Homosexuality and religious.

[Vinayaka]

The simple answer is God, as all the Names of God are given to all the Messengers, even if they are not seen in this matrix to reflect those Names.

Most likely the entire debate about the way God is revealed to us, is contained in that simple answer, so in the long run, it will be the most debatable answer.

Regard Tony

Thanks, Tony, but that still doesn't answer the question. Since it seems you have no answer, I will cease this line of questions, and stick with what I wrote in post 4082.

 

[F1fan]

The simple answer is God, as all the Names of God are given to all the Messengers, even if they are not seen in this matrix to reflect those Names.

It is a simple answer, and one that isn’t part of factual explanation. These answers are troubling as they are written as if you’re describing reality but it’s known to thinkers that it isn’t.

Most likely the entire debate about the way God is revealed to us, is contained in that simple answer, so in the long run, it will be the most debatable answer.

The basic assumptions about gods existing is the primary debate. Its odd to me that theists claim their own God and truth yet acknowledge other Gods and those truths. This isn’t a red flag? It’s astonishing that believers ignore the evidence that suggests religion and related concepts are man-made, and the truths highly subjective.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I apologise for this rather large quote but I wish to drive home the point that science is respected and accepted except where God has weighed in on an issue which is rarely but still He does occasionally make a statement against the common knowledge of the people, later verified by up to date scientific knowledge. I place homosexuality in this category.

“For example, as you know, before the observations of the renowned astronomer of later times, that is, from the first centuries down to the fifteenth century of the Christian era, all the mathematicians of the world were unanimous in upholding the centrality of the earth and the movement of the sun. This modern astronomer was the source of the new theory that postulated the movement of the earth and the fixity of the sun. Until his time, all the mathematicians and philosophers of the world held to the Ptolemaic system, and whosoever uttered a word against it was considered ignorant. It is true that Pythagoras, and Plato during the latter part of his life, conceived that the sun’s annual movement around the zodiac did not proceed from the sun itself but from the earth’s movement around it, but this theory was entirely forgotten and the Ptolemaic theory was universally accepted by all mathematicians. But in the Qur’án a number of verses were revealed which contradicted the Ptolemaic system. One of them, “The sun moves in a fixed place of its own”, alludes to the fixity of the sun and its movement around an axis. Likewise, in another verse “And each swims in its own heaven”, the movement of the sun, the moon, the earth, and the other celestial bodies is specified. When the Qur’án was spread abroad, all the mathematicians scoffed and attributed this view to ignorance. Even the Muslim divines, finding these verses contrary to the Ptolemaic system, were obliged to interpret them figuratively, for the latter was accepted as incontrovertible fact and yet was explicitly contradicted by the Qur’án.” Abdul-Baha

So too, those who scoff at and mock and ridicule Baha’u’llah now will be proven wrong.

"So too, those who scoff at and mock and ridicule Baha’u’llah now will be proven wrong."

If so, it will be proven by science, not the Baha'i faith or its gurus. Also, science has disproved multiple religious claims about reality.

I understand that you see this as some kind of endorsement for the words of the Qur'an and/or your religious texts, but have you noticed that these kinds of arguments affirm science as the gold standard for truth in these matters? You're saying, "See, they got it right when the philosophers and mathematicians were wrong."

But who determined that they were wrong - a holy book, or science? It was science. The theists are unwittingly attesting to the authority of science over any other system of deciding what is true about the world, including the claims of prophets and messengers. That's why their words on these matters aren't helpful. They're unsupported claims. When science agrees, they become supported, and one can now go ahead and justifiably treat them as (empirical) fact. When science disagrees, they are ruled out. So what use are the scriptures?

WL Craig does this when defending the Kalam argument. His first premise - that the universe had a beginning - is a guess in his hands, the same one found in every creation myth and why they're called that. Craig's argument assumes that as fact thanks to the science. Where would that argument be if all he had were scripture?

 

[CG Didymus]

And then there’s Mount Tabor where the disciples saw the Heavenly Father and Moses but Christ told them to tell the vision to no one.

They saw these things is spiritual visions not waking life.

