Differing beliefs, one truth

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by cavalier

Taijasi

With all due respect, I think you're missing the point. Originally I was picking up on Thomas's point about hierarchical truth. If such a thing is possible then it would follow that different religions could be more, or less true. It may Thomas's view that Christianity is the most true religion, we should let him answer that if he so wishes, but it is not my view. I would also add that you have perhaps been a little hasty in jumping to that conclusion.

My question, "In your opinion, could a religion other than Christianity, a possibly less true religion, be a pathway to God?" was directed towards a Christian. I considered it safe to assume that this Christian would believe that Christianity is a pathway to God. The question was asked to find out how the Catholic Church resolves the aforementioned Bible verse with the concept that other religions can be a pathway to God. That should have been made very obvious when I wrote, "How does the Roman Catholic Church explain the verse?"

Agreed, Cavalier - and thanks for the call. I just hope we can get back to the OP, since if we get sidetracked on any one faith, then we miss the point entirely!

Still, I think I begin to appreciate the Socratic method - which it seems to me you are applying - and I do look forward to what Thomas has to say in response to your question.

cheers,

taijasi

[lunamoth]

I am not Thomas but I am a Christian. I think part of the answer lies in where one puts the emphasis on that passage.

1"Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God[a]; trust also in me. 2In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. 3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. 4You know the way to the place where I am going."

Jesus the Way to the Father
5Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"

6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7If you really knew me, you would know[b] my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

8Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."

9Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. (John 14, NIV)

John 14 is all so great it's hard to pick a place to stop when posting the context of that passage.

When I read the part of this passage highlighted in red I hear emphasis on "I" rather than on "the." Christians believe that in Christ God was among us as a Person. The disciples were asking what to do, looking for direction, and they were especially troubled when Jesus said He would be going away. But Jesus did not respond by telling them a long list of things to do, or instructions on where to go. Instead He told them that He was the Way, to follow His example because His example is God's example. The Way is to be as He is/was.

Now, as for the presumed exclusiveness in this, that no one comes to the Father except through Him, I see two things. First, I think it is true that the reason any of us can be reconciled with God is because of Christ and through His death on the Cross. That is a tenet of Christianity. But it's not a 'rule' or a fence that keeps some people in or some people out of heaven. But at least in part it is an invitation to see things differently and do things differently in this life.

Second, Christ is God and God is Love (not the emotion but an active force in the world), so you can also say no one comes to the Father except through Love.

My own thoughts,
luna

[9Harmony]

Originally Posted by cavalier

I guess this is pretty basic stuff for many of you. I hope you'll excuse that, I'm really only beginning my spiritual journey.

I was brought up in the reformed churches, but stopped going when I was a teenager because I couldn't accept their idea of God. While at university I became very interested in Buddhism, especially Zen. I also went to a few Baha'i meetings, and church services of several different Christian denominations.

The more I looked, the more I studied, the more I saw similarities between the different religions, the same truth expressed in a different way.

I wouldn't, at present, say I definitely believe it, but I can certainly see how the world's religions could simply be different expressions of the same ultimate truth.

Your thoughts, whether you agree or not, would be much appreciated.

Andy

Hi cavalier,

As a Baha'i, yes i agree.

the differences are a result of our different vantage points, though we are all describing the same one reality, mankind has a tendancy to hold that our own personal vantage point is the only way it is, when someone looking at it from a different angle holds just as much validity from their own perspective.

The principle of Progressive Revelation.

Have a great day!

-Amy

[Thomas]

Hi Cavalier -

Hey Thomas
Perhaps I shouldn't be, but I am surprised that the Roman Catholic Church says yes, I'm also encouraged.

I know. The contrary propaganda is insidious and, by exposure, effective.

"I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except by me." As you rightly said, other denominations do not feel the same way, largely I think due to this verse. My explanation for it would be that you could come through the Son without actually knowing that that is what you're doing. How does the Roman Catholic Church explain the verse?

Roughly same way.

"All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."
John 1:3-5

John does not say the light is not there, just that we do not comprehend it.

If you read of the fall in Genesis, the 'first fruit' of the tree was shame, and the Primoridial Couple hid, from themselves, from one another, and from God ... man's religious aspiration ever since has been to find God, but the sense of shame overwhelms him – why is it so hard to love our neighbour? because we fear that they might not love us in return.

