Why can't we look at the different religions as levels of discovery or different ways of looking at the same things? I see religions as tools to get in touch with inner self or your higher self. I see them as a method of preparing yourself for the most high. I see them as a way to get back in touch with that which you have lost. To me insisting that our religion is the only way and everyone else is wrong is like saying we have the only maid in town that can clean house.

Why can't we acknowledge that all religions have something to say to us?

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

If we had the answer to that question, LK, we could save the world! I feel as you do...no one has the only answer and no one has a corner on the truth. However, to get fanatics to see this is one of the great challenges, I guess.

Sorry my answer isn't much help.

Maggie

__________________
So much to learn and see and do

Baha'is have the view that is called Progressive Revelation, that religions are stages along the way and should be appreciated for what they convey. All the religions have very similar spiritual perspectives.... It's usually in ordinances and ritual along with languages that they differ.

- Art

__________________
"it benefits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God."
- Johannes Kepler

Religion is a man-made construct, an attempt to understand what can't be understood any other way.

Scripture is written by human beings in an attempt to explain, in terms that the community can understand, what those attempts at understanding have come up with.

If there is such a thing as "revelation" -- of any kind, nature or description -- then it is an abysmal and catostrophically stupid way for any god to make its message known to all people. The reasons should be obvious:

• Revelation is always made to one or very few, never to the community as a whole. This leads inevitably to misunderstandings because human communication is not perfect. The history of schisms, heretics and so forth provide copious, nay profuse, examples.
• If revelation is made only to one or very few, then it is possible (or even certain) that others will claim to have a private revelation also, leaving the community -- with no help whatever from the god -- to determine which, if any, revelation is "real."
• Even if multiple people feel that they have had a legitimate, personal experience of god, and a revelation from same, then to the extent that these revelations mutually contradictory (as is the case among different religions and/or sects), then:
  • at most only one of them can be true
  • they are all true, and god doesn't care how humans perceive and/or worship it
  • there is no god, there was no revelation, and another explanation for the experience is required

Let's try a little thought experiment. Let us suppose that Congress meets in secret next week and passes a new bill. It is ratified in the Senate (again behind closed doors) and a couple of days later, the President signs it into law in the privacy of the Oval Office.

Now, let us also suppose that, for reasons known only to themselves, all of these lawmakers decide not to publicize the law for all to see. Instead, they will tell one or two very select individuals. To make matters worse, they will not tell the world who those individuals are, or when the content of the new law will be revealed to them. It will be entirely up to those to whom the revelation was given to announce that they had been informed of the new law, and to provide whatever credentials they could muster.

Now, several weeks later, a lawyer from a prestigious law firm in Philadelphia holds a news conference to announce that he has been told, by the highest authority, that it will henceforth be illegal in the United States for any person to marry without the written consent of the head of their family. This shall be effective immediately, and for all persons.

This news is duly picked up by the Philadelphia papers, and eventually is reported (with all due skepticism) around the country, while everyone snickers. Meanwhile, another lawyer, this time in Seattle, tells almost the same story, the only wrinkle being that he mentions a clause stating that if an individual has no living family members, then he/she may appeal to the courts for permission to marry.

This is "almost corroboration." Could it be true? The puzzlement in the papers, on CNN and Fox becomes palpable as everybody tries to understand what's going on. Meanwhile, the President and Congress remain silent, as they have agreed. They have not even told the courts.

What, I wonder, should deeply in love John and Meena, he Christian, she Hindu, do? If they marry without permission (Meena's family won't give it) are they contravening a law or are they not?

Of course, this doesn't even begin to cover off the possibilities, when the following week, a free-thinker from San Francisco announces that he's been told, by the President himself (who will not, unfortunately, confirm or deny) that marriage is to be freely available for everybody, of whichever gender to whichever gender, and in multiples so long as the number of parties in the arrangement is even (so nobody is left out on any given night).

Now that the country has gotten used to having the laws about marriage revealed to them in this odd fashion, what credence should citizens give to this new revelation?

============================================

Now you know precisely how I feel about the revelations of Saul of Tarsus, Moses, Mohammed and every other prophet in the long history of man's struggle to understand himself and his place in the world.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

[quote] Speaking for Christianity this is not a biblical option, to do this would be to deny it's core message - that reconcilation with God is only possible through faith in Jesus Christ alone.

what is this "inner self"
What is this "higher self?"

