Do all (Religious) Roads Lead to Rome(So to Speak)?

Hey ATS, I have a question for you, those of you who are religious and those of you who aren't.

I mean no offence by this, nor am I trying to paint one religion in a better light than another, nor is it my intention to say that any religion is wrong, me myself, if I were to say I had a religion, it would be Christian. Although I'm of the opinion that 'loving thy neighbour' and being a good person is more important than the dogma of most organised religions.

But this is by the by; although I thought I'd better clarify my own religious beliefs before I ask this question.

And this is it;

Do all the religions, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam and the hundreds of others that humankind follow, all lead to the same place.

Now I know, most religions are mutually exclusive. By that I mean a Muslim cannot worship the Christian God etc.

What I really mean, does it matter what religion you follow, do they all lead to 'Rome' as it were.

Is being a good person, considerate, spiritual and having a good soul more important than Who you actually kneel down to?

I know it sounds like a dumb question, but it just rings true to me.

Please don't mock or be derogatory to other religions, this is an honest question from someone still trying to find his way in life, Spiritually and in many other ways.

"Many paths, one mountain"
-Zen　quote

That's what I've been thinking, but I wonder what people of different religions think of it.

I know they'll probably say that there's is the only way, but I just wonder.

In a sense you are right, they do, however, There is ONE True God. and ALL must face His Son for Judgment.... so as long as you life life morally and ethically, theoretically you can reach "Rome"

Thank you, I'm still finding my feet and all input is much welcome!

I've just been starting to feel empty spiritually lately, (death of a family friend), and it's got me asking questions.

thanks again!

Heaven is for everyone. In my opinion. We will all get there eventually, but we probably live many lifetimes before we arrive. All I can say to you now is that you should love others as you love yourself....also enjoy the ride.

Don't cry for the dead, they cry for you, because we laugh about aftermath, but they know how true, there ain't nobody gettin it worse than you and me, and you will see.....

I think the most effective way is to choose a single path for yourself and stick to it, but that doesn't mean other people's paths are invalid.

To use the "mountain" metaphor, if you try to climb a mountain with many paths, you'll get to the summit more effectively by walking along a single path than by wandering among dozens of different paths. That could just leave you circling the base of the mountain endlessly in confusion. Yet at the same time, if you pick one path to the top and your brother picks another, it doesn't mean either of you is "wrong." Both of you will get to the peak eventually if you persist on your chosen paths.

Also, some paths may be more suitable for different people based on their proclivities, personalities, backgrounds, situations, and so forth. A young athelete may be able to scale sheer cliff walls, while a man with a cane might need to take a more gentle and winding way to the top.

We live in an age where there is so much information available it can be very difficult to "pick a path and stick to it." There is constant confusion, constant distraction. My own view is that no knowledge is wasted, and its good to learn about many diffeerent traditions. But at the same time, I think you've got to make a personal committment to one way of thinking and practicing, or you won't get very far. Discipline is needed. But this does not at all imply intolerence for other people's spiritual choices. For some reason, a lot of people have trouble holding both ideas simultaneously, which strikes me as incredibly sad and short-sighted.

Thanks man, good advice.





That makes sense, and I definitely tried to make that clear in the OP, no offence intended at all.

It depends.
I think many Christians will tell you that you must accept Jesus as the saviour and the son of God to be saved. They say this without really looking at what Jesus was saying, though. Without going into it too deeply, it occured to me during studies that what Jesus was actually saying, and what the church preaches today are two different things entirely.

The Jews believe you must follow their Law to be clean in God's eyes.

Muslims believe that they are carrying forward the teachings of Jesus and Moses, and that you must follow their laws to be clean in God's eyes.

Ecumenicalism is pretty universally frowned upon.

If 'ROME' means a life-after-death, a lifetime of homage & obedience to a 'G'od, aspiring to 'sing' night & day at the throne of that heavenly god.
then NO.

there are some teachings which hold that we (mankind) are also gods...
there are teachings that say the Galactic Feminine Mother is the be-all & end-all...not some tribal G-d...

millions trust that SunYungMoon is the awaited Messiah
many others are inspired by Lucifer or Mother Earth...

so NO--- all paths do not lead to a Supreme Being or Creator.......(rome)
there are esoteric paths that diverge from modern organized religions.


use google or bing

Actually, no. A lot of religions say you will either go to heaven or hell. I understand that, if you are resurrected, chances are you will be here in a paradise on earth. Only a few(144,000) will go to heaven.

But not everybody will be resurrected. If not, you will just be dead. Not conscious, knowing nothing. No pain. No torment. People will not suffer in hellish torment.

It is deeply frowned upon by the major institutional doctrines of the Abrahamic religions, and by some other religious traditions originating in other parts of the world. But I wouldn't say its "universally" frowned upon. Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, and Shintoism all mutually accept each other for the most part, although you will find strains of thought in each of these traditions that are more exclusivist.

reply to post by silent thunder

---

Maybe thats what the koan about the sound of one hand clapping is meant to explain??

The non dualistic eastern religions train members to understand the relationship between the seer and the seen. Its not something you can teach by just preaching.

[edit on 17-10-2009 by fromunclexcommunicate]

reply to post by DaisyAnne

---

Jesus was pretty straightforward that the only way to get to God was through him:

John 14.6:


John 3.16-17:

reply to post by kiwifoot

---

Yes, all religions will lead people to God. But, only one religion can be correct though. At some point, they all start teaching contradictory things. There can only be one truth. Everyone's religion will lead them to either salvation or judgment.

reply to post by Blueracer

---

You should go back and read Revelation. The 144,000 aren't chosen for heaven but for ministry for God.

[edit on 10/17/2009 by octotom]

reply to post by kiwifoot

---

Muslim god is the same god as the judeo-christian god. so they can and do worship the same god. Of course the vatican created Islam, but thats a whole other thread

reply to post by octotom

---

Oh yes, he was pretty straightforward about it. It is people who have layered double meanings on top of it. That you must accept him into your heart etc. He was never that vague. What he actually wants us to do to be saved, through him, is different to what the church is peddling. It's actually much darker. And beautiful.

reply to post by DaisyAnne

---

I don't find the phrase "invite Jesus into your heart" to be vague. The reason being, it's just a way to communicate the idea that one has to truly believe on Jesus, not just intellectually believe in him.


No, it's not really. Christ wanted people to believe on his death and resurrection to atone for their sins and thus gain salvation. That's the straightforward reading of the Gospel. That's what the majority of Christian churches today teach. When we start allegorizing the text, saying that want Jesus really meant was something much darker and beautiful, that's when we get into trouble and miss the meaning.

reply to post by Totalstranger

---

It may be the same God but both the Judeo-Christian and Muslim traditions can't be right. It's not possible. They're mutually exclusive. Someone is wrong.

As for the Vatican creating Islam, that's a funny idea to me, considering that the Vatican has always been about numbers. Why would they create a faith that would make them lose numbers? lol

I may be wrong, but I don't even think that the Vatican had much control, if any, in that region of the world when Islam came to be.

reply to post by octotom

---

No no. I'm not saying allegorize it. In fact, quite the opposite. It's all there in the scripture as plain as day. Starightforward, from his lips to our ears. Let the reader understand. Out of all the churches, I do think the Catholic church has the strongest grasp on the rituals with the transubstantiation, even if they cloak the meaning a little.