Announcement

Collapse

Comparative Religions 101 Guidelines

Welcome to Comp Religions, this is where the sights and sounds of the many world religions come together in a big World's Fair type atmosphere, without those delicious funnel cakes.

World Religions is a theist only type place, but that does not exclude certain religionists who practice non-theistic faiths ala Buddhism. If you are not sure, ask a moderator.

This is not a place where we argue the existence / non-existence of God.

And as usual, the forum rules apply.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

IF Bahai was in charge of the laws of our land...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • IF Bahai was in charge of the laws of our land...

    From another thread...

    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

    Regardless of your voluminous efforts and many citations. Baha'i Laws and administration is for Baha'is ONLY,
    So, JUST SUPPOSE that Bahai became the predominant religion in the US, and JUST SUPPOSE they were in charge of our justice system, how would that affect daily life for Christians in America?
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    From another thread...



    So, JUST SUPPOSE that Bahai became the predominant religion in the US, and JUST SUPPOSE they were in charge of our justice system, how would that affect daily life for Christians in America?
    By laws are specific. 'Just suppose' speculation is meaningless. By the writings and administrative decisions Baha'i Laws and administration is for Baha'is ONLY
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

      By laws are specific. 'Just suppose' speculation is meaningless. By the writings and administrative decisions Baha'i Laws and administration is for Baha'is ONLY
      Then feel free to exit the thread.
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

        Then feel free to exit the thread.
        It is by no means clear cut, but it also seems that the Bahai concept of world governance would not allow for the imposition of (Bahai) theocratic law. However, interpretation of the detail is largely a matter of semantic presumption - there is a lot of wiggle room available to take advantage of, should the Bahai leadership gain comfortable majority support in any given country.
        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
        .
        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
        Scripture before Tradition:
        but that won't prevent others from
        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
        of the right to call yourself Christian.

        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tabibito View Post

          It is by no means clear cut, but it also seems that the Bahai concept of world governance would not allow for the imposition of (Bahai) theocratic law. However, interpretation of the detail is largely a matter of semantic presumption - there is a lot of wiggle room available to take advantage of, should the Bahai leadership gain comfortable majority support in any given country.
          So, it seems a lot like Islam, where, depending on who interprets it, is a harmless religion of peace - or a force authorized by Allah to control the world?
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

            So, it seems a lot like Islam, where, depending on who interprets it, is a harmless religion of peace - or a force authorized by Allah to control the world?
            Bahai seems to be sourced from Islam, but nothing in what is presented indicates any approval of militancy.

            It comes down to - Can anyone assume that Shunya's concept and interpretation of Bahai is in accord with what a future Bahai leadership's concept and interpretation might be?
            Going on the track records of all religious and philosophical groups to date ... that would not be a safe assumption.
            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
            .
            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
            Scripture before Tradition:
            but that won't prevent others from
            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
            of the right to call yourself Christian.

            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by tabibito View Post

              Bahai seems to be sourced from Islam, but nothing in what is presented indicates any approval of militancy.

              It comes down to - Can anyone assume that Shunya's concept and interpretation of Bahai is in accord with what a future Bahai leadership's concept and interpretation might be?
              Going on the track records of all religious and philosophical groups to date ... that would not be a safe assumption.
              I appreciate your response.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                Then feel free to exit the thread.
                This is not a coherent response. By laws are specific. 'Just suppose' speculation is meaningless. By the writings and administrative decisions Baha'i Laws and administration is for Baha'is ONLY
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                  Bahai seems to be sourced from Islam, but nothing in what is presented indicates any approval of militancy.

                  It comes down to - Can anyone assume that Shunya's concept and interpretation of Bahai is in accord with what a future Bahai leadership's concept and interpretation might be?
                  Going on the track records of all religious and philosophical groups to date ... that would not be a safe assumption.
                  Religions of the past, Judaism, Christianity and Islam advocated complete rule by Divine right with no separation of church and state. The Baha'i scriptures define the Laws and administration as for Baha'is only in the form of and elected heirarchy of Houses of Justice.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                    This is not a coherent response. By laws are specific. 'Just suppose' speculation is meaningless. By the writings and administrative decisions Baha'i Laws and administration is for Baha'is ONLY
                    So you are saying if Baha'i did control a county's government, that they would not make any laws for anyone who wasn't Baha'i? That the rest of the citizens could just do whatever they wanted? Rob banks, speed down the road, commit murder, etc?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                      This is not a coherent response.
                      This is my thread, I'll decide what's coherent!

                      By laws are specific.
                      You mean bylaws (or by-laws).

                      Just suppose' speculation is meaningless.
                      Normal people do this all the time, Frank. It's a "thought exercise".

                      By the writings and administrative decisions Baha'i Laws and administration is for Baha'is ONLY
                      This thread is not about that. Again, you are free to leave.

                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                        So, it seems a lot like Islam, where, depending on who interprets it, is a harmless religion of peace - or a force authorized by Allah to control the world?
                        The same can be said for Christianity 'seems' to be a lot like Judaism, depending on who interprets it, is a harmless religion of peace - or a force authorized by God to control the world.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                          It is by no means clear cut, but it also seems that the Bahai concept of world governance would not allow for the imposition of (Bahai) theocratic law. However, interpretation of the detail is largely a matter of semantic presumption - there is a lot of wiggle room available to take advantage of, should the Bahai leadership gain comfortable majority support in any given country.
                          There is not semantic presumption open in Baha'i Law and administration. It is specifically in the writings as for Baha'is ONLY.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                            The same can be said for Christianity 'seems' to be a lot like Judaism, depending on who interprets it, is a harmless religion of peace - or a force authorized by God to control the world.
                            A) Christianity is obviously based on Christ, recognized by Christians as the Messiah of the Old Testament
                            2) The OT had the Israelites battling to possess their land, promised by God - not "the whole world"
                            c) The NT (Christianity) has no such emphasis on gaining control of land or governments.

                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                              A) Christianity is obviously based on Christ, recognized by Christians as the Messiah of the Old Testament
                              Obviously Christ is described as the successor of the tribal 'Messianic' lineage of the Old Testament.

                              2) The OT had the Israelites battling to possess their land, promised by God - not "the whole world"
                              As far as the Isrealites were concerned beginning in Genesis it was "the whole world."

                              c) The NT (Christianity) has no such emphasis on gaining control of land or governments.
                              I believe the above is false. More references to follow.

                              Revelation 11 verse 15
                              15 The seventh angel sounded, and great voices in heaven followed, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord, and of his Christ. He will reign forever and ever!”

                              Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-23-2022, 11:32 AM.
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X