The "One True" religion

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Belindi »

Lark_Truth wrote:
Would a true religion have or not have a set of fundamental beliefs or guiding principles? To me that just strikes me as a very necessary thing for a religion to have as there is so much confusion in the world as to religion that I would very much like to know exactly what my religion believes and what makes my religion different from another religion. Yes a guiding principle should be thought about with reason to the best of an individual's ability, I agree with you there.
Yes, but those rules, such as for instance the Ten Commandments, or the Beatitudes, should be subject to individuals' reasoning and faith and not imposed by religious authorities. The religious authorities' duty should be to inform and educate , not say "Do this do that".

What is wrong with a credal religion is that people who want to think for themselves and revise those important sets of beliefs are excluded from the fellowship. When people question and search for the good they should be able to do so with consciences that are free from the edict of authorities.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Fooloso4 »

Belindi:
That is the Jewish literary device of repetition in a different form. Both ' I am the way the truth the life' and ' no one comes unto the Father if not through me' mean the same .
Sorry, I just saw this.

Whether they mean the same thing or different things depends on what you bring to the interpretation. Whether there is a difference depends on how one understands the relationship between Jesus and God. If they are the same then the statements mean the same, but if the Father is not the son or Son then the second is read as pointing to that difference. If they are the same then “through me” means to me. If they are different then through me means that I am the intermediary between man and God.
The claim is that only through a man's paradigmatic life can other men understand anything of God.
Some have understood it in this way but we really do not know if Jesus even said this. It appears only in John, and it is in John, the latest of the canonical gospels, that we find the most extravagant claims. The author of John may have heard it from another unknown earlier source though. From a Jewish perspective it is the Law that provides the paradigm for how to live, but what many do not know is that there has always been disagreement as to how the Law is to be interpreted and applied. Jesus’ dispute with the Pharisees is firmly within this tradition. And so there is some plausibility to the idea that his life did serve as paradigmatic as to how the Law is to be lived.
The historical Jesus was a Jewish teacher who did not intend his teaching for the gentiles, and so Jesus does not consider avatars from societies other than Jews.
Right, but we have no way of distinguishing between what Jesus might have taught and what is passed down as his teachings under the influence of Paul and the growing faction between Jews and Christians.
Fooloso4, do you think that the emphasis on the unique individual, Jesus of Nazareth , in 'I am the way the truth the life. None come to the Father except by me' is a Pauline version of Jewish need for a political-religious leader of Jews at the perilous and unhappy time in Jewish history, the Roman occupation?
I think it is a Pauline version of the messiah that was tailored to suit the gentiles, but I think it goes much further. Paul’s Christ was much more than a political-religious leader. In my opinion Paul was not a theologian. He believed the end of the world was at hand and he had no interest in theological distinctions. His only concern was to save as many souls as possible before it was too late. It did not much matter what he told them or what they believed as long as they accepted salvation through Christ.
Was the Gospel in question composed after Paul's work adapting Jesus for the gentiles? If this was the case the author of the Gospel in question was likely to be a Pauline author.
Most scholars today estimate the date of the gospel of John at about 100 AD. Given its overt hostility to the Jews the author was definitely in the Pauline tradition but far enough away in time from Paul that the growing animosity between Jew and Christian was much greater than what is described in Acts. How much the character, deeds, and teachings of Jesus the Jew changed over that period of time is an open question.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Belindi »

Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply, Fooloso4.

You wrote:
Whether they mean the same thing or different things depends on what you bring to the interpretation. Whether there is a difference depends on how one understands the relationship between Jesus and God. If they are the same then the statements mean the same, but if the Father is not the son or Son then the second is read as pointing to that difference. If they are the same then “through me” means to me. If they are different then through me means that I am the intermediary between man and God.
Are not most Christians, Prots and RCs, Trinitarians, and isn't it definitive of Trinitarians that they believe that the Father and the Son are different aspects of the same?

Is it best for believers and unbelievers alike to use holy scriptures as sources for interpretations and meanings that are relevant to present lives? Is it best to reserve historical interpretations of The Bible for people who are interested in history? Personally I am interested in The Bible as socio- historical source, as you explained it in your last. I thnk that most believers believe that Christ of faith and Jesus of history are identical. Believers who want to be philosophers need to understand that Christ of faith and Jesus of history are not the same, and that faith need not be compromised by that understanding.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Fooloso4 »

Belindi:
Are not most Christians, Prots and RCs, Trinitarians, and isn't it definitive of Trinitarians that they believe that the Father and the Son are different aspects of the same?
Yes, although there are exceptions. Whether this is what the gospel authors believed or meant is another story. The question is when this concept was developed and when it became widely accepted. The question of Jesus’ divinity and the relationship between Jesus and God was contested at the Council of Nicaea. Paul seems to have used the term ‘son’ in the Jewish sense. The further in time we get from Paul the more the Greek and Roman influences and their notions of human gods enters the picture. When the gospel of John says
The Father and I are one (10:30)
this can be interpreted to mean either that they are one and the same or in unity.
Believers who want to be philosophers need to understand that Christ of faith and Jesus of history are not the same, and that faith need not be compromised by that understanding.
I think there is a third element: the Christ of faith as accepted by the mainstream does not appear to be the same as the Christ of faith of the early followers. Their views were somewhat diverse and pluralistic. Some today find inspiration in this. They prefer not having authorities telling them what they must believe.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Belindi »

Fooloso4 wrote:
Paul seems to have used the term ‘son’ in the Jewish sense. The further in time we get from Paul the more the Greek and Roman influences and their notions of human gods enters the picture. When the gospel of John says

The Father and I are one (10:30)


this can be interpreted to mean either that they are one and the same or in unity.