Here's the passage as told in Matthew....

17 After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2 There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. 3 Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus.

4 Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three shelters—one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.”

5 While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!”

6 When the disciples heard this, they fell facedown to the ground, terrified. 7 But Jesus came and touched them. “Get up,” he said. “Don’t be afraid.” 8 When they looked up, they saw no one except Jesus.

9 As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, “Don’t tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.”
​

How are you interpreting a "vision"? Like a dream? Something that is seen in the mind but is not real? This was told as if real. Jesus is transformed and then Moses and Elijah appear and then God speaks from a cloud. And he tells them not to tell anyone what they've seen until Jesus is raised from the dead. That's a little different then how you retell it.

You act as if this is some sort of proof that what the disciples saw later was a vision of Jesus, not the real Jesus. But again, you never address the verse that says that Jesus said to touch him and see that he had flesh and bone and was not a ghost. I do believe the resurrection story was meant to be believe that Jesus conquered death. Your explanation seems to assume the resurrection and the transfiguration really happened, but then you explain them away as visions and not real events. I still believe that if the resurrection and the transfiguration didn't really happen, then they weren't even visions... They were nothing. That they never happened. They are myth. Made up embellished stories to make Jesus a God/man.

But Baha'is are in that awkward position of having to believe the Bible and the NT and not call them myth. So, Baha'is do the next best thing. They say those things didn't really happen. They were real... but in a spiritual way. They didn't really happen in the physical world. I don't think it's a very good explanation, because, like I said, the gospel writers made it clear that the resurrection of Jesus was real and happened in the physical world.

And Baha'is also have to explain away the times that dead people were brought back to life. The easy explanation? Made up fictional religious stories, myth. Or the Baha'i explanation? I remember one Baha'i here on the forum said that Lazarus was "spiritually" dead, and Jesus made him "spiritually" alive. How does that fit the story?

John 11:1 Now a man named Lazarus was sick... he(Jesus) went on to tell them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.”

12 His disciples replied, “Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” 13 Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep.

14 So then he told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead, 15 and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”

17 On his arrival, Jesus found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb for four days.

38 Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. 39 “Take away the stone,” he said.

“But, Lord,” said Martha, the sister of the dead man, “by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days.”

41 So they took away the stone...

43 Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” 44 The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face.

Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.”​

What is the Baha'i explanation again? Or do you have a different and better one?

​

 

[CG Didymus]

What benefit in bringing a person back from the dead if they are just going to die again? But if the life they were brought back to was the life of faith, then that is everlasting and of true benefit to a person. So apart from it being scientifically proven to be impossible, it serves no purpose to be brought back from the dead as the person is going to die again anyway.

So, now with this you believe science. It is impossible for God to bring people back to life once they are dead. Great, then don't say you believe the Bible and the NT. Do as a lot of us do and say it is a book written by religious people about their God. It is probably based on myth and legends and none of those stories are necessarily true. And the main reason why some of us think that? Because it goes against science. We agree with Baha'is on that.

But I disagree with how Baha'is explain away these stories. You say there was no benefit? The person had died and got to live again. His friends and family got to be with the person again. And it showed the power of God. Jesus could do the impossible. Therefore, he must be God's Son. And with Jesus, the story says that he didn't die again. He conquered death and lives forever and... the part Baha'is don't want to believe; Jesus is coming back. Much better for Baha'is if he were dead.

So, now back to science. Science has proven it is impossible for a dead person to come back to life. Again, what has science proven about homosexuality? Is it something that we should condemn and forbid?

 

[CG Didymus]

I apologise for this rather large quote but I wish to drive home the point that science is respected and accepted except where God has weighed in on an issue which is rarely but still He does occasionally make a statement against the common knowledge of the people, later verified by up to date scientific knowledge. I place homosexuality in this category.


