Interfaith as a Faith

Quahom1 said:
Now if you are talking of so-called Liberals that are not really proper conversion Liberals then that is another thing altogether. What you must realise is that the Liberalism spends billions globally on conversion(funded by ORDINARY Liberals) against what it sees as ‘rival’ faiths and no amount of nice chumminess over coffee will EVER change this main point.

You can not stop proper Liberals infiltrating events that are ‘supposed’ to be there for acceptance and understanding unless you get real, wise up and begin to recognise how Liberalism really works in society.
Click to expand...
I saw on C-span Ann Coulter and another both hawking their books on the horrors and G-dlessness of Liberalism... and how those evil liberals were teaching/preaching peace and tolerance and oneness...when in reality the only thing that keeps peace is iron fists in the right hands...might in weapons, armies...as man is a warrior and conqueror by nature....

we create our own world...by our thoughts and words...I'm ready to jump to the the liberal camp...tired of the world created by the warmongers.
 
If so, he doesn't seem to be aware that we do remove posters. The general impression I'm given is that those who call themselves Christian Fundamentalists should not be given access to the forums in the first place.

Looking on the forums, we have some members who gladly call themselves Christian Fundamentalists but are perfectly capable of showing respect and restraint. And after the past couple of years, have never made any demands on how the boards are run, let alone shown any interest in taking over CR. :)
 
wil said:
I saw on C-span Ann Coulter and another both hawking their books on the horrors and G-dlessness of Liberalism... and how those evil liberals were teaching/preaching peace and tolerance and oneness...when in reality the only thing that keeps peace is iron fists in the right hands...might in weapons, armies...as man is a warrior and conqueror by nature....

we create our own world...by our thoughts and words...I'm ready to jump to the the liberal camp...tired of the world created by the warmongers.
Click to expand...

That is the beauty of liberty. You can choose as you see fit. I for one, did not take Coulter's book, at face value. I chose to research what was being stated...and man did I find out a whole bunch about our government and what kind of crap goes on behind closed doors.

And history thinks Nixon was a liar, and LBJ was an idiot...:rolleyes:
 
Quahom1 said:
That is the beauty of liberty. You can choose as you see fit. I for one, did not take Coulter's book, at face value. I chose to research what was being stated...and man did I find out a whole bunch about our government and what kind of crap goes on behind closed doors.

And history thinks Nixon was a liar, and LBJ was an idiot...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
There you go again...droppin tidbits..gonna start another thread?
 
bolo, I think you quite misunderstand what interfaith is - it isn't about only choosing the most liberal people to come together and agree - it's about dialogue with everybody.
Click to expand...

I am sorry Brian but that does not quite hold water.

Pardon! “dialogue with everybody” yet “everyone” does NOT include some that you have “ejected!” That seems quite illogical to me. 'Everyone' has of course to mean you mean 'everyone' or else you are simply confusing this issue.

Are you actually saying that you are contented with missionary inroads into ordinary tolerant interfaith meetings - or not? Do you realise the ramifications of such actions? Interfaith between tolerant pluralistic folk is wonderful yet wherever is the common sense of accepting into your fold well-grounded, well- funded missionaries with a clear cut agenda to Evangelise others present – how ever can such absurdity ever fit into the development of a genuine interfaith movement network? Moreover, why would you desire to place the charitable and yet naïve people who obviously know little about the character of fundamentalism in such a place at such possible jeopardy?

Again, you have sadly ignored all my main points which appears quite strange to me.

There's nothing blind about it - you don't fight discrimination with discrimination and hate with hate - yet you continue to labour under the impression that the only way to work with religion is to fight it. That's not interfaith.
Click to expand...

Again – you seem to be under a wrong impression. It is “blind” to let a wolf into a pen of sheep. It is blind to not warn others that are openly trusting, that billions are spend each year by suited evangelical outreaches to other faiths; evangelicals that have abused the TRUST of others in order to gain converts? It is not a matter of ‘hating’ anyone – or discrimination just simple logic and common sense, that is all. It is decidedly ridiculous to jeopardise otherwise amicable interfaith liaisons by letting in outreach missionaries and very precarious as well.

