The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions

[inhumility]

I want to add more details of the Inter-Religions Conference of 1896.
“A person named Swami Sadhu Shugan Chandar who had served for three four years for reformation of Kaesth, a Hindu community; he thought in1892 that unless all get together there is no use. At last he conceived the idea to convene a Religious Conference, the first of it was conducted in Ajmeer. Then he selected Lahore as an appropriate venue for the second Conference, being conducive for inter-faith dialogue and then he got busy for it. The Swami made a Committee to make arrangement of this Religious Conference whose chairman was named Master Durga Parshad and Lala Dhampat Roy B.A., L.L.B., a Hindu pleader of Chief Court of Lahore, who was selected as Chief Secretary of the Committee.
The dates of the Conference were fixed to be held on 26, 27,28th December in 1896 and following six Moderators were nominated:-

• Mr. Roy Bahadur Babu Partool Chand, Judge, Chief Court of Punjab.
• Mr. Khan Bahadur Shaikh Khuda Bux, Judge Small Cause Court Lahore.
• Mr. Roy Bahadur Pundit Radha Kishan Cool, Pleader Chief Court, ex-Governor Jammu.
• Hazrat Moulvi Hakim Nooruddin, Royal Physician (of Jammu and Kashmir).
• Mr. Roy Bahwani Das, M.A .Extra Settlement Officer Jhelum.
• Mr. Sardar Jowahar Singh, Secretary Khalsa Committee, Lahore.

(Report Jalsa Great Religions, Page 253,254 printed by Siddiqui Press, Lahore 1897)
Swami Shugan Chandar also expressed in a published announcement and gave a covenant to Muslims, Christians and Aryas (Hindus) and beseeched their renowned religious scholars to commit themselves to participate in the Conference to elucidate merits of their religions. He mentioned that in the proposed Inter-Religions Conference, which would take place in Town Hall, Lahore the purpose of the Conference was only to provide opportunity to the truthful Religion to prove its verities in a civilized public gathering, so that the love of truthful religion gets deeply penetrated in the hearts of the people by reasons and arguments which they discern. Every religion is represented by its eminent scholars so that they can express and put deep into the heart of the audience the facts and excellencies of their religion and the audience are also provided with the opportunity of listening to the speeches of the eminent scholars of the religion in their selected gathering and make a comparative study and where they see the glitter of truth thy could accept it.
In the present era, due to the religious encounters, there is a desire among the people to explore for the truthful religion; to achieve this end it seems most appropriate that, the scholars of every religion, who are already committed and are used to deliver such lectures to propagate their religion; such people should gather at one place and make speeches and express the merits of their religion complying the announced questions. .Hence in such a meeting where elders of all religions have gathered the light of the truthful religion would definitely outshine the others. This is the purpose of this convention. The able lecturers of every religion know for certain that it is their duty to express the truth of their religion, and since purpose of this meeting facilitates their motive they should now feel free to express the verities and excellences of their religion, so they should in fact use this opportunity which God has granted them which one seldom gets.
Then he wrote motivating them. A man who knows about others that they are suffering from some fatal disease, and he knows the remedy of that disease and knows that they will get cured if he provided the remedy; I can’t believe that such person will hesitate in providing the treatment, while that person claims that he loves the humanity, he won’t intentionally stop to help them if he is called for help by such poor patients. My heart is eager to know that it is proved as to which religion is in fact full of truths and facts. I don’t find words to express true enthusiasm in this regard. The representatives of different religions accepted the invitation of the Swami and confirmed their participation in the Inter-Religions Conference in the Christmas holidays in Dec. 1896 at Lahore. The representatives of almost all religions participated in the Conference to respond to 5 questions which the Committee has publicized and for which the Committee had put a condition that every speaker would try to confine his response from the Holy Book he had already accepted as sacred. (The representatives of following religions participated in the conference which took place on the dates fixed for it, Sanatan Dharm, Hinduism, Arya Samaj, Free Thinkers, Barhamu Samaj, Theosophical Society, Religion of Harmony. Christians, Islam, Sikhism.)
But in reality there was only one speech which truly and completely covered the answers of the given questions. It is difficult to narrate the scene- the influence of the speech on the audience when Hazrat Moulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoty read the paper of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, in a very ecstatic style which filled ears with a lovable voice to the enjoyment of all. There was not a single person of whatever religion who did not enjoy the pleasure of the speech and who did not show and record his pleasure in a loud gesture of the pleasure or applause.
There was no person who did not feel the trance and was not carried away by the eloquent speech. The style of the speech invoked the interest of all and every body enjoyed. Even the opponents were praising the speech which truly spoke of the high quality of the essay. One of the renowned and popular English Newspapers of India, The Civil & Military Gazette of Lahore, which was a Christian Newspaper praised the Essay and mentioned it as the only essay worth mentioning.
The time allotted for the Essay, written by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, was only two hours, but the interesting essay could not be finished in this time, so the Moderators of the Conference added one day of 29the Dec. 1896 so that the reading of the essay could be completed. Punjab Observer, a daily, praised the essay and filled columns after columns .Other newspapers e.g. Paisa Akhbar, Chowdween Sadi, Sadiqul Akhbar, Mukhbare Deccan ,General Gohar Asifi of Calcutta, all newspapers concurred in the praise and excellence of the Essay. Other neutral communities and followers of other religions also confirmed the supremacy of the essay over others. Mr. Dhampat Roy, the secretary of the Religions Conference made following observation in the published Report of the Conference
“There was an interval of one and a half hour after which the lecture of Mr. Pundit Ghurdun Das was to be delivered; but because one of the renowned representatives of Islam was to present his essay, the eager audience did not leave their seats and kept seated on their seats. There was still some time when at 1.30 PM the essay was to be read, the vast building of Islamia College began being filled hurriedly and it was full to its capacity within no time .There were about 7000 to 8000 people gathered to listen it. A large number of intelligentsia of different Religions and communities were present. The chairs, benches, and carpet flooring, arranged in abundance, were full and many a people had but to hear the speech in standing. Many Professors, Barristers, Pleaders, Government Officials, Extra-Assistants, Doctors were among those who were standing, the way these dignitaries of all classes and segments were standing with patience and listening to the lecture showed how much these people had attachment and eagerness with this comparison of religions. The lecturer, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, though was not present on the occasion himself yet he especially sent one of his able disciples namely Moulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoty to read the written paper that showed how much these were influenced by this movement. The Committee had allocated the time of only one hour for the lecture but the audience got so much interested in the paper that the Moderator had to announce due to increased interest of the audience that the time would be extended till the lecture is finished. This was in fact to the heartiest assent of the audience, so much so that the next speaker Moulvi Abu Yousuf Mubarak Ali voluntarily allowed that his time should also be given to finish the paper. This was according to the wish of the Moderators as also the audience and they expressed their joy and assent loudly and thanked the Moderators and the Moulvi Sahib with applause. The scheduled time was to finish by 4.20 PM but owing to the interest of the audience it was continued up to 5.30 PM as the written paper was read in about four hours and the audiences were glued to their seats to listen it form beginning to the end.”
(This is a faithful and free translation made by me for the CR members. For the original in Urdu, please refer to the preface by the publisher of Roohany Khazaen Volume -10, pages 8-12).

