End Times Speculation - A Different View

[openmind77]

OK!

hehehe, I apologize for tiring you, I will give it and you a rest…

Thanks for the convincing reasoning to give up on Baha’u’llah
(I was hoping you can give one good reason to doubt Baha’u’llah, I will continue to wait)

(also for someone who didn’t know the most basic teaching of non-finality in the Baha’i Faith, you seem to ‘claim’ to know enough to proclaim that Baha’u’llah knows little about God. Can you tell us what Baha’u’llah says about God at all?)

.

I think already went through what Bahaullah did not know about God as well as spiritual matters, in another thread - no need to go over it again.

 

[meltzerboy]

I believe the word ‘Messiah’ itself means Savior or Deliverer, but I may be wrong.

Only perhaps by inference. Actually Mashiach means “Anointed.” There is also a Hebrew word “Moshiah” which means Savior. Any king or ruler who is anointed is called a mashiach. The Mashiach, according to Judaism, is a king or ruler anointed by G-d.

 

[Servant19]

I think already went through what Bahaullah did not know about God as well as spiritual matters, in another thread - no need to go over it again.

Really? Ok

I can’t remember reading such a thing…

.

 

[tonyfish58]

Even the most Ancient Cultures talk about End Time Prophesy - A common theme which can be used to think about the common source, that is our One and Only God.

THE PACIFIC: AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL 2012 INDIGENOUS PROPHECY
Australian Aboriginal: “The End of the 40,000 year Dreamtime”

Prophecies handed down from generation to generation of the Australian Aboriginal Elders speak of the coming of the end times of one dimension as we enter another, the end of the 40,000 year Dreamtime.

Guboo Ted Thomas, an Australia Aboriginal Elder says:

“I was in dreamtime. I [have] seen this great wave going. I tell people about this wave. It wasn’t a tidal wave. This was a spiritual wave. So, to me, I believe that the Dreamtime is going to be that. I believe the revival is going to start in Australia when we’re Dreaming. It’s the humming bee that I’m talking about. And love. We’ve got to learn to love one another.

You see, that’s really what’s going to happen to the earth. We’re going to have tidal waves. We’re going to have earthquakes. That’s coming because we don’t consider this land as our Mother. We’ve taken away the balance, and we’re not putting it back.”

Another of the prophecies from the Australian Aboriginals has to do with ‘black rain’ falling at the end time whilst the D’Harawai Aborigines prophesize the convergence of three ancient climate cycles, beginning in 2001 and ending in 2012. This union will create an age of great upheaval, fire and ice, with devastating effects that will last for 2,000 years.

Link - theshamanictimes.com/australian-aborigine-indigenous-prophecies-2012.html

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

This is from this link - theshamanictimes.com/buddhist-indigenous-prophecies-2012.html

Buddhist: "The Coming of Maitreya Buddha"

Buddhist prophecies predict a time when the world will suffer from the absence of Dharma and a decline in morality and an increase in ignorance. This time will come to an end with the coming of Maitreya Bodhisattva, the future Buddha, who will appear on Earth and teach Dharma to the people of the world and this will enable the emergence of a new spiritual world order.

“The signs of these times are new and fantastical modes of dressing - traditional styles forgotten”

“The arrogant elevate profanity. The proletariat rules the kingdom; kings become paupers; the butchers and murderers become leaders of men; unscrupulous self seekers rise to high position.”

“Drunkards preach the path to Salvation… Guileful imposters claim psychic powers… False doctrines are devised from the Buddha’s Word and the teachers’ interpretations become self-vindications… Ideas are established contrary to traditions.”

“Famine, frost and hail govern many unproductive years… release[ing] diseases, horrible epidemics and plagues which spread like wildfire, striking men and cattle.”

"No rain falls in season, but out of season; the valleys are flooded.”

"Earthquakes bring sudden floods, while fire storms and tornadoes destroy temples, stupas and cities in an instant.”

Padma Sambhava also prophesied the return of tulkus at an important time in the future but the returning tulkus may not be Tibetan nor even Buddhists and some of them may not even wear a physical body.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[GuyNextDoor]

There are some parts in the link which you provided aren’t quite right and are not the correct teachings of Buddhism, but I won’t be surprised because the link is not of Buddhism origin. It is advisable to read about Buddhism from Theravada Buddhism (the oldest surviving council) sites for the Pali canons instead of gleaning random info from elsewhere.