As before, we have ground rules here - most accept them, but we've had people of every major faith and non-faith refuse to that, and they are ejected as a result.
Click to expand...
Well Brian, you have virtually ‘agreed’ with me to some degree with this comment and somewhat contradicted your previous statements too. So you DO admit that if radical missionaries seeking converts created trouble by abusing this forum by say pressing their gospel – spreading biblical addenda TOO FAR and blatantly hunted for converts then you ‘would’ remove them - or have already removed them?

Please clarify this point for me!


I've been doing this for the past 7 years in various online communities. I can assure you there's nothing naive in the approach, but neither will I take on board any side's fears. CR is strictly neutral, as should be.
Click to expand...

Sorry Brian but this does not quite add for me either.

“Fears” you say? You will not then listen to your ‘own’ previous comments about ejecting some “posters.” Surely you must have ‘feared’ something to eject them?

The matters I have raised are exceptionally simple yet the debate appears to be turning rather abstract.

Again I reiterate – troublemaking evangelical ‘Missionaries’ unremittingly seek converts at interfaith events via infiltration (don’t believe me – just check out their own websites, doctrine, history, literature etc) ergo letting them into interfaith is both ridiculous and hazardous for the other members (especially new trusting types) present at these welcoming gatherings!

It’s so exceedingly simple and nothing to do with “discrimination” – just plain, good ‘ol fashioned common sense!

I care passionately about fair and equal understanding between tolerant people yet it is not in any way discriminatory to warn other good people about the dangers posed by one-sided missionaries and I believe it is quite unreasonable of you to suggest this falsehood! It is evidently you that is ‘misunderstanding’ this situation not me!

I do however thank you sincerely for ‘virtually’ agreeing with me!

 
bolo said:
Again – you seem to be under a wrong impression. It is “blind” to let a wolf into a pen of sheep. It is blind to not warn others that are openly trusting, that billions are spend each year by suited evangelical outreaches to other faiths; evangelicals that have abused the TRUST of others in order to gain converts? It is not a matter of ‘hating’ anyone – or discrimination just simple logic and common sense, that is all. It is decidedly ridiculous to jeopardise otherwise amicable interfaith liaisons by letting in outreach missionaries and very precarious as well.
<snip>
Again I reiterate – troublemaking evangelical ‘Missionaries’ unremittingly seek converts at interfaith events via infiltration (don’t believe me – just check out their own websites, doctrine, history, literature etc) ergo letting them into interfaith is both ridiculous and hazardous for the other members (especially new trusting types) present at these welcoming gatherings!
Click to expand...
Hmm, reminds me of the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
 
seattlegal said:
Hmm, reminds me of the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
Click to expand...

Yup...why just yesterday evening and again this a.m.I saw another one on TV doing just that very same thing. Do you think it's contagious or something ?

flow....:cool:
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quahom1
That is the beauty of liberty. You can choose as you see fit. I for one, did not take Coulter's book, at face value. I chose to research what was being stated...and man did I find out a whole bunch about our government and what kind of crap goes on behind closed doors. And history thinks Nixon was a liar, and LBJ was an idiot...:rolleyes: Quote:
Originally Posted by wil
There you go again...droppin tidbits..gonna start another thread


Quahom1 said:
Why? got yer goat? :D
Click to expand...
No I think this is worth discussing...just the wrong thread/forum...love to hear your research and comments..
 
DrFree said:

Seeing interfaith as a faith is not yet seen as a faith, a religion, in and of itself. And it is certainly a universal religion, if by that is meant a common set of stories and practices. But it offers perhaps the most feasible route towards the peace on earth that all religions proclaim.
Click to expand...
That seems to be a over-generalized definition of a religion. In fact the guidance revealed by God on his true prophets like Moses, Jesus, Zoroaster, Krishna, Buddha and Muhammad is the religion. Your intention seems to be truthful but it is no alternative to the guidance provided by God. Moreover the living God has not left his people unattended. God has sent Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and has appointed him as the Guided One or Imam Mahdi and Promised Messiah that was to come in the latter days. He is a successor of all the true prophets of God, anywhere on earth ; through him teachings of all prophets of God have been revived. This is not to discourage you, but this is just to inform you that through peaceful means and dialogue this object would be fulfilled as destined by God.This is in short.
I am an Ahmadi a faith in Islam, which is the centre of all Revealed Religions. I believe that all Revealed Religions were truthful in their origin but with the passage of time when humans forgot the pristine message from God, the message was revived by God. So in this way logically and morally there is no difference between a true Jew, a true Christian, and a true Muslim or with any other label. Truth has to be respected and believed in whatever its name.

