On 2012-05-12 20:09, kambiz wrote:
All religions claimed finality (quotes can and will be provided upon request) just like Mondays sun may claim finality ("no plant will ever grow except through me") Suddenly Tuesdays sun comes along and claims the same thing, does the plant REJECT Tuesdays sun?

I think if your intentions to discover the truth is genuine, then assuredly you would want to explore this theology more. Wouldn't you?

Kam

On 2012-05-12 11:50, kambiz wrote:
The Bahai Faith recognizes all global religions as completely true...

On 2012-05-12 17:22, mastermindreader wrote:

Quote:

On 2012-05-12 16:44, LobowolfXXX wrote: I think that the difference, for instance, between believing that one gains eternal salvation through one's works on earth, on one hand, and through faith, on the other, is more than a superficial difference.

From a literalist or fundamentalist perspective it is indeed a significant difference. But from the perspectives I am referring to it is a distinction without meaning.

On 2012-05-12 23:11, tommy wrote:
When we get this New World Order and I become its leader then you will know that I am God.

On 2012-05-12 23:41, tommy wrote:
Get thee behind me Townsend.

On 2012-05-12 23:11, tommy wrote:
Herein have I completely explained the Operation of the Sun.

The following is an attempt to systematize alike the data of mysticism and the results of comparative religion.
The skeptic will applaud our labours, for that the very catholicity of the symbols denies them any objective validity, since, in so many contradictions, something must be false; while the mystic will rejoice equally that the self-same catholicity all-embracing proves that very validity, since after all something must be true.

- Aleister Crowley, 777

On 2012-05-13 08:39, Woland wrote:

Finally, I am convinced that all attempts to "immanentize the eschaton" result not in the creation of a paradise on earth, but in simulacra of Hell.

On 2012-05-12 20:51, LobowolfXXX wrote:

Quote:

On 2012-05-12 20:09, kambiz wrote: All religions claimed finality (quotes can and will be provided upon request) just like Mondays sun may claim finality ("no plant will ever grow except through me") Suddenly Tuesdays sun comes along and claims the same thing, does the plant REJECT Tuesdays sun? I think if your intentions to discover the truth is genuine, then assuredly you would want to explore this theology more. Wouldn't you? Kam

A search for the truth cannot violate the laws of logic - in particular, the law of the excluded middle. Your plant example is a good enough one. The plant doesn't reject Tuesday's sun; however, when it arrives, the plant should realize that the statement of Monday's sun was incorrect. Religions may "claim" finality, but that doesn't make it so. When the Tuesday sun arrives, surely the plant will disagree of statements like:

Quote:

On 2012-05-12 11:50, kambiz wrote: The Bahai Faith recognizes all global religions as completely true...

It is not "completely true" that the Monday sun is the only one, if there is also a Tuesday sun,

On 2012-05-12 22:49, mastermindreader wrote:
You're correct, Lobo, my position does conflict with the notion that all religions can be completely true and not in conflict with each other. I simply am stating that there are "truths" that are common to all faiths. It should be clear that I don't agree with the Baha'i concept that it fully embraces all religions as "completely true."

Whether or not salvation is attainable through faith alone without regard to works is a question that has divided Christian sects themselves for centuries. Simply put- as to that issue there isn't a monolithic "Christian" position that can be contrasted with other faiths.

Good thoughts,

Bob

On 2012-05-13 11:09, Woland wrote:

I associate the concept (and understanding the perils) of immanentizing the eschaton more with Eric Voegelin, in his critique of gnosticism. I am aware that Wilson used the phrase, but since I view him, perhaps incorrectly, as sympathetic to gnosticism, it may have a different connotation in his work than in Voegelin's.

"Let's put it another way, Don Juan. What I meant to say is that if I had tied myself to a rock with a heavy chain I would have flown just the same, because my body had nothing to do with my flying.' Don looked at me incredulously. "If you tie yourself to a rock," he said, "I'm afraid you will have to fly holding the rock with its heavy chain."

- Castenada, "The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge"

On 2012-05-13 12:00, tommy wrote:
Some things can be true and false at the same time.

If "this sentence is false" is true, then the sentence is false, which would in turn mean that it is actually true, but this would mean that it is false, and so on ad infinitum. So some things can true and false at the same time.

If that is right then are you wrong?

On 2012-05-13 12:00, tommy wrote:
Some things can be true and false at the same time.

If "this sentence is false" is true, then the sentence is false, which would in turn mean that it is actually true, but this would mean that it is false, and so on ad infinitum. So some things can true and false at the same time.

If that is right then are you wrong?

On 2012-05-12 22:49, mastermindreader wrote:
It should be clear that I don't agree with the Bahai concept that it fully embraces all religions as "completely true."

Good thoughts,

Bob