“For example, as you know, before the observations of the renowned
astronomer of later times, that is, from the first centuries
down to the fifteenth century of the Christian era, all the mathematicians of
the world were unanimous in upholding the centrality of the earth and the
movement of the sun. This modern astronomer was the source of the new theory
that postulated the movement of the earth and the fixity of the sun. Until his
time, all the mathematicians and philosophers of the world held to the
Ptolemaic system, and whosoever uttered a word against it was considered
ignorant. It is true that Pythagoras, and Plato during the latter part of his
life, conceived that the sun’s annual movement around the zodiac did not
proceed from the sun itself but from the earth’s movement around it, but this
theory was entirely forgotten and the Ptolemaic theory was universally accepted
by all mathematicians.

But in the Qur’án a number of verses were revealed which contradicted the
Ptolemaic system. One of them, “The sun moves in a fixed place of its own”, alludes to the fixity of the sun and its movement around an axis. Likewise, in another verse
“And each swims in its own heaven”, the movement of the sun, the
moon, the earth, and the other celestial bodies is specified. When the Qur’án was spread abroad, all the mathematicians scoffed and attributed this view to ignorance. Even the Muslim divines, finding these verses contrary to the Ptolemaic system, were obliged to
interpret them figuratively, for the latter was accepted as incontrovertible
fact and yet was explicitly contradicted by the Qur’án.”

Abdul-Baha

So too, those who scoff at and mock and ridicule Baha’u’llah now will be proven wrong.

So, when does science trump religion? How do we know when a religion is saying something that condemns and forbids a behavior that it is the truth and not superstition? It sounds like, when it comes to the Baha'i Faith, true science will come to agree with the Baha'i Faith. False science is from man and his biases and superstitions.

 

[CG Didymus]

In that reply, there was definitely no God.

Regards Tony

Thsi is what some of us keep asking...

Provide evidence if you can.

We've heard all the different religions that proselytize tell us their story, their "proof". Baha'is don't believe any of them, only your own. But your "proof" is no different and no better than theirs. Yet, you reject theirs? And people here reject the Baha'i Faith for very similar reasons. But when it is used against Baha'is, then it is just not right. Baha'is should be left to believe as they wish. After all, they aren't hurting anyone... except a few gays that want to be Baha'is and also be allowed to live their gay lifestyle.

 

[CG Didymus]

You can type in 1260 in the calendar converter.

I haven't seen a response to this post.

It's amazing that 1260 on the Islamic calendar is 1844. But none of these things began in 622 AD, the year of the Hejira and start of the Islamic calendar, and end in 1844 with the declaration of the Bab.

I said 1260 days or things that can be made to equal 1260 days are mentioned I believe 6 times or so. Baha'is take those days and make the lunar years. The year 1260 on the Islamic calendar is the year1844. That's not the major problem with what Baha'is do with it.

Rev 11:1 “Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, with its worshipers. 2 But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months. 3 And I will appoint my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.”
Already there's two times. The Gentiles will trample the Holy city for 42 months, which gets converted by Baha'is to 1260 lunar years. Then the two witnesses, supposedly Muhammad and Ali, will prophesy for those same 1260 days changed to years.

7 Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them. 8 Their bodies will lie in the public square of the great city... 9 For three and a half days... 11 But after the three and a half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet...
Now after they had finished their 1260 day/years of prophesying, they are killed and lie in the street for 3 1/2 days, which is converted to 1260 lunar years. For Baha'is, each one of these things starts in the year of the Hejira and ends 1260 lunar later, which is the year 1844. The year the Bab declared. But there's more...

Rev 12:1 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman... 2 She was pregnant and... about to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads... The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. 6 The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days.
This also starts with the Hejira and ends in 1844. Then this...

Rev 13:1 The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea... The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. 3 One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed... 4 People worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast... 5 The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months.
This beast had authority for 42 months which gets converted to 1260 lunar years and this also starts with the Hejira and ends in 1844. All these events Baha'is have interpreted to be about specific people. None of them started with the Hejira in 622AD and ended in 1844. But that's how the Baha'is interpreted them.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Thanks, Tony, but that still doesn't answer the question. Since it seems you have no answer, I will cease this line of questions, and stick with what I wrote in post 4082.

It is a simple answer, and one that isn’t part of factual explanation. These answers are troubling as they are written as if you’re describing reality but it’s known to thinkers that it isn’t.