(Belindi wrote)Believers who want to be philosophers need to understand that Christ of faith and Jesus of history are not the same, and that faith need not be compromised by that understanding.


(Fooloso4 wrote)I think there is a third element: the Christ of faith as accepted by the mainstream does not appear to be the same as the Christ of faith of the early followers. Their views were somewhat diverse and pluralistic. Some today find inspiration in this. They prefer not having authorities telling them what they must believe.

"In the Jewish sense" I take to mean for instance " Belindi is a daughter of the Church of Scotland" , or " Fooloso4 is son of philosophy" .
When you say that Greek and Roman human gods enter the picture I take it this means that Greek and Roman human gods have physical parents of the flesh. I suppose I should try to not be prejudiced against the latters' pagan simplicity.

I do favour "The One True Religion" insofar as I would like believers to understand the history of their religion and try to see how their religion whatever it is can be adapted to fit the best of modern civilisations. I don't actually known what preachers are doing with regard to educating their flocks. I wonder if there is any proper research.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Fooloso4 »

Belindi:
"In the Jewish sense" I take to mean for instance " Belindi is a daughter of the Church of Scotland" , or " Fooloso4 is son of philosophy"
I mean how the term ‘son’ is used in the Hebrew Bible. There are several men who are called a “son of God”. In no way does it mean human divinity.
When you say that Greek and Roman human gods enter the picture I take it this means that Greek and Roman human gods have physical parents of the flesh. I suppose I should try to not be prejudiced against the latters' pagan simplicity.
Some of the human gods had one parent who was a god, just like the Jesus mythology. There is also the notion of deification or apotheosis, of a man achieving divinity. This was the position taken by Arius at the Council of Nicaea regarding Jesus, that he was a man who became a god.
User avatar
Lark_Truth
Posts: 212
Joined: December 24th, 2016, 11:51 am
Favorite Philosopher: Brandon Sanderson

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Lark_Truth »

Belindi wrote:Lark_Truth wrote:
Would a true religion have or not have a set of fundamental beliefs or guiding principles? To me that just strikes me as a very necessary thing for a religion to have as there is so much confusion in the world as to religion that I would very much like to know exactly what my religion believes and what makes my religion different from another religion. Yes a guiding principle should be thought about with reason to the best of an individual's ability, I agree with you there.
Yes, but those rules, such as for instance the Ten Commandments, or the Beatitudes, should be subject to individuals' reasoning and faith and not imposed by religious authorities. The religious authorities' duty should be to inform and educate , not say "Do this do that".

What is wrong with a credal religion is that people who want to think for themselves and revise those important sets of beliefs are excluded from the fellowship. When people question and search for the good they should be able to do so with consciences that are free from the edict of authorities.
Yes, and YES Belindi. Each and every individual person should (and does) have the personal authority to worship how, where, or what they may. Scripture and the teachings of prophets and evangelists should be up to the interpretation of individuals, for if it doesn't make sense to them, then why on earth should they believe it?
I'm not going to point fingers or name names here, but I would think that a true religion is one that has a set of beliefs but doesn't force people to follow them, and the individual members are allowed to choose what to believe according to their ideals of faith.
Truth is Power. Reason is Wisdom. Intelligence is Experience. Hope is Bright!
Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Eduk »

If I went to a Christian church and used my personal right to freedom of interpretation to believe that God was man made, would I still be a Christian? Surely you have to believe some of the religion to be considered a member of that religion?
Unknown means unknown.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Belindi »

Educ, a goodly proportion of Unitarians are Humanists. I bet that if you did not make too much of it you could be welcomed into the C of E with that belief that God is man made. Priests are much concerned with not too much disruption and frightening of the horses.
Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Eduk »

Ha ha, I like your response. My wife used to work in Bermuda and worked a Sunday job playing organ in a local church. I visited a few times (we were only dating at the time) and came along to the church and I basically agree with you. What the members of the church actually believed didn't feel like it was particularly relevant. I met people who I would say certainly did believe in God and I met others who I'm not sure really could care about the subject and if pushed might say they didn't. But they both went to the same church and got along for other reasons. Religion on the island felt like that to me, and I'm sure this is echoed elsewhere.