Thanks
 
bolo, let's be clear - you've come to CR with a presumption about how CR is run, and on top of that you're planting your main flag - that Christian Fundamentalists are the enemies of the world.

I really have no interest in any of this - if you want to hang around CR and see how it's run that's fine - you're welcome to join in the discussions.

If the heart of your argument is to try and have me say that I don't like Christian Fundamentalists and won't allow them on CR, then I'm not going to say it. Point about CR is that it's neutral ground for anybody who can accept basic tenets of civility. Fin.

What's really funny is that when I started up CR, I always feared it would be the Christian fundies who would cause most disruption on CR, but that's never been the case. Perhaps if you've ever done any kind of interfaith you'd have found that out for yourself.

Anyway, if you want to discriminate against people, that's your business. It's not going to be mine. And I'm certainly not going to encourage any kind of policy here that sees discrimination as a way to fight discrimination. Maybe it's worth underlining that you don't defeat an enemy by becoming the enemy.

Like I said, you're welcome to join in elsewhere around CR, and maybe that will help provide a better picture of the sort of people and discussions we have here, and how they are conducted.
 
Interfaith as a Faith... :)

I don't know if someone already mentioned this, but in the Baha'i Faith we believe the divine origin of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Buddhism... which means we believe that Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ, Muhammad, Zoroaster, Krishna, the Buddha, are all really in agreement and would teach the same things at this point in history... They would all teach at this time, I believe, that we need love and unity, that at this stage of human history we need to break down barriers of prejudice and unite in love and friendliness as one human family. We need to love one another of every religion. I believe every true Prophet would teach that...

"God's purpose in sending His Prophets unto men is twofold. The first is to liberate the children of men from the darkness of ignorance, and guide them to the light of true understanding. The second is to ensure the peace and tranquillity of mankind, and provide all the means by which they can be established." -Baha'u'llah
 
Dah-veeth said:
Interfaith as a Faith... :)

I don't know if someone already mentioned this, but in the Baha'i Faith we believe the divine origin of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Buddhism... which means we believe that Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ, Muhammad, Zoroaster, Krishna, the Buddha, are all really in agreement and would teach the same things at this point in history... They would all teach at this time, I believe, that we need love and unity, that at this stage of human history we need to break down barriers of prejudice and unite in love and friendliness as one human family. We need to love one another of every religion. I believe every true Prophet would teach that...

"God's purpose in sending His Prophets unto men is twofold. The first is to liberate the children of men from the darkness of ignorance, and guide them to the light of true understanding. The second is to ensure the peace and tranquillity of mankind, and provide all the means by which they can be established." -Baha'u'llah
Click to expand...

I can not see how, since the above mentioned "enlightened ones" do not preach nor teach similar messages to mankind. Of all of the voices coming from the wildnerness, only one states He is the way. The rest only try to show the way...
 
Quahom1 said:
I can not see how, since the above mentioned "enlightened ones" do not preach nor teach similar messages to mankind. Of all of the voices coming from the wildnerness, only one states He is the way. The rest only try to show the way...
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure They all say They are the Way. When a Manifestation of God, a Prophet and Messenger from God comes to mankind, He is the Way to salvation, salvation and advancement for civilization and the individual members of it.
 
First let me apologize to participants in this forum. I seem to have kicked off the thread, and then dropped out of the discussion. Fortunately it went without me very well for a while.

RubySera_Martin said:
Have you ever checked out the definition for universalism? I'm not sure what it is myself but I came across the term in sociology of religion and I got the idea it is the kind of religion where you believe all religions are good. I did have the impression that it meant Christians who accept all other religions as equal to their own. If that is the case, then you do take it a step further. I really like the similarities you point out. I am simply amazed to see someone express my own beliefs so well. Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...

Ruby, this is a late response, for which I am embarrassed.

