And my point was that you were doing the same by pointing to what non-Muslims do, claiming that they somehow represent the religion.
Printable View
And my point was that you were doing the same by pointing to what non-Muslims do, claiming that they somehow represent the religion.
I am sorry that you missed my point. I literally said that I was distinguishing between mere agnostics (who, despite not believing in GOD may be some very fine specimens of morality) and those who push for a removal even of their own convictions, to practice their immorality in a vacuum, which I call atheism, not for lack of belief in GOD, but because the word literally means "being without GOD". In the case of the latter term, I set it apart from "agnosticism", to allow for a different meaning. If one is agnostic, he isn't trying to be without GOD, but can either do what he believes is most decent, or not do that. By "atheism", I assigned a different term to give a name to an intended movement that wishes to remain apart from GOD - thus, according to this definition, an atheistic government (such as was the case with the former U.S.S.R.) pushes to alienate the country away from GOD. A truly agnostic country would allow religious differences, but would leave Church and state separate institutions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xamonas Chegwe
I am grieved to think you misunderstood what I meant.
Most of your response reiterated what I actually said altogether in posts above. Agnosticism is not a religion, but a valley of decision and a mystery to be investigated. Atheism is a substitute for religion, and the opposite. It could stem from hurt feelings, the idea that religion is false, or from pure hatred of GOD. An atheist as an individual may, like an agnostic, differ in character. He may subconsciously be an agnostic though. But if he wishes to deny others freedom to think, and will not give a thought to anything himself, he is merely anit-religious.
There are many hypocrites calling themselves "Christian", but even many of these, like many atheists, do not do certain things islamic literature records Muhammad to have done. The Church thinks that a hypocrite in the Church is the worst kind. The Scripture say not to judge unbelievers for their unbelief )Paul himself wrote that).
The thing that brought up what I said was Amra and Nightshade denying something we cannot really enter in upon, as these are current politics. But one cannot argue against what is historically undeniable about the roots of Christianity and of islam. Peter spoke of the necessity for a man to consider the weaker/more vulnerable sex, with a warning against all who are insensitive to the hearts of women, that they will not be heard in turn by GOD. The Church began as Martyrs. No one can change Christianity at this late date. Either you ptactice it or you do not.
islam involves loyalty to a man and his book, and to others that hold this loyalty. The earliest islamic sources show a man that personally decreed that all under a muslim man's right hand could be slept with (this included female slaves with no say otherwise). Thus, what calls itself islam often is islam, from a historical point of view.
Mililalil,
Please make yourself more credible by bringing some kind of references for your ludicrous statements. Otherwise, it is just painful to watch your ignorance.
You have a strange, alarming and erroneous view of atheism Mil.
Atheism literally means 'ungodly' (from the Greek: a- negative prefix = un- : theos = god : -ismos adjectival suffix = -ly) and is a blanket term for any that believe there is no god or gods guiding our fate. There are as many types of atheism as there are atheists. We are not all alike and are certinly not all trying to establish an 'anti-christian' atheistic state. Forcing people into any viewpoint, even one that I consider true, is anathema to me; arguing my case is a different matter.
I resent any imputation that I am less moral than anyone else because of my religious beliefs, which are incidently that:
The good I do is to my credit,
The evil to my shame,
No praise is due to god above
Nor lucifer to blame.
I do not need to justify my actions in terms of any man-made religion; my own conscience is my only judge but it keeps me in check quite well, thanking you all the same! I neither need nor desire either Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, nor any other holyman, shaman, demigod or deity to absolve me of any sins I have commited; they are mine. I live with them.
When I die, I will be gone. That is it. In this world I try my best to enjoy myself while doing others as little harm as possible, in the hope that they will do likewise. Apart from that, what I eat or drink, what I wear, what I do on Sunday, what I say and what I read, and who I choose to **** is my business and no-one elses.
As I said, even if you consider yourself an "atheist", I was using it and "agnostic" in contrast to one another, to speak of those that are simply not religious for lack of conviction that they ought to be from those that are anti-GOD. In the case of the communist goverment formed by the Russian revolutionaries, there was a political entity I reserved the one word for - what else could I call it to bring out the non-religious nature of its forceful regime? I see still what you are getting at, and I still insist that I announced the manner in which I would distinguish the use of one word from another for a complex comparison of differences among unbelievers.
No avtual unity exists between people for merely not believing something. Christianity holds certain beliefs, and what contradicts it is considered heretical or alien. Two that hold the same belief may not bear the same heart. Some have blasphemed CHRIST's NAME not by what they said was true with words, but by committing attrocities while presuming to bear the name belonging in Truth only to true Disciples of JESUS. No two atheists necessarily hold the same beliefs. Starting from this place of mutual dissimilarity, they do not hold in common a standard of any sort. Part and parcel with a religious leader is his teaching. Thus, there have been certain atheistic groups that have conducted antichristian campaigns that atheists outside of their group have nothing whatsoever to do with. Communism has no bearing on you - because you are not a communist. Does this clear up my statements at all?