Having said that this feels more like a social club than a religion per say? It could be that for the average religious person this is the reality of day to day to life? I am only familiar with the church in England and in England it's never been a social club I wanted to join :)
Unknown means unknown.
Gamnot
Posts: 250
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 2:10 am

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Gamnot »

The integral theorist, Ken Wilbur, says that no one is 100% wrong, but I am sure that some are closer to being completely wrong than others. In some cases different religions may be hitting the same target with some being closer to the bulls-eye than others. Because of fixations, conditioning factors and our self created blind spots we cannot know how close to the bulls-eye we are. Some religions or ideologies miss the target altogether.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Belindi »

Gamnot wrote;
The integral theorist, Ken Wilbur, says that no one is 100% wrong, but I am sure that some are closer to being completely wrong than others. In some cases different religions may be hitting the same target with some being closer to the bulls-eye than others. Because of fixations, conditioning factors and our self created blind spots we cannot know how close to the bulls-eye we are. Some religions or ideologies miss the target altogether.
But dont you agree that some cultures of belief are better than others? Cannot you, personally, come off the fence and declare which beliefs are better than others, and why they are better?

If not, you must be unable to vote in a political election.
Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Eduk »

Because of fixations, conditioning factors and our self created blind spots we cannot know how close to the bulls-eye we are. Some religions or ideologies miss the target altogether.
Knowing factually that you have blind spots is helpful knowledge though. It could lead you to conclusions that you wouldn't make if you weren't aware that you had any blind spots. It could lead you to constrain yourself in certain ways which in turn could help you work around those blind spots. The analogy of the blind spot is quite good when I come to think of it, when driving on the motorway and deciding to change lanes I look in my mirror to see if anything is coming because I am self aware enough and have enough predictive power to imagine a world where something was coming and my changing lanes could cause an accident. After checking in my rear view mirror I indicate my intention to change lane (assuming I see nothing). Oh and when checking I don't simply look to see if cars are coming, I look to see if anything is coming, If I'm only looking for cars I might miss a bike. Then before manoeuvring I check the blind spot of the car by turning my head. Then if it's clear I change lane smoothly. Again even though at this point I've made multiple checks I'm still aware that I'm human and it's possible even at this point that I've missed something. So I change lane relatively slowly so again if I have missed something there is time to react. All these checks because I know factually I'm not a perfect device for working out if something is coming.
Unknown means unknown.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Fooloso4 »

Eduk:
Knowing factually that you have blind spots is helpful knowledge though. It could lead you to conclusions that you wouldn't make if you weren't aware that you had any blind spots. It could lead you to constrain yourself in certain ways which in turn could help you work around those blind spots.
I think that this is central to Socrates’ practice of the examined life and Delphic maxim to know thyself. The emphasis is on practice. It is something that one must deliberately work at. Philosophical discussion is part of this practice in that it forces us to clarify our opinions and can provide a mirror that reflects our opinions back to us via the responses of others.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: The "One True" religion

Post by Rr6 »

Eduk wrote:Then before manoeuvring I check the blind spot of the car by turning my head......... All these checks because I know factually I'm not a perfect device for working out if something is coming.
Yeah, and now smart cars are helping to fill in those blind spots ex a flashing light in mirror goes off if car is passing you in the blind spot.

There is much more in-depth blind spot that involves the ego blocking out that which does not want to acknowledge rational, logical common sense truths when presented them.

I current president is perfect example of such non-acknowledgement and denial of truth and skewing of truth into 'alternative facts'{ aka horse puckey or poppycock } There are several examples in this forum that also take place.

1} "U"niverse/"G"od: The Cosmic Heirarchy.

....1a} metaphysical-1{ spirit-1 }spirit-of-intent, mind/intellect/concepts ex concepts of God, Universe, Space, Love, Dogs Cats etc....
------------line-of-demarcation-----------

.....1b} metaphyscial-2, macro-infinite non-occupied space, that, embraces the following,

......1c} finite, occupied space Universe aka Uni-V-erse,

.............1c2} physical/energy{ spirit-2 }, fermions, bosons and any aggregate collection thereof-- ex biologicals ---as our observed reality of time/frequency/sine-wave{ ^v^v or as \/\/\/\/ }[/color],

.............1c3} metaphysical-3{ spirit-3 } gravity{ mass-attraction } that I speculate is positive shaped geodesic arc of a torus,

..............1c4} metaphyiscal-4{ spirit-4 } dark energy{ cosmological constant } that, I speculate is negative shaped geodesic arc of a torus.

For religion to be w-holistic and comprehensive requires a cosmology that deals with the most comprehensively w-holistic scenarios, as my cosmic hierarchy does above.

For religion to be successful for the individual, it only has to work for them.

This then begs the question of where does the search for truth and acknowledgement of truth, begin and end, within a context of religion?

Our presidents religion has nothing to do with truth. imho

We don't yet have smart meters-- with flashing light ---for humans ego-based, blind spots.

"One true religion?" Do any really place considerate thought on what the word 'true' means exactly, within that context?

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021