For many years I have been a part of the Unitarian-Universalist Church, a Twentieth Century merger of the Unitarian and Universalists congregations. Both had a strong presence in 18th & 19th liberal religious thought in America, though Unitarianism itself traces back to 16th Century Transylvania.

A quip that suggests the essence of these faiths goes something like this: "Universalists believe that God is too good to damn fallen souls to Hell; Unitarians believe that they are too good to be damned." The essence of the Universalist faith in the 19th Century was universal salvation, everyone is saved.

I no longer style myself a unitarian. That word literally refers to the opponents of the trinitarian doctrine that ultimate swept orthodox Christianity. I'm not a unitarian not because I don't believe in a single god rather than a trinity or a plurality, but because I don't understand how to count gods. (Apologies for the compound negatives!)

I do believe in a form of universalism. I'm not sure I'm ready to say that everybody is saved. But I do believe that everyone has the opportunity and means of salvation within their own culture and religion, without having to import doctrines from elsewhere. You don't have to convert to Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Juche or any other faith to be righteous, saved and beloved of God. The question is not which religion you belong to; it's what you do with the elements of faith your religion gives you.

Namiste,
Dr Free
 
Unitarian -- monotheist.... I believe in only one God.

Universalist -- I believe God desires the salvation of everyone, and I believe salvation is loving God.... if you love God, great! :)

I'm not a member of the UUA, though.
 
A lot of energy has been expended on this thread disputing the dangers of fundamentalism and whether any form of dialog can effectively address that threat.

There seemed also to be a strong suggestion by some participants that fundamentalism was uniformly dangerous as a source of intolerant tyranny, if not terrorism. Now while I agree that in the hands of someone with a personal history that leads to hate, fundamentalism can crystalize that hatred into something really dangerous. But it is a mistake to categorize all fundamentalist in that mold. All groups have spectra of attitudes, only the most radical have inclinations toward sociopathic behavior. Unfortunately, if the group is economically or culturally downtrodden, that might be sufficient for them to gain leadership.

But my question is not how we deal with radical terrorism. It is how we use the tools we have to gradually broaden the community of those who are willing to dialog.

Of course as many have pointed out, just because we are willing to dialog, it doesn't follow that others will join us, especially our most ardent opponents. But some from the more liberal end of the spectrum might. And over time this erosion can expand.

It is my hope that what Jesus and Buddha and the Ghandi and Dalai Lama and Martin Luther King were teaching in their doctrines of love was that by acting out of love and respect toward those who disagree with us (and perhaps by being at least little bit less grasping in our economic policies), we can gradually enlarge the circle of dialog and erode the power base of the extremes.

Naive? Perhaps. Long-term? Of course! It will take a long time to overcome centuries of antagonism. But I think a course of action that accords with the highest principles of our faiths is preferable to either the status quo or World War III.

Namiste,
Dr. Free
 
DrFree said:
First let me apologize to participants in this forum. I seem to have kicked off the thread, and then dropped out of the discussion. Fortunately it went without me very well for a while.



Ruby, this is a late response, for which I am embarrassed.

For many years I have been a part of the Unitarian-Universalist Church, a Twentieth Century merger of the Unitarian and Universalists congregations. Both had a strong presence in 18th & 19th liberal religious thought in America, though Unitarianism itself traces back to 16th Century Transylvania.

A quip that suggests the essence of these faiths goes something like this: "Universalists believe that God is too good to damn fallen souls to Hell; Unitarians believe that they are too good to be damned." The essence of the Universalist faith in the 19th Century was universal salvation, everyone is saved.

I no longer style myself a unitarian. That word literally refers to the opponents of the trinitarian doctrine that ultimate swept orthodox Christianity. I'm not a unitarian not because I don't believe in a single god rather than a trinity or a plurality, but because I don't understand how to count gods. (Apologies for the compound negatives!)

I do believe in a form of universalism. I'm not sure I'm ready to say that everybody is saved. But I do believe that everyone has the opportunity and means of salvation within their own culture and religion, without having to import doctrines from elsewhere. You don't have to convert to Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Juche or any other faith to be righteous, saved and beloved of God. The question is not which religion you belong to; it's what you do with the elements of faith your religion gives you.

Namiste,
Dr Free
Click to expand...
I agree that what we are does not define us, but rather what we do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top