@Vinayaka I hesitate to give an answer in detail. It is no short answer, so here is a little larger answer to show I am happy to provide further detail.

In the end it requires us to consider what Baha'u'llah offered has some merit, if not, anything offered will be already rejected and ready to be disputed. I see that as a fair comment, I feel you will see that is applicable?

I will expand a little on the Names of God, as it is recorded and I do see that these Names and Attributes are one of the greatest things that can veil us from God. It could be that it is our greatest challenge in this world!

All the Names and Attributes are the 'Cause' they all come from the Spirit that gives existence to Creation. I previously offered this Tablet by Abdul'baha, a provisional translation, so some wording could change.

Tablet of the Universe (Lawh-i-Aflákiyyih)

The opening paragraphs of that Tablet tell us of the beginning of creation

"Praise be to God Who hath ever caused His Names and Attributes to penetrate the degrees of existence; Who hath made the effects of those Names and Attributes to shine resplendent and their signs to be firmly established in both the hidden and manifest worlds..."

So how does this tie into the Names that are Attributed to Baha'u'llah?

All the Messengers from the first to the Last are manifested in this world from that same Holy Spirit and as such they are One and all the Embodiment of all the Names and Attributes, though outwardly they may only be known by a Single Name and only seen by some to be the embodiment of a few Attributes. This has been explained in great detail in the Baha'i Writings.

So Krishna is a Name that contains all the Names and Attributes of God, Krishna can also be known as Baha'u'llah (Glory of God), as their Essence is One and the same. We humans only perceive what we choose to see in Krishna, it is relative to our chosen frames of references. To some Krishna is God, to others whatever they perceive. To a Baha'i, they all have become One in the name of Baha’u’llah, or we perceive them all as the "Glory of God". Baha'u'llah offered;

"These Manifestations of God have each a twofold station. One is the station of pure abstraction and essential unity. In this respect, if thou callest them all by one name, and dost ascribe to them the same attributes, thou hast not erred from the truth. Even as He hath revealed: “No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers.” For they, one and all, summon the people of the earth to acknowledge the unity of God, and herald unto them the Kawthar of an infinite grace and bounty. They are all invested with the robe of prophethood, and are honored with the mantle of glory..."

Which brings us to the conclusion that Shoghi Effendi gave us in the book "God Passes By".

All the Names, Titles and Attributes, in every Holy Book ever written, that references a future promise to be fulfilled, belong to the Messenger/s that gave them, came before them and were to fulfill them, they are already written and recorded for them to manifest when they are revealed. All Shoghi Effendi did, was research and put them together for our quick reference.

This can be discussed in many ways, there is much more to consider, this answer does not even scratch the surface, it is very superficial.

I am always happy to share what I have found. We live in a truly bountiful and amazing time.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

We've heard all the different religions that proselytize tell us their story, their "proof". Baha'is don't believe any of them, only your own. But your "proof" is no different and no better than theirs. Yet, you reject theirs? And people here reject the Baha'i Faith for very similar reasons. But when it is used against Baha'is, then it is just not right. Baha'is should be left to believe as they wish. After all, they aren't hurting anyone... except a few gays that want to be Baha'is and also be allowed to live their gay lifestyle.

@Vinayaka I hesitate to give an answer in detail. It is no short answer, so here is a little larger answer to show I am happy to provide further detail.

In the end it requires us to consider what Baha'u'llah offered has some merit, if not, anything offered will be already rejected and ready to be disputed. I see that as a fair comment, I feel you will see that is applicable?

I will expand a little on the Names of God, as it is recorded and I do see that these Names and Attributes are one of the greatest things that can veil us from God. It could be that it is our greatest challenge in this world!

All the Names and Attributes are the 'Cause' they all come from the Spirit that gives existence to Creation. I previously offered this Tablet by Abdul'baha, a provisional translation, so some wording could change.

Tablet of the Universe (Lawh-i-Aflákiyyih)

The opening paragraphs of that Tablet tell us of the beginning of creation

"Praise be to God Who hath ever caused His Names and Attributes to penetrate the degrees of existence; Who hath made the effects of those Names and Attributes to shine resplendent and their signs to be firmly established in both the hidden and manifest worlds..."