I only brought up atheists to stress that they too are present in places Amra presumes to call Christian, just to counterbalance claims about muslims.
If you still do not see what I have said, I'll try again to clarify. It was only to tie a loose end - a peripheral matter - that I brought up agnostics, whom I defined as not being what they are as serving an anti-GOD aggenda (while there are actual governments that consider unbelief in GOD alone defensible, and treat it as an ideal - though some of those that predated their atheistic phase were libertines letting go of Christian thinking from their society). Not all unbelievers have a cause for unbelief, but neither are all neutral either. Even in some so-called "Christian" nations, the government has a harsh view of the culture of the people.
The one who does not believe, but is in earnest, might be a man who hates the idea of child brides, breaking the hearts of women, slandering neighbors, etc., and GOD will bless him for his best attempts at conscientiousness. But an unbeliever of another sort also exists, bearing the character of too many men at large. The first kind of unbeliever has a hard time finding a basis for challenging the ways of the other kind. In Christianity, if a man has a perverse heart, I do not hesitate to expose it and show him how he shames the name of a "Christian". I know some agnostics who appreciate my attempt at imitation of CHRIST, and see it as at least evidence that HE was a good man. If HE be no more than a good man, they reason, HE still deserves their applause for tirelessly being good-hearted.
But I see men in general as being all too selfish to avoid mistreating women. Where a believer is concerned, he is convicted by the standard his heart falls short of, and has somewhat of a motivation to either bury his sentiments under a disguise, change, or outright apostasize. His failure cannot diminish the standard fallen short of, and that standard ever remains the lowest common denominator between earnest believers.
You shouldn't feel singled out by my mentioning a sea of various kinds of characters, all unrelated to one another, except if they hold something more than unbelief in common. Is an atheist the crowning epithet for what you are? I don't think so.
I am an atheist, not an agnostic. I believe (on the basis of available evidence) that there is NO god. Agnostics are ditherers without the courage of their convictions. They hedge their bets, sit on the fence and refuse to decide. Not me, my friend. Atheist. The only word that fits.
AND I will not deny that Stalin was also an atheist. But as I pointed out, it is a broad definition. Would you claim that differing christian denominations from your own (I'm afraid I have no idea what that is) are not christians (actually, you very well might, that would be running to type among a lot of the religious types I have met!) Are Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Amish, 7th-day Adventists, Methodists, Mormons and Coptics not all christians? They all share a belief in Jesus as an incarnation of god. Similarly, I share a belief in the non-existence of any god with all other atheists, Stalin and Hitler included, you don't need a different name for me in order to distinguish me from 'the bad ones'. I don't need to call you another name to seperate you from the crimes of the Sanish inquisition or the crusaders (although there is a word that is tempting ;)). Atheism is a broad church. just don't tar all of us with the same brush - pigeon-holing is counterproductive and prejudicial.
Love, empathy and compassion are human traits, not solely religious ones. I have no desire to be, nor claim to be, anything more or less than human, with all of the flaws and all of the virtues that that entails.
Amra, are you familiar with Safiyah Bint Huyeiy Ibn Akhtab? She was shown no humane understanding for her heart's deepest needs.
She was a Jewish seventeen year old, whose father, brother, and husband Muhammad had just killed. He liked her shell, so he had her as his sex-thing at once. Where does one begin commenting on the injustice of this treatment?
Muhammad created his own situation for "having to go to war", made up decrees for jihad, and for taking those he defeated into captivity, and for subjecting the women captured to himself and to his soldiers sexually. This is ancient history which I am not going to brush aside. Any discussion of islamic literature has to allow for perusing the literature itself, and this is what it states.
see this islamic site's article:
http://www.muslimunited.org/topics/prophet/wives.html
While it admits certain things, it leaves much out, giving a false impression about what the first islamic traditions reveal of Muhammad.
Here below are things from islamic sources to fill in the picture a little:
Ishaq:510 "When the Apostle looked down on Khaybar he told his Companions, ‘O Allah, Lord of the heavens and what they overshadow, and Lord of the Devils and what into error they throw, and Lord of the winds and what they winnow, we ask Thee for the booty of this town and its people. We take refuge in Thee from its evil and the evil of its people. Forward in the name of Allah.' He used to say this of every town he raided."
Bukhari:V5B59N510"Allah's Apostle reached Khaybar at night. It was his habit that, whenever he reached an enemy at night, he would not attack them till it was morning. When morning came, the Jews came out with their spades and baskets. When they saw the Prophet, they said, ‘Muhammad! O dear God! It's Muhammad and his army!' The Prophet shouted, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a nation, evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.'"
Bukhari:V5B59N512"The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer [the Prayer of Fear] near Khaybar when it was still dark. He said, ‘Allahu-Akbar!' [Allah is Greatest] Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a hostile nation to fight, then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.' Then the inhabitants of Khaybar came out running on their roads. The Prophet had their men killed; their children and woman were taken as captives."
Tabari VIII:122/Ishaq:515 "Abi Huqayq [Safiyah's father] held the treasure of the Nadir [the second Jewish tribe Muhammad exiled from Yathrib]. He was brought to Allah's Messenger, and he questioned him. But Huqayq denied knowing where it was. So the Prophet questioned other Jews. One said, ‘I have seen Kinanah [Safiyah's husband] walk around a ruin.' Muhammad had Kinanah brought to him and said, ‘Do you know that if we find it, I shall kill you.' ‘Yes,' Kinanah answered."
Tabari VIII:122/Ishaq:515 "The Prophet commanded that the ruin should be dug up. Some treasure was extracted from it. Then Muhammad asked Kinanah for the rest. He refused to surrender it; so Allah's Messenger gave orders concerning him to Zubayr, saying, ‘Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah's chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him."
Tabari VIII:121/Ishaq:515 "Ali struck the Jew with a swift blow that split his helmet, neck protector, and head, landing in his rear teeth. And the Muslims entered the city. Muhammad conquered Qamus, the [Jewish] neighborhood of Abi Huqayq. Safiyah bt. Huyayy was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal led them past some of the Jews we had slain including the woman's dead husband. When she saw them, the woman with Safiyah cried out, slapped her face, and poured dust on her head. When Allah's Prophet saw her, he said, ‘Take this she-devil away from me!'"
Tabari VIII:116/Ishaq:511 "So Muhammad began seizing their herds and their property bit by bit. He conquered Khaybar home by home. The first stronghold defeated was Naim. Next was Qamus, the community of Abi Huqayq. The Messenger took some of its people captive, including Safiyah bt. Huyayy, the wife of Kinanah and her two cousins. The Prophet chose Safiyah for himself."
Bukhari:V5B59N524 "The Muslims said among themselves, ‘Will Safiyah be one of the Prophet's wives or just a lady captive and one of his possessions?'"
Tabari VIII:122/Ishaq:515
"Muhammad commanded that Safiyah should be kept behind him and he threw his cloak over her. Thus the Muslims knew that he had chosen her for himself."
Ishaq:517 "When the Apostle married Safiyah on his way out of town, she was beautified and combed, putting her in a fitting state for the Messenger. The Apostle passed the night with her in his tent. Abu Ayyub, girt with his sword, guarded the Apostle, going round the tent until he saw him emerge in the morning. Abu said, ‘I was afraid for you with this woman for you have killed her father, her husband, and her people."
Bukhari:V5B59N551 - "When Khaybar was conquered, a sheep containing poison, was given as a present to Allah's Apostle"
Tabari VIII:123/Ishaq:516"When the Messenger rested from his labor, Zaynab, the wife of Sallam, served him a roast sheep. She had asked what part Muhammad liked best and was told that it was the shoulder and foreleg. So she loaded it with poison, also poisoning the rest. Then she placed it before him. He took the foreleg and chewed it, but he did not swallow. With him was Bishr, who, like the Prophet, took some, but he swallowed it. The Prophet spat out the lamb saying, ‘This bone informs me that it has been poisoned.'"
Tabari VIII:124/Ishaq:516"The Messenger, during the illness from which he died, said to Bishr ‘s mother, ‘Umm, at this very moment I feel my aorta being severed because of the food I ate with your son at Khaybar.'"
From Ibn Sa'd page 249:
The apostle of Allah and his companions ate from it. It (goat) said: "I am poisoned." He [Muhammad] said to his Companions, "Hold you hands! because it has informed me that it is poisoned!" They withdrew their hands, but Bishr Ibn al-Bara expired. The apostle of Allah sent for her (Jewess) and asked her, "What induced you to do what you have done?" She replied, "I wanted to know if you are a prophet, in that case it will not harm you and if you are a king, I shall relieve the people of you. He gave orders and she was put to death.
Might be a clue that a wife or more conspired for revenge.
The quran itself has this so say:
4:24 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.
Here we are told that if a woman is taken as a captive, even if already married, she can be used sexually by the one in whose right hand she was unfortunate enough to wind up. And the battle on Khaybar was not necessary, but was one of Muhammad's many created occasions for taking captive women from out of the lives they were rightfully living. Some say he had to deal with treachery of a few men that had tried to kill him with a falling rock. So all this area had to be ruined?! He had come into place after place brandishing demands without any prior basis, and some felt he was a dangerous man to let go about in that manner. He prevoked their attempt on his life, then punished all their people. He took a desolate woman, placed her under his right hand, then got right down to consumating a new relationship with this child. (Some people wait for such a young person to reach her twenties before being anything more than a friend and brother to her - which we see no attempt at). I thought women were people - is there no a person to befriend before anything further?
Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:
Narrated Hisham's father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 6, Number 298:
Narrated 'Aisha:
[Read if you can find it - I didn't want to post such a lewd thing as this tradition.]
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:
Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:
I asked 'Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, "I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah's Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. "
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
[The rapes were allowed, but scholars debate over whether he meant that birth control was allowed or not.]
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 135:
Narrated Jabir:
We used to practice coitus interrupt us during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 136:
Narrated Jabir:
We used to practice coitus interruptus while the Quran was being revealed. Jabir added: We used to practice coitus interrupt us during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle while the Quran was being Revealed.
Malik's Muwatta Book 29, Number 29.32.96:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'n-Nadr, the mawla of Umar ibn Ubaydullah from Amir ibn Sad ibn Abi Waqqas from his father that he used to practise coitus interruptus.
Sunan Abu Dawud Book 11, Number 2166:
Narrated AbuSa'id al-Khudri:
A man said: Apostle of Allah, I have a slave-girl and I withdraw the penis from her (while having intercourse), and I dislike that she becomes pregnant. I intend (by intercourse) what the men intend by it. The Jews say that withdrawing the phallus (azl) is burying the living girls on a small scale. He (the Prophet) said: The Jews told a lie. If Allah intends to create it, you cannot turn it away.
[Here we see the Jews are put down for disdaining birth control.]
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 17:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
When I got married, Allah's Apostle said to me, "What type of lady have you married?" I replied, "I have married a matron' He said, "Why, don't you have a liking for the virgins and for fondling them?"[...]
Sahih Bukhari Volume 3, Book 38, Number 504:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
I was accompanying the Prophet on a journey and was riding a slow camel that was lagging behind the others. [...] When we approached Medina, I started going (towards my house). The Prophet said, "Where are you going?" I said, "I have married a widow." He said, "Why have you not married a virgin to fondle with each other?"[...]
"All the commentaries agree that verse 57 of Sura 4 (on-Nesa) was sent down after the Jews criticized Mohammad's appetite for women, alleging that he had nothing to do except to take wives" (Ali Dashti, 23 Years, pp. 120-138).
I once had no view of Muahammad at all, so I tried to discover whatever good in him I could, and was very disappointed about the character such an influential man was proved again and again to have - not by Christian writings, but by early islamic tradition. The myriads of agreeing statements outside of islam only compounded this fact. I didn't make these sources up. Either they are true, the product of faithful eyewitness history, or the same liars suspected where the hadiths are concerned are not above suspicion where the quran is concerned as well. What fault can you find with these inescapable discoveries that forced one inevitable conclusion on me while I was as of yet without an opinion?
Surah 66:1 - Prophet, why do you prohibit that which God has made lawful to you, in seeking to please your wives?
The background on this verse says: "Muhammad was caught (probably having intercourse) by one of his wives named Hafsah with a Coptic slave (her name was Mariyah). Muhammad was supposed to be spending the day with another one of his wives named Aisha. It was Aisha's turn to "be" with Muhammad. Muhammad asked Hafsah not to tell Aisha and he promised not to have sex with Mariyah again. But Hafsah secretly informed Aisha. But later, Muhammad got a "revelation" allowing him to break his promise, and to have sexual relations with his slave girls again. To free Muhammad from his promise to Hafsah was the object of this chapter.
Ibn Sa'd's "Tabaqat", gives a clear description of other background details. Muhammad was having sexual relations with Mariyah, his Coptic slave. Mariyah and her sister, Sirin were slaves given as gifts to Muhammad. Muhammad gave Sirin to Hasan Thabit, the poet. Ibn Sa'd says that Muhammad "liked Mariyah, who was of white complexion, with curly hair and pretty." [Taken from Ibn Sa'd's "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir" (Book of the Major Classes), p151].
Ibn Sa'd also writes that Mariyah bore Muhammad a son named Ibrahim. He died 18 months later. Sa'd writes: "If he had lived, no maternal uncle of his would have remained in bondage", p164. This shows that there were other Coptic slaves owned by the Muslims.
surah 66:1 - Prophet, why do you prohibit that which God has made lawful to you, in seeking to please your wives?
The background on this verse says: "Muhammad was caught (probably having intercourse) by one of his wives named Hafsah with a Coptic slave (her name was Mariyah). Muhammad was supposed to be spending the day with another one of his wives named Aisha. It was Aisha's turn to "be" with Muhammad. Muhammad asked Hafsah not to tell Aisha and he promised not to have sex with Mariyah again. But Hafsah secretly informed Aisha. But later, Muhammad got a "revelation" allowing him to break his promise, and to have sexual