The message of God is that He loves us, unconditionally; it is we who lack faith, not in God, but in such a strength of love - and all our religions, and our aspirations, and our esoterisms, and our occultisms, and our metaphysical systems, and our mysticisms, our philosophies ... all testify to that we try and explain it to ourselves, because inside, we don't believe it can be that simple ...

Lunamoth sums it up very nicely.



Thomas

[cavalier]

Tai - thanks, and point taken.

Amy, Luna, Thomas - Thanks for your replies. Raised as a Calvinist, I have a fear that I am wrong to hold this view. It is good to meet others who think the same way.

[inhumility]

Originally Posted by cavalier

The more I looked, the more I studied, the more I saw similarities between the different religions, the same truth expressed in a different way.
I wouldn't, at present, say I definitely believe it, but I can certainly see how the world's religions could simply be different expressions of the same ultimate truth.

There is only ONE GOD, the one and only source of guidance of Revealed Religions, hence all Revealed Religions are truthful in origin, and hence the similarities you and I have noted are natural.
The question is which Revealed Religion has been able to preserve the Word of God, intact as Revealed, in the same Language it was revealed and what other foolproof systems have been mentioned in it by God to renew the guidance received from God. Are there any promises from God in this regard?
I quote hereunder some versed from Quran which are relevant to what I have said above.
Chapter 21 Al-Anbiya'
[21:17] And We created not the heaven and the earth and all that is between the two in sport[21:18] Had We wished to find a pastime, We would, surely, have found it in what is with US, if at all We were to do such a thing. [21:19] Nay, We hurl the truth at falsehood, and it breaks its head, and lo! it perishes. And woe to you for that which you ascribe to Allah[21:20] To Him belongs whosoever is in the heavens and the earth. And those who are in His presence do not disdain to worship Him, nor do they weary of it; [21:21] They glorify Him night and day; and they flag not. [21:22] Have they taken gods from the earth who raise the dead? [21:23] If there had been in the heavens and the earth other gods beside Allah, then surely both would have gone to ruin. Glorified then be Allah, the Lord of the Throne, far above what they attribute to Him[21:24] He cannot be questioned as to what He does, but they will be questioned. [21:25] Have they taken gods besides Him? Say, 'Bring forth your proof. This Qur'an is a source of honour for those with me, and a source of honour for those before me.' Nay, most of them know not the truth, and so they turn away. [21:26] And We sent no Messenger before thee but We revealed to him: 'There is no god but I; so worship ME alone.'
Chapter 15 Al-Hijr
And they said, 'O thou to whom this exhortation has been sent down, thou art surely a madman, [15:8] 'Why dost thou not bring angels to us, if thou art of the truthful?'[15:9] We do not send down angels but with the requirements of justice, and when We do send them, the disbelievers are not respited[15:10] Verily, it is We Who have sent down this Exhortation, and most surely We are its Guardians. [15:11] And We sent Messengers before thee among parties of ancient people. [15:12] And there never came to them a Messenger but they mocked at him.
Chapter 75 Al-Qiyamah
[75:17] Move not thy tongue, O Prophet, with the revelation of the Qur'an that thou mayest hasten to preserve it. [75:18] Surely, upon US rests its collection and its recital. [75:19] So when We recite it, then follow thou its recital. [75:20] Then upon US rests the expounding thereof.

[cavalier]

Originally Posted by inhumility

There is only ONE GOD, the one and only source of guidance of Revealed Religions, hence all Revealed Religions are truthful in origin,

Even if there is only one God, and many would question this, that doesn't necessarily mean that that God is the source of all Revealed Religions, there could be another source, such as humankind's sinful or impure nature. Therefore, and though they might contain truth, not all revealed religions are necessarily truthful in origin.

[Thomas]

Hi Cavalier -

I think we have to be careful with definitions here.

Even if there is only one God, and many would question this,

One can believe in one God, and no God - or one can speak of God, or speak not of God - but I think one can no longer hold onto polytheism - as philosophy and metaphysics would demonstrate that to be no longer workable.

Aristotle, for example, spoke of the Unmoved Mover, the First Cause - there must logically be a First Cause, but not 'First Causes' - you can only have one '1'. (In relative mode, as we are, you can have multiple causes, but not in metaphysical mode).

that doesn't necessarily mean that that God is the source of all Revealed Religions,

That depends upon how you define 'revealed' - the usual assumption is that it is revealed by God either directly, or indirectly. As a Christian, the OT and the Qran would seem to imply indirect revelation.

Anything that is not 'revealed' by God, directly or indirectly, is either a process of reasoning (logical operation of the intellect) or a process of deception...