So how does this tie into the Names that are Attributed to Baha'u'llah?

All the Messengers from the first to the Last are manifested in this world from that same Holy Spirit and as such they are One and all the Embodiment of all the Names and Attributes, though outwardly they may only be known by a Single Name and only seen by some to be the embodiment of a few Attributes. This has been explained in great detail in the Baha'i Writings.

So Krishna is a Name that contains all the Names and Attributes of God, Krishna can also be known as Baha'u'llah (Glory of God), as their Essence is One and the same. We humans only perceive what we choose to see in Krishna, it is relative to our chosen frames of references. To some Krishna is God, to others whatever they perceive. To a Baha'i, they all have become One in the name of Baha’u’llah, or we perceive them all as the "Glory of God". Baha'u'llah offered;

"These Manifestations of God have each a twofold station. One is the station of pure abstraction and essential unity. In this respect, if thou callest them all by one name, and dost ascribe to them the same attributes, thou hast not erred from the truth. Even as He hath revealed: “No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers.” For they, one and all, summon the people of the earth to acknowledge the unity of God, and herald unto them the Kawthar of an infinite grace and bounty. They are all invested with the robe of prophethood, and are honored with the mantle of glory..."

Which brings us to the conclusion that Shoghi Effendi gave us in the book "God Passes By".

All the Names, Titles and Attributes, in every Holy Book ever written, that references a future promise to be fulfilled, belong to the Messenger/s that gave them, came before them and were to fulfill them, they are already written and recorded for them to manifest when they are revealed. All Shoghi Effendi did, was research and put them together for our quick reference.

This can be discussed in many ways, there is much more to consider, this answer does not even scratch the surface, it is very superficial.

I am always happy to share what I have found. We live in a truly bountiful and amazing time.

Regards Tony

The quoted answer given above to Vinayaka, indirectly answers your quoted reply as well.

If a person embraces Faith in God, then God's laws have not changed on this aspect of life.

So yes a line is drawn, a line that is gifted from God, we have the choice to understand the Law God has given us and stay on that side of the line, or we can walk the line between our will and Gods Will, or we can cross the line and forgo what God has given in Law.

Such is the way God set up this world, such are our choices and the balance we find in this world. The more that cross the line to the choice of no God, the greater will be the force released when the scales again balance.

What else can I offer CG, you have been shown the source of all that I have found. I just have a different way of seeing it all?

Regards Tony

 

[LuisDantas]

So the world is divided into those who are positively in favor of homosexual acts as a morally good thing to participate in and those who are homophobic?

I would say so.

Which other categories do you see?

 

[Vinayaka]

@Vinayaka I hesitate to give an answer in detail. It is no short answer, so here is a little larger answer to show I am happy to provide further detail.

In the end it requires us to consider what Baha'u'llah offered has some merit, if not, anything offered will be already rejected and ready to be disputed. I see that as a fair comment, I feel you will see that is applicable?

I will expand a little on the Names of God, as it is recorded and I do see that these Names and Attributes are one of the greatest things that can veil us from God. It could be that it is our greatest challenge in this world!

All the Names and Attributes are the 'Cause' they all come from the Spirit that gives existence to Creation. I previously offered this Tablet by Abdul'baha, a provisional translation, so some wording could change.

Tablet of the Universe (Lawh-i-Aflákiyyih)

The opening paragraphs of that Tablet tell us of the beginning of creation

"Praise be to God Who hath ever caused His Names and Attributes to penetrate the degrees of existence; Who hath made the effects of those Names and Attributes to shine resplendent and their signs to be firmly established in both the hidden and manifest worlds..."

So how does this tie into the Names that are Attributed to Baha'u'llah?

All the Messengers from the first to the Last are manifested in this world from that same Holy Spirit and as such they are One and all the Embodiment of all the Names and Attributes, though outwardly they may only be known by a Single Name and only seen by some to be the embodiment of a few Attributes. This has been explained in great detail in the Baha'i Writings.

