How much interfaith?

[gregory210]

I find it hard to believe in any real interfaith when people of different faiths believe each other are going to hell to be tortured forever for their beliefs. No wonder atheists, agnostics and others want to give religion a wide berth.

 

[dauer]

Most religions don't have hell. Some of those that do have groups that reject the idea that people of other faiths are destined to end up there.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Hi, Gregory, and welcome to the Forum.

I agree. That is why I have a belief system that says all good people, whether they are Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Moslems, etc., are making progress along their own path.

 

[gregory210]

Thanks guys, That's very encouraging, Cheers, Greg

 

[Thomas]

Hi Gregory —

I find it hard to believe in any real interfaith when people of different faiths believe each other are going to hell to be tortured forever for their beliefs. No wonder atheists, agnostics and others want to give religion a wide berth.

Yes I know, the history of negative propaganda by some faiths about others, fundamentalism within faiths themselves, and general assumptions based on not much at all, continually present ideas such as above.

My faith, Catholicism, is widely regarded as one of the worst offenders by those who don't know what they're talking about, and don't bother to find out.

Atheists and agnostics are often amongst the worst offenders however, and in my experience are given to making judgements based on their own opinions and offering critical and often offensive assumptions about what others believe.

Thomas

 

[TealLeaf]

In the interest of fairness I should point out that most western religions espouse that it is not enough to be a good person and do good works but that one must also worship God. Further they often have clauses that make their religion exclusive of other religions.

It seems that most of the voices here so far indicate that these religions are unequivocally benevolent in their treatment of other religions but in my experience I have heard much double talk and avoidance from various religions on the subject. In their defense perhaps this is unavoidable.

I think the modern gist of what religions profess with regards to other religions is that no one is going to Hell in the afterlife but some people are going to be closer to God than others.

It would seem that Hell has been replaced with alienation. I'm not sure how much more friendly to other religions that is.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

TealLeaf,

I agree. Exclusivity is the biggest obstacle to the idea of interfaith acceptance. Unfortunately, exclusivity is what most religions teach.

I also agree that requiring others to worship God is a key example of exclusivity.

I disagree with your view of Hell. I think that most religions teach the idea of Hell. But these religions say there are two ways to get into Hell. One is by doing bad things. The other is by refusing to accept dogmatic teachings of a particular religion. (For example, many Christians feel that refusing to believe in Jesus or God will send a person to Hell.) It is important to keep the two ideas separate. I think that doing bad things will send a person to Hell (temporarily). I do not think that rejecting Jesus sends anyone to Hell.

 

[wil]

Namaste and welcome Gregory,

Those that espouse it is my way or the highway or my G!d is better than your G!d or I know it all and you don't....or that your headed to hell if you don't believe...

They aren't interfaith. You are correct.

Here we are a combination, folks that embrace interfaith, and folks that wish to talk about their faith...and a little of everything in between, and some outside that box as well.

Have fun.

 

[Nick_A]

I find it hard to believe in any real interfaith when people of different faiths believe each other are going to hell to be tortured forever for their beliefs. No wonder atheists, agnostics and others want to give religion a wide berth.

You raise the interesting question if it is wise to contemplate the nature of karma and the Wheel of Samsara?

Wheel of Life

It is unpleasant to contemplate and quite understandable why people would not want to. After all, who wants to be on a wheel of suffering? It is nicer to think of universal peace and love. Yet if there is any truth to it, it may be wise to do so even though others find it offensive to Interfaith. Our choice.

 

[Thomas]

Hi TealLeaf —

In the interest of fairness I should point out that most western religions espouse that it is not enough to be a good person and do good works but that one must also worship God.

Again, one cannot speak generally of 'most western religions' without a pretty fair leeway of error.

Catholicism, for example, acknowledges the distinction between the 'natural good' as and end, and the 'supernatural good' of participation in the Divine life. The former does not necessarily imply the latter, whereas the latter insists upon the former.

Further they often have clauses that make their religion exclusive of other religions.

And they often have sound reasoning to do so. The 'equality of religions' was a myth of the Romance movement that has been picked up by many. The argument is based more on sentimentality than metaphysical principle.

It seems that most of the voices here so far indicate that these religions are unequivocally benevolent in their treatment of other religions but in my experience I have heard much double talk and avoidance from various religions on the subject. In their defense perhaps this is unavoidable.

