quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
The problem with all these Hadiths is, the word of Muhammad still dictates Islamic law.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

I think its more to do with fear. Whilst Christianity has been allowed to evolve with the times, Islam is still (at least in some cases) stuck in the dark ages.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

I think its more to do with fear. Whilst Christianity has been allowed to evolve with the times, Islam is still (at least in some cases) stuck in the dark ages.

The funny thing is Christianity caused this. Prior to the crusades and the general assault on the Muslim world by Christians the Muslim world was experiencing what could only be called a renaissance. The arts and sciences were flourishing, trade was expanding (many items we consider everyday parts of our lives were introduced to Western Europe by Arab merchants during this period). It was only when the relentless barbarians showed up on their doorstep that the Muslim world turned inward.

Yes, it is troubling that a Hadith discusses Muhammed's marriage to a nine year old girl but there are passages in the Bible and in classic literature that are just as troubling.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Yes, it is troubling that a Hadith discusses Muhammed's marriage to a nine year old girl but there are passages in the Bible and in classic literature that are just as troubling.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

I think its more to do with fear. Whilst Christianity has been allowed to evolve with the times, Islam is still (at least in some cases) stuck in the dark ages.

The funny thing is Christianity caused this. Prior to the crusades and the general assault on the Muslim world by Christians the Muslim world was experiencing what could only be called a renaissance. The arts and sciences were flourishing, trade was expanding (many items we consider everyday parts of our lives were introduced to Western Europe by Arab merchants during this period). It was only when the relentless barbarians showed up on their doorstep that the Muslim world turned inward.

Yes, it is troubling that a Hadith discusses Muhammed's marriage to a nine year old girl but there are passages in the Bible and in classic literature that are just as troubling.

Oh yes. And the muslims are completely blameless, for example in the rape of vienna in 1620.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

Outright hilarious.

We're talking about the teachings of Christ, vs the teachings of Mohammed.
One preaches love, the other terrorism.

quote:

So you change the topic to what the religions thereafter say about one woman. Cause a minor person getting less than 1% of the mentions in either book are really important.

But even THEN you get it wrong, because you are conflating what secular groups like martin scorsesi etc said about Mary Magdalene.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Yes, it is troubling that a Hadith discusses Muhammed's marriage to a nine year old girl but there are passages in the Bible and in classic literature that are just as troubling.

Really. Quote me something from the New Testament that is as troubling.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Again - bull. Find Anywhere in the new testament where christ says - go kill someone. Your moral equivalency is ridiculously and it just shows how debased your sense of honor is when you will say anything.

Matthew 15:4 to 7
Same story in Mark 7:9 to 13

quote:

quote:

..
Outright hilarious.

We're talking about the teachings of Christ, vs the teachings of Mohammed.
One preaches love, the other terrorism.

No. Both teach love and the rest as well as violence. You have to willfully misinterpret the Qu'ran to make it all about violence.

quote:


No. I'm saying what Jewish law and tradition of the 1st century says she was.

To start with the stoning for adultery.....

quote:


Then when she is sitting shiva after the death of her brother Lazarus Jesus tells her to stop her mourning after she had refused to obey her father's command to do so. Again by Jewish custom the only one who could tell a woman sitting shiva to end her mourning is her closest male relative....

quote:


Finally of course is the frequent use of the term Rabbi. In the first century a man had to be married to be a Rabbi.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

quote:

..
Outright hilarious.

We're talking about the teachings of Christ, vs the teachings of Mohammed.
One preaches love, the other terrorism.

No. Both teach love and the rest as well as violence. You have to willfully misinterpret the Qu'ran to make it all about violence.

Bullshit again.

You claimed moral equivalency. I have in the past shown over 100 quotes from the Quran telling its followers to terrorize the infidels. To torture them. To castrate them, to flay the skin from them. To kill them while they sleep.

I then challenged you to find ONE instance in the teachings of christ that encouraged violence and terrorism against others. You have so far failed.

quote:

quote:


No. I'm saying what Jewish law and tradition of the 1st century says she was.

To start with the stoning for adultery.....

And again, you are completely wrong.

Here is a quote from "Got Questions.org" which is a christian site that answers biblical questions:


Answer: Mary Magdalene was a woman from whom Jesus cast out seven demons (Luke 8:2). The name Magdalene likely indicates that she came from Magdala, a city on the southwest coast of the Sea of Galilee. After Jesus cast seven demons from her, she became one of His followers.

Mary Magdalene has been associated with the "woman in the city who was a sinner" (Luke 7:37) who washed Jesus' feet, but there is no scriptural basis for this. The city of Magdala did have a reputation for prostitution. This information, coupled with the fact that Luke first mentions Mary Magdalene immediately following his account of the sinful woman (Luke 7:36-50), has led some to equate the two women. But there is no scriptural evidence to support this idea. Mary Magdalene is nowhere identified as a prostitute or as a sinful woman, despite popular portrayals of her as such.

quote:

Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus’ honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint[a] of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 “Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.” 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.

7 “Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. 8 You will always have the poor among you,[c] but you will not always have me.”

quote:

quote:


Then when she is sitting shiva after the death of her brother Lazarus Jesus tells her to stop her mourning after she had refused to obey her father's command to do so. Again by Jewish custom the only one who could tell a woman sitting shiva to end her mourning is her closest male relative....

Mary and Martha were among the first listed believers of the Christ. When Christ is coming Martha goes to out to meet him. Martha would also be sitting shiva. And yet Martha comes out. So much for your theory.

quote:

quote:


Finally of course is the frequent use of the term Rabbi. In the first century a man had to be married to be a Rabbi.

And yet Elijah wasn't married.
Jeremiah wasn't married. Jeremiah was specifically told not to.
Daniel wasn't married.