So Krishna is a Name that contains all the Names and Attributes of God, Krishna can also be known as Baha'u'llah (Glory of God), as their Essence is One and the same. We humans only perceive what we choose to see in Krishna, it is relative to our chosen frames of references. To some Krishna is God, to others whatever they perceive. To a Baha'i, they all have become One in the name of Baha’u’llah, or we perceive them all as the "Glory of God". Baha'u'llah offered;

"These Manifestations of God have each a twofold station. One is the station of pure abstraction and essential unity. In this respect, if thou callest them all by one name, and dost ascribe to them the same attributes, thou hast not erred from the truth. Even as He hath revealed: “No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers.” For they, one and all, summon the people of the earth to acknowledge the unity of God, and herald unto them the Kawthar of an infinite grace and bounty. They are all invested with the robe of prophethood, and are honored with the mantle of glory..."

Which brings us to the conclusion that Shoghi Effendi gave us in the book "God Passes By".

All the Names, Titles and Attributes, in every Holy Book ever written, that references a future promise to be fulfilled, belong to the Messenger/s that gave them, came before them and were to fulfill them, they are already written and recorded for them to manifest when they are revealed. All Shoghi Effendi did, was research and put them together for our quick reference.

This can be discussed in many ways, there is much more to consider, this answer does not even scratch the surface, it is very superficial.

I am always happy to share what I have found. We live in a truly bountiful and amazing time.

Regards Tony

It's okay, Tony. No reason to elaborate. It won't make sense to me, and will just go on some wild goose chase to avoid answering the question directly.

 

[CG Didymus]

So who gave him these titles? His followers, or himself, of God? I still have no idea.

It sounds like giving titles to people was common. Shoghi Effendi married Mary Maxwell and...

In 1937, when Mary was 26, she married Shoghi Effendi, the head of the Bahá’í Faith at the time... Shoghi Effendi gave her the name Amatu’l-Bahá Rúhíyyih Khánum—“Amatu’l-Bahá” means “Handmaid of Glory,” “Rúhíyyih” means “spirit,” and “Khánum” is a respectful title, like “Lady.”

In the summer of 1848, eighty-one prominent Babis gathered at the village of Badasht in northwestern Iran to discuss ways of freeing the Bab from his imprisonment in Azerbaijan. Bahá'u'lláh attended with his brothers, and rented gardens for some of the Babis, such as Tahirih, but largely stayed in the background. He suggested divine names for some of the Babis, in accordance with the Bab's instructions that his followers glorify God in this manner, and it was at this point that he adopted for himself the name Baha', or the divine glory. His young brother and ward, Mirza Yahya, then 17, became Subh-i Azal or the Morn of Eternity.
​

Mirza Yahya later split off from Baha'u'llah. I wonder what he called him after that?

Early followers of the Báb were known as Bábís; however, in the 1860s a split occurred after which the vast majority of Bábís followed Mirza Husayn ʻAli, known as Baháʼu'lláh, and became known as Baháʼís, while the minority who followed Subh-i-Azal, Baháʼu'lláh's half-brother, came to be called as Azalis.​

 

[Vinayaka]

It sounds like giving titles to people was common. Shoghi Effendi married Mary Maxwell and...

In 1937, when Mary was 26, she married Shoghi Effendi, the head of the Bahá’í Faith at the time... Shoghi Effendi gave her the name Amatu’l-Bahá Rúhíyyih Khánum—“Amatu’l-Bahá” means “Handmaid of Glory,” “Rúhíyyih” means “spirit,” and “Khánum” is a respectful title, like “Lady.”

In the summer of 1848, eighty-one prominent Babis gathered at the village of Badasht in northwestern Iran to discuss ways of freeing the Bab from his imprisonment in Azerbaijan. Bahá'u'lláh attended with his brothers, and rented gardens for some of the Babis, such as Tahirih, but largely stayed in the background. He suggested divine names for some of the Babis, in accordance with the Bab's instructions that his followers glorify God in this manner, and it was at this point that he adopted for himself the name Baha', or the divine glory. His young brother and ward, Mirza Yahya, then 17, became Subh-i Azal or the Morn of Eternity.
​

Mirza Yahya later split off from Baha'u'llah. I wonder what he called him after that?

