Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I am guessing that gays who are in a committed and loving relationship are not banned from joining Hinduism? Or are they basically told they are defective humans with medical problems that need to be cured or hidden in order to be considered 'true' Hindu? Because if not, that would be an actual example of unity in diversity and not just claiming it.
Gays are not banned from joining and being active members of the Baha'i Faith.
Thanks. It seems more reasonable than the judgemental Abrahamics. And they don't expect everyone on the planet to be homogeneous and ruled under a single theocracy. I just don't understand how anyone could consider that a good thing.
Way older. By about 2,500 years at least. But I'm not certain, it could be more than that.
Extracts from letters written by or on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:
But that is what your Master, Abdul Baha, is saying.
No. They are not. Actually we have a religious order dedicated solely to LGBTQ. That is known as Kinnar Akhada. This is the Chief of Kinnar Akhada. She is a qualified electrical engineer. They are respected by common people who seek their blessings. A blessing from LGBTQ to new-borns is considered very ausicious and is sort of a must. We treat LGBTQ, in life and in law, as any other people. They play important parts in our mythology. We have Gods and Goddesses who are partial to LGBTQ - Yellamma, Iravan, Bahuchara Mata and possibly more. The last thing that has to come is acceptance of gay-marriage, and we hope that Indian law will accept it soon. However, as Hindus, we do not go about seeking adherents. We consider that demeaning.
Your religion is supposed to be the fulfillment of it. Duh. If it's meaningless why do Baha'is say they believe in the Bible. Say it's myth and I'll be fine.
I did not say it is meaningless, I said nobody would ever agree on the meaning.
Read the story of Shikhandini from Mahabharata. It is a famous and poignant story. She was a women (Amba) abducted by Bhishma, the Kaurava warrior, for marriage to his nephew. But before the marriage could have taken place, the nephew died. The person who she earlier wanted to marry refused to accept her. Shikhandini asked a sage to give her a new life as a male warrior so that she could take her revenge from Bhishma, because she knew Bhishma would not fight with her if she remained in the form of a female. That is not considered fair in Hinduism. For that she jumped into a fire sacrifice. The sage did give her a new life as a warrior but fumbled in the mantras to change her sex. When Shikhandini saw that she was still a woman, she complained. The sage corrected his mistake by changing her sex to that of a male (how easy is that in mythology
). In the great Mahabharata war, Arjuna hid behind Shikhandi to shoot an arrow at Bhishma. Though that too was unfair in Hinduism, Krishna advised Arjuna to go ahead with it, because there was no other way Bhishma could be killed. Bhishma saw all that, but he felt guilty about his abduction of Amba wanted to pay for his error. He let Arjuna shoot him from behind Shikhandi, though he had power to do so.
Read the story of Shikhandini from Mahabharata. It is a famous and poignant story. She was a women (Amba) abducted by Bhishma, the Kaurava warrior, for marriage to his nephew. But before the marriage could have taken, the nephew died. The person who she earlier wanted to marry refused to accept her. Shikhandini asked a sage to give her a new life as a male warrior so that she could take her revenge from Bhishma, because she knew Bhishma would not fight with her if she remained in the form of a female. That is not considered fair in Hinduism. For that she jumped into a fire sacrifice. The sage did give her a new life as a warrior but fumbled in the mantras to change her sex. When Shikhandini saw that she was still a woman, she comlained. The sage corrected his mistake by changing her sex to that of a male (how easy is that in mythology
Except... aah… No. Baha'is have pulled out the not written by eye-witnesses but rather by second and third hand source card. Who wrote the Bible? Who wrote the gospels? Were they passed down oral traditions? Did the events described really happen? All questionable things. Baha'is could have said "No". There is no question about it. The Bible was revealed to people by the Holy Spirit and is word for word true. But instead, Baha'is say "no". We can't say it's all true. Only the things Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha' say is true we can trust as true.
So these new social teachings are worse, the same, or better than the old ones? And don't blow what I say out of proportion to make yourself look good. Oh, and no Baha'i has told me what the new social teachings that were brought to humanity by Jesus. Would you happen to know?
Yeah, every thing else is falsehood accept what your trio of Gods, Bahaullah, Abdul Baha and Shoghi Efendi say. I understand that.