Jim
Nets of Wonder
I don't agree for any person or institution to decide for everyone how to interpret what any scriptures say about a prohibition against some kind of sexual practice between two men.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Number of times the word "homosexuality" appears in Baha'i scriptures
- Thread starter Jim
- Start date
Its all a matter of faith...and that inner feeling that homosexuality is not quite right. My beliefs are not from the dark ages...they are from the God who created us and he does not change his standards like we humans do.
Do you have a faith that you adhere to? Is it Hinduism? Do you have sacred writings that influence your faith? When were they written?
If you have a faith then why the question? If not then why bother trying to understand people who do?
Indeed, and also to the faith of the Jehovah Witnesses. All have imported opinions of people from the dark ages.
I could never feel comfortable in a religion that had adopted such opinions of people from the dark ages.
Its all a matter of faith...and that inner feeling that homosexuality is not quite right. My beliefs are not from the dark ages...they are from the God who created us and he does not change his standards like we humans do.
Do you have a faith that you adhere to? Is it Hinduism? Do you have sacred writings that influence your faith? When were they written?
If you have a faith then why the question? If not then why bother trying to understand people who do?
My spiritual path (with its scriptures) is from the last century. It does not include opinions of people from the dark ages (in the Middle East).
Calling something "faith" does not make it a good thing.
Last edited:
If you claim to follow a religion, how can you be out of step with its teachings? I would imagine that they apply to all who profess that faith.
You seem to be out of step with the other Baha'i's here.....it seems as if you are questioning their beliefs and rejecting some of them in favor of your own views. You can hardly follow the prophet if you can't accept his teachings.
All of Jehovah's Witnesses for example hold to one set of beliefs.....there is no disagreement because that is not the unity foretold for Christ's followers. (1 Corinthians 1:10)
Jesus mandated marriage between a man and a woman.....
"...Have you not read that the one who created them from the beginning made them male and female 5 and said: ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’? 6 So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together, let no man put apart.” (Matthew 19:4-6)
There is no room in his teachings for homosexuality to be practiced....between either men or women.
Hmmmm.....if you practice Hinduism as your avatar suggests, then its sacred texts are almost as old as the Bible.
Not exactly last century then?
According to this source.....
"Hindu scripture
The Vedas
These are the most ancient religious texts which define truth for Hindus.
They got their present form between 1200-200 BCE and were introduced to India by the Aryans.
Hindus believe that the texts were received by scholars direct from God and passed on to the next generations by word of mouth.
Vedic texts are sometimes called shruti, which means hearing. For hundreds, maybe even thousands of years, the texts were passed on orally."
BBC - Religions - Hinduism: Scripture
This type of attitude is called religious fundamentalism (no reasoning, strict obedience to religious dogma).
Ah, there you are wrong. I am not a hindu, Hinduism is not even a religion nor do I have a religion.
Shiva lived long ago and it is He who is dancing in my avatar. That was thousands of years before the people of Israel existed.
India is a much older civilisation and was much more advanced than the Middle East and Europe at the time that Leviticus was written.
Last edited:
No one forces us to accept these teachings. We have examined the scriptures for ourselves often over many years, and we have all come to the same conclusions. There is a great deal of reasoning and if you have ever read my posts you would see that. We have no "religious dogma" just a logical belief system based entirely on scripture.
Hinduism is not a religion? Really?
"Hinduism has been variously defined as a religion, a religious tradition, a set of religious beliefs, and "a way of life". From a Western lexical standpoint, Hinduism like other faiths is appropriately referred to as a religion. In India the term dharma is preferred, which is broader than the western term religion.
Hinduism - Wikipedia
Hinduism - Wikipedia"
Hinduism is a belief system.
Shiva is the third god in the Hindu triumvirate. The triumvirate consists of three gods who are responsible for the creation, upkeep and destruction of the world. The other two gods are Brahma and Vishnu. Brahma is the creator of the universe while Vishnu is the preserver of it.
Shiva is part of the Hindu trinity.
So....?
So if you are (as you stated) not dogmatic in accepting such dark age opinions in Leviticus, then please give me your arguments why you would accept such a despicable form of discrimination of people with different sexual orientations?
Is that really all you can give me, something someone writes on Wikipedia?