Early followers of the Báb were known as Bábís; however, in the 1860s a split occurred after which the vast majority of Bábís followed Mirza Husayn ʻAli, known as Baháʼu'lláh, and became known as Baháʼís, while the minority who followed Subh-i-Azal, Baháʼu'lláh's half-brother, came to be called as Azalis.​

The giving of titles sounds way too much like patting friends on the back, looking for favours, egocentrism, and totally lacks humility. But in the spirit of things, I'll give you the title of The Illustrious Questioner.

 

[CG Didymus]

The giving of titles sounds way too much like patting friends on the back, looking for favours, egocentrism, and totally lacks humility. But in the spirit of things, I'll give you the title of The Illustrious Questioner.

Does it come with infallibility? Actually, it's strange to call himself Baha'u'llah and then say, "Well, looky here. I'm prophesied in the Bible. How can anyone doubt me now?"

 

[Vinayaka]

Does it come with infallibility? Actually, it's strange to call himself Baha'u'llah and then say, "Well, looky here. I'm prophesied in the Bible. How can anyone doubt me now?"

lol .. Like I said before ... How can somebody who is infallible be wrong about his own infallibility?

Here's another one for you ... He Whose Bright Words Express Reality
We Hindus do that for our Gods ... every God has a list of 108 names, and a list of 1008 names. They're describers or attributes mostly. But it's generally only used in ritual, although I have occasionally used them on here.

 

[loverofhumanity]

"So too, those who scoff at and mock and ridicule Baha’u’llah now will be proven wrong."

If so, it will be proven by science, not the Baha'i faith or its gurus. Also, science has disproved multiple religious claims about reality.

I understand that you see this as some kind of endorsement for the words of the Qur'an and/or your religious texts, but have you noticed that these kinds of arguments affirm science as the gold standard for truth in these matters? You're saying, "See, they got it right when the philosophers and mathematicians were wrong."

But who determined that they were wrong - a holy book, or science? It was science. The theists are unwittingly attesting to the authority of science over any other system of deciding what is true about the world, including the claims of prophets and messengers. That's why their words on these matters aren't helpful. They're unsupported claims. When science agrees, they become supported, and one can now go ahead and justifiably treat them as (empirical) fact. When science disagrees, they are ruled out. So what use are the scriptures?

WL Craig does this when defending the Kalam argument. His first premise - that the universe had a beginning - is a guess in his hands, the same one found in every creation myth and why they're called that. Craig's argument assumes that as fact thanks to the science. Where would that argument be if all he had were scripture?

The Holy Books are not science but occasionally a statement will be included that is later proved by science.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Here's the passage as told in Matthew....

17 After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2 There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. 3 Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus.

4 Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three shelters—one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.”

5 While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!”

6 When the disciples heard this, they fell facedown to the ground, terrified. 7 But Jesus came and touched them. “Get up,” he said. “Don’t be afraid.” 8 When they looked up, they saw no one except Jesus.

9 As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, “Don’t tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.”
​

How are you interpreting a "vision"? Like a dream? Something that is seen in the mind but is not real? This was told as if real. Jesus is transformed and then Moses and Elijah appear and then God speaks from a cloud. And he tells them not to tell anyone what they've seen until Jesus is raised from the dead. That's a little different then how you retell it.

You act as if this is some sort of proof that what the disciples saw later was a vision of Jesus, not the real Jesus. But again, you never address the verse that says that Jesus said to touch him and see that he had flesh and bone and was not a ghost. I do believe the resurrection story was meant to be believe that Jesus conquered death. Your explanation seems to assume the resurrection and the transfiguration really happened, but then you explain them away as visions and not real events. I still believe that if the resurrection and the transfiguration didn't really happen, then they weren't even visions... They were nothing. That they never happened. They are myth. Made up embellished stories to make Jesus a God/man.

But Baha'is are in that awkward position of having to believe the Bible and the NT and not call them myth. So, Baha'is do the next best thing. They say those things didn't really happen. They were real... but in a spiritual way. They didn't really happen in the physical world. I don't think it's a very good explanation, because, like I said, the gospel writers made it clear that the resurrection of Jesus was real and happened in the physical world.