[Bill]

Hi,

May I be permitted to take a different tack? I often feel that the value of a question lies in the nature of questions, rather than in any answers they may provide.

The reality taught to us by science and history is that behind every question stand more questions. Every time we think we have an answer, we have simply not thought the answer through properly. In truth we simply have another question.

The danger with answers is that we can believe that we have the final answer, the truth beyond all others, a dogma, an article of faith, which would be heretical to question. Down this path is found some of the worst horrors of the last century.

My view is that there is only one answer beyond which there are no further questions, I call that answer God ("...by whichsoever name ye will, invoke Him: He hath most excellent names" Qur'án 17:110).

Baha’u’llah, quoting a Hadith wrote "Knowledge is a single point, but the ignorant have multiplied it." All other answers are illusions; there are really only more questions. I firmly believe that down this path is found tolerance and compassion.

Brownoski wrote, in his book “The Ascent of Man” a chapter in which he compared certainty and knowledge. True knowledge, he argued, doubted itself and saw its own limitations, saw itself in relation to the vastness of creation; certainty on the other hand is a very dangerous attitude.

The 5 questions posed have all been addressed in the great revealed religions, and commented on well by the other contributors, and all draw anyone thinking about them closer to the mystery we call God, whatever tradition they ascribe to. And that mystery is ultimately knowable only in the perfection of our true self.

Bill

[Ron Price]

It has been nearly two months since this thread began its existence in this piece of cyberspace. Already there is a lengthy discussion with many facets of the initial question surveyed, with opinions outliend in brief. I will write briefly about "the greatest principle of comparative studies of religions and interfaith dialogue."
____________________
Apologetics is a branch of systematic theology, although some experience it’s thrust in religious studies or philosophy of religion courses. Some encounter it on the internet for the first time in a more populist and usually much less academic form. As I see it, apologetics is primarily concerned with the protection of a religious position, the refutation of that position's assailants and, in the larger sense, the exploration of that position in the context of prevailing philosophies and standards in a secular and pluralistic society. Apologetics, to put it slightly differently, is concerned with answering critical inquiries, criticism of a position, in a rational manner. Apologetics is not possible, it seems to me anyway, without a commitment to and a desire to defend a position. Everyone's position is, in a broad sense, religious--it is religious in the sense that everyone has assumptions and gathers his or her emotions around those assumptions. Assumptions are concerned, in the areas discussed here, with very basic questions about life.

For me, the core of my position I could express in one phrase: the Baha'i Revelation. With that said, though, the activity I engage in, namely, apologetics, is a never ending exercise. The apologetics that concerns me is not so much Christian apologetics, secular apologetics or Islamic apologetics, but Baha'i apologetics. There are many points of comparison and contrast, though, which I won't go into here. Christians will have the opportunity to defend Christianity by the use of apologetics; agnostics will defend their agnosticism, atheists their atheism, etc. And I will in turn defend the Baha'i Faith by the use of apologetics. In the process we will all, hopefully, learn something about our respective Faiths, our religions, our intellectual and philosophical positions which we hold to our hearts dearly.

At the outset, then, in this my first posting, my intention is simply to make this start, to state what you might call "my apologetics position" as the foundation for a discussion of the initial question that started this thread. This brief statement indicates, in broad outline, where I am coming from in the weeks and months ahead. -Ron Price with thanks to Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics?" Baha'i Studies Review, Vol. 10, 2001/2002.
_______________________
As an extension of this brief statement above let me add a second part to compelte more fully this foundation stone for a discussion of this "greatest principle." This foundation is essentially an outline of my basic orientation to Baha’i apologetics. Critical scholarly contributions or criticism raised in public or private discussions about questions, issues and statements like the one we are concerned with here and which are an obvious part of apologetics should not necessarily be equated with hostility. Often questions are perfectly legitimate aspects of a person's search for an answer to an intellectual conundrum. Paul Tillich once expressed the view that apologetics was an "answering theology."(Systematic Theology, U. of Chicago, 1967, Vol.1, p6.)

