Women and Religion - Does it anger you?

That's HAREM.As far s the teaching, it depends who you ask. I used to know a Moroccan Muslim who said that the promise of 70 virgins in paradise was not orthodox or commonly preached. I have also read that both men and women were promised such rewards for martydom. Don't have a quote from the book itself, but it would probably be google-able.

Actually, the promise is similar to the Christian vision of Heaven. It's what ever you can imagine. And taken about as seriously as the Christian view of wings and harps.But both sexes are offered rewards in paradise based on their lives.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

that the propaganda isn't true! Who do you think you are? This message has been edited by zephyr, 05-20-2004 11:43 PM

'Sokay, you'll get your wings AND a harp. edited to add.Frankly, 72 Virgins would not be my idea of Paradise anyway. Maybe that's why you never hear about mature suicide bombers. After a certain age you learn your limts. This message has been edited by jar, 05-20-2004 11:48 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Me? HAH!If such places exist, I'll be squashed under hooves on the floor of the mosh pit while Lucifer busts out some bitching guitar solos on the center stage of hell

If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."

The people you read about in the bible were human beings and they lived many centuries ago. They simply cannot be judged by our standards.In ancient Athens just as few centuries prior to Jesus' time, the only people in the entire society who walked around armed were scythian slaves, serving roughly as cops. What's wrong with the picture? I mean, can you picture a scene in Atlanta or Richmond prior to the civil war, in which only negroes had guns, AND THEY STILL STUCK AROUND AND WERE HAPPY WITH THEIR LOT IN LIFE?? I mean, that only works if being an Athenian slave was so far above being a scythian that it wasn't even worth thinking about.Nor is there any shortage of similar examples. There is no reasonable argument to be made that those guys were hypocrites or acting in any sort of an immoral manner because some customs may have changed over 2000 years.

buzsaw writes:

quote:

---

...you begin by saying you endorse nothing I say and then proceed to document me to be correct concerning Islamic women. Which is it?

---

I find very little I can agree with in any of your posts, buz. You seem to think that the Quran is harsher toward women than is the bible. I disagree. However, jar averred that the Quran contains nothing to demean women and in fact places them on an equal status with men. I disagree with that as well, and I therefore quoted scripture to support my position. I did not want that jar should think I was siding with you, so I felt it necessary to include that disclaimer.

quote:

---

I've tried to make it clear here in town that I am a very busy sole proprietor in business and have a very limited amount of time to expend on this forum.

---

That's fine, I know how hard it is to try to run your own business. I admire that you have the patience and I hope your enterprise is successful. However, I feel that you should avoid making any assertions you are not prepared to back up when called upon to do so. You use the "I don't have time" defense a bit too often, and that is why I said you don't debate in good faith.Perhaps this would be a good time to say that I have no ill will toward you, buz. You very much remind me of my father. His attitudes about women are similar to yours, which is rather surprising to me since I remember his liberalism during the civil rights struggle of the 60s. I think he's become much more reactionary in his old age. Sexist bigot though he is, I love my father very much and would do anything in the world for him.Again, I realize your time is valuable, but I have already asked you to respond to my post 63 upthread more than once. I'm sorry if my words sound insulting, but your words regarding women sound insulting as well.EDIT: On re-reading this I notice my selective capitalization. I assure everyone I meant no disrespect to the bible. The only reason I can give is that I use the word 'quran' far less often than I do 'bible', and since I usually see it capitalized I capitalized it without thinking. Barring another slip of the mind I will not do so again.This message has been edited by berberry, 05-21-2004 04:05 AM

redwolf asseverates:

quote:

---

The people you read about in the bible were human beings and they lived many centuries ago. They simply cannot be judged by our standards.

---

I agree, but the logic runs both ways. If we should not apply our standards of behavior to those who lived in biblical times, neither should our behavior today be judged by the standards of the bible.

Exactly.

quote:

---

Frankly, 72 Virgins would not be my idea of Paradise anyway. Maybe that's why you never hear about mature suicide bombers. After a certain age you learn your limts.

---

A man who wants to bed only virgins must be REALLY insecure about his skill and prowess in the sack.If you sleep with a virgin, she has no experience to know if he is any good or not.

quote:

---

If you sleep with a virgin, she has no experience to know if [you are] any good or not.

---

In my case, let's be honest, she'd know.regards,
Esteban "Me Neither, Baby" Hambre

quote:

---

If you sleep with a virgin, she has no experience to know if he is any good or not.

---

And no clue how to meet your needs, either.

quote:

---

72 Extremely Unimpressed Women Later

---

I opened this thread just because I saw that. I love good self-deprecating humor....This message has been edited by zephyr, 05-21-2004 11:09 AM

I agree, but the logic runs both ways. If we should not apply our standards of behavior to those who lived in biblical times, neither should our behavior today be judged by the standards of the bible.

I believe you have to pick and choose. There are parts of the bible, both testaments, which are clearly applicable to the authors' times and not ours, and there are other parts which appear timeless. The ten commandments strike me as timeless as does much if not all of what you read in the sermon on the mount.

If you're acknowledging that cultural context always has and always will affect churches' interpretation of Biblical standards for living, then I salute you. Please confirm or deny