Homosexuality and religious.

[TransmutingSoul]

What does the "kingdom of names" mean to Baha'is?

There is a good explanation by Adib Taherzadeh in his book "The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh"

"In this world every one of God's attributes is clad with a name, and every such name reveals the characteristics of its attribute. For instance, generosity is an attribute of God, and it manifests itself in human beings. However, a person who has this attribute often becomes proud of it and loves to be referred to as generous. When his generosity is acknowledged by other people, he becomes happy, and when it is ignored, unhappy. This is one form of attachment to the Kingdom of Names. Although this example concerns the name 'generosity', the same is true of all the names and attributes of God manifested within the individual. Usually, man ascribes these attributes to his own person rather than to God and employs them to exalt his own ego. For instance, a learned man uses the attribute of knowledge to become famous and feels gratified and uplifted when his name is publicized far and wide. Or there is the individual whose heart leaps with feelings of pride and satisfaction when he hears his name mentioned and finds himself admired. These are examples of attachment to the Kingdom of Names. Human society at present exerts a pernicious influence upon the soul of man. Instead of allowing him to live a life of service and sacrifice, it teaches him to pride himself on his accomplishments. From early childhood he is trained to develop his ego and to seek to exalt himself above others. His ultimate aim is to achieve self-importance, success and power. The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh aims to reverse this process. The soul of man needs to be adorned with the virtues of humility and self-effacement so that it may become detached from the Kingdom of Names."

A complete reversal of current trends. Service to all humanity, not at the expense of any other person.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I've never looked into the German Templers, but William Miller's calculations had all sorts of problems with it. He took the days of one prophecy, I believe it was the 2300 mornings and evenings, and attached it to another prophecy about the rebuilding of Jerusalem from another, and made his calculations come out to 1844. But still, 1844 was the coming of the forerunner, the Bab, and not of the coming of Baha'u'llah. So, there's a lot of "adjustments" made in this and other prophecies to get them to predict the date desired.

It was recorded as it was recorded 2000 years ago.

The events happened as the happened in the 1800's

The two are complimentary, or they are not.

The Revelation of Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible, or it is not.

Our Choices CG.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is a good explanation by Adib Taherzadeh in his book "The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh"

"In this world every one of God's attributes is clad with a name, and every such name reveals the characteristics of its attribute. For instance, generosity is an attribute of God, and it manifests itself in human beings. However, a person who has this attribute often becomes proud of it and loves to be referred to as generous. When his generosity is acknowledged by other people, he becomes happy, and when it is ignored, unhappy. This is one form of attachment to the Kingdom of Names. Although this example concerns the name 'generosity', the same is true of all the names and attributes of God manifested within the individual. Usually, man ascribes these attributes to his own person rather than to God and employs them to exalt his own ego. For instance, a learned man uses the attribute of knowledge to become famous and feels gratified and uplifted when his name is publicized far and wide. Or there is the individual whose heart leaps with feelings of pride and satisfaction when he hears his name mentioned and finds himself admired. These are examples of attachment to the Kingdom of Names. Human society at present exerts a pernicious influence upon the soul of man. Instead of allowing him to live a life of service and sacrifice, it teaches him to pride himself on his accomplishments. From early childhood he is trained to develop his ego and to seek to exalt himself above others. His ultimate aim is to achieve self-importance, success and power. The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh aims to reverse this process. The soul of man needs to be adorned with the virtues of humility and self-effacement so that it may become detached from the Kingdom of Names."

A complete reversal of current trends. Service to all humanity, not at the expense of any other person.

Regards Tony

@CG Didymus

Consider CG that the Messengers, who hold all the power of God in their hands, give a Message in complete submission to what humanity will do to them.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I read these kinds of affirmations and it doesn't resonate to my mind in any meaningful way.

Maybe one day you will get the chance to find out the meaning.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

As others have said, if you disapprove of homosexuality, then you are homophobic by definition, which is a type of bigotry, and bigotry is a type of irrational prejudice.