This is from this link - theshamanictimes.com/buddhist-indigenous-prophecies-2012.html

Buddhist: "The Coming of Maitreya Buddha"

Buddhist prophecies predict a time when the world will suffer from the absence of Dharma and a decline in morality and an increase in ignorance. This time will come to an end with the coming of Maitreya Bodhisattva, the future Buddha, who will appear on Earth and teach Dharma to the people of the world and this will enable the emergence of a new spiritual world order.

While it is true that the coming of maitreya was predicted by the buddha, he has clearly stated maitreya will be back to re-institute the Dharma, not create a new spiritual order. It will be the same exact teachings as taught by Gautama buddha and those before him. To claim otherwise that wasn’t taught by the buddha is akin to creating your own religion or re-interpreting Buddhism to fit another religion. Its all too common now.

Just so you know, the buddha never taught about an Almighty God & Creator. He even claimed it will serve us no purpose to have the knowledge whether there are any gods or a Creator God, because we are of different realms and that they cannot help us. And thus he taught of how to liberate ourselves from sufferings & attain nirvana by our own diligence & practices. That was the purest form of Buddhist teachings found most clearly in Theravada Buddhism (the oldest surviving council). And that’s why Buddhism was never considered a religion but philosophy.

GuyNextDoor

 

[tonyfish58]

There are some parts in the link which you provided aren’t quite right and are not the correct teachings of Buddhism, but I won’t be surprised because the link is not of Buddhism origin. It is advisable to read about Buddhism from Theravada Buddhism (the oldest surviving council) sites for the Pali canons instead of gleaning random info from elsewhere.

While it is true that the coming of maitreya was predicted by the buddha, he has clearly stated maitreya will be back to re-institute the Dharma, not create a new spiritual order. It will be the same exact teachings as taught by Gautama buddha and those before him. To claim otherwise that wasn’t taught by the buddha is akin to creating your own religion or re-interpreting Buddhism to fit another religion. Its all too common now.

Just so you know, the buddha never taught about an Almighty God & Creator. He even claimed it will serve us no purpose to have the knowledge whether there are any gods or a Creator God, because we are of different realms and that they cannot help us. And thus he taught of how to liberate ourselves from sufferings & attain nirvana by our own diligence & practices. That was the purest form of Buddhist teachings found most clearly in Theravada Buddhism (the oldest surviving council). And that’s why Buddhism was never considered a religion but philosophy.GuyNextDoor

Thank you for your thoughts - Yes these scriptures are quite old and some meanings are most likely lost or had (name removed by moderator)ut from mans own ideas! bahai-library.com/momen_encyclopedia_buddhism

A couple of thoughts re Buddha from a Baha’i Perspective are these. `Abdu’l-Bahá describes the Buddha as “the cause of the illumination of the world of humanity” (CoC1 43:15) and as the establisher of “a new religion” (CoC1 46:16). Shoghi Effendi clearly places the Buddha in the same rank and station as the founders of the other world religions (CoC1 54-56:19-20, 60:21, 63:22). A warning is sounded however that the Buddhist texts that have come down to us do not necessarily represent the exact words or teachings of the Buddha (CoC1 46:16, 48:17, 60:21, 64:22). This perception is also to be found in the Buddhist scriptures themselves, as there are several statements to the effect that the true dharma (dhamma) preached by the Buddha would gradually disappear from the world (Anagatavamsa, tr. in Warren 482ff and Conze 47-50).

God bless and Regards Tony

 

[GuyNextDoor]

Thank you for your thoughts - Yes these scriptures are quite old and some meanings are most likely lost or had (name removed by moderator)ut from mans own ideas! bahai-library.com/momen_encyclopedia_buddhism

A couple of thoughts re Buddha from a Baha’i Perspective are these. `Abdu’l-Bahá describes the Buddha as “the cause of the illumination of the world of humanity” (CoC1 43:15) and as the establisher of “a new religion” (CoC1 46:16). Shoghi Effendi clearly places the Buddha in the same rank and station as the founders of the other world religions (CoC1 54-56:19-20, 60:21, 63:22). A warning is sounded however that the Buddhist texts that have come down to us do not necessarily represent the exact words or teachings of the Buddha (CoC1 46:16, 48:17, 60:21, 64:22). This perception is also to be found in the Buddhist scriptures themselves, as there are several statements to the effect that the true dharma (dhamma) preached by the Buddha would gradually disappear from the world (Anagatavamsa, tr. in Warren 482ff and Conze 47-50).

