substance....

...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

If the New Testament, itself, was never accurate, then Christians never had "The Truth". And, of course, since Jesus didn't write it, there will always be a question as to how trustworthy were his disciples in writing down the things he said and did? The bigger issue about the resurrection story. Four gospels have several chapters and verses dealing with Jesus walking and talking and even being touched by his disciples. These were written by people that supposed either were eyewitnesses or knew the eyewitnesses. And they wrote it down as if it really happened. Christians for 2000 years believe it happened. Now Baha'i tell them that it didn't happen. The resurrection story was only symbolic.

What else did Christians have to go on? They trusted their early Church leaders. Those Church leaders believed the gospel accounts, and built their theological beliefs around that. But, it was wrong? Their Scriptures, their beliefs, everything is wrong? And it took God 600 years before he sent another messenger to correct the erroneous beliefs and teachings of Christianity?

But did it fix the problem? Christianity still grew and what about the new message, Islam? How long did it stay pure? How long before its leader got corrupted? Because a Baha'i here has said that the Umayyads and the Abbasids are the evil beasts in the Book of Revelation. Even the Shia Islam that the Baha'i Faith sprung out of... How pure are what they teach?

But Baha'is believe there is some eternal spiritual truth common to all of them. What about the temporary "social" teachings? What were they? What did Jesus teach that was a temporary social law? How about Muhammad? He must have changed those temporary social laws of Jesus and added his own, new social laws that would carry people along until the next messenger. What were they? They must have specifically took people to the next level in the progression? That of nation building, right? But, there wasn't nations before that? There were empires, but they don't count as nations I suppose? 'Cause to me an empire sounds bigger than a nation. Anyway, thanks for your time and effort in answering my questions.

 

[Trailblazer]

If the New Testament, itself, was never accurate, then Christians never had "The Truth". And, of course, since Jesus didn't write it, there will always be a question as to how trustworthy were his disciples in writing down the things he said and did? The bigger issue about the resurrection story. Four gospels have several chapters and verses dealing with Jesus walking and talking and even being touched by his disciples. These were written by people that supposed either were eyewitnesses or knew the eyewitnesses. And they wrote it down as if it really happened. Christians for 2000 years believe it happened. Now Baha'i tell them that it didn't happen. The resurrection story was only symbolic.

What else did Christians have to go on? They trusted their early Church leaders. Those Church leaders believed the gospel accounts, and built their theological beliefs around that. But, it was wrong? Their Scriptures, their beliefs, everything is wrong? And it took God 600 years before he sent another messenger to correct the erroneous beliefs and teachings of Christianity?

But did it fix the problem? Christianity still grew and what about the new message, Islam? How long did it stay pure? How long before its leader got corrupted? Because a Baha'i here has said that the Umayyads and the Abbasids are the evil beasts in the Book of Revelation. Even the Shia Islam that the Baha'i Faith sprung out of... How pure are what they teach?

But Baha'is believe there is some eternal spiritual truth common to all of them. What about the temporary "social" teachings? What were they? What did Jesus teach that was a temporary social law? How about Muhammad? He must have changed those temporary social laws of Jesus and added his own, new social laws that would carry people along until the next messenger. What were they? They must have specifically took people to the next level in the progression? That of nation building, right? But, there wasn't nations before that? There were empires, but they don't count as nations I suppose? 'Cause to me an empire sounds bigger than a nation. Anyway, thanks for your time and effort in answering my questions.

You're welcome, anytime.

As far as I am concerned, the Baha'i Faith is the only religion that can make sense of all the religions and put them in perspective. As stand-alones, religions can work for certain groups of people, but these older religions can never work for everyone; so the hundred-dollar question is whether it is God's Will for people to keep following these older religions FOREVER or whether it is now time for everyone to move into the new age? How does it benefit humanity for everyone to cling to older religions that have social teachings and laws and a message which is not for this new age?

This is not to mention the fact that the original scriptures of these older religions have been changed and distorted so much by the leaders of those religions such that they are no longer what was revealed by their Prophets in the first place. Just think, one-third of the world population are Christians believe that Jesus rose from the grave, and most of them believe Jesus is going to return. What are the implications for humanity? How can humanity ever move forward?