And yet.. they were called "rabbi".

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

I think its more to do with fear. Whilst Christianity has been allowed to evolve with the times, Islam is still (at least in some cases) stuck in the dark ages.

The funny thing is Christianity caused this. Prior to the crusades and the general assault on the Muslim world by Christians the Muslim world was experiencing what could only be called a renaissance. The arts and sciences were flourishing, trade was expanding (many items we consider everyday parts of our lives were introduced to Western Europe by Arab merchants during this period). It was only when the relentless barbarians showed up on their doorstep that the Muslim world turned inward.

Yes, it is troubling that a Hadith discusses Muhammed's marriage to a nine year old girl but there are passages in the Bible and in classic literature that are just as troubling.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't read Arabic. I did read a couple of different Hadith.

As to the Bible versus the Qu'ran on women, both have passages oppressive of women but both also have passages supportive of women's rights. This is fairly obvious if you know who Khadija was. It is important to understand that both the Bible and the Qu'ran derive from Semitic religion and culture and in that culture and religion women were usually considered second class citizens at best.

I think the clearest comparison of the teaching of Christ versus Muhammed on women is the treatment of Khadija versus the treatment of Mary Magdalene. Khadija is venerated while Mary, based on John almost certainly Jesus' wife, is defamed and made into a prostitute despite nothing in the Bible saying anything of the sort. Further there is no doubt that much of the earliest writing down of what would be the Qu'ran was done by Khadija who was literate while Muhammed was not.

The treatment of women we see in much of the Arab world and central Asia has more to do with culture than it does religion.

I think its more to do with fear. Whilst Christianity has been allowed to evolve with the times, Islam is still (at least in some cases) stuck in the dark ages.

The funny thing is Christianity caused this. Prior to the crusades and the general assault on the Muslim world by Christians the Muslim world was experiencing what could only be called a renaissance. The arts and sciences were flourishing, trade was expanding (many items we consider everyday parts of our lives were introduced to Western Europe by Arab merchants during this period). It was only when the relentless barbarians showed up on their doorstep that the Muslim world turned inward.

Yes, it is troubling that a Hadith discusses Muhammed's marriage to a nine year old girl but there are passages in the Bible and in classic literature that are just as troubling.

I have heard of the christians being blamed for a lot of different shit but this is the first time I have ever heard that they were responsible for keeping Islam stuck in the dark ages. They must really be some powerful motherfuckers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

quote:

..
Outright hilarious.

We're talking about the teachings of Christ, vs the teachings of Mohammed.
One preaches love, the other terrorism.

No. Both teach love and the rest as well as violence. You have to willfully misinterpret the Qu'ran to make it all about violence.

Bullshit again.

You claimed moral equivalency. I have in the past shown over 100 quotes from the Quran telling its followers to terrorize the infidels. To torture them. To castrate them, to flay the skin from them. To kill them while they sleep.

I then challenged you to find ONE instance in the teachings of christ that encouraged violence and terrorism against others. You have so far failed.

There is just as much rhetorical hate and violence in the NT.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html

You will of course claim it is all metaphor and rhetoric and so is most of what is in the Qu'ran.

quote:

quote:

quote:


No. I'm saying what Jewish law and tradition of the 1st century says she was.

To start with the stoning for adultery.....

And again, you are completely wrong.

Here is a quote from "Got Questions.org" which is a christian site that answers biblical questions:


Answer: Mary Magdalene was a woman from whom Jesus cast out seven demons (Luke 8:2). The name Magdalene likely indicates that she came from Magdala, a city on the southwest coast of the Sea of Galilee. After Jesus cast seven demons from her, she became one of His followers.

Mary Magdalene has been associated with the "woman in the city who was a sinner" (Luke 7:37) who washed Jesus' feet, but there is no scriptural basis for this. The city of Magdala did have a reputation for prostitution. This information, coupled with the fact that Luke first mentions Mary Magdalene immediately following his account of the sinful woman (Luke 7:36-50), has led some to equate the two women. But there is no scriptural evidence to support this idea. Mary Magdalene is nowhere identified as a prostitute or as a sinful woman, despite popular portrayals of her as such.

Such pathetic evasion,

quote:


Here is the right passage from the NIV
John 12: 1 to 8

quote:

Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 Here a dinner was given in Jesus’ honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3 Then Mary took about a pint[a] of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

4 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5 “Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.” 6 He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.

7 “Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. 8 You will always have the poor among you,[c] but you will not always have me.”

Pretty explicitly Mary (as it names her very specifically)


As to her being the woman about to be stoned, that association is made because the first mention of Mary is immediately afterwards and there is no story about the casting out of demons.

quote:

quote:

quote:


Then when she is sitting shiva after the death of her brother Lazarus Jesus tells her to stop her mourning after she had refused to obey her father's command to do so. Again by Jewish custom the only one who could tell a woman sitting shiva to end her mourning is her closest male relative....

Mary and Martha were among the first listed believers of the Christ. When Christ is coming Martha goes to out to meet him. Martha would also be sitting shiva. And yet Martha comes out. So much for your theory.

Martha may have been married and commanded to cease mourning all ready. I really doubt most Jews of the era could really do nothing for 7 days after the death of a relative. However you are welcome to look into Jewish tradition yourself. Only the closest male relative could tell a woman to stop mourning early.

quote:

quote:


Finally of course is the frequent use of the term Rabbi. In the first century a man had to be married to be a Rabbi.

And yet Elijah wasn't married.
Jeremiah wasn't married. Jeremiah was specifically told not to.
Daniel wasn't married.

And yet.. they were called "rabbi".

Different period. We're talking about the first century not about during several centuries earlier. You could have easily argued that modern Rabbi don't have to be married, it would have been just as relevant.