God bless and Regards Tony

Buddhism teachings, like early Christianity teachings was passed down by oral tradition before it was written. If anyone were to make any claim that Buddhism teachings or Christianity teachings were not properly represented, how does anyone know what is accurate & what’s pure hogwash? Anyone could go out and make that claim, I could even claim Islam & Baha’i’s interpretations of their teachings as pure hogwash too, using the same claim you do.

IMO, it is plain disrespectful and arrogant for A Religion to claim B Religion being inaccurate as it should be, but yet shamelessly took upon themselves that B Religion is actually A Religion in truth. Best part is one religion taught of God and the other rejected the Creator God. And A Religion can’t even be certain of which parts of A Religion is accurate or inaccurate. How does anyone explain that? There’s no logic here. I can even go out and say Baha’i is being misinterpreted as must be correctly interpreted as what Christianity want it to be. Where do my evidences to my claims come from? From the fact Baha’i uses the same way to justify their claims of course.

Pointing out to others that C & D Religions are making the same claim in order to justify A Religion should be allowed to make any claims they wish is…childish. Kinda reminds me of kids throwing a tantrum screaming “Not fair! If he can do it, so must I.”

Not impressed one bit.

GuyNextDoor

 

[Servant19]

Buddhism teachings, like early Christianity teachings was passed down by oral tradition before it was written. If anyone were to make any claim that Buddhism teachings or Christianity teachings were not properly represented, how does anyone know what is accurate & what’s pure hogwash? Anyone could go out and make that claim, I could even claim Islam & Baha’i’s interpretations of their teachings as pure hogwash too, using the same claim you do.

IMO, it is plain disrespectful and arrogant for A Religion to claim B Religion being inaccurate as it should be, but yet shamelessly took upon themselves that B Religion is actually A Religion in truth. Best part is one religion taught of God and the other rejected the Creator God. And A Religion can’t even be certain of which parts of A Religion is accurate or inaccurate. How does anyone explain that? There’s no logic here. I can even go out and say Baha’i is being misinterpreted as must be correctly interpreted as what Christianity want it to be. Where do my evidences to my claims come from? From the fact Baha’i uses the same way to justify their claims of course.

Pointing out to others that C & D Religions are making the same claim in order to justify A Religion should be allowed to make any claims they wish is…childish. Kinda reminds me of kids throwing a tantrum screaming “Not fair! If he can do it, so must I.”

Not impressed one bit.

GuyNextDoor

Do you not find it strange that the entirety of Christianity is based around the sinful and fallible, fallen nature of man, yet it trusts completely the words and understandings and implications deduced from a Revelation, by men, as being sacred?

It is for this very reason that the Revelation of Baha’u’llah is authenticated by Baha’u’llah Himself. Every Sacred Writing found in the Bahai Faith is found with Baha’u’llah’s own stamp. We no longer need to have our Faith (capital F) so reliant on having faith (little f) in fallen men and women.

Infallibility and authenticity is vouchsafed by God and only God. Moving forward mankind can feel assured that what they have Faith in is safely secured and not as a result of the deductions and conclusions made by anyone other than those directly and explicitly authorised by God Himself.

Hope that clarifies the very strong Bahai position in this matter you correctly have raised

.

 

[GuyNextDoor]

Do you not find it strange that the entirety of Christianity is based around the sinful and fallible, fallen nature of man, yet it trusts completely the words and understandings and implications deduced from a Revelation, by men, as being sacred?

Nope I don’t find it strange at all because Christ gave His Promise that His words will never pass away. And I believe that. The Church was also given infallibility on doctrines by Jesus Himself. And I also believe that. What’s so strange?

It is for this very reason that the Revelation of Baha’u’llah is authenticated by Baha’u’llah Himself. Every Sacred Writing found in the Bahai Faith is found with Baha’u’llah’s own stamp. We no longer need to have our Faith (capital F) so reliant on having faith (little f) in fallen men and women.

I don’t want to know about the “sacred writings” of Bahaullah or his own stamp, etc. I simply don’t care about Baha’i so do me a favor, stop using your religion to correct another religion.