I have always been attracted to the founder of the Baha'i Faith's exhortations in discussion to "speak with words as mild as milk," with "the utmost lenience and forebearance." I am also aware that, in cases of rude or hostile attack, rebuttal with a harsher tone may well be justified. It does not help an apologist to belong to those "watchmen" the prophet Isaiah calls "dumb dogs that cannot bark."(Isaiah, 56:10) At the same time, I am not one to use a harsh tone; I prefer mildness and, if I must be critical, humour and sarcasm, irony--all in the context of an etiquette of expression. For without that etiquette and a certain acute judgement, one can easily get into a slanging match which no one wins.

Motive, manner, mode, style, tone, a judicious exercise in wordsmithing that avoids dissidence--all are an important component of this etiquette of expression. This is so important because, in its essence, apologetics is a kind of confrontation, an act of revealing one's true colours, of hoisting the flag, of demonstrating essential characteristics of one's faith: one's assumptions and the place where one's emotions tend to gravitate around.

Dialogue, as Hans Kung puts it, "does not mean self-denial."(quoted by Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics," Baha'i Studies Review, Vol.10, 2001/2) Schaefer goes on: "A faith that is opportunistically streamlined, adapting to current trends, thus concealing its real features, features that could provoke rejection in order to be acceptable for dialogue is in danger of losing its identity."

It is almost impossible to carry the torch of truth through a crowd without getting someone's beard singed. In the weeks that follow, my postings will probably wind up singing the beards of some readers and, perhaps, my own in the process. Such are the perils of dialogue, of apologetics. Much of Baha'i apologetics derives from the experience Baha'is have of a fundamental discrepancy between much in secular thought, much in the thought of the many religious positions around the globe and the Baha'i revelation on the other. In some ways, the gulf is unbridegeable but, so too, is this the case between the secular and much thought in the Christian revelation. So, too, is this the case in virtually all posiitons--that's what makes them unique positions--secular or sacred.

Anyway, that's all for now. It's back to the winter winds of Tasmania, about 3 kms from the Bass Straight on the Tamar River. The geography of place is so much simpler than that of the spiritual geography readers at this site are concerned with, although I am aware that whom the gods would destroy they first make simple and simpler and simpler. Even the geography of place, as any geographer will tell you, has its complexities too. I look forward to the continued dialogue in this thread. Here in far-off Tasmania--the last stop before Antarctica, if one wants to get there through some other route than off the end of South America--your postings will be gratefully read. -Ron Price, Tasmania.

[wizanda]

Ok, as you asked me to add my experience, that is where I will begin; I remember way back in the beginning, we had one faith at a point in our culture and history as human race.
Where there was just one belief between us, this would be going back about after the flood, if we look where the earliest settled culture and where our history book says a flat plain…..
We have India and what was is one of the oldest religions there?
Vedanta

So it is not a new concept you are discussing, nothing has gone under the sun that hasn’t done at some point….
I am unsure if you understand the principles of Vedanta yet my understanding is this:
All Religions discuss parts of the whole; God is one and has many different names and reflections… so in all books there is wisdom to be learned…. Even in folly; as this even if you miss it, and then this truly proves your heart….

Why the elders/ ascended masters/ angels set everyone up with the Bible and wide road, as we knew most would take the easy option and heaven is not about that.

So in your point I hear and see, yet let us all also remember that in the beginning we were one, this is what we lost, this is where our ego got in the way.

The age of Kali/metal Beast Empire is all about time and enforcing it over us, its time we all woke up….there are 13 months in the year.
365 divided by 28 (Luna/menstrual cycle) = 13.1
We live under roman rule still this is in all your books, under different figurative descriptions yet the same entity, in energy being described each time.

So a certain prophet is never the point it is the fact we all said the same, we are all going to for ever more as God is One. We come from heaven, it is one heart, one mind, one focus, and this is to allow you all to understand….
Oneness
One word
One Place
One World
One God
One Us
Oneness

That is heavens true name!

Hell on the other hand is dense energy and the basement of the universe on a metaphysical/spirit/matrix level; as said heaven is at hand, meaning its here within the matrix of reality.

So points over a time frame in the eye of God and heaven is none existent, if we wish to come close in human form and bound by time, we have to first learn to be free of it…

As in what Lao Tzu said “don’t worry about, I am this or I am; that just be…

In the beginning as a child you were one, we all are, that is our divine nature, yet as we grow we enforce mouldings on our self’s.
Changing languages so we don’t understand each other…. Haven’t you noticed you can have to children of different races and they can play…?
Get to adults and what has gone wrong???
We add edges we get hurt, we make boundaries in the way we speak, and Kids speak in whistling as do most animals they talk in a scale of music.

Heaven is the same as is the whole after life.

Also if God is the lord of the living and to live, in what way is any religious dogmatic behaviour helping you to live, in fact does it do the opposite in many cases and if live is opposite of its self isn’t this evil?

So yes I could spend ages studying all the posts of people and seeing where you are all heading in your spirits right now, yet there is one God guiding us…

How to tell the falsities in the books…..

My earthly dad lies terribly, well over exaggerates especially in the pub….When I was a child it was hard to tell, which bits were added and which was stable…..
So having this from an early age helped see this system…
Now in each story regardless if my dad adds bits, he would keep parts of the original, where his ego didn’t get in the way….
Same applies with our books, at points in all of them you can hear where the ego has got in the way…
So go through the books and understand the whole story each time, then observe them as one picture, like dad, by the end of the day I could see in between his entire story the reality as I heard it so many times.

