Why is Sikhism the True Religion?

I will post my last post now i think . In Genesis it says the snake spoke to Eve, what language did he speak ?. The snakes punishment was that he will slither on his belly for ever, does this mean prior to making Eve eat the Apple he was walking upright .
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/interfaith-dialogues/31467-why-is-sikhism-the-true-religion.html
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=31467
Why should i be hanged or put to death if my dad killed someone ? If Adam & Eve ate the forbidden fruit why are we all sinners and paying for there sins even newborn babies are sinners in the eyes of the Bible. I think i will leave it at that, no question about Sikhism has been asked and that is what it was all supposed to be about.

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

Who says it is?
Sikhism certainly doesn't
The question is flawed

My answer would be: "I don't know because Sikhism doesn't say it is the the true religion. It's only rigid followers of sectarian paths like yourself that thinks there is some sort of contest for which there can only be one winner"

I wish to give it a try. From what I learned, Christianity as we know it has very little to do with Jesus. Jesus insisted that he came to save the Jews. He wanted to purify the Hebrew faith as it got corrupted by the scribes and those who he called hypocrites ie. the various religeous authorities. He told the apostles to go and preach all over the world, because there were Jews all over (in Greece too) who spoke different languages, he never told them to proselyse non-Jews. Judas is very interesting. He thought Jesus was a political revolutionary that was going to free them from the Romans. When he realised his mistake, he betrayed Jesus because he saw Jesus as a traitor to the Jewish cause. When the Romans came and destroyed Jerusalem, many Jews converted to Christianity because they saw that Jesus was right. He predicted that it would happen.
To make a long story short, it is with Paul (Saul), the first non-Jew convert
that marks the first turning point of Christianity as we know it. Then in the early Middle Ages, a theologian...I'm not sure but I think it was St. Augustin really laid down the theological foundation of Christianity. There was also the first "concile" where some texts where chosen to become the "true" dogma and where some other texts were put aside. For example there is an ancient text that would qualify as a gospel but it was ignored as heretic because it clearly states that Mary Magdalan was not only one of the Apostles but his favorite one. The story says that after his death Jesus appeared to her at first and the apostles were very jealous of that...
Now we know how important the "Our Father" prayer is to Christians but not many know that this spiritual omen was replaced in importance (as to acknowledging Christian membership), by the "I beleave" prayer which makes beleavers bow first of all to the Church and its mortal representatives.

Personally I'm tired of discussing Christianity in a Sikh site. Too bad, the thread started as a real inquiry into Sikhism and it was interesting but then we see it is all about some Christian crusador...not again...there was Bittu and now there is Kairos.

Kairos, you talk a lot about truth but from my personal expereance Christians are the most unhealthy of all kinds of beleavers first because they are encouraged to see ignorance as a virtue and second because they are fed with so many lies and inconsistancies that lying becomes a second nature. Whereas all people lie now and then, Christians indeed are the champions because they are capable of lying even to themselves. I don't want to be rude but if I had time I would conduct a scientific psychological study on this.

Finally, the idea of an original sin is pretty creepy.How can we see an innocent infant as a filthy sinner who would never go to heaven if it dies before baptism. Blood, sweat and tears, that's what Christianity is all about...too bad.

Kairos,
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=31467
I’m going to attempt to answer your last question, because I think it’s an important one.

To begin with, each religion began with a messenger, who was chosen by the Grace of God to receive and then transmit the truth as the Word of God. Those messengers each had a capacity to comprehend a portion of truth, yet had direct experience of the whole, universal truth. Expressing the whole truth is impossible for any human being, so the messengers were given specific matters to transmit to mankind, which related to the times and cultures they were born into. The expression of truth is always colored by human culture, yet at the core of all religions, the same truth exists.

There is a distinct difference between the Word of God as revealed through the scriptures of any religion and the cultures that arise around religions to give them the color and characteristics we associate with them. Yet, God has no religion and does not play favorites with creation. The whole of creation is created, directed, cultivated, governed and owned by One Universal Creator Being.

