How are these Great Beings explained?

[Vinayaka]

I don't think 'out of touch' is not the best use of words. We simply have a perspective that reflects traditional family values of many cultures.

Working through moral issues such as euthanasia, genetic manipulation, and the environment are different types of issues, and the Baha'i Faith certainly has the institution capacity to approach each one. the Baha'i community has been increasingly involved in discussions about conservation at an international level and as you may know we have NGO status with the United Nations.

Personally, I think 'out of touch' is apt. But that's just my opinion. You're welcome to differ, obviously.

Here's the UN list of NGOs. I don't see the Baha'i' faith recognised, but it may well be under some other charity name.

List of Non-Governmental Organization Accredited to the Conference of States Parties | United Nations Enable

 

[Dawnofhope]

Personally, I think 'out of touch' is apt. But that's just my opinion. You're welcome to differ, obviously.

So how does homosexuality fit with Hinduism? You are acquainted with the Baha'i perspective no doubt.

 

[Ingledsva]

The level of Chastity called for is also not new. Man easily forgets God.

Regards Tony

Actually it is fairly new.

Patriarchal religions of the past allowed men to have sex with whomever they wanted as long as the woman was NOT the POSSESSION of another man. They could have multiple wives, concubines, and rape the handmaids. Oh, and also rape prisoners, etc.

And according to these patriarchal religions - these rights were conferred upon them by a male God.

*

 

[Vinayaka]

So how does homosexuality fit with Hinduism? You are acquainted with the Baha'i perspective no doubt.

My sampradaya is fine with it, as are most. It's one of God's branches of diversity for mankind. But in India, culturally there can be some very strong homophobic stuff going on. Not really sure why, but there are remnants of the old. That ignorance can go on anywhere.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Here's the UN list of NGOs. I don't see the Baha'i' faith recognised, but it may well be under some other charity name.

List of Non-Governmental Organization Accredited to the Conference of States Parties | United Nations Enable

United Nations Offices

United Nations Civil Society Participation (iCSO) – Login

 

[Vinayaka]

United Nations Offices

United Nations Civil Society Participation (iCSO) – Login

Yes, sorry, after more research I found a much larger list, not even a list, just NGO numbers by country. But my point was really that this is no big deal. Tons of organisations are recognised bu the UN.

Of course many NGOs cause a ton of trouble, especially in things like religious conversion activities.

Like this: RUHI BOOKS: Deceptive Conversion Techniques

 

[InvestigateTruth]

It is your BELIEF that he speaks for God.

A JEWISH story - written down by JEWS - about a specific JEW - tells us the JEWISH son being sacrificed was ISAAC.

And how do you know what Bahaullah wrote, is different from Jewish Bible?

The Quran does not actually give a name in this story. So it is just an Islamic myth, that it is Ishmael,

Did you know that Hadithes are also considered Islamic sources, by them, Quran is interpreted?

- which is not in the Quran, -

Not being explicitly in Quran, does not mean, it is not in Quran. Certain things are in Quran, in the form of allusions. Then Hadithes from Prophet and Shia Imams make those allusions clear.

which is being pushed by Baha'u'llah, -

I doubt it, even you have read what Bahaullah wrote about that. Have you?

supposedly from God, - but in reality is a myth from the region which is the original source of the Baha'i religion.

Do you actually believe there was a prophet or person by the name Issac or Ishmael, being son of Abraham? How do you know?

There are no writings what so ever to support the Ishmael idea, - other then Baha'u'llah, - whom grew up with that Islamic myth, - and claims that different information is from God.

*

If Bahaullah was simply stating Islamic beliefs, one of the main Islamic beliefs is finality of the Sharia Law of Quran. Why then Bahaullah refuted the finality of Law of Quran, even though it caused a lot of animosity towards Him, by fanatical Muslims?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Don't know if you are more interested in what I'm telling you since I know what you believe.

When talking about a Particular Religion's view, I am only interested to discuss when you support anything you say, with the Scriptures of that Religion. You seem to say many things, which to me are not precisely in the Bible, as far as I know, and they are just what you have heard from people. All i am saying, accuracy is important, when speaking about a religion teachings.
For example, you speak of literal and physical death and resurrection of Jesus. There is no such a thing in Bible. Just quote me the verses.

 

[Ingledsva]

And how do you know what Bahaullah wrote, is different from Jewish Bible?

Because I've read the Hebrew. Because the Jews whom book this is say so. Because the earliest bits of scrolls also say this.

Islam has a reason for a change to Ishmael. They trace his line to Mohammad, - thus they want Ishmael to be this special child.

Did you know that Hadithes are also considered Islamic sources, by them, Quran is interpreted?