Anyway just a suggestion, yet worked for me and this life is predestined, I live in.

Not sure how far to take, this yet I am sick of hiding behind the covers pretending its not me… you see if you check up the texts for the new name of Christ and then online what people are saying his new name is Sananda and in Hinduism and the person to come is Skanda. This doesn’t mean I am Christ, yet his brother and he won’t be back according to texts, until the (ts=Zâmach/ ts=Zemach) fig/buds are out, pipes/anointed ones in Zechariah (ts=Zantârâh) the books are sorted, this has begun…

I died at 23, so am certain of who I am and really want to help everyone, if they can allow me the opportunity to explain… and not ban me from trying my best to be unbiased, which is hard considering I find some of the Biblical bits a personal attack on me, I remember my brothers life. I have had visions of how it feels to have your mother watch you die and nothing you can do about it… ok for you as you know you are safe, yet do you know how much pain a mother suffers to see that.

Anyway going off track, basically Heaven is one, at some point we will get around to drawing it, as I saw it when I was there last…
Basically is a circular, almost like an eye in the first level of heaven though all is equal like the eye each does its part.
You have love which is more white and less intense, this is what many draw as heaven as clouds, yet really it is dynamic strands of energy, that have become transcendental understanding loving to an unconditional oneness level; we all one! (Heaven sees your whole life and understands why in most cases.)
Next you have the inner circle which focuses energy of the universe in to code that is accessible to God i.e. intercessor (Christ in Isaiah 53), Buddha, Lao Tzu, Elijah, Moses to name a few, so can people stop arguing over who is better; as we don’t, lol!
The only thing above that level is God and no one thing can step into them shoes, as it is all the dynamic creative logical intrinsic knowledge and insight into the whole universe in single place….
There is no Devil, it has no opportunity to exist other the in mans ego and that is about it, hell (basement/Sheol) is watched by heaven; it has no physical control over the matrix it is surrounded in.
As you ascend through the dimensions/ commandments we have all written, then you have more control, it is mans choice to allow ego in…
It doesn’t help we drink death as a pastime like my dad his ego was huge in the PUB! Alcohol is well why we fell as it is fallen, (I could explain the dimensions, another time).
Christ said not to drink and they forged it blatantly as you can still see until this day the real translation, I ask you not to drink.


I hope that helps, as you asked for my experiences.

I will not stand by any one prophet, as all prophets are God’s to begin, so stand by the person who taught them.

Peace, Love AN Unity B WITH US

God Blesses you all

[Vajradhara]

Namaste wizanda,

thank you for the interesting post.

Originally Posted by wizanda

As in what Lao Tzu said “don’t worry about, I am this or I am; that just be…

do you recall where you read this quote attributed to the Old Master?

In the beginning as a child you were one, we all are, that is our divine nature, yet as we grow we enforce mouldings on our self’s.

oh. well, this form does not have a divine nature. that is an adharmic belief.

Also if God is the lord of the living and to live, in what way is any religious dogmatic behaviour helping you to live, in fact does it do the opposite in many cases and if live is opposite of its self isn’t this evil?

i suppose it would depend on the particular practices, generalization of this nature is not likely to be all that productive. as for God being the lord of the living and to live, that is a matter of belief

Not sure how far to take, this yet I am sick of hiding behind the covers pretending its not me… you see if you check up the texts for the new name of Christ and then online what people are saying his new name is Sananda and in Hinduism and the person to come is Skanda. This doesn’t mean I am Christ, yet his brother and he won’t be back according to texts, until the (ts=Zâmach/ ts=Zemach) fig/buds are out, pipes/anointed ones in Zechariah (ts=Zantârâh) the books are sorted, this has begun…

pardon me for being blunt. you feel that you are the Messiah and are lecturing the rest of the forum members on their ego? there is a teaching of Jesus which is apt here, the one of the splinter and the plank, i should think.

I died at 23, so am certain of who I am

the last words belie the first ones.

and really want to help everyone,

a very worthwhile endeavor and goal.

if they can allow me the opportunity to explain… and not ban me from trying my best to be unbiased, which is hard considering I find some of the Biblical bits a personal attack on me, I remember my brothers life.

please feel free to explain your points of view whilst remaining inside the Code of Conduct which you argreed to when you joined the forum.

Next you have the inner circle which focuses energy of the universe in to code that is accessible to God i.e. intercessor (Christ in Isaiah 53), Buddha

Buddhas are not intecessors to any deity they are, in fact, teachers of the deities. this is true of all Buddhas, not just Buddha Shakyamuni, by the by.

As you ascend through the dimensions/ commandments we have all written,

are you seriously asserting that you had a hand in writing the 10 Commandments? you will, no doubt, pardon me for being somewhat skeptical of this claim.

metta,

~v

[Victor]

I have been asked to join this debate by inhumility. It gives me an opportunity to take a brief pause in my theological work to do so.

Why do I chuckle? With due respect to all the members, I have selected various bits and pieces from several posts, which I will use within the body of my response. I find them thought provoking. I believe, without stating it emphatically, that Ron Price has hit the nail on the head. He might not even have realized it! Reread his post, if you will, with a discerning eye to 'person.'

My second cause for humor is the fact that anyone could produce sufficient verbal dissertation to allow for more than four hours in which to read a simple essay! If I were a Cobra and an Indian mystic had played the pipe, I would have slithered off before the first thirty minutes had expired! But then, there are those who can hypnotise and mystify with the sound of their voice.

