Law and Sanctions

[lunamoth]

[QUOTE=PrimaVera]Actually, that's precisely the passage I had in mind. Now, consider the implications of the text you highlighted. If one is not living in the spirit, is one under the law?/QUOTE]

Are Paul's epistles authoritative for Baha'is?

[PrimaVera]

[QUOTE=lunamoth]

Originally Posted by PrimaVera

Actually, that's precisely the passage I had in mind. Now, consider the implications of the text you highlighted. If one is not living in the spirit, is one under the law?/QUOTE]

Are Paul's epistles authoritative for Baha'is?

Yes, though I'm not obligated to accept an interpretation of those epistles that's clearly contrary to what Baha'u'llah has written.

Now, can we please stop this "fundamentalist rules" thing and get back to exploring the nature of our disagreement before Brian shows up and shuts down the thread for all the animosity? I'm not trying to callenge your beliefs. I just don't understand them. Repeatedly trying to justify your beliefs doesn't help me to understand them.

[lunamoth]

And where again are those laws that are particularly difficult for heterosexual men?

[lunamoth]

Yes,
I'm mad. I'm breaking my own personal code of conduct, the spirit of the COC here, and quite lacking in the fruits of the Spirit at the moment.

I was living quite peacefully here at CR until a barage of Baha'i showed up to Blazen the Name of Baha'u'llah, telling everyone that they understand everyone else's religion better, that we all have our own religions wrong, we're all "inside a box", thousands of years of wisdom are written off as useless, problematic man-made dogma. It is proselytization, pure and simple. It may be presented in a gentle, obtuse manner, but it is clearly proselytization of the Baha'i Faith.

Interfaith dialogue? That requires an openness to learning about another's beliefs, not telling them that you understand it all better and have all the answers.

Expecting sanctions myself at an moment.

BTW, the views expressed by lunamoth in this forum are her own and in no way should reflect the policy of this forum or its hosts.

peace out,
lunamoth

[BruceDLimber]

L>While we are at it, exactly where in the Aqdas does Baha'u'llah say that the penalty for homosexual relationships is exclusion from the community?

As I trust you're well aware, Baha'u'llah (and 'Abdu'l-Baha after Him) each delegated interpretive authority to a specific individual, and Shoghi Effendi (for one) made this rule quite clear, as was his right and duty.

Peace,

Bruce

[BruceDLimber]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

So anyway, I don't stand a chance here.

Most interesting that you conclude this and yet continue posting here nonstop....

Bruce

[BruceDLimber]

[QUOTE=lunamothAre Paul's epistles authoritative for Baha'is?[/QUOTE]

As earlier scripture that may now have been superseded by newer Revelation, yes!

Peace,

Bruce

[BruceDLimber]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

I was living quite peacefully here at CR until a barage of Baha'i showed up . . .

Interfaith dialogue? That requires an openness to learning about another's beliefs, not telling them that you understand it all better and have all the answers.

I would also humbly suggest that it rquires a more open and positive attitude than nonstop attack on a given religion such as the Baha'i Faith (whicih is frankly all I can remember seeing from you).

Dear Kettle,

You're black.

Love, Pot

Perhaps we can all try a friendlier approach? :-)

Peace,

Bruce

[Popeyesays]

[QUOTE=lunamoth]

Originally Posted by PrimaVera

Actually, that's precisely the passage I had in mind. Now, consider the implications of the text you highlighted. If one is not living in the spirit, is one under the law?/QUOTE]

Are Paul's epistles authoritative for Baha'is?

One is not under the Mosaic Law, though one should follow the Mosaic Law.

But Baha`i's are under the Law of the Aqdas, not the Torah.

Regards,
Scott

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Are you a perfect Baha'i? Do you follow all the laws perfectly?



I don't normally go for bludgeoning others with scripture, but since we are playing by fundamentalist rules, of course we can.



So you accept Paul's epistles, or even just Galatians, as authoritative for Baha'is?




While we are at it, exactly where in the Aqdas does Baha'u'llah say that the penalty for homosexual relationships is exclusion from the community.

Thanks,
lunamoth

Dear Luna,

When and if the time comes that the laws of the Aqdas become the law of society THEN, the Universal House of Justice would be called upon to set law into legal terms.

By the way every single place where the Aqdas mentions death as a punishment it allows for imprisonment to be given instead.

The implication here is the Universal House of Justice will turn the verses of the Aqdas into statute.

But in now wise is jurisprudence in any society regulated by Baha`i Law, and Baha`i communties must observe the law of the land in criminal matters.

As to being a perfect Baha`i - only Abdu'l Baha was a Perfect Exemplar.

The rest of us just do the best we can.

When I was in the faith for a few months my first wife and I seperated and divorced. I look back on that time as painful, but I bless the guidance of the institution I received during the time, it did not make me "perfect", but it did allow me to successfully complete a year of paztience, a civil divorce and conduct myself in a way that respected myself, my ex-spouse and the community. I could not have asked for more.

Regards,
Scott

[lunamoth]

[QUOTE=PrimaVera]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

I'm not trying to callenge your beliefs. I just don't understand them. Repeatedly trying to justify your beliefs doesn't help me to understand them.

Hi Primavera,

That is becasue the only understadning you will accept is your own.

peace,
lunamoth

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

L>While we are at it, exactly where in the Aqdas does Baha'u'llah say that the penalty for homosexual relationships is exclusion from the community?

As I trust you're well aware, Baha'u'llah (and 'Abdu'l-Baha after Him) each delegated interpretive authority to a specific individual, and Shoghi Effendi (for one) made this rule quite clear, as was his right and duty.

Peace,

Bruce

Yes, the idea that each up to and including the UHJ is infallible. If one rejects any of it they must reject all of it.

luna

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

Most interesting that you conclude this and yet continue posting here nonstop....

Bruce

Just call me a fool.

I'm doing you a favor, Bruce. You've been spoiling for the clash of ideas in every post with your "just the facts" and in your face style. I've relented and given you one.

lunamoth

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

As earlier scripture that may now have been superseded by newer Revelation, yes!

Peace,

Bruce

Convenient that you may reject anything that does not support your beliefs.

lunamoth

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

I would also humbly suggest that it rquires a more open and positive attitude than nonstop attack on a given religion such as the Baha'i Faith (whicih is frankly all I can remember seeing from you).

Dear Kettle,

You're black.

Love, Pot

Perhaps we can all try a friendlier approach? :-)

Peace,

Bruce

I have tried to engage Baha'is in more neutral and friendly discussions before, with some pleasant success, in the past. Sometimes I was just ignored, but hey that was OK by me, sometimes I was just cut off. I guess you must have just ignored my friendlier attempts. It has just been in the past few months in response to the more aggressive proselytizing by some of the Baha'i members here that I have started not to push, but to push back.

But you are right.

It's time to cool it.

lunamoth