Why do you see them this way? Can you just pick anyone of them?

What do you think we have lost? What do you think all religions have in common that they can all get you back in touch with it? How would you know when you have got it?

Maybe they do but not one of them can supplement what God teaches through the bible for it is completely sufficient information on who God is, who man is, what God wants from us, how we are seperated from God, how we can be reconciled to God and how we should live our lives in this present world, whence came I and whither goeth I and so much more.

__________________

I believe that weakness in or lack of faith is what causes this. I believe that it goes deeper, though. There is something to be learned in all things. Most people seem to be so very wrapped up in things of little importance that they don't take the time to think, contemplate, or appreciate the knowledge that is available in all things. Lay down and study a blade of grass. There is knowledge of the universe there to be found. How many people do this? How many would find it to be a pointless exercise? How many would accept it, but still find something else to do?

[quote=Paul] Then I suppose that is your answer to my long post above?

I am sorry, and deeply saddened, that every time I ask the tough questions, the whole site goes deadly silent. Seems like a lot of people ask a lot of questions, but only want the answers they were hoping to get when they first asked.

Looking for comfort. That does seem to be the very core of religion, doesn't it?

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

[quote=evangelicalhumanist]
Or perhaps the majority of people on forums like this won't take the time to read an overly long post, especially if it doesn't overly interest them? That isn't aimed at anyone in particular, the point is that those of us who are the most passionate, tend to write the longest posts...which most people don't read completely. Don't take it as an insult if you happen to post a very long post, but get no comments on it. Chances are that nobody read all the way through it. There are other things going on that take attention away from the posts, even when they are really good. Also, some people don't come here every day, as much as we'd like it if they did, or they may need time to consider a response before making it.

[quote=evangelicalhumanist] I don't see your questions as tough. I started another thread on your main theme of your post because it seemed like it needed it's own thread.
I agree that sometimes people want to think about posts before they reply.
I think you are very respected here as being a thinker. Keep on posting the questions.

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

I'll respond to your post EH! First, you're a great spokesperson - and of the kind that the world needs to here right now, because we can't afford to continue blindly believing in one God vs. the other. We need to ask the most challenging quesitons, and you have a gift in that area, for sure.

Now comes the "but" - While you're correct that religion is man's attempt to explain the unexplainable, and many people are clinging to outdated and overly interpreted versions of that explanation, it doesn't necessarily follow that there is no revelation and that it's not available to everyone. If you look at the outer form/differences of religion, you find alot of contradictory beliefs. But if you look at the content, or inner experience, what you find is very similar. If there is no true religious/spiritual experience, there's alot of crazy folks running around talking about something that doesn't exist. I find that hard to believe, looking at all the near-death experiences, out-of-body experiences, people communicating with "the other side", etc. There are too many parallels. It's also hard to explain many of the other stories (just read Autobiography of a Yogi and you'll see what I mean). People on this forum have had very, very interesting experiences. You may well argue that this is all "natural" and someday we'll understand it, and I agree 100% - but it still doesn't deny that there is something greater out there, of which we're all a part, something people often call God. Not everyone thinks that God is an entity who wants things His way or the highway.

As to your assertion that God's revelations are contradictory, if there is a Creative Power or Higher Intelligence (or whatever you want to call it) why would it have to show up only in one way? Wouldn't it be more meaningful if it were appropriate to the culture/time in which people could understand it? Would it have done any good for Jesus to talk about quantum physics 2000 years ago? Granted, most of the dogma doesn't have anything to do with love or peace, but there are some profound statements in all scriptures nonetheless. As far as I'm concerned, we need today's revelation as it comes to each of us, not something built on man's interpretation of what happened centuries ago. If God is God, it seems he/she/it would speak to each of us in a way that would be the most meaninful to us personally. And the message from those who have tried to show the way is that it comes from within. Infact, if we're a part of God, revelation would HAVE to be personal and unique.

So keep speaking out against the contradictions you see, but remember that the scientists don't know everything either, and the true skeptic questions even their own skepticism. And I say that in all appreciation for the passion you have for the truth.