With your permission I will take the time to write a proper response and then return to post it. I merely wished to note that I will participate and in doing so will not demean anyone or their beliefs.

Victor G

[Eudaimonist]

I will speak for the Fellowship of Reason's nontheistic philosophical and spiritual path, which we call Eudaimonism. This path has its roots in ancient Greek eudaimonistic thought, in particular Aristotle, and in modern thinkers such as Ayn Rand, David Norton, Abraham Maslow, and others.

The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.

To boil it down from one perspective...

Health, decay. Self-actualizing, self-destructive. Self-esteeming, self-hating.

What is the State of Man After Death?

No state. Non-existent.

The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.

The object of man's life is eudaimonia, which may be described as the objective flourishing or happiness of the human individual in this life. All of us are like diamonds in the rough, with potentials to actualize and fulfill. The means of eudaimonia's attainment is, at root, the excellent use of the faculty of reason, and includes developing moral character, mutually beneficial friendships and other relationships, and a love of life.

The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.

The what?

Sources of Divine Knowledge.

Reason is the only means of acquiring or validating knowledge. Perhaps this makes reason divine.


eudaimonia,

M.

[soulatom]

More than a million years before God “Revealed” Himself to mankind through Holy Scriptures, tens of thousands of generations of our ancestors also needed to communicate with Him and gain spiritual comfort from His Presence.

Throughout the Stone Age, He/She was seen everywhere present – in every animal, tree, rock or cloud. For 99,000 generations Animism sustained mankind’s needs and helped hunter/gatherer family groups to gain self-confidence, multiply and spread out of Africa across the face of the Earth.

Then, when hunting and gathering could no longer sustain our on-going evolution, the idea of agriculture inspired the mind. Family groups banded together and cooperated in domesticating Nature and over time grew into large clans, which kept dividing. Each clan worshiped its own ancestors as spirit mediators between God and the living. Each erected its own totemic image. As competition between clans escalated each began to believe that their original founder was the only direct Son of God and sat on his right side. This superstition assisted in binding individual clan loyalties and giving pause to disgruntled members about thinking of betrayal during internecine clan vendettas. Shamans mediated between the living and the dead - especially on the death bead, when grim specters related to sloth, laziness, and deceit etc, rose up to haunt the dying.

When regional areas could no longer sustain farm-based economies, nationalization became an evolutionary imperative. The superstitious lock made union rationally impossible. Total, devastating war, initiated by a ruthless warlord was the only answer. Merciless impaling and the skulls crushed of literally hundreds of thousands of people, broke the spirit of totemism and forced the clans to unite behind a the tyrant’s own clan. (See the Rule of Shaka, Zulu, 1780 -1821) Thus nations were born out of clans through blood and chaos. Dynastic rules inevitably weaken, and the union would disband back into petty clan vendetta – unless a powerful, binding, dogmatic Scripture emerged to keep the nation intact. Scripture served multiple purposes. Firstly: Belief in God, supplied every individual with an absolute standard of Goodness against which to measure themselves and promised an after-life – which in-turn allowed for discrepancies in caste. It also generally supplied a genealogy that showed how all the clans originated from a Single Godhead. It gave written rules and instructions for good social behavior, It supplied metaphorical answers to the mysteries of Creation It evolved a learned priest caste who’s mission was to teach callow youth how to read. It was instrumental in creating conscientious industrial craftsmanship. It supported the idea that the King was Divinely appointed, which helped ensure national loyalties during national wars.

The success of nationhood, led to imperial colonization and the rise of scientific technology. Science succeeded in demystifying the Scriptures and gradually used rational argument to break the superstitious Belief in the Divine nature of Royalty. Thus republicanism was born, but not without bloody revolution,

In this sense Science replaced Scripture and became a universal standard of measurement. The problem faced by science today is that it is not infallible, and cannot supply an absolute Standard of Good. This leaves modern, atheistic man, spiritually uncomfortable, if not destitute,

With the end of imperialism, a New global paradigm has emerged. And Mankind finds itself in increasing need of a “New Revelation”

So from this perspective, the question raised at the beginning is moot. Man’s need of God has always been revealed and the argument about who is God’s only son ends up with a logical answer. Mankind itself. There is no more need to argue.

The New Scripture has to be a meld of the human mind and the human heart.

If this all sounds familiar, it is inspired from the posts of a member who is no longer present and who’s name is not allowed to be mentioned..

Cheers.

[Victor]

inhumility, et al:

If I am lengthy, it is because my advanced age and ‘failing’ sense of humility allow me other than brevity.

Mick: "I believe the original theme of this posting is that you should be able to find references in your Revealed Books. I am not suggesting that the Christian Religion is Man-Made, but the exercise was not to state your opinion or belief, but to answer the five questions with support from your Bible."

All that we assume or state as belief or knowledge is essentially our personal perspective of that which others have set as standards of doctrine and behavior within given spiritual denominations.

Ron Price’s offering: “As I see it…. everyone has assumptions and gathers his or her emotions around those assumptions….. For me, the core of my position I could express….. "my apologetics position"…..”

Ron is correct! If Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, had wanted to bring the major religions into discussion he would have found it necessary to employ an area large enough to accommodate approximately 3 billion delegates. Why; because each of us discerns our basic faith in as many divergent forms. Doctrine varies from denomination to denomination, sect to sect, individual to individual. There are over 1000 variations in the worship of Christianity alone. Islam? Well, I am aware of three basic groups, Sufi, Suni, and Shiite. In Judaism? And in each, doctrine varies, as does the Law, in each major group AND within the minds of the congregations! We each have, as Mick states properly, (in my personal opinion):

"Furthermore, know ye that God has created in man the power of reason, whereby man is enabled to investigate reality. God has not intended man to imitate blindly his fathers and ancestors." `Abdúl-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 291.