And Baha'is also have to explain away the times that dead people were brought back to life. The easy explanation? Made up fictional religious stories, myth. Or the Baha'i explanation? I remember one Baha'i here on the forum said that Lazarus was "spiritually" dead, and Jesus made him "spiritually" alive. How does that fit the story?

John 11:1 Now a man named Lazarus was sick... he(Jesus) went on to tell them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.”

12 His disciples replied, “Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” 13 Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep.

14 So then he told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead, 15 and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”

17 On his arrival, Jesus found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb for four days.

38 Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. 39 “Take away the stone,” he said.

“But, Lord,” said Martha, the sister of the dead man, “by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days.”

41 So they took away the stone...

43 Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” 44 The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face.

Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.”​

What is the Baha'i explanation again? Or do you have a different and better one?

​

King James Bible
And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

It’s very easy to explain. For example the Body of Christ’s Cause lay for three days in the tomb of doubt and disbelief then after three days when the disciples recognised the true station of Christ His Cause became alive risen. There is no such thing as bodily resurrection and science can prove that. Christianity has had 2,000 to wake up that this belief is superstition and that is why so many have left because dead people do not come alive days after they have died.

Baha’u’llah explains that all these terms have a deeper spiritual context that makes sense such as the tomb of self, the death of unbelief and the life of faith. It’s like the 7 days of creation. The earth is some 4.5 billion years old proven by scientists so either one is accusing the Bible of being superstition and not a Book of God or there is another meaning. Abdul-Baha says the 7 days are Divine Days that is, the Days on which a Manifestation arises and in the Adamic Cycle there were about 7 spanning about 7,000 years and that makes perfect sense if we are speaking about the history of religion.

But without Baha’u’llah’s interpretations Christians will weave superstitious ideas around these passages and critical thinkers and atheists will attack such nonsense. Stories like Adam and Eve, Noah’s Ark and the Red Sea are just stories and we’re never actual events. There are stories and parables for our spiritual development. But only a Manifestation of God it says knows all the meanings and which are literal and which are figurative or in some cases both.

The Bible does not oppose science so there is always an explanation which accords with both the Bible and science. But where it doesn’t accord with science, we should not accept the superstitious interpretation as it is not according to reason and logic.

 

[loverofhumanity]

So, now with this you believe science. It is impossible for God to bring people back to life once they are dead. Great, then don't say you believe the Bible and the NT. Do as a lot of do and say it is a book written by religious people about their God. It is probably based on myth and legends and none of those stories are necessarily true. And the main reason why some of us think that? Because if goes against science. We agree with Baha'is on that.

But I disagree with how Baha'is explain away these stories. You say there was no benefit? The person had died and got to live again. His friends and family got to be with the person again. And it showed the power of God. Jesus could do the impossible. Therefore, he must be God's Son. And with Jesus, they story says that he didn't die again. He conquered death and lives forever and... the part Baha'is don't want to believe; Jesus is coming back. Much better for Baha'is if he were dead.

So, now back to science. Science has proven it is impossible for a dead person to come back to life. Again, what has science proven about homosexuality? Is it something that we should condemn and forbid?

Baha’u’llah explains these things in the Book of Certitude so I refer you to it.

God is All Powerful and can do anything but Baha’u’llah tells us the true meaning of passages like that and it’s not what people have attributed to the verses.

But on homosexuality this is what a Manifestation of God has stated and I’m not arguing with God as He is All Knowing and myself and all human beings are not. In time science will prove His judgements as all being correct I believe. But for now this is a test for people.

 

[loverofhumanity]

So, when does science trump religion? How do we know when a religion is saying something that condemns and forbids a behavior that it is the truth and not superstition? It sounds like, when it comes to the Baha'i Faith, true science will come to agree with the Baha'i Faith. False science is from man and his biases and superstitions.

Science can never prove God to be wrong otherwise He would not be God. God is the greatest of all scientists and knows everything unlike humans who have finite minds.