Again it depends on what religions and who you ask. The dialogue between religions happens at a high level, and for the most part with a significant degree of cordiality. Moreso than here, dare I say.

I think the modern gist of what religions profess with regards to other religions is that no one is going to Hell in the afterlife but some people are going to be closer to God than others.

Again, a generalisation. Hell exists as a reality, although the nature and understanding of that reality rarely moves on beyond the wildest imaginings of the Middle Ages in the minds of most.

It would seem that Hell has been replaced with alienation. I'm not sure how much more friendly to other religions that is.

Privation is how I understand it. Again, I don't believe God or anyone else sends anyone to hell, I think the choice remains ours, although we are very creative in convincing ourselves other than what we know to be the case.

Thomas

 

[soleil10]

Again, I don't believe God or anyone else sends anyone to hell, I think the choice remains ours, although we are very creative in convincing ourselves other than what we know to be the case.

Thomas, I agree with you that God does not send anyone to hell but that we ultimately judge ourselves. No one else does.

I also believe that no one is destined to be in hell forever.

Could anyone be satisfied and free in heaven, knowing that his or her relatives, children or friends are in hell. Can a God of love be free, knowing that some of his children are in hell ?

I believe, there is a process to liberate people from hell.

 

[soleil10]

I find it hard to believe in any real interfaith when people of different faiths believe each other are going to hell to be tortured forever for their beliefs. No wonder atheists, agnostics and others want to give religion a wide berth.

Hi Gregory,

Interfaith dialogue can be challenging but is very important. In every religion, I have found that a % of people truly love God and their fellow men.
To understand what others truly believe brings us closer, creates harmony and expand our capacity to love. It also takes away many of the fears we created.

I have no problem assuming that everyone believes their faith tradition is the One. I do respect that

I always find some common points. In a family, the children may not agree and have different personalities but because they have the same parents, they go beyond their differences.

I see interfaith in this light. We have the same Heavenly Father and we are like a family.

 

[Tariki]

I find it hard to believe in any real interfaith when people of different faiths believe each other are going to hell to be tortured forever for their beliefs. No wonder atheists, agnostics and others want to give religion a wide berth.

gregory,

From my own life and experience it seems that there is much true interfaith dialogue..............."true" in the sense of seeking to understand the faith of another without prior judgement, and with the intent of thereby - perhaps - deepening their own. It seems we each have our choices, whether to dismiss all who deviate from our own understanding as being outside of "truth", or to open to the possibility of self-judgement towards ourselves and our own subjectivity.

One example of what I would call "true" dialogue is drawn from the life and writings of the Catholic Trappist monk Thomas Merton. Without ever, in any way, compromising his own deep faith and trust in Christ and God, he nevertheless sought to open his being to the possibilities of truth in faiths other than his own. Reading his journals and letters, it was never a case of "pick n' mix", but more how he himself spoke.......

The more I am able to affirm others, to say "yes" to them myself, by discovering them in myself and myself in them, the more real I am. I am fully real if my own heart says yes to everyone. I will be a better Catholic, not if I refute every shade of Protestantism, but if I can affirm the truth in it and still go further. So. too, with the Muslims, the Hindus, the Buddhists, etc. This does not mean syncretism, indifferentism, the vapid and careless friendliness that accepts everything by thinking of nothing. There is much that one cannot "affirm" and "accept," but first one must say "yes" where one really can.

And it comes down to our own heart. Each day I unfortunately witness to my own rejection of others in a multitude of subtle ways, in contrast to how I believe "reality-as-is" accepts me without reservation. There is always work to be done! Once again, it remains our own choice (if we find ourselves with the grace of being able to make it) Whether we read our "scripture" and then seek to light the fires of the stake, or read our "scripture" and head off to Calcutta to feed the homeless - or the billion intermediate things! - the choice remains ours. If a Christian who asks himself in all seriousness the question "does God hear the prayer of the Jew?" turns me away from ALL religion, ALL possibility of opening to the Divine, then that is my choice. I know some of the choices of others can make us doubt in fundamental ways, yet for me there are always others who restore my resolve.

Anyway, enough waffling! Speaking for myself, I find it impossible to reconcile myself to the thought that any human being - by their own choice or not! - can remain outside of the divine life forever. But what do "I" know!

