Homosexuality and religious.

[TransmutingSoul]

Then just who are the enemies? It's you that used the word.

From what I understand from the writings, it is those who fight against Baha'u'llah from a position of authority, they would be an enemy of Baha'u'llah.

Mostly this has been the Divines, those that from an authority of faith fight against the Divinity of Baha'u'llah.

I get that from this passage.

".....Behold the low estate of these men who know full well how I have offered up Mine own Self and My kindred in the path of God and for the preservation of their faith in Him, who are well aware how Mine enemies have compassed Me about, in the days when the hearts of men feared and trembled, the days when they hid themselves from the eyes of the loved ones of God and of His enemies, and were busied in ensuring their own security and peace...."

The enemies in that passage are the Islamic Divines and Rulers that passed sentence on him.

The remaining men of low estate are those that knew the nobility of Baha’u’llah, but then hid themselves for their own security, when the enemies passed judgement, as you note, they also hid themselves from the enemies.

Rejection of Baha’u’llah's Station does not mean one is automatically an enemy.

Regards Tony

 

[Vinayaka]

From what I understand from the writings, it is those who fight against Baha'u'llah from a position of authority, they would be an enemy of Baha'u'llah.

Mostly this has been the Divines, those that from an authority of faith fight against the Divinity of Baha'u'llah.

I get that from this passage.

".....Behold the low estate of these men who know full well how I have offered up Mine own Self and My kindred in the path of God and for the preservation of their faith in Him, who are well aware how Mine enemies have compassed Me about, in the days when the hearts of men feared and trembled, the days when they hid themselves from the eyes of the loved ones of God and of His enemies, and were busied in ensuring their own security and peace...."

The enemies in that passage are the Islamic Divines and Rulers that passed sentence on him.

The remaining men of low estate are those that knew the nobility of Baha’u’llah, but then hid themselves for their own security, when the enemies passed judgement, as you note, they also hid themselves from the enemies.

Rejection of Baha’u’llah's Station does not mean one is automatically an enemy.

Regards Tony

Thanks. So mostly it was his political enemies. What about covenant breakers, were they also considered enemies?

 

[CG Didymus]

Nope. But it's no great loss, the tolerant seem to be doing well without the intolerant. Better to move on to bigger and better things than spend time convincing the unconvincable.

Other fundamental/conservative religious groups, like the born-again Christians, don't accept Baha'is at all. They consider Baha'u'llah a false prophet. Liberal Christians are fine with Baha'is and will work together with them for peace and unity. But, I wonder, do they know that Baha'is have this law against homosexuality? Because many of them accept homosexuals and accept gay marriages.

Liberal Christians will compromise with other people for the sake of peace and unity. I think liberal Baha'is would too. It's just those conservative Baha'is that can't compromise their beliefs but believe that others should. And we all know the reason why other should and those conservative Baha'is won't... Because they believe that their beliefs are absolute, infallible and can't be changed for a 1000 years. And everybody else's beliefs are wrong or outdated and must be discarded, and the Baha'is Faith accepted as the continuation of their old religion. Then we'll have peace and unity.

 

[CG Didymus]

Sure, but the unity would be supeficial. Anything rigid is at risk to snap under pressure.

And that is what I think too. A rigid set of laws don't work. So, then what happens? Religious leaders try to force the laws on the people? And that still won't work. Even laws against behaviors that most all of us consider wrong don't work to stop some people from doing those things.

 

[CG Didymus]

Living as an example amongst ones enemies has proven in the past to be the best path, showing friendship no matter what.

Regards Tony

But how do you do that? What does it say in the Baha'i writings about how to deal with your enemies and those that disagree with you?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But how do you do that? What does it say in the Baha'i writings about how to deal with your enemies and those that disagree with you?

Read about Abdul'baha and one has the perfect example as to how to do that.

Regards Tony

 

[zerogain]

Just to clerify my true stand on it, i am neutral to what other people do in their relationship sexually, i is not any of my business to critique them.

It isn't hateful to explain truths and be objective but isn't our business to prevent loneliness .

Being homosexual is a part of lifes inherent trait for companionship , it can't be helped .

Transsexual is actually a NRF (neurological reference frames) failure to identify themselves by observation and given terminology . It is a malfunction of the NRF in mental health terms .

I am not personally hateful towards transgenders because they aren't harming anybody else .

 

[CG Didymus]

False. We are critical of immoral beliefs, especially those that a person adopts through a religion.

Of course Baha'is don't include themselves with all the bad things the other religions have done. And I'm sure that Baha'is would agree that burning people at the stake for being heretics was a horrible practice. Or forcing a people to accept their religion and outlawing the religion of their ancestors.

Or maybe it was a good thing to outlaw some of those religions. Like those that sacrificed people to their gods. But then replaced that religion with a religion that believes in devils and demons and believes their prophet is God. A religion that Baha'i would say is just as false as the religion they replaced.