And “truth” is to each of us, as is beauty, in the eye of the beholder! May I say that we are all sick and tired of having the establishment make statements of faith, and decisions of doctrine, for us. We each have a mind endowed by God’s Holy Spirit and we have the freedom of action that allows us to agree with, or disagree with, even the most basic precepts of our chosen religions. One of my most personal disagreements within my Lutheran faith is the matter of ‘original sin.’

If anyone here believes that the Bible, or the Quran, or the Holy Scriptures, were the only means through which God revealed knowledge of His wisdom to man, I consider them sadly mistaken. You see, there is no one book, no one ‘word’, that contains all that man is to be informed of, and I refuse to be limited in scope of thought or acceptance of belief, to any one source.

The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.

The physical state of man is as we see it in ourselves; a material vessel subject to the corruption of time and the world. In youth we are vigorous and strong, we agitate and seek to discover the earth and all its knowledge, but then we age; we dim, we tire, we grow weary. ‘Pot’ bellies become ‘obscene’, breasts sag, and we discover that as we believe Adam was sent into the physical world, cast out from paradise, we are all that Adam, all to suffer the same fate:

“And unto Adam He said: ‘Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying: Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt though eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it thou wast taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” (Genesis 3:17-21 Masoretic Text)

The moral state of man: Ethics and Morality vary from social order to social order, they would certainly vary from species to species, and from life-form to life-form!

Religions give us basic codes for moral action, and they often vary as do Judaic, Christian, and Islamic Law though they come from the same base. The basic foundations of our legal systems stem from ‘Theos nomos’, God’s Law! ‘Agios nomos’, man’s law, usually generates from those principles and adapts by necessity. But no one yet has accomplished a ‘perfect’ Law in heart, mind or spirit. In this sense, our moral state is chaotic at best. Judaism, Islam, and Christianity are based on those Laws which we consider Deuteromic. (Genesis 20:1-14; Deuteronomy chapter 5.)

Our Spiritual state, however, deserves greater emphasis and understanding.
“Then the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul!” (Genesis 2:7 Masoretic Text)

“And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden…” (Genesis 2:9) “Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, though shalt not eat of it…” (Genesis 2:16b)

Adam was immortal. He was a creation of God given an immortal soul (the breath of life) which emanated from God Himself and he ate of the tree of life which made him immortal…. “…lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever.” (Genesis 3:22) [Unhappily, this is not the time or place to debate the divergent cult myths concerning Genesis.]

The three major faiths I have mentioned, and others of which I am totally ignorant, suggest an afterlife. The supposition here is that in one form or another, physical or spiritual, we will inherit an afterlife to which we are deserving. In Lutheranism as well as in the vast majority of Christian doctrines, it is agreed that man possesses an immortal soul. His spiritual state, however, is one that remains incomplete. That discussion is best taken up in the next issue.

What is the State of Man After Death?

I insist that definition be noted here. To this person; paradise, heaven, the Garden of Eden, the Kingdom, nirvana… whatever, all denote the same plane of existence, a state of afterlife and (possibly) immortality.

“The Quran insists upon belief in the life after death.” (Surah 5:70; 23:38)

Christianity believes in an afterlife, but as late as Paul the resurrection was a Spiritual resurrection, not one of the physical body.
“For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable nature must put on the imperishable, and this mortal nature must put on immortality.” (1 Corinthians 15:51-54 RSV)

It is as late as the Maccabees that a doctrine concerning a physical resurrection was adopted under the cruelties of Antiochus Epiphanes. (See 1 Maccabees Chapter 1: NRSV Study Bible) Lutherans, as well as Catholics, believe in the physical resurrection as stated in the Apostles Creed as well as in the Nicene Creed:

“I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the Resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.” (The Lutheran Book of Worship)(The Small Catechism: The Book of Concord)

Jesus, however, disagrees on this point. Let us visit his teaching on the woman with seven husbands. A woman’s husband has died. Under Jewish Law his brother may take her as wife. Unfortunately for this woman, he had seven brothers, and she worked her way through all seven before the last also perished.

“After them all, the woman died. In the resurrection therefore, to which of the seven will she be wife? But Jesus answered them, ‘You are wrong because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.” (Matthew 22:27-30 RSV)

Here Jesus also refers to the resurrection by teaching: “And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?’ He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” (Matthew 22:31-32 RSV)

Oddly enough, the Jewish orthodoxy in the first century believed that angels were neither male or female, that they were as God created them, both male and female… in other words, neuter! This also, I believe through study, meditation and life-experience, was the nature of man in the beginning. Make of it what you will, but I refer you to the scripture Jesus referred to, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1:26-27: RSV; Masoretic Text) And due to the Creator’s nature, I believe that He is a spiritual entity and not a physical human being.

“God is spirit and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:24 RSV)

It is my belief from the Holy Scriptures and the New Testament that we will ascend in a spiritual resurrection into the Kingdom, and there, in God’s garden, will take up the task of the fallen Adam in an effort to reach a state of perfection (whatever that may entail). Amazingly, one may refer to the writings of Theophilus of Antioch, the 6th Bishop of that church. Circa 170-188 A.D. the Bishop wrote in his, Ad Autolycum, this very same awareness; that each of us upon reaching that state, would ascend into Paradise, the Garden, and there take up the task of the original Adam in gaining knowledge and wisdom and eventually reaching a state of grace, or perfection.