P.S. I have an unfortunate reputation for filling my posts with various quotes, so I will finish by adding to it.......

Our real journey in life is interior; it is a matter of growth, deepening, and of an ever greater surrender to the creative action of love and grace in our hearts. Never was it more necessary for us to respond to that action.

(Thomas Merton, in a letter to friends)

 

[DrFree]

Levels of Interfaith Commitment

Hi, Gregory,

I find it hard to believe in any real interfaith when people of different faiths believe each other are going to hell to be tortured forever for their beliefs. No wonder atheists, agnostics and others want to give religion a wide berth.

Yes, you are right that some people of almost every faith believe that people of other faiths are beyond salvation, but not everyone. A viable interfaith movement does not depend on getting everyone to participate. All that is needed is a critical mass of people who believe that we all have to get along.

Furthermore, the measure of faith in interfaith is not what we believe is in other people's hearts but in our own. I suggests that there are levels of commitment to interfaith through which people can grow, and that success of the movement can be measured by progress through these levels:

1. Toleration. The first level of interfaith commitment is the decision to refrain from divisive and hateful speech and action, and to discourage it by others. Dialing down the rhetoric is essential to create a climate conducive to more extensive interfaith activities. To my mind this requires us not to support organizations who describe themselves as advocating religious tolerance but whose literature constantly attacks other religions for their lack of tolerance.
2. Cooperation. The second level of interfaith commitment is to participate in activities that deliberately bring together members of different faith communities. For several years I was a member of a local interfaith group whose members included among others Catholics, Protestants, Unitarians, Bahai's, Christian Scientists, Buddhists, and now Muslims. The group cooperated to provide services to the poor and homeless and needy throughout our county, as well to provide opportunities for interfaith dialog. Participating in such a group dispels any notion that people of other faiths are essentially wicked. Indeed one is quickly convinced that these are good people, as good as any in my own faith.
3. Dialog. The third level of interfaith commitment goes beyond cooperation on non-religious social issues to a willingness to talk openly about religion with members of other faiths. Dialog is not intended to persuade others (it is not evangelistic). It is intended to dispel misconceptions about other religions. In many cases it reveals that the differences among religions are not nearly as great as we had believed, and in a few cases it causes us to rethink our own convictions. Whatever the outcome for our beliefs, the process reduces the tensions between faith communities. A structured process of interfaith dialog was one of the most successful activities of that interfaith organization that I belonged to.
4. Universalism. The highest level of interfaith commitment is actually a faith in itself. (I leave it open for other levels to be inserted at this point.) It is the faith that the seeds of salvation have been sown in every faith, in every religion, in every culture, that no one need import nor convert to another's faith or religion in order to achieve grace, salvation, nirvana, heaven, or whatever else one deems as the ultimate goal of faith.

In the 19th Century, Universalists proclaimed that everyone is saved! (Starr King, a minister ordained by both the Unitarians and the Universalists, once quipped that Universalists believed that God was too good to damn people to Hell, while Unitarians believed that they were too good to be damned.) I don't know that I agree with the "is"; I do believe that salvation is available to everyone.

There are a variety of opinions about what this universal path to salvation is, and that was the topic of another thread: Interfaith as a Faith. Almost all of them focus on the universality of the Golden Rule.

Universalism as described here is compatible with any faith (except for those claims by a faith that it offers exclusive access to God or salvation). It does not require one to give up one's beliefs about God or about the proper worship of God. One can still hold that some of the beliefs of other faiths are mistaken. One need only grant that those mistakes, in and of themselves, are not mortal sins, i.e., they do not condemn those of other faiths to eternal damnation.

Although I am a believer in and an advocate for Universalism, I do not believe that it is essential for others to reach this level of interfaith commitment for the interfaith movement to be beneficial to global society. If more people could reach level 1, the benefits would be significant, and of course, the more people at higher levels, the better.

And as I say, don't measure the viability of interfaith by other people's actions but by your own.

Namaste,

 

[c0de]

If you guys want a trippy emotional experience... read through this thread
while listening to Stand By Me by The Temptations....

(lol... it came on 'randomly' on my playlist, I swear!)

 

[mee]

I find it hard to believe in any real interfaith when people of different faiths believe each other are going to hell to be tortured forever for their beliefs. No wonder atheists, agnostics and others want to give religion a wide berth.

i am glad to say that Jehovahs witnesses are into the truth of what the bible teaches ,and it is NOT hellfire , that hellfire teaching is a manmade doctrine, and not what the bible REALLY teaches.