I disapprove of homosexual behavior because of the laws of my religion, but I am not homophobic by definition since I can separate the behavior from the people. I do not dislike or have a prejudice against gay people and I do not have a negative attitude towards homosexuals. If anything, I feel quite the opposite way since I have always had empathy for the oppressed.

homophobia: dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
what is homophobia - Google Search

Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT).
Homophobia - Wikipedia

 

[Trailblazer]

So, all "deviant", "abhorrent", and "forbidden" sexual practices, including homosexuality, must be purged from society before there can be peace? Then will there ever be peace

No, that would not be necessary in order to have peace. Sexual practices are only one aspect of religious teachings.
No, there will never be peace if we wait for everyone to live up to the Baha'i standard of sexual behavior.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is how you convince yourselves that this is not homophobia. The laws are homophobic.

Laws are not homophobic, people are.

 

[Trailblazer]

And that's the question... If God can change the laws, why didn't the law against homosexuality get changed? Maybe Baha'u'llah didn't know but the all-knowing God certainly knew that gays would come out and demand equality. And equality is something Baha'is stand for too. And they say equality for all people.

God did not change those laws because He chose not to.
Why should God change laws just because some people make demands?

 

[Trailblazer]

that is your judgment against gays, something Jesus taught not to do.

Jesus said to love the sinner but hate the sin.
Jesus also said to go and sin no more.

 

[Trailblazer]

Homosexuality is wrong and is forbidden.

by Baha'u'llah.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

That's the great thing? It would be better if nobody opted for that choice. Faith is why Baha'i disesteem homosexuality and contribute to Abrahamic homophobia. Faith is why America is about to enter a tumultuous cultural battle over abortion laws that will harm society. And it's not limited to religious faith. Faith is why so many people rejected the climate scientists, which facilitated the mess we're in today and the bigger mess coming (Have you heard the trope that this was the hottest summer of your life so far and the coolest one of your life to come?) Faith is why so many people believe that the last presidential election was stolen and why many of them participated in a failed coup and will now be heading off to prison. Faith is why people refused a life-saving vaccine and hundreds of thousands died needlessly in America, leaving families missing a parent or two and in financial ruin. In every case, reason applied to evidence is the better path to belief.

We get to decide what is from our own selves and what is from God. We have to look beyond other peoples faults and look within our own self. I see that If we see faults in others, they are still within our own selves.

This fails to address my rebuttal, and actually says nothing at all to me. If you do not rebut my rebuttal, the debate is over and the issue resolved. If you'd care to defend your position in the future, I'm all ears. But at this point, your claim has been successfully refuted. If this were a trial and the jury had to vote, how do you think they would choose? Do you think my argument changed or convinced minds? Do you think your reply did?

I disapprove of homosexual behavior because of the laws of my religion, but I am not homophobic by definition since I can separate the behavior from the people.

That's not part of the definition of homophobia. And it really isn't your call in the eyes of others. As you have seen, they decide that for themselves.

homophobia: dislike of or prejudice against gay people.

Yes, you have a prejudice against gay people, the same one your messenger says your god has. Clearly you don't agree, but do you think that that should matter to others who find the Baha'i doctrine on gays irrational and destructive?

Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT).

Yes, your god, your messenger, and you all hold negative attitudes about such people in the eyes of many, who disapprove of them as you have seen.

Laws are not homophobic, people are.

OK. Then it's not Baha'i doctrine that homophobic. It's the Baha'i people who teach it that are homophobic, and the adherents who imbibe it uncritically who become homophobic when they accept it. Is that better?

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I read these kinds of affirmations and it doesn't resonate to my mind in any meaningful way. I recognize the words as religious, and recognize an appeal to a God, and my mind immediately dismisses it as unrealistic and questionable.

