Homosexuality and religious.

[CG Didymus]

Baha’u’llah did say in the Book of Certitude that symbolic stories are a test to prove the hearts. So although Christ died and His Body has never been found, Christianity has based its belief on the Resurrection instead of the power of Jesus to transform lives. And that is keeping them from recognising Baha’u’llah because they are so attached to the symbolic story as a literal one that it’s a severe test. Just like other Faiths have some belief that tests them so much that they reject the new Manifestation. But those who have recognised Baha’u’llah are those who have been able to rise above these tests.

So the resurrection is not a problem for Christian Baha’is nor the Seal of the Prophets for Muslim Baha’is. It’s not easy to recognise a Manifestation of God. One must become worthy


“Know verily that the purpose
underlying all these symbolic terms and abstruse allusions, which emanate from
the Revealers of God’s holy Cause, hath been to test and prove the peoples of
the world; that thereby the earth of the pure and illuminated hearts may be
known from the perishable and barren soil”

The Kitáb-i-Íqán
Bahá’u’lláh

So then, did the gospel writers know they were writing a fictional, not literal, story? And then there is when the gospel stories were written. Long after the event. So, these gospel writers got their information from somewhere, traditions and legends about a resurrected Jesus? Or were they the ones that concocted this great "test" to see if Christians would believe this phony resurrection story? Funny, but it worked. Christians ran with it and preached it and are still preaching it. And all the people that knew the truth, that the resurrection was not physical but symbolic, never corrected the error? Sorry, that to me is so unlikely. If the resurrection is not true, I'll go with they concocted the story to make Jesus a miracle working God/man. Which, since it is not true, makes Christianity a false religion.

Plus, Baha'is believe the resurrection is impossible and yet they believe that the virgin birth is possible. Why? Why not reject that too. What good does it do Baha'is? What scientific proof can you find that there has been any human that was born without having a father?

 

[CG Didymus]

That's their leverage - a literal resurrection. They need there to be original sin, free will, literal damnation, and a living savior that survived death on the cross and ascended to heaven. You take that away from Christianity, and what is left?

And Baha'is are preaching to people that agree with them about the things written in the NT about Jesus. They never happened. They were made up. Original sin, Satan, hell, Jesus being God, God himself, walking on water... all of it gets eliminated, because it doesn't make sense. Yes, I can see that. Christianity made up all those things to get people to believe and follow their teachings and obey or risk being sent to hell and burn.

But then Baha'is have a different reason to not believe those stories. If all those things written are true, then their religion is false. Can't have that, so they invent a way to interpret those stories to make them not true, in a literal sense, that is to say they didn't really happen, but those stories were "symbolically" true. And they were a grand test to see if the followers of Jesus would believe him or the phony stories about him. That's incredibly wild. But Baha'is believe it.

Christianity has based its belief on the Resurrection instead of the power of Jesus to transform lives. And that is keeping them from recognising Baha’u’llah because they are so attached to the symbolic story as a literal one that it’s a severe test.

Or it's whacked out interpretations and explanations of how the other religions are wrong that keep people from taking the Baha'i Faith seriously. Interpretations like these is why I don't believe the Baha'i concept of "progressive" revelation. To get Christianity into the progression, Baha'is make most every belief and doctrine of Christianity false.

 

[CG Didymus]

We've never heard from any god,

But there are Scriptures that have God talking, writing on walls., parting seas, leading his people as a pillar of smoke, smiting evil people. sending fire from heaven to consume Elijah's sacrifice, sending angels and raising Jesus from the dead. What more "proof" do we need? Oh yeah, these are just people writing in a book and saying these things happened. And even Baha'is don't seem to believe those things really happened. And if they don't believe those things, then what? Do they believe that people just made up these stories? Too weird, they believe in the Scriptures of all the other religion, but not everything it says in the Scriptures of the other religions.

 

[CG Didymus]

This is contradicted by the quote from Baha'u'llah you provided.


Those who have been guided "have performed some deed". That's not a gift, it's a reward for the deed performed.