But now Baha'is expect the world to accept them. Okay, what are the beliefs? What are the practices? Where is the proof to these claims of being from God and that there even is a God? Some critical thinkers reject some of those things that Baha'is claim are true. Is that wrong? Apparently, to the Baha'is, it is wrong.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Thanks. So mostly it was his political enemies. What about covenant breakers, were they also considered enemies?

An enemy can change and become a friend.

Covernant breakers are next level. Covernant Breaking is a grave spiritual illness, where it is nearly impossible to turn back from, this is a level of complete darkness.

Baha'u'llah, Abdul'Baha and Shoghi Effendi used to keep these people, who were in danger of doing this, close to them, as to protect those around them.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

I ask the Christians the same regarding Jesus, and get crickets.

And that is the biggest problem. Some of the tough questions are ignored. Or they say they've given the Baha'i answer several times already. Like... "What's the proof that Baha'u'llah is a manifestation?" They say, "His life... His mission... His writings." I don't know which is worse? Crickets or unprovable proofs?

 

[CG Didymus]

What do you want compromised? Humanists are already maximally tolerant of everything but intolerance, and that's not open for negotiation. Did you want them to compromise their moral intuitions and accept or partially accept Baha'i homophobic doctrine? Why would they? That doctrine is immoral by the standards of rational ethics.

Somebody asked recently about compromising with the anti-abortionists. They may be able to impose their values on humanists, but why should humanists ever accept that or move closer to that ideologically? Humanists advocate choice, which is a form of freedom and tolerance. The anti-abortionists advocate forced birth, which is the opposite, and a dangerous state of affairs for women.

We don't compromise on ethics, and neither do you. Or maybe you'd like to modify Baha'i doctrine and accept a compromise position on homosexuality, like it's OK if confined to a monogamous marriage. That sounds like a midway point between the two positions. What do you say to a compromise?

Conservative Baha'is can't compromise. But if the objective is peace and unity, maybe they should. A law that forbids homosexuality will never stop it. It will only make things worse. Gays will be separated and marginalized again. Those that want to appear to be "normal" will have to hide their homosexual relationships from "normal" society.

Yet, Baha'is seem to think they can't treat them as they would anybody else. Can they? And do they? There's been links to the stories of gay Baha'is here in this thread. There are problems with them being accepted and treated equally by other Baha'is.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Baha'is are maximally tolerant of everything as long as it does not go against Baha'i Laws

That applies to the Nazis as well. And everybody else, even Trump. Don't defy them, and there's no problem. Of course, that is not the definition of tolerant in humanism.

I don't want you to compromise anything.

You wrote, "Can there be unity when one side, the atheists, can't compromise on their beliefs?" Do you think these two comments make sense together when combined with the Baha'i claim to pursue unity?

Why not go up against some other religion such as the JWs? They have essentially the same attitude towards homosexuality as the Baha'is.

They're not here. When they express homophobia, they are rebuked by humanists as well, like all other homophobes.

The Witnesses visit me from time to time, but we don't talk about their homophobic doctrine. They want to tell me how horrible the world is, and why that means I need to get down to a Kingdom Hall. You guys don't go there, which is an improvement over that deeply nihilistic, pessimistic, and humanity-disesteeming faith - perhaps the most extreme in Christianity, including other apocalyptic types like the evangelicals. I tell them that I don't agree that the world is going to hell, at least not in the way that they mean it, and that stops them in their tracks. Apparently, they have no back-up pitch if one doesn't accept that premise. It's interesting listening to them tell me why I should be despairing like they do.

Did you want Baha'is to compromise the Baha'i Laws, which came from God, in favor of the thoroughly rotten morals of the majority of people in modern-day society?

Yes, but I don't expect it. If you do, don't substitute other thoroughly rotten morals for them. Try just, fair, rational, tolerant, and empathetic morals instead. And, no, nothing in words came from any god, at least none smarter or kinder than a human being is capable of being. Everything ever written attributed to gods is very human.

 

[F1fan]

An enemy can change and become a friend.

So a Bahai believer can reject his religion and become a decent person that gays can consider a trustworthy friend?

Or do you mean gays have to reject who they are to satisfy Bahai believers just to add a conditional friend to their life?

 

[Vinayaka]

An enemy can change and become a friend.

Covernant breakers are next level. Covernant Breaking is a grave spiritual illness, where it is nearly impossible to turn back from, this is a level of complete darkness.

Baha'u'llah, Abdul'Baha and Shoghi Effendi used to keep these people, who were in danger of doing this, close to them, as to protect those around them.