I read those kinds of affirmations and all I see is a cruel rebuke disguised as "I turned to God and got better, so why didn't you?" Or in the instance of the post you replied to, "My wife turned to Baha'i, and she got better." I see it as an "in your face" mindset and an attempt to rub my nose in the fact that they found a meaningful purpose in their life with the Abrahamic God despite their pain and suffering, and that there must be something seriously wrong with me because I did not. I maybe overly sensitive, but that's what I see.

It's interesting that it addresses anxiety, as many people feel powerless and filled with anxiety in life, much of that from subconscious fears that can't be managed directly. Religions do use this condition of people and design prayers and affirmations to attract these peolpe. Does it help? Sure, it acts as a sort of placebo. It doesn't resolve the anxiety, just masks it temporarily. This explains why religion can become a dependency for some folks, and why they can't think beyond what their religions dictate. This can apply to political ideology as well.

I can only speak for myself when I say that my faith in God and being a Christian were the root cause for my anxiety, fear, and sense of hopelessness. I didn't start to heal emotionally or develop better coping mechanisms for life in general, including coping with PTSD, until I let go of my faith and belief in God. My experiences as a Christian aren't like what you typically hear from Christians about how God saved them, emotionally healed them, or how their life is a lot better because of God. I experienced the opposite as a Christian, and it was an absolute miserable existence. But being a Christian was deeply rooted in my psyche, and it was terribly difficult for me to be free of all the Christian indoctrination that I had been subjected to in my life. It took me a long time to liberate myself from it all, and now that I am free, there is no amount of condemnation, guilt-tripping, or scare tactics Christians can use against me would ever persuade me to return to it. Again, I can only speak for myself and not for anyone else who has also left Christianity. And while I didn't find solace in Christianity, I did find it in Wicca, and despite the peace that I feel in my life now, I still keep my beliefs at arm's length. My beliefs are personal, as is my spiritual journey, and I'd never rub an ex-Wiccan's nose in it and try to shame them for leaving Wicca.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But at this point, your claim has been successfully refuted. If this were a trial and the jury had to vote, how do you think they would choose? Do you think my argument changed or convinced minds? Do you think your reply did?

I am not able to change minds. It is relative to you that you consider you offered a successful refutation. I personally see the refutation was based in error.

The Message of Baha’u’llah can change minds, so all I do is share that.

The turmoil we see in the world today can be balanced in that Message.

That is the only thing I can offer and I have no control over it's acceptance or it's rejection.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Or in the instance of the post you replied to, "My wife turned to Baha'i, and she got better." I

That is your own opinion, I did not offer she got better, in fact she got worse.

But her faith in God is unbreakable.

Our predudices blind us to many things.

Regards

 

[Trailblazer]

That's not part of the definition of homophobia. And it really isn't your call in the eyes of others. As you have seen, they decide that for themselves.

Others can and do decide whatever they want to decide. I have no control over the thoughts of others nor do I want to control others' thoughts.

Yes, you have a prejudice against gay people, the same one your messenger says your god has.

prejudice: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=prejudice+meaning

I do not have a prejudice against gay people since I have no preconceived opinions that are not based on reason or actual experience, since I have no opinions at all.

God does not have prejudice. God cannot be prejudiced since God does not have opinions (see below).

Clearly you don't agree, but do you think that that should matter to others who find the Baha'i doctrine on gays irrational and destructive?

I do not think anything should matter to others except what matters to them.
I do not care what matters to others. Do they care what matters to me?

There is no Baha'i doctrine as Baha'is have no doctrines. All we have are the Baha'i Writings.

Yes, your god, your messenger, and you all hold negative attitudes about such people in the eyes of many, who disapprove of them as you have seen.

God and Baha'u'llah don't have attitudes, they reveal laws.
I do not hold negative attitudes towards homosexual people.

OK. Then it's not Baha'i doctrine that homophobic. It's the Baha'i people who teach it that are homophobic, and the adherents who imbibe it uncritically who become homophobic when they accept it. Is that better?

There is no Baha'i doctrine as Baha'is have no doctrines. All we have are the Baha'i Writings.