Those who have been deprived, "their acts alone have hindered them". They're deprived not because they declined the gift, but because their actions prevented it.

The quote does not describe a gift, it's clearly quid-pro-quo.

It's like Christianity too. The "free" gift of salvation. Sounds great. All I have to do is believe that I inherited sin from Adam. That, if I were a Jew, following the Law would not save me. In fact, that it's impossible to follow the Law perfectly, so I'm guilty of sin. And the sacrifice of animals doesn't really do the job. But what is needed is a perfect sacrifice, Jesus. Accept his atoning death and all is well between that person and God. Simple. But it makes Judaism a religion that was just a temporary, and inadequate, fix to the problem. The salvation that Jesus brought fixed the problem.... sort of. Baha'is change everything again and make Christianity only a temporary "truth" that needed more. And, of course, for the Baha'is, the Baha'i Faith is that "more".

 

[CG Didymus]

All the religions speak of the same one God, if one drastically re-writes their scripture forcing that to be the case.

Exactly, each new religion takes what it can use from the previous religions to build theirs. But then what's sad, is they then say that they've replaced the previous religions. Those other religions are no longer valid.

 

[CG Didymus]

It is about embracing the Messengers and the Message in its pure form

Okay, which was what? What is the pure form of Hinduism? Of Buddhism? Of Judaism and the rest? It is what you, the Baha'is, say it is. Prior to Baha'u'llah, was there a pure form of any of the other religions that was known and followed and believed? No, Baha'is believe all, except maybe Islam, were corrupted.

 

[CG Didymus]

We each just go our own way. People each choose which path they wish to walk along. Freedom of belief or non belief is a part of life.

If there is a God, and that God has told us how to live, all people should live by that. But there's so many different religions telling people about different laws and different things they must do to please God. Finally, some people and some countries, had to separate religion out of it. Theocracies weren't working.

 

[CG Didymus]

Extremely fortunate and lucky more like it.

And how many born-again Christians feel lucky to have found Jesus? And to be saved from Satan lies? Except Baha'is don't believe much of that salvation stuff. So, are they fortunate? Or are they believing a lie? That there is no Satan. There is no original or inherited sin and Jesus is not God.

 

[CG Didymus]

All the religions as far as I know speak of the same one God.

Did you ask them if the God they believe in is the same God you believe in? Seems like some believe in multiple Gods or a Trinitarian God or no Gods.

 

[CG Didymus]

I'm not sure that science will take a position on abnormality and condemnation. However it should be able to show whether or not homosexuality destabilizes society. This is the reason repeatedly given ( I think by the supposedly infallible Abdul'Baha ). Showing that Abdul'Baha is not infallible and does not reflect the science of homosexuality shows that Baha'u'llah is not infallible and then the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

The only reason I keep harping on science is because of the science and religion should agree belief of the Baha'is. I do think it is clear that, no matter what science comes up with, if it disagrees with Baha'i beliefs, science is wrong.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Do you think that is a fruit that Baha'u'llah has produced in his followers through his teachings?
I'm sorry that sounds so bad but of course I did not realise this would come out as being what Baha'u'llah teaches his followers.

I see It is not about being more worthy, it is purely a gift, that only God can give to the hearts. It appears there is a defining moment in each person's heart where we are open to that gift to choose or not to choose a God given path.

Imagine being in the time of Jesus, look how many He taught, but how many embraced Jesus as the Son of God? We know the records show very few took up that cross, were born again from the material world into that of the Spirit of Christ.

So in this age, as I mentioned in the last post, maybe oneness and predudices are the key. Are we able to see that Jesus Christ's Message was all Embracing, that that Message is found in all Faiths, can we drop our predudices long enough to let that gift permeate our thoughts and open the door to the possibility that the oneness of God is far beyond what we used to perceive.

Personally I was not even looking for God, but I can say, because of my nature and nurture, which saw many diverse religions and cultures at a young age, I had this thought that if there was a Christian God, then that God was most likely found in all faiths and that every culture was really searching for the same fulfillment.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Then stop claiming a we that is not there. That we is not the best for me. That is the best for you and thus it must be the best for me. It is not the best for me. So all the best you wish me, is the best for you.