Jehovahs witnesses are into the truth of what the bible
REALLY TEACHES and it is verrrry goooood

 

[Quahom1]

Thomas, I agree with you that God does not send anyone to hell but that we ultimately judge ourselves. No one else does.

I also believe that no one is destined to be in hell forever.

Could anyone be satisfied and free in heaven, knowing that his or her relatives, children or friends are in hell. Can a God of love be free, knowing that some of his children are in hell ?

I believe, there is a process to liberate people from hell.

Well then, you must believe in "purgatory". That is where people "work" their way back. But that would imply that the Catholic Church is correct, in a middle ground, allowing "marginal souls" to garnish enough grace to enter the pearly gates...some how I don't see that suiting you.

 

[soleil10]

Well then, you must believe in "purgatory". That is where people "work" their way back. But that would imply that the Catholic Church is correct, in a middle ground, allowing "marginal souls" to garnish enough grace to enter the pearly gates...some how I don't see that suiting you.

I believe that we go to the place that correspond to the spiritual level we have reached during your physical life.

While our physical body grows with (food,water,air and sunlight) our spirit self also needs life and vitality elements (God's love, God's truth and our good deeds, good actions.)

Once we are in the spirit world, we do not have our physical body anymore and cannot do good actions. The way we can still grow is through the good actions of our descendants.

Every human being has to go through 3 stages (formation, growth and perfection). Adam and Eve fell before they reached individual perfection (fruitful).
The next step is (multiply) to establish an ideal family.
We go to Heaven as a family, not individual. Husband and wife should become one.

From the beginning God has been trying to create one ideal family. Our first ancestors fell and multiplied fallen descendants.

Jesus came as a second Adam to create such family but he was killed physically.Through his victorious resurrection we are saved spiritually but are still born with the original sin.

This is why in Revelation, we are waiting for the marriage of the lamb. The Messiah has to come back.(3rd Adam).

All humanity has to reconnect to to true lineage of the true tree of life for the Kingdom of heaven to be build on earth.

 

[Thomas]

Hi soleil — as this is 'interfaith' and not Christianity nor theology, I'll offer some personal views in response to your post.

I believe that we go to the place that correspond to the spiritual level we have reached during your physical life.

So do I.

I believe the aim of Catholicism is to be 'conscious' in the afterlife, and thus 'active', as opposed to what St Paul called 'the sleep in Christ'.

Once we are in the spirit world, we do not have our physical body anymore and cannot do good actions.

But if we have conscious spiritual bodies, we can seek to communicate and influence good actions in the physical realm, as do guardian angels, and angels generally. Miracles are often attributed to saints, and one of the tests of a saint is the witness of a miracle attributed to him or her.

The way we can still grow is through the good actions of our descendants.

Indeed. Besides Purgatory, we believe the prayers of the living for the dead are not wasted.

It is our view that there is a difference between spiritual life (angelic orders) and human life. As man is both body and soul, spirit and matter, in the spiritual life man is 'incomplete' — is less than he was created to be.

In the General resurrection, we shall be reborn, in the flesh, as man in spirit and body, bit what form precisely the body will take, we do not know, except that it will replicate the soul perfectly, and be immortal and inocorruptible.

Jesus' resurrection body, which was physical, is the best evidence we have to speculate on this. He was a physical body who could eat and drink and touch ... but also pass through walls, etc., and even pass into and out of man's vision.

Christ's appearance to the travellers on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24) for example.

Likewise, the ascension of Christ recorded in Acts 1, should not be read as if Christ suddenly floated up into the air, like a rocket in slow motion, until he disappeared into the upper atmosphere ... this is symbolic language, meaning Christ ascended the physical realm into a higher realm ... it has close correspondences with the Transfiguration accounts.

In the physical realm we have no control over our physicality, however, reborn spiritually, our physicality will manifest as we so choose.

Thomas

 

[Quahom1]

Every human being has to go through 3 stages (formation, growth and perfection). Adam and Eve fell before they reached individual perfection (fruitful).
The next step is (multiply) to establish an ideal family.
We go to Heaven as a family, not individual. Husband and wife should become one.

Which Wife? Some of us have had more than one.