My earlier post was about Buddhism being misinterpreted and how some religions using Buddhist philosophy to fit its own ends erroneously. I responded with the right Buddhist teachings against misinterpreted Buddhism. You don’t walk around holding a Geography textbook to correct another person on the subject of Chemistry.

GuyNextDoor

 

[Servant19]

Nope I don’t find it strange at all because Christ gave His Promise that His words will never pass away. And I believe that. The Church was also given infallibility on doctrines by Jesus Himself. And I also believe that. What’s so strange?

GuyNextDoor

You seem upset…I won’t continue too much longer. My intentions are not to enrage anyone…

Know that my comments were made in light of Christian thinking “applied” to Buddhism. Why would you think that the Buddha’s teachings, as Tony pointed out to you, are still authentic? Did the Buddha say His words would not pass away?

.

 

[GuyNextDoor]

Know that my comments were made in light of Christian thinking “applied” to Buddhism. Why would you think that the Buddha’s teachings, as Tony pointed out to you, are still authentic? Did the Buddha say His words would not pass away?

He didn’t, in fact he did say the dharma he taught will decay slowly. The question is how do you determine what’s accurate or inaccurate about Buddhism (notice I am speaking on a Buddhism standpoint).

The buddha did not glorify God, in fact he rejected the idea of a Creator God. If the buddha did acknowledge there is a God and that part was not passed down the lineage into the Pali canon, either someone lied or they made the biggest blunder in history. And by claiming his teachings of self-liberation & self attainment or that he rejected God is inaccurate, then there’s really nothing left in Buddhism for anyone because the core of buddhism is rejected & re-interpreted.

Moses could not enter the promised land because he did not glorify God. The buddha will be no different either. So if Buddhism fits other faiths with Creator God concept outside of Buddhism by re-interpreting & being so certain whats accurate or inaccurate, that’s all fine by me.

GuyNextDoor

 

[Servant19]

He didn’t, in fact he did say the dharma he taught will decay slowly. The question is how do you determine what’s accurate or inaccurate about Buddhism (notice I am speaking on a Buddhism standpoint).

Baha’u’llah is the Divine Standard as to what is accurate or inaccurate in every single thing since before time began…

That’s how you determine.

You are no different. For you, Jesus is the same Standard. If Jesus said that Buddha said ABC and it goes against Buddhist teaching, who do you believe? The schools of Buddhism or Jesus?

.

 

[SteveVH]

You seem upset…I won’t continue too much longer. My intentions are not to enrage anyone…

Know that my comments were made in light of Christian thinking “applied” to Buddhism. Why would you think that the Buddha’s teachings, as Tony pointed out to you, are still authentic? Did the Buddha say His words would not pass away?

.

Servant, you first have to know what Christian thinking is before you can apply it to anything.

GuyNextDoor is absolutely correct. You say you accept Christianity yet you disagree with Christian teaching. You say you accept Islam, yet you disagree with Muslim teaching. You cannot reinvent existing religions into something that they are not just so they align with your paradigm. And that is exactly what the Baha’i faith does. And you wonder why people “seem upset”. It is because you misrepresent what we and everyone else believe while addressing us as your “dear friends”, as if that will make everything okay.

In most rational minds, if one is exploring various faith traditions, what is taught by these faith traditions is weighed against what one believes to be true or can accept as true. If one does not believe that Jesus could have resurrected bodily from the grave, for instance, then one should reject this out of hand as a religion in which they believe. One does not, however, tell the members of that faith tradition that they have had it wrong all of this time and that what they have written concerning their own faith is in error as they just never understood the true meaning of their own founder’s words.

While I disagree with the concept of reincarnation I accept that this is what Hindus believe which is why I can never be a Hindu. I will not try and make the case that Hindus simply misunderstand what their faith tradition has taught over these many centuries and that it is actually “Catholic” if they were just enlightened enough to realize it.

This is what the Baha’i faith does as a matter of course and yes, it justifiably raises the hackles of those of us whose beliefs are misrepresented by one outside of our respective faiths whether it be Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism or any other “ism”.

Does this sound lie an unreasonable position for us to take?

 

[Servant19]

Servant, you first have to know what Christian thinking is before you can apply it to anything.