Regards Tony

In my research, covenant breakers were those who were dared challenge authority. It's not surprising of how they were described. Sounds very much like the political rhetoric we hear from the US these days. Rather nasty stuff. Do you know who the last covenant breaker was, declared so by the UHJ?

 

[Trailblazer]

You wrote, "Can there be unity when one side, the atheists, can't compromise on their beliefs?" Do you think these two comments make sense together when combined with the Baha'i claim to pursue unity?

We can pursue unity but it impossible to have unity with people who don't want to have unity with us.

CG Didymus said: Can there be unity when one side, the Baha'is, can't compromise on their beliefs?

Trailblazer said: Can there be unity when one side, the atheists, can't compromise on their beliefs?

Baha'is do not expect you to compromise your beliefs but you expect Baha'is to compromise their beliefs.
It is your way or the highway. You are right and we are wrong.

This entire thread is a demonstration of that.

You can keep going if you want to but there is nothing that has not already been said on both sides.
I am never going to believe that homosexual acts are moral, and you are never going to believe they are immoral, so why continue to talk about it?

 

[Vinayaka]

Other fundamental/conservative religious groups, like the born-again Christians, don't accept Baha'is at all. They consider Baha'u'llah a false prophet. Liberal Christians are fine with Baha'is and will work together with them for peace and unity. But, I wonder, do they know that Baha'is have this law against homosexuality? Because many of them accept homosexuals and accept gay marriages.

Liberal Christians will compromise with other people for the sake of peace and unity. I think liberal Baha'is would too. It's just those conservative Baha'is that can't compromise their beliefs but believe that others should. And we all know the reason why other should and those conservative Baha'is won't... Because they believe that their beliefs are absolute, infallible and can't be changed for a 1000 years. And everybody else's beliefs are wrong or outdated and must be discarded, and the Baha'is Faith accepted as the continuation of their old religion. Then we'll have peace and unity.

1000 years? Wow. I ponder about this planet's future in 50 years. But one has to wonder just exactly what this next manifestation will have to do in order to be accepted as 'the guy' assuming there is even a single Baha'i left. The last guy just said, 'I'm your guy,' and that was enough to convince a few people. With thinking skills on the rise, and change accelerating as we speak, this guy will have to be something else. If history means anything, there will be about 10 000 claimants around then, and all through the centuries until then. How will he stand out?

 

[CG Didymus]

1000 years? Wow. I ponder about this planet's future in 50 years. But one has to wonder just exactly what this next manifestation will have to do in order to be accepted as 'the guy' assuming there is even a single Baha'i left. The last guy just said, 'I'm your guy,' and that was enough to convince a few people. With thinking skills on the rise, and change accelerating as we speak, this guy will have to be something else. If history means anything, there will be about 10 000 claimants around then, and all through the centuries until then. How will he stand out?

I don't know of a prophecy that has the prophet/Messiah come and not fix things. I keep asking Baha'is to show me the prophecies where the promised on comes and gets rejected, imprisoned, then dies... and then says that the world is going to go through a bunch of bad times for rejecting him.

But... I think Baha'is have one chance. If an environmental disaster happens, and some even more deadly pandemic happens, and World War III breaks out and after all that... if the world then turns to the Baha'i Faith, and they actually do fix things and establish God kingdom on Earth with his laws, then maybe they are for real and telling the truth... maybe. But even then, who's going to want to live by Baha'i rules?

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't know of a prophecy that has the prophet/Messiah come and not fix things. I keep asking Baha'is to show me the prophecies where the promised on comes and gets rejected, imprisoned, then dies... and then says that the world is going to go through a bunch of bad times for rejecting him.

But... I think Baha'is have one chance. If an environmental disaster happens, and some even more deadly pandemic happens, and World War III breaks out and after all that... if the world then turns to the Baha'i Faith, and they actually do fix things and establish God kingdom on Earth with his laws, then maybe they are for real and telling the truth... maybe. But even then, who's going to want to live by Baha'i rules?

The race of homosexuals will have died out by then. After all, they can't reproduce, can they?

 

[samtonga43]

We can pursue unity but it impossible to have unity with people who don't want to have unity with us.

CG Didymus said: Can there be unity when one side, the Baha'is, can't compromise on their beliefs?

Trailblazer said: Can there be unity when one side, the atheists, can't compromise on their beliefs?

Baha'is do not expect you to compromise your beliefs but you expect Baha'is to compromise their beliefs.
It is your way or the highway. You are right and we are wrong.

This entire thread is a demonstration of that.

You can keep going if you want to but there is nothing that has not already been said on both sides.
I am never going to believe that homosexual acts are moral, and you are never going to believe they are immoral, so why continue to talk about it?

So why are you continuing to talk about it?

 

[CG Didymus]

Mostly this has been the Divines, those that from an authority of faith fight against the Divinity of Baha'u'llah.

Why do Baha'is call them "Divines"?