In the end, Jesus the Christ assures us of our task here on the earth.

“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasure in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” (Matthew 6:19-21)

The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.

I have read in your posts notations that refer to compassion, justice, caring for others, loving the stranger, etc. Well, this is all very nice. It certainly can have the effect of making one feel warm and cuddly inside, but it most assuredly has nothing to do with the basic purpose in life of spiritually guided souls. The great prophets of all religious groups give us the same cautions and directions. The fact that they bring us the same message helps to assure us of their validity. But their insights are only guidelines toward the ultimate goal of man, Redemption!

In most religions it is the following of God’s Law and living a righteous life that leads toward salvation. And I must note that even within the dawning doctrines of Christianity, into the late 2nd century, this held true. Theophilus quotes Ezekiel 18:21-23 in his, Ad Autolycum, which is an amazing revelation for this period in time.

“If the lawless man is converted from all the lawless deeds he has done and keeps my commandments and performs my ordinances, he may truly live and will not die; all his iniquities which he has done will not be remembered, but by the righteousness which he has done he will live; for I do not desire the death of the lawless man, says the Lord, so much as that he may be converted from the evil way and live. (3.11) (Theophilus of Antioch: Rick Rogers)

Today, in our modern Christian theology, there is but one way to salvation and that is through acceptance of Christ Jesus as our personal Lord and Savior. Redemption comes through true repentance and a conversion of mind, body, and soul to trust and confidence in Jesus the Christ. I could add a hundred claims made by that figure, including that of John’s Gospel in which Jesus states that no one ascends to the Father save through him, but I choose another as my personal text.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes Him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.” (John 5:24 RSV)

The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.

I believe we have noted this in other parts of my offering. The Law is essential to a well governed, civilized society. I would then only encourage Christian participants to note Jesus’ own words.

“Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:17-18 RSV)

This may be accomplished individually or universally, but I would not think that the Law would apply in the Kingdom… would it be necessary?

Sources of Divine Knowledge.

For myself, the Holy Spirit is the benefactor of life and the source of ALL knowledge. Surely the prophets came with God’s word to enlighten mankind, but they too were a tool. The source of their wisdom was also of the Holy Spirit. Where wisdom is spoken of in the New Testament, the Spirit is co-joined with it. (KJV Luke 2:40)

“Therefore, brethren, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom whom we may appoint to this duty.” (Acts 6:3 RSV)

Theophilus echoes the words of Holy Scripture when he states: “It was the [the logos], spirit of God and beginning and Sophia (wisdom) and power of the most high, who came down into the prophets and spoke through them about the creation of the world and all the rest.” (2.10) (Theophilus of Antioch: Rick Rogers)

Without further dissertation, I must end my offering at this point. I do not wish to extend my responses to four hours. However, I would like to address a fellow sojourner.

inhumility :"...I have not yet found any other faith that would convince me that they are better guided and truth is more with them….. The purpose of this exercise is that one could clearly explore the truth between the religions of the world under a common, simple yardstick and follow the best religion one finds among them."

I do not believe that you will find that which you are seeking in this manner. No simple yardstick is sufficient to measure the minds of mankind adherent, yet differing in their ‘translations’, to any given religion or spiritual state. You and you alone can only witness to yourself and the wisdom imparted to you, by the Spirit, as an individual soul. Aside from doctrine and theological assumption, ‘life experience’ may be the greatest ‘religious’ experience of all. I thank you for your invitation and pray I have not overstayed my welcome but the nature of your post demanded lengthy response.

“No one has yet accomplished a ‘perfect’ religion or spiritual statement. I believe it is because we have become so diverse in our nature as individuals.” (Victor G)

Victor G

[Vajradhara]

Namaste soulatom,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by soulatom

The problem faced by science today is that it is not infallible, and cannot supply an absolute Standard of Good.

since science deals with evidence and observable phenomena, there is no remit to make pronouncements concerning ideas such as "good" and the like.

This leaves modern, atheistic man, spiritually uncomfortable, if not destitute,

au contraire i have no "spiritual uncomfortability" though, perhaps i do since i'm not really sure what this is meant to be indicating. a general sense of spiritual lacking or some such?

metta,

~v

[Vajradhara]

Namatse victor,

thank you for the post.

a correction if i may.

Originally Posted by Victor

I insist that definition be noted here. To this person; paradise, heaven, the Garden of Eden, the Kingdom, nirvana… whatever, all denote the same plane of existence, a state of afterlife and (possibly) immortality.

Nibbana/Nirvana is not heaven in any sense of the term nor is it a seperate plane of existence, Nirvana is something which is realized whilst this physical form is manifest in this world system.

Oddly enough, the Jewish orthodoxy in the first century believed that angels were neither male or female, that they were as God created them, both male and female… in other words, neuter!

when both genders are present, isn't the term hemaphrodite? neuter would, i think, be when there is no gender expression, yes?

I have read in your posts notations that refer to compassion, justice, caring for others, loving the stranger, etc. Well, this is all very nice. It certainly can have the effect of making one feel warm and cuddly inside, but it most assuredly has nothing to do with the basic purpose in life of spiritually guided souls.

i am sure you won't be offended if i don't take your word for this seeing as how i lack a belief in things called "souls". Buddha Dharma places a fair amount of importance on the generation of Bodhichitta, the development of genuine compassion for the welbeing of other sentient beings.

metta,

~v

[Eudaimonist]

Originally Posted by soulatom

In this sense Science replaced Scripture and became a universal standard of measurement. The problem faced by science today is that it is not infallible, and cannot supply an absolute Standard of Good. This leaves modern, atheistic man, spiritually uncomfortable, if not destitute,

Who is "modern, atheistic man"? Are you talking about self-identified atheists -- and specifically those who are scientistic (i.e. who attempt to reduce all knowledge to results of the scientific method)? Or do you have a broader category in mind?