God's laws are not homophobic. God disapproves of homosexual acts, but that does not mean He dislikes the people.

God cannot be prejudiced since God does not have opinions. God has knowledge and God is all-knowing. In order to make judgments, God does not need reason or experience like humans do, since God is all-knowing and all-wise.

homophobic: having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
homophobic means - Google Search

prejudice: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=prejudice+meaning

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

God wants us to learn to use our free will.

The skeptic understands that to mean that that manmade religions admonish man to suppress his free will. Learning to use our free will means learning to submit to the stated will of the deity.

I had to respond to this snippet of conversation, because I found it so important. It encapsulates much of the difficulty that skeptics and believers have in trying to have meaningful dialogue. You see it even in books (for example: "An Atheist and a Christian Walk into a Bar: Talking about God, the Universe, and Everything" by Randal Rauser and Justin Schieber - a dreadful book, by the way).

@TransmutingSoul makes it very clear that by "using free will," he means "accepting what you're told, finally, because it has been pronounced true." This is, of course, the very definition of dogmatic belief, and the very antithesis of free will, for the very simple reason, as @It Aint Necessarily So makes clear by evoking "the stated will of the diety."

The problem, of course, is that "the stated will of the diety" is never actually stated by the deity, but rather by some human person making representations claiming to know what that will is. But the reasons given in such representations never do amount to anything like "evidence" that can be truly examinded and tested. Once again, it just falls back on a willingness to accept or believe. This, the skeptic can never do.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I am not able to change minds. It is relative to you that you consider you offered a successful refutation. I personally see the refutation was based in error.

The Message of Baha’u’llah can change minds, so all I do is share that.

The turmoil we see in the world today can be balanced in that Message.

That is the only thing I can offer and I have no control over it's acceptance or it's rejection.

Regards Tony

I think it is very important to say this: "The Message of Baha'u'llah can change minds," but only those minds willing to accept without real evidence the claims about the provenance of that Message.

I am with King Canute on this: his storied attempt to command the incoming tide stop, and not wet his feet and robes, was his way of saying, "look folks, the reality is, the King is a man, and man does not command the laws of nature." Canute was a lot more sensible, in my view, than a lot of believers in my own time.

 

[dybmh]

God cannot be prejudiced since God does not have opinions

In this context, the Law is God's opinion?

God and Baha'u'llah don't have attitudes, they reveal laws.

The laws reveal their attitudes?

God cannot be prejudiced since God does not have opinions. God has knowledge and God is all-knowing. In order to make judgments, God does not need reason or experience like humans do, since God is all-knowing and all-wise.

OK, but these are all assertions. How do you know God doesn't have opinions and attitudes?

 

[Trailblazer]

The request is irrational and unreasonable. Why should they adapt to Baha'i sexual standards if they are not their own?

Nobody is requesting that anyone adapt to Baha'i sexual standards.
If a society bereft of morals, most people won't get on board with the Baha'i standards of sexual behavior for a very long time but when they do it will be by their own choice.

 

[Trailblazer]

In this context, the Law is God's opinion?

I do not believe that God has opinions, because an opinion is a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. Since God is all-knowing God knows everything so God has knowledge about everything, not opinions.

The laws reveal their attitudes?

I believe the Laws reveal the Will of God, and are based upon the knowledge and wisdom of God.

Attitudes are what people have. God is not a person so God does not have an attitude.

attitude: a settled way of thinking or feeling about someone or something, typically one that is reflected in a person's behavior.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=what+is+an+attitude

OK, but these are all assertions. How do you know God doesn't have opinions and attitudes?

They are based upon what I believe about the nature of God and God's attributes, they are not assertions.
I believe that only humans have opinions and attitudes, and since humans are not all-knowing their opinions and attitudes vary from person to person.

I do not think that God has opinions or attitudes. Since God already knows the truth about everything by virtue of being all-knowing and all-wise, God does not need to form an opinion, and since God is not a person God does not have an attitude.

Anyway, that is how I see it.