GuyNextDoor is absolutely correct. You say you accept Christianity yet you disagree with Christian teaching. You say you accept Islam, yet you disagree with Muslim teaching. You cannot reinvent existing religions into something that they are not just so they align with your paradigm. And that is exactly what the Baha’i faith does. And you wonder why people “seem upset”. It is because you misrepresent what we and everyone else believe while addressing us as your “dear friends”, as if that will make everything okay.

After all this time Steve, dear friend, you have no idea what the Baha’i Faith teaches about Christianity, Islam, etc etc. Its time for you to study and clarify for yourself, because the Baha’is have spent months trying to enlighten you, and you still get upset.

I cannot do more for you my friend. For the life of me I have tried to clarify Baha’i teachings but you continue to show a significant gap in your understanding

.

 

[Servant19]

.

We are getting way off topic anyway.
Feel free to start a new thread on this if you wish.

.

 

[SteveVH]

After all this time Steve, dear friend, you have no idea what the Baha’i Faith teaches about Christianity, Islam, etc etc. Its time for you to study and clarify for yourself, because the Baha’is have spent months trying to enlighten you, and you still get upset. I cannot do more for you my friend. For the life of me I have tried to clarify Baha’i teachings but you continue to show a significant gap in your understanding

Uh huh. It is us that don’t understand. If we just studied the Baha’i faith we would all become as enlightened you. Well, thanks for your efforts, Servant, sorry that I am so dense and unenlightened. My only solace is that I am in good company. Apparently people like Thomas Aquinas, St Augustine and all the Church fathers are equally as unenlightened.

You want me to clarify my understanding? Lets just begin with a few examples:

• Christian teaching: Jesus rose bodily from the grave.
• Baha’i teaching: Jesus only rose only spiritually from the grave. Christians just didn’t understand their own holy writings.
• Christian teaching: Christ invited Thomas to touch the wounds on his body.
• Baha’i teaching: Thomas only experienced a “vision” (apparently so did all of the rest of the disciples gathered together with him). Christians just didn’t understand their own holy writings.
• Christian teaching: Jesus will return in glory on the clouds of heaven with his angels.
• Baha’i teaching: Jesus snuck back into human history as Baha’u’llah. Christians just didn’t understand their own holy writings.

Lets just leave it at that for now, for simplicity’s sake.

Now, for clarification purposes, please tell me where I have gone wrong? I have asked before but never got an answer. Is there one doctrine of the Catholic Church with which you agree? Just one. If not, why do you say you embrace Christianity as possessing truth?

Thank you, my dear friend.

Steve

 

[tonyfish58]

Buddhism teachings, like early Christianity teachings was passed down by oral tradition before it was written. If anyone were to make any claim that Buddhism teachings or Christianity teachings were not properly represented, how does anyone know what is accurate & what’s pure hogwash? Anyone could go out and make that claim, I could even claim Islam & Baha’i’s interpretations of their teachings as pure hogwash too, using the same claim you do.

IMO, it is plain disrespectful and arrogant for A Religion to claim B Religion being inaccurate as it should be, but yet shamelessly took upon themselves that B Religion is actually A Religion in truth. Best part is one religion taught of God and the other rejected the Creator God. And A Religion can’t even be certain of which parts of A Religion is accurate or inaccurate. How does anyone explain that? There’s no logic here. I can even go out and say Baha’i is being misinterpreted as must be correctly interpreted as what Christianity want it to be. Where do my evidences to my claims come from? From the fact Baha’i uses the same way to justify their claims of course.

Pointing out to others that C & D Religions are making the same claim in order to justify A Religion should be allowed to make any claims they wish is…childish. Kinda reminds me of kids throwing a tantrum screaming “Not fair! If he can do it, so must I.”

Not impressed one bit.GuyNextDoor

Dear GuyNextDoor - You asked “How does anyone know what is accurate & what’s pure hogwash”?

Dear Friend in God - Any thing that causes disunity is not of God. To use accusations like what is said above, is but echoing accusations of Old. The same was attributed by the Jews to the Christians.

The Love of God and living the Fruits of Christ are of God. If one is not Living the Fruits then is that the Fault of the Religion or the Followers!

Look for the Love, Look for the Fruits and you find God.

A “Good Tree” can not bare “Bad Fruit”.