Quran is supposedly from God. Hadiths are from MEN as in the MALE of the species. So this is actually bull, regardless of what they think.

Not being explicitly in Quran, does not mean, it is not in Quran. Certain things are in Quran, in the form of allusions. Then Hadithes from Prophet and Shia Imams make those allusions clear.

Not this.

I doubt it, even you have read what Bahaullah wrote about that. Have you?

No I haven't read that particular section. Why should I. You folks are telling us he made this claim. In investigation, such appears to be a false claim.

Do you actually believe there was a prophet or person by the name Issac or Ishmael, being son of Abraham? How do you know?

I have no idea what is history and what is myth in Tanakh. However, I can read the scrolls, use related exegeses, archaeology, etc., and look at the history, and whom is saying what about a Hebrew text. And logically decide whom is wrong.

If Bahaullah was simply stating Islamic beliefs, one of the main Islamic beliefs is finality of the Sharia Law of Quran. Why then Bahaullah refuted the finality of Law of Quran, even though it caused a lot of animosity towards Him, by fanatical Muslims?

Sharia Law is not part of the Quran. It is man crap added later.

Also, I did not say he was "simply stating Islamic beliefs." I said he and the Baha'i religion come out of those Islamic areas and ideas, - and thus their patriarchal ideas sometimes show up in ideas about women.

*

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The Church/body was built with Christ and his disciples.

Here you are making an assumption, without backing it up with Scriptures. You are saying 'church/body', as if church and body of Christ are the same. Where in the Scriptures say these two are the same. Please quote from Scriptures where it says, the Church is the Same as Body of Christ.

The chosen people that, in christianity, lead to salvation was the chosen people-the Jews.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here.

The Church, as we know it today, is a link from the apostles.

How do we know this? Can you prove it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I gave up putting scripture, suttas, and even a couple of verses from the Gita to support my point. Instead of being interested in what I say and how what I post supports my views, you rather tell me again what Bahaullah says about it as if it changes what's written and what the practitioners teach about the given topic.

When talking about a Particular Religion's view, I am only interested to discuss when you support anything you say, with the Scriptures of that Religion. You seem to say many things, which to me are not precisely in the Bible, as far as I know, and they are just what you have heard from people. All i am saying, accuracy is important, when speaking about a religion teachings.

I say many things but you guys invalidate or belittle my experiences as proof in addition to the scriptures I posted "years" back. It's very insulting but then you guys want me to read pages of Tablets after reading all of your quotes etc on what Bahaullah etc talk about. It's very one-sided conversation. I learn from you but do you want to learn from me. That makes a better conversation rather than trying to find similarities and defending your belief as if I'm trying to prove you wrong or something.

You are very very scripture based. Many religions and christian denominations have a more personal relationship with their god(s) and so forth. It goes beyond what's written. You have to take interest in our experiences to understand why we use them as support for what we say. With The Body of Christ, it's supported by the Body's experiences not just my own. Yet, even that, you call "man's views" so I can't win.

Accuracy in religion is not possible. It's all what you want to see through Bahaullah's views. I don't have that mindset. You believe what you do and I believe what I do.

The problem isn't your belief in and of itself again it is just inaccurately using other people's religions and quoting them as facts in the eyes of Bahaullah and not the people who believe it.

It is very rude and inappropriate regardless if god tells you or not. If anything, you do not care about man (humanity), just god.

For example, you speak of literal and physical death and resurrection of Jesus. There is no such a thing in Bible. Just quote me the verses.

Yes, I do and yes, there is. The problem is you are very literalist yet you say you believe it's symbolic. You contradict yourself.

Instead of asking me for proof you will only accept (which I keep posting but I gave up since you a read the gospels for yourself) why not just take interest in how the bible speaks of it through the body of christ?

The Body is the people. If you don't trust the people/humanity, whatever I say will mean nothing to you.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How do we know this? Can you prove it?

How can I prove to you something you don't accept from me as fact?

That's silly. You have to be interested in what I say and why I say it and how I support it. If you keep looking for what you want to accept, it's a waste of time trying to make greater peace with humanity. Make it among Bahai. They agree with.

816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267 (Catechism of the Catholc Church)

Romans 12:4-5

For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function, so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

1 Corinthians 12:28

And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues.​

STOP trying to prove me wrong. If you're not interested in a discussion, say it now because I do not care for one sidedness and I will not take Bahaullah's word for scripture that is clearly about christ and of god only.

Here you are making an assumption, without backing it up with Scriptures. You are saying 'church/body', as if church and body of Christ are the same. Where in the Scriptures say these two are the same. Please quote from Scriptures where it says, the Church is the Same as Body of Christ.

LOLOL

There are sooooooooooooooooo many scriptures that say the body of christ are the people of the Church.