The idea of 'religion' is a European invention. In India before the British occupation of India there was no such thing as "Hinduism", there was only different philosophical interpretations of what is Dharma, i.e. of how to live properly in order to further spiritual progress.
The idea of Lord Shiva as part of a Trinity is a mythical idea just like "Jesus sitting at the right hand of God" or "Jesus being the Son of God". It has nothing to do with the real identities of Lord Shiva or Lord Jesus. It is myth.
You can see God as the Generator, Operator and Destructor in this universe, but this is not really connected to actual personalities of any kind.
Last edited:
I see these words repeated.....you seem fixated on the "dark ages" for some reason. Hinduism is dark age stuff too apparently.
Since sex is primarily for reproduction, as is seen in all living creatures on this planet....people of the same sex who are not designed for reproduction or even copulation for that matter, seem ill suited to the task...wouldn't you say? It is not a despicable form of discrimination but logical common sense IMO. It goes against nature. The God I worship made laws about it...perhaps yours didn't?
If you say so...I have not the slightest interest in Hinduism.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
@Deeje No one has to believe anything, to be a member of the Baha’i Faith. I think that what keeps all the Baha’is of the world working together is the power of Baha’u’llah over people’s hearts.
I think that Bahá’u’lláh has endorsed the prohibition against a man substituting in the place of a woman, in an imitation of procreative union. I object to calling that a prohibition against homosexuality, because what “homosexuality” means to most or all people goes far beyond that, and frankly, to me, it looks dishonest and treacherous to substitute that word in the place of God’s description of it.
I think that Bahá’u’lláh has endorsed the prohibition against a man substituting in the place of a woman, in an imitation of procreative union. I object to calling that a prohibition against homosexuality, because what “homosexuality” means to most or all people goes far beyond that, and frankly, to me, it looks dishonest and treacherous to substitute that word in the place of God’s description of it.
I will say it again, many of the old prophets in the so-called Old Testament have less enlightened ideas because their culture was still partly stuck in the dark ages (primitivity or less evolved from our point of view).
Seeing sexuality as a thing purely for procreation is outdated because people can if they wish get their sperm from a sperm bank or find a mother to carry their baby in the womb for them (even that will soon be done in machines). Besides that it is no business of yours what married people do in their bedrooms.
So the dogmatic idea that we must "follow nature like the animals do" is not doing it for me (actually animals do it in all sorts of natural ways). Abusing the name of God to throw your primitive dark age dogma's at people is low and crude.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
Jim
Nets of Wonder
@adrian009 @Tony Bristow-Stagg
I didn't start this thread to discuss homosexuality with Baha'is, but after seeing the discussion here, I'd like to explain why I object to telling people that there is a prohibition against homosexuality in the Baha'i Faith. It's because the word "homosexuality" means a lot more to most or all people, than what is prohibited. Telling people that there's a prohibition against homosexuality, and leaving it to them to attach whatever meaning they want to, to "homosexuality," means that you will be misinforming most people about what, precisely, is prohibited.
I'm sure you know that for many people, "homosexuality" means same-sex attraction, or only falling in love with people of the same sex. Do you think that God condemns people for same-sex attractions, or for falling in love with people of the same sex? That's what it means to some people, including some of the people most vulnerable to feeling condemned by God, when you say that there's a prohibition against homosexuality. Why? Why insist on using that word, which is guaranteed to be misunderstood in harmful and possibly even fatal ways, when it is never used in Baha'i scriptures for whatever it is that is prohibited?
I didn't start this thread to discuss homosexuality with Baha'is, but after seeing the discussion here, I'd like to explain why I object to telling people that there is a prohibition against homosexuality in the Baha'i Faith. It's because the word "homosexuality" means a lot more to most or all people, than what is prohibited. Telling people that there's a prohibition against homosexuality, and leaving it to them to attach whatever meaning they want to, to "homosexuality," means that you will be misinforming most people about what, precisely, is prohibited.
I'm sure you know that for many people, "homosexuality" means same-sex attraction, or only falling in love with people of the same sex. Do you think that God condemns people for same-sex attractions, or for falling in love with people of the same sex? That's what it means to some people, including some of the people most vulnerable to feeling condemned by God, when you say that there's a prohibition against homosexuality. Why? Why insist on using that word, which is guaranteed to be misunderstood in harmful and possibly even fatal ways, when it is never used in Baha'i scriptures for whatever it is that is prohibited?