If one decides a Fruit makes God Exclusive of Others, then I would Question the Fruit. Outwardly it may appear sweet but inwardly it is very rotten.

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

Uh huh. It is us that don’t understand. If we just studied the Baha’i faith we would all become as enlightened you. Well, thanks for your efforts, Servant, sorry that I am so dense and unenlightened. My only solace is that I am in good company. Apparently people like Thomas Aquinas, St Augustine and all the Church fathers are equally as unenlightened.

You want me to clarify my understanding? Lets just begin with a few examples:

• Christian teaching: Jesus rose bodily from the grave.
• Baha’i teaching: Jesus only rose only spiritually from the grave. Christians just didn’t understand their own holy writings.
• Christian teaching: Christ invited Thomas to touch the wounds on his body.
• Baha’i teaching: Thomas only experienced a “vision” (apparently so did all of the rest of the disciples gathered together with him). Christians just didn’t understand their own holy writings.
• Christian teaching: Jesus will return in glory on the clouds of heaven with his angels.
• Baha’i teaching: Jesus snuck back into human history as Baha’u’llah. Christians just didn’t understand their own holy writings.

Lets just leave it at that for now, for simplicity’s sake.

Now, for clarification purposes, please tell me where I have gone wrong? I have asked before but never got an answer. Is there one doctrine of the Catholic Church with which you agree? Just one. If not, why do you say you embrace Christianity as possessing truth?

Thank you, my dear friend. Steve

Dear SteveVH - You asked “Now, for clarification purposes, please tell me where I have gone wrong”? I would like to offer an answer, not out of ill intent, but as a genuine attempt to point out what I see as the difference. Out of Love of God indeed

IMHO - You stated your case and without considering the alternate view you replied already knowing the answer and with intent to show the silliness of the alternate view.

Lets take an example you offered as follows.

• Christian teaching: Jesus will return in glory on the clouds of heaven with his angels.
• Baha’i teaching: Jesus snuck back into human history as Baha’u’llah. Christians just didn’t understand their own holy writings.

The Baha’i Response to the Biblical Passage is not at all as posted. Baha’u’llah did not “Sneak” as you have accused. In fact Baha’u’llah proclaimed in all Gods Might to all the Kings, Rulers and Peoples of the Earth. The Clouds as foretold by Christ are any thing that Obscures ones vision from beholding the Glory of the Returned Lord. Just as clouds veil the sunlight from man.

Can you answer with hand on heart that you think the Jews know the spiritual content of their scriptures? What did/will it take to rend their veils asunder, or the Clouds that obscure the Spirit of the Old Testament Teachings from them?

The important factor here is the Love of God - Using the explanations of Baha’u’llah we can Love the One and Only God in all True religions. We can embrace the oneness of Mankind and the Love of the One and Only God without condemning or rejecting another for His or Her Beliefs.

When the Pope embraced the Muslims by declaring that they Worship the One and Same God, did this take away from the Pope or Christianity? Or did this open the way to further Love of our fellow man?

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[GuyNextDoor]

Dear GuyNextDoor - You asked “How does anyone know what is accurate & what’s pure hogwash”?

Dear Friend in God - Any thing that causes disunity is not of God. To use accusations like what is said above, is but echoing accusations of Old. The same was attributed by the Jews to the Christians.

Disunity is not of God? Let me show you some examples, Tony.

Matthew 10:34
34"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35"For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;…

Luke 12:51
“Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division.”

Using the same logic you applied here, Jesus is not of God then. Why did you claim to accept Him then?

A “Good Tree” can not bare “Bad Fruit”.

If one decides a Fruit makes God Exclusive of Others, then I would Question the Fruit. Outwardly it may appear sweet but inwardly it is very rotten.

Only partially true, Tony. Not all good trees are of God.

Mormonism isn’t a bad religion too. They are good people & bear good fruits too. Aren’t they of God? Why didnt you yourself accept them?

Wicca is a good religion too since their motto is to harm no one, are they of God? Why didn’t you accept them?

You cannot tell me that their teachings don’t fit yours anymore. No matter how wrong or inaccurate some people claimed Mormonism or Wicca are, they are still good people and bear good fruits. So by your own logic, they are all of God & “true religions” then. You could accept all of them and unite them under one umbrella too, simply by reinterpreting their teachings. How hard can that be? Its been done many times before.

Why not now?