The Vedas, on the other hand, are not 'revealed' but 'remembered' - which is a whole other discussion.

And then there are what Catholicism refers to as 'natural religion', which is not revealed as such, but rather a process of reasoning, which is how it views Buddhism, for example ... unless we argue that 'enlightenment' is the equivalent of 'revelation' ... and I'm not sure it is ...?

there could be another source, such as humankind's sinful or impure nature.
Then we would say there is no revelation here, just deception, self- or otherwise.

Therefore, and though they might contain truth, not all revealed religions are necessarily truthful in origin.
Agreed - now that 'religion' is an open term for anyone to call anything they like a religion ...

Whilst we all agree that there is only one God, and that 'all roads lead to Rome', as it were (sorry, that was dreadful, but I couldn't help myself), we must acknowledge that what counts is not only the vantage points - and not all vantage points are the same - nor necessarily the depth of perception that vantage point offers ...

... again, Truth is one, but that does not mean that all truths are the same, but rather they share a common quality, truths themselves exist in a hierarchy.

Thomas

[taijasi]

Here are some more examples of a differing beliefs, across the various faith traditions, with one underlying truth. Note that I do not say one IDENTICAL truth - for though I believe that, and believe in it for the same reasons that you point to a First Cause, Thomas ... we can at best point out the similarities of belief and then leave it up to the reader/experiencer to arrive at the same recognition/realization. No true understanding can be forced!

What occurred to me earlier today are the teachings on a life after death as found universally within all religious traditions. Consider that what is presented is always the idea that our experience as a conscious entity continues after the transition called `death,' and that a new journey is embarked upon - consisting of various stages, involving a meeting with various types of holy figures or `gods,' and leading one through numerous "layers" or worlds of postmortem existence. It is this last aspect of the journey upon which I would like to focus, providing a few examples. Maybe others will add ...

TIBETAN BUDDHISM
The various layers or levels of the Bardo (meaning `between two' - the gap between two births)
These levels are divided into SIX states according to the Tibetan Book of the Dead (Bardo Thodol), three of which are relevant here:
the bardo of the moment before death, the bardo of dharmata, and the bardo of becoming. For more info, consult the source (Evans-Wentz).

EGYPTIAN Teachings
Sekhet-hetep, Amenti, also Sekhet-aanre, `The Fields of the Reeds'
The deceased enters the first region as a khu, performing duties as in life. Then he is led by Anubis to the Hall of Osiris where he is judged by 42 judges (highly symbolic) and his heart is weighed by Maat as against a feather. Those who are ready pass to the fields of Aalu, much as the Buddhist Nirvana. The rest pass to the lower regions of Amenti.

HINDUISM
The concept of seven lokas (meaning `place' or `locality') - 2 1/2 in particular being the abode of the dead
The lowest of these is Bhur-loka (`earth'), and the deceased pass through Bhur-loka, Bhuvar-loka (`air') or Antarloka, Svar-loka (`heaven-world') or Svargaloka, Mahar-loka (`world of delight'), Janar-loka (`birth-world'), Tapo-loka (`devotion-world') or Taparloka, and finally, Satya-loka (`truth-world' or `reality-world'). Out of these seven worlds, it must be explicity understood that even the most enlightened of average Humanity do not pass beyond the Svarloka, or 3rd lowest world, before returning to rebirth. Only the saints and rishis have consciousness in and of the four higher worlds ...

THEOSOPHY
The existence of Seven Planes of Being - or interpenetrating worlds of existence, 2 1/2 in particular being the abode of the dead
Theosophy echoes the Vedic teachings in emphasizing that upon death, we inhabit briefly the higher ethers of the physical world - in what is called the linga sarira (`impermanent model- or pattern-body') or `etheric body.' We then withdraw to kamaloka (`place of desire'), popularly known as the `astral or emotional plane.' The term `astral' was chosen by medieval alchemists simply because it means "starry," due to the fact that astral substance slightly glows of its own accord. The astral journey can last months, years, or even decades, but souls universally arrive in Devachan (state of `possessing happiness'). This is identical with the `Pure Land' of Theravadin Buddhism, and is said to last from a few moments to well over 1,000 years, prior to rebirth. Devachan is also identical with the various portions of the plane of Mind - and again, normal human evolution does not transcend this level between births. Higher worlds include the Buddhic/Intuitional, Nirvanic/Atmic, Monadic and Divine - with their correspondences in Hinduism.