Jumi
Well-Known Member
Is it the same in Persian as in Arabic?
I've read that in those times it was quite accepted for "men and boys" in the region of Ottomans and Persia (you can still find some remnants that in Afghanistan, search bacha baz or köcek and you know), but not so for two men. So are they the same topic? I'd say they aren't.
Last edited:
wandering peacefully
Which way to the woods?
Actually if you read what I posted from the site, it says that it was a letter "written on behalf of Shoghi"... There is no named author of the letter and it also says that your prophet said nothing specifically on the matter of homosexuality. So who wrote the letter and how do you know they were being truthful about what was said and where did your prophet write anything about homosexuality? 15,000 tablets, one of them surely should show his direct wording on the subject of same sex sex.
And I see Jim didn't want to tackle trying to explain exactly why Bahai is the "new religion for this day and age" and what about your religion is different from all of the existing and past religions.
I know you like to quote your prophet so can you please repost his quotes on at least 5 "new social laws" from him directly which will help unite the world in peace and harmony under a Baha'i world theocracy? What laws will change humanity for the better?
There should be many more of course but I would be happy with just five "new laws" which make this religion so attractive and relevant for this day and age.
Let's not let this be the time when Bahai's all of a sudden don't want to quote their prophet. That would just be strange.
wandering peacefully
Which way to the woods?
Honestly I have no idea what either language would use for the topic of same sex sex. But certainly it was the norm for men on boys or men with men before Christianity set out to change it into an abomination. I have no idea if Islam also forbade it but seeing as Bahai arose out of a rebellion against Islam maybe prohibition against same sex sex was one of the rules the Bab wanted to get rid of. Like I indicated to Tony, certainly out of 15,000 tablets by his successor, somewhere there must be direct wording on the subject by the prophet himself. Not letters "written on behalf of" various players.
It would be interesting to know.
exchemist
Veteran Member
I've always thought this notion that the "main purpose of sex is procreation" is absurd.
That is certainly its simple biological purpose, but for creatures with a complex mental life and psychology, there a great deal more to it. It is increasingly recognised that sexual relations are crucial for the bonding between a couple which is so important, first for the confidence to start a family and then for family stability. Whether the churches like it or not, the link between sex and procreation has been irreversibly weakened by contraception, such that children are increasingly brought into the world by deliberate act rather than the traditional mixture of lust and chance. So it is not all about procreation at all, nowadays.
A more realistic attitude to sex on the part of religions would be a great help to their adherents.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
First I want to say that in my current understanding of these issues, I don't think that what Shoghi Effendi meant by "homosexuality" includes everything that people are calling "homosexuality" now. It looks to me like a prohibition against men playing the role of a women, in an imitation of procreative union. That's all. I don't see it as a prohibition against anything else that anyone is calling "homosexuality" today. I also don't think that it's anything that any institution should be trying to enforce now, unless it's the same kind of promiscuity that would call for action if it were a man and a woman.
Baha'u'llah says:
It is forbidden you to wed your fathers' wives. We shrink, for very shame, from treating of the subject of boys.
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 58)
That puts it in a context of who can be a man's wife. The subject that Baha'u'llah shrinks from treating might be young men playing the role of wives in an imitation of procreative union. It might not be exactly the same topic as the prohibition against men in general playing that role, but it's part of it.
If I do it with Doug without lying down God doesn't care.
That's how i interpret it.
Not really, I am sure that God believes whatever He is told to by ancient prophets. So He is pretty homophobic.
Tom
Jim
Nets of Wonder
I don't think He did write anything about what people are calling "homosexuality" today. I think that all He did was ratify the sexual prohibitions in Leviticus, and one of those is a prohibition against a man playing the role of a woman in an imitation of procreative union. Significantly for me, Leviticus explicitly prohibits men and women from having animals as sex partners, but it says nothing about two women.
Why are you asking about all that? What difference would it make to you, if any of that were true? Are you looking for a new religion for this day and age? Do you want to help unite the world in peace and harmony? Are you looking for a religion with laws that make it attractive to you and relevant for this day and age?