All the religions are each designed for different segments of mankind, based upon cultural conditioning, as well as consciousness capacity. Western religions are pragmatic, aiming to teach discipline of behavior and humility of ego by laying out laws that no person could adhere to fully. A good example is the Judeo-Christian Sabbath law. Jesus actually broke this law by gleaning wheat on the Sabbath. He did this to remind the Jews that the laws were intended to serve man and not man the laws. Likewise, Islam, on the surface, has black & white philosophies where you either are or are not an infidel.

Eastern religions, like Buddhism and Hinduism, aim to teach what is above pragmatic, concrete and material, with focus on universality, diversity of oneness and the futility of striving after the transient. As examples, the rishis and munis are those who abandon the temporal world to concentrate their consciousness in meditation on spiritual siddhis, or supernatural powers. The Buddhists also aim to empty themselves of the ego-I so that the God’s consciousness can fill their beings and be present as light in the world.

Sikhi, as laid out by the Word of God as expressed in Gurbani, observes the transience of the temporal world, but does not reject the opportunities to learn from Waheguru what life in human form provides. The Word of God revealed to Nanak Dev ji speaks of the same universality expressed through the Eastern religions, but it also speaks of the importance of living an honest virtuous life, as was expressed in Western religions.

Each and every individual is not only entitled, but encouraged, to practice – to the highest degree – the religion that is best suited to their character (samskaras) and capacity of consciousness. Sikhi is no more or less the ‘true religion’ than any other. Sikhi does not proselytize, but it also does not tolerate forced conversion. Sikh principles observe the Formless Universal Creator God without intermediary (no more human gurus, effigies or idols), because a Sikh’s consciousness has the capacity to. Not everyone can do this and adherents of fundamental Sikh philosophy accept and understand this.

As Guru Gobind Singh ji said to Aurangzeb, ‘Your Majesty it is not the stamp on the coin but what is inside which makes the coin worthwhile. Even if a counterfeit coin has your Majesty’s creed imprinted upon it, no one will exchange it with the goods in the market place. So also in the case of faith, it is not the label, but the content that is pleasing to God and which determines who is consigned to hell, who to heaven. I believe in one God, not two or three and for me no one is an infidel save one who denies His presence’.

I’ll have to answer the question, ‘What makes you believe, the teaching of reincarnation is true?’ with a personal view, as only personal experience can determine what one believes. The simple answer is ‘samskaras’. These are the unique and distinct likes and dislikes, as well as quirks of character and what seem to be inborn preferences we all have. Biases, prejudices, preferences and such are either culturally learned or innate. Those that are culturally learned are readily recognisable as such. Much of what is innate can be attributed to survival objectives. But for those biases, prejudices and preferences that are neither culturally learned, nor attributable to survival objectives, there must be some explanation. Through rational analysis of facts, I (and many others) conclude the following theory:
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=31467

Through our biological ancestry, we inherit genetics that give us physical characteristics and though our consciousness DNA we inherit mental and emotional dispositions. Between lives we revert to the ‘seed’ of potentialities. In lives we sprout, grow, mature, bear fruit, re-seed and then die. The seed carries forward what we have evolved into. The seed is not the parent and one’s current being is not the same person whose consciousness DNA was passed along. The dispositions– those samskaras – that encapsulate characteristics, but not the ego-identity, are transferred from lifetime to lifetime.

Essential, truth arises within as direct experience of Divine Knowledge. Whatever we learn from external sources can only corroborate and confirm what the Grace of God has inspired us to understand. We each possess inborn comprehension of the absoluteness of any given quality, but it is only through contemplation and communion with the Absolute that we gain awareness of it. All religions recognise the importance of remembering and contemplating the One Universal Creator Being. Some perceive it imminent. Some perceive it remote. Our perception of it does not change it in the least.

Forum members pyaare jios,


I asked that the posters address the question posed by the thread. Still again we are reading an exegesis of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures with argument one way or the other, and links to further explain these texts. Thus we are going in circles.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=31467


Some recent posts have been deleted. Apologies. The final comments left is that of respected ik-jivan as it summarizes the issue very well.

The thread is closed.