CHRISTIANITY
Realms of Purgatory, followed by `Heaven' and `Hell'
Though some may object that only Catholicism emphasizes the existence of a Purgatory, and though I may draw fire for stating this, I would suggest that this is essentially the same truth as mentioned above. The earliest stages of postmortem existence must needs include a gradual purging and cleansing of the coursest human vibrations and tendencies. Thus the commonality of teachings, since this is exactly what the lower astral realms, and the earliest stages of the Bardo, are all about. Likewise, the existence of hellish experiences for us all - of greater or lesser duration & intensity according to the strength of the corresponding "sins" - is a UNIVERSAL experience for the soul upon death (souls are not `Christian' or otherwise, they are REDEEMED or otherwise - with all possible stages in between). Finally, an experience of timeless, blissful `Heaven' is sure to eventually follow, wherein each soul receives according to its own merit, just as in the case of the earlier "hell-experience." And of course, all but the fully Redeemed must again "GO OUT." Such is the Truth and the Law, inviolable - though either perfectly or imperfectly understood ... and usually a bit toward the latter.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I would stop here because these are the religions and belief systems which have impacted me most directly, and with which I resonate most readily. I am unfamiliar with the Koran, Torah/Kabbalah, with Bahai teachings and with Zoroastrianism ... though each of these, and other faiths, must surely teach something with regard to the life after death. I would be interested to see where commonalities lie in terms of a layered progression through the various realms of postmortem existence.

I know, for example, that there is the concept of the Elysian Fields (plus Olympus and Hades) as found in Greek Mythology, corresponding rather obviously with the numbered realms of the astral plane & Heaven-worlds, plus the lower astral (hellishness) & purgatory. There was a recent thread (on Judaism?) about the Hebrew Gehenna/She'ol, also a correspondence to Purgatory - at least in the case of Gehenna/Gei'Hinnom. And then there is the Norse Valhalla, and other mythologies that I have missed ...

Again, I do not say that there aren't variations, but I trust that those with eyes to see and ears to hear ... can distinguish & discern, and are not deceived by the variations in presentation.

Namaskar,

taijasi

[Therapon]

Originally Posted by inhumility

There is only ONE GOD,

Au Contraire, there are indeed many Gods!

Monotheism represents the departure from previously polytheistic religion, and is a human invention. Akhenaton, Zoroaster, Moses, Mani etc etc all confused the One with a single, particular deity and therefore missed the point.

IMHO; The One is God. Plotinus

[Jeannot]

It's been said that God is utter simplicity, and at the same time, infinite variety.

[Dr. Now]

Originally Posted by cavalier

I wouldn't, at present, say I definitely believe it, but I can certainly see how the world's religions could simply be different expressions of the same ultimate truth.

Maybe religions are like instruments -musical or scientific -and each one contributes a little something to the big picture. Or maybe they're like systems designed to get at something that can't really be gotten at with systems, so you get a whole bunch of them going in a circle around it.

Now you know where it is, generally, and kinda what it's like, but whatever It Is it's all still pretty mysterious.

I don't know. Maybe.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Dr. Now

Maybe religions are like instruments -musical or scientific -and each one contributes a little something to the big picture. Or maybe they're like systems designed to get at something that can't really be gotten at with systems, so you get a whole bunch of them going in a circle around it.

Now you know where it is, generally, and kinda what it's like, but whatever It Is it's all still pretty mysterious.

I don't know. Maybe.

The Uncertainty Principle of Truth.

Welcome to CR.

lunamoth

[inhumility]

Originally Posted by Therapon

Au Contraire, there are indeed many Gods!
Monotheism represents the departure from previously polytheistic religion, and is a human invention. Akhenaton, Zoroaster, Moses, Mani etc etc all confused the One with a single, particular deity and therefore missed the point.
IMHO; The One is God. Plotinus

My dear,it is the otheway round.Monotheism is first and when due to superstition people are lead astray they become polytheistic.History is a witness to it.
Thanks

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Dr. Now

Maybe religions are like instruments -musical or scientific -and each one contributes a little something to the big picture. Or maybe they're like systems designed to get at something that can't really be gotten at with systems, so you get a whole bunch of them going in a circle around it.

Now you know where it is, generally, and kinda what it's like, but whatever It Is it's all still pretty mysterious.

I don't know. Maybe.

Maybe the different religions are different versions of sheet music, and we are the different musical instuments. That would make God the conductor.
Welcome to CR, Dr. Now.