What Church are you referring to because I am not quoting the whole Romans, Corinthians, Acts, Gospels, Galatians, Exodus, etc for you to dispute me.

Unless you have another definition of Church the bible and I are completely are unware of?

I am not sure what you are trying to say here.

The chosen people are the Jews in the OT. Christ said Jew and Gentile and all people can be saved through his Passion.

Yes, I can prove it. Will you learn?

 

[Dawnofhope]

My sampradaya is fine with it, as are most. It's one of God's branches of diversity for mankind. But in India, culturally there can be some very strong homophobic stuff going on. Not really sure why, but there are remnants of the old. That ignorance can go on anywhere.

I can understand the reluctance of many to embrace LBGT agenda. Its a largely untested social experiment. Calling those with concerns homophobic is likely to create more heat than light IMHO but that's just my socially conservative side coming out.. There, showing my true colours now!

Yes, sorry, after more research I found a much larger list, not even a list, just NGO numbers by country. But my point was really that this is no big deal. Tons of organisations are recognised bu the UN.

Yes, its hardly a badge of honour. The point is the Baha'is being involved in the UN is that we are involved in social discourses about a variety of issues of global importance through this office. It helps us to be better placed to contribute meaningfully about environmental issues for example. You said we might be out of touch. I doubt if we are on in such issues.

Of course many NGOs cause a ton of trouble, especially in things like religious conversion activities.

Like this: RUHI BOOKS: Deceptive Conversion Techniques

Looks like some Hindus are not too happy with having the Baha'is in India after all. I wonder why?

 

[CG Didymus]

Those that don't believe in the physical resurrection.

Did the writer's of the gospel believe Jesus came back to life?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Vinayaka Hey. I have a question for you. I was looking up what our (Nichiren Buddhist) object of worship means since it's in sanskrit, chinese, and japanese. It has different Buddhist dieties on it etc. One think it had from Indian cosmology was:

I am Great Heavenly King Brahma...regarded as the personification of the fundamental universal principle (Brahman).

Is Brahma somewhat defined this way? Because I am quite certain Buddhism doesn't incorporate Brahma in it's teachings. There was a time The Buddha debated Brahma when Mata, an incarnation of Brahma challenged The buddha. He lost. So, this is quite confusing but it's not in the theravada suttas as far as I know. (Background-not expecting you know this. Shrugs.)

 

[CG Didymus]

There are four gospels as you know. You believe the stories are not true. I believe they are part literal, part symbolic/allegorical...

No. This was most likely written centuries after Moses passed away. It is thought to be based on Moses teachings but we don't know for sure bow much of it was...

I don't know if the Bible is true or not. I think it is religious myth and legend, but I don't know for sure. But you say you believe some parts are literal? Which parts?

I quote things written down by Luke reporting events that took place after Jesus had been put to death. Luke says people saw him, talked to him and ate with him. Luke says Jesus presented himself alive by many convincing proofs... but Baha'i don't take this as a real event? They make this symbolic. I don't understand how you can do this? An explanation that the "body" of Christ is the believers therefore the resurrected body of Christ is the believers? How does that make any sense with what Luke is says what happened?

 

[CG Didymus]

I thought it was all clear? What specific part are you confused about?

I'm confused about you. You're the one changing the plain meaning and saying it symbolic. So you tell me in Luke's gospel account of the post resurrection events and what he said in Acts... what really happened and what is symbolic?

 

[CG Didymus]

Did Bahai give a purpose for changing Isaac to Ishmael and the importance of this change?

I mean, unless Bahai has a different god who gave different instructions he gave to Abram that they interpret in the bible, I don't see how the god of abraham can say Isaac but then turn around and really mean Ishmael. Unless god has two faces or something.

Same old thing, because Baha'u'llah said it, they believe it. That is all the proof they have and need. One of them said that maybe it got changed while it was being passed down as an oral tradition, before it was written down. I posted two quotes from the NT that says it was Isaac, but I haven't gotten to any response yet. I'm reading posts on page 438 right now, so I got a ways to go. But isn't it amazing the new things that come up?

 

[CG Didymus]

Avoid discussing religion too much and enjoy each others company.

But how do you discuss religion and keep the peace and harmony and respect?

 

[CG Didymus]

We can disprove the resurrection...

The most useful proof of God is that power His teachings have to transform the hearts of those who love Him and try to live the life. In that manner we all have hope and a promise of a better life.

So if you can disprove the resurrection, then that means you can prove any Christian that believes it really happened is wrong?

Do you believe all spiritual teachings in all sects of the different religions are true? I would hope not. Some get a little "out" there. And, most of the time they get labelled as cults. Yet, the believers in those cults get transformed. How do you explain that?