As for me, I value philosophy (including ethics, which gives me a standard of human good) along with science (and so I am not scientistic), and I find myself quite spiritually "comfortable".

I suspect that even scientistic atheists are often comfortable not believing themselves to have infallible knowledge of the universe or ethics, because they tolerate a lack of absolute certainty, and because they love the search for knowledge.


eudaimonia,

Mark

[Victor]

Vajradhara:
Thank you for your corrections and I am most certainly not offended. Is not our point here to be educated in matters in which we lack knowledge?

"Nibbana/Nirvana is not heaven in any sense of the term nor is it a seperate plane of existence, Nirvana is something which is realized whilst this physical form is manifest in this world system."

Now this interests me since Christian ethic claims that we have the power to become the ‘sons of God,’ but of course, they claim this is attained AFTER death. (God forbid that anyone should reach this level of enlightenment before that event. LOL)

"when both genders are present, isn't the term hemaphrodite?"

Physically, yes, but in this context it is to be taken as, Spiritual. I personally do not accept the Christian doctrine that we will receive a ‘physical’ body in the afterlife. In this instance I am forced to accept Paul’s definition that our mortality must take on immortality. He believed, as did the Pharisees of that period in a spiritual resurrection, as did Jesus.

"…the development of genuine compassion for the well being of other sentient beings."

As does Christianity, but it is involved in a process of attaining, Salvation, the end result of a doctrine reaching toward, Redemption. Here the great debate still rages in my religion because most Christians are Pauline and they accept a matter of salvation on Faith alone. James, the Lord’s brother, however, writes that faith without works is dead! That faith and works are united irrevocably. And so the debate goes on….

I Am, as always,
Victor G

[Vajradhara]

Namaste victor,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by Victor

Vajradhara:
Thank you for your corrections and I am most certainly not offended. Is not our point here to be educated in matters in which we lack knowledge?

generally, yes though i'm sure that you and i have both run into beings that were not very receptive to having their ideas challenged heck, i suspect that, for some beings, i am that being

"Nibbana/Nirvana is not heaven in any sense of the term nor is it a seperate plane of existence, Nirvana is something which is realized whilst this physical form is manifest in this world system."

Now this interests me since Christian ethic claims that we have the power to become the ‘sons of God,’ but of course, they claim this is attained AFTER death. (God forbid that anyone should reach this level of enlightenment before that event. LOL)

i agree. this is one of the most fundamental differences between Sanatana Dharma and the Christian paradigm, in my view. of course, if one reads some of the non-canonical texts like the Gospel of Thomas, for instance, we find Jesus teaching that "the kingdom of Heaven is within" which, in my limited understanding of things, seems to initmate that one need not wait until the physical form ceases to realize this kingdom.

"when both genders are present, isn't the term hemaphrodite?"

Physically, yes, but in this context it is to be taken as, Spiritual.

ah, thank you for the clarification.

I personally do not accept the Christian doctrine that we will receive a ‘physical’ body in the afterlife. In this instance I am forced to accept Paul’s definition that our mortality must take on immortality. He believed, as did the Pharisees of that period in a spiritual resurrection, as did Jesus.

that would be the most consistent position on this to take, in my view. i've always been somewhat curious as to how the spiritual ressurrection was confused to be a physical one... i suppose that it has something to do with Jesus body not being found in the tomb... though how that relates to beings who are not Jesus is a bit unclear to me.

"…the development of genuine compassion for the well being of other sentient beings."

As does Christianity, but it is involved in a process of attaining, Salvation, the end result of a doctrine reaching toward, Redemption. Here the great debate still rages in my religion because most Christians are Pauline and they accept a matter of salvation on Faith alone. James, the Lord’s brother, however, writes that faith without works is dead! That faith and works are united irrevocably. And so the debate goes on….

I Am, as always,
Victor G

as an aside, i have really enjoyed your essay on Paulinian Christianity and, after investigating the claims made therein, agree with your conclusions. a fine piece of writing, to be sure. i suspect, however, that many of your companions in the faith are not so keen on it

i would, of course, agree. ones actions and the intentions behind said actions are paramount. what use are proper vocal chord vibrations without accompanying action?

metta,

~v

[Victor]

Vajradhara:

If I may, I suggest a reading of, The Gospel of Mary which is contained in
two separate volumes; The Complete Gospels, and, The Nag Hammadi
Library. Much like Thomas, which I am familiar with, the writing, is
spellbinding. The last time I heard anyone mention pre-animate matter and
matter dissolving at the end time was on Star-trek! And this is a second
century writing.

As to a physical resurrection, I understand it to have been introduced when
the Hellenists entered Palestine after Alexander the Great’s conquests. The
original ‘holocaust’ under Antiochus Epiphanes was so horrific that
Jewish doctrine changed, probably during a period of 165-180 B.C. This is
contained in the Apocrypha in, 1 Maccabees. Oddly enough Paul’s
theological outlook did not differ from the original spiritual doctrine, yet
during the Advent of the Church, Hellenistic thought controlled the moment.
Even stranger is that the church today is basically Pauline.

Finally, most who have read, The Pauline Conspiracy, agree with it, even in
my church. However, your thoughts humble me and I am grateful for this
site which has excellent positive vibrations.

A fellow sojourner;
Victor G