Sure, Christians, Muslims and Jews and others are sincere about their religions, but if those dispensations have been abrogated they are not following the Will of God. Moreover, many people select a religion as they would buy a new pair of shoes -- does this fit me? I cannot even imagine having a religion just because I like it and it works for me, I can only think of a religion as the Will of God. It does not matter to me if there are a few Laws in the Baha'i Faith I might not like; religion is not about what I like, it is about God's Will for me and the rest of humanity, because obviously an All-Knowing and All-Wise God knows more about what is best for humanity than I could ever know.

I consider the Baha'i Faith a reasonable and logical religion. That is the ONLY reason I am a Baha'i. I was never searching for God when I became a Baha'i in 1970 and only within the last six years have I started to try to get right with God. I became a Baha'i because the teachings made sense. I understand that they do not make sense to everyone but I would be willing to bet that the main reason they don't is because most people already have a religion and they cannot see the Baha'i Faith for what it is because they have too much bias, too many veils. Either that or what they want matters more to them than what God wants; as you know there are certain Laws in the Bahai Faith many people consider too restrictive.

Also, according to what Baha'u'llah wrote that some people are guided by God, which means that others are not guided. We cannot know exactly why but it makes sense that God guides those people who He knows will "choose" to believe in Baha'u'llah and not the others. God will never force anyone to believe. They have to do so by their own free will or not at all.

“Great indeed is this Day! The allusions made to it in all the sacred Scriptures as the Day of God attest its greatness. The soul of every Prophet of God, of every Divine Messenger, hath thirsted for this wondrous Day. All the divers kindreds of the earth have, likewise, yearned to attain it. No sooner, however, had the Day Star of His Revelation manifested itself in the heaven of God’s Will, than all, except those whom the Almighty was pleased to guide, were found dumbfounded and heedless.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 11​

“So blind hath become the human heart that neither the disruption of the city, nor the reduction of the mountain in dust, nor even the cleaving of the earth, can shake off its torpor. The allusions made in the Scriptures have been unfolded, and the signs recorded therein have been revealed, and the prophetic cry is continually being raised. And yet all, except such as God was pleased to guide, are bewildered in the drunkenness of their heedlessness!”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 39​

"Some were guided by the Light of God, gained admittance into the court of His presence, and quaffed, from the hand of resignation, the waters of everlasting life, and were accounted of them that have truly recognized and believed in Him. Others rebelled against Him, and rejected the signs of God, the Most Powerful, the Almighty, the All-Wise.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 145​

“Whoso maketh efforts for Us,” he shall enjoy the blessings conferred by the words: “In Our Ways shall We assuredly guide him.””
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 266-267​

 

[Dragonslayer]

One of the strengths of religious forum is the diversity of Faiths represented. That presents an excellent opportunity to learn about the faiths of others. This opportunity doesn’t readily present itself to the same degree where I live as religion has become a risky topic of conversation and so best avoided. This year I joined my cities Interfaith council so that’s been helpful.

But why learn about the religion of another in the first place? What is your motivation and what is mine? It’s a personal question really. For me I like to see the bigger picture of ‘world history’ with civilisations that have come and been, and ideologies and beliefs that inspired the masses. It helps me better understand the world as it is today and others in an increasingly multicultural world. It also brings coherence to my own faith and worldview I can not deny.

Obviously there’s other agendas too. We can learn about another faiths so we can make our own beliefs look good and demean others. Many of us know that illusory satisfaction in our worldview as we build our straw man as to what we imagine another’s faith is about. Ego trips are part of the human condition and whose really immune?

Anyway thoughts and reflections? Thanks for listening and discussing if your interested.

The interfaith council is a gathering of Pagan religions, where they get together and have an orgy of Pagan ceremonial fornication. It is an absolute abomination in the sight of the One True God, who will not share His glory with Pagan gods.

All of those who participate in spiritual fornication, will be judged as having participated in a Pagan spiritual orgy. That is an abominations inn God's sight and He will cast all those who take part into hell. There is no room for Pagans in heaven, they are all going to hell.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is an abominations inn God's sight and He will cast all those who take part into hell. There is no room for Pagans in heaven, they are all going to hell.

pagan: a person holding religious beliefs other than those of the main world religions. https://www.google.com/search

I think that Interfaith councils have those people of the main world religions.

Who do you consider Pagans?