I have no desire to tell you to stick to I

So please do not try to change me, I will continue with we and you can continue with I.

I will always include you in we, if one needs help, we is always required over the I.

Meanwhile I can put up with being rubbished about the we, it is no drama for me, I have faith humanity will embrace its oneness and the We will become I.

Regards Tony

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I have no desire to tell you to stick to I

So please do not try to change me, I will continue with we and you can continue with I.

I will always include you in we, if one needs help, we is always required over the I.

Meanwhile I can put up with being rubbished about the we, it is no drama for me, I have faith humanity will embrace its oneness and the We will become I.

Regards Tony

Yeah, and I still have a different faith and you and I are not a we, despite how much you claim it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This is contradicted by the quote from Baha'u'llah you provided.

Those who have been guided "have performed some deed". That's not a gift, it's a reward for the deed performed.

Those who have been deprived, "their acts alone have hindered them". They're deprived not because they declined the gift, but because their actions prevented it.

The quote does not describe a gift, it's clearly quid-pro-quo.

I do not see it that way. I see that the gift is already available to all.

How is it that 50 to 60 years before the Bab and Baha'u'llah gave the Messages, there were people already with that gift?

They made a choice to open it. Does that make them more worthy of the gift, or is it just a more wise use of our given capacity?

So now fast forward to our age. The gift was given, it was given to all humanity, not just individuals. Some have chosen to see what it contained, does that make them more worthy, or was it just a choice they apartook of?

That is all a Baha'i does in teaching. Offer there is a gift still to be opened.

Yet, people have that choice, why do they not have a look? Is the package not the right size and shape, are they just not interested?

To me that is where the deed comes into play, one has to change something, to open that gift.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yeah, and I still have a different faith and you and I are not a we, despite how much you claim it.

Yet we die and all the we are made of enters back into creation, to be taken up into another form.

It is only our own frames of references that divides.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Okay, which was what? What is the pure form of Hinduism? Of Buddhism? Of Judaism and the rest? It is what you, the Baha'is, say it is. Prior to Baha'u'llah, was there a pure form of any of the other religions that was known and followed and believed? No, Baha'is believe all, except maybe Islam, were corrupted.

Love, unity, compassion, empathy all those things that build a lasting civilization.

Regards Tony

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yet we die and all the we are made of enters back into creation, to be taken up into another form.

It is only our own frames of references that divides.

Regards Tony

I don't have that faith, so stop treating the rest of us as it is a fact for all of us including you. Notican and compare that you also use "I" about you.

I have no desire to tell you to stick to I

So please do not try to change me, I will continue with we and you can continue with I.

I will always include you in we, if one needs help, we is always required over the I.

Meanwhile I can put up with being rubbished about the we, it is no drama for me, I have faith humanity will embrace its oneness and the We will become I.

Regards Tony

And now notice what you said about me: "... you can continue with I". You are doing the same thing, but apparently you don't notice it. You are to you a we and to me you are another "I" and you in fact do that. You answer as an "I" as you and not a we.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I don't have that faith, so stop treating the rest of us as it is a fact for all of us including you. Notican and compare that you also use "I" about you.

That is science that I offered.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And now notice what you said about me: "... you can continue with I". You are doing the same thing, but apparently you don't notice it. You are to you a we and to me you are another "I" and you in fact do that. You answer as an "I" as you and not a we.

Are you intent on proselytising your views? To answer, if one does not speak to one's own self, there is automatically a we, we are discussing individual frames of references.

Your view are not my views, but in this world, bot views have ramifications to the whole.

Regards Tony

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That is science that I offered.

Regards Tony

You just confirmed that you are an "I" and I noticed that. Please stop. I get it, you speak for a we and I am not a part of it, because I don't want your offer. You mean well, but I don't need your help. As for all the different cases of "we" I am a member of other ones than you.
We only share a few ones, the rest are different.

Unless we can compromise between you singular and I. I will never become that we you speak off. You don't need my help as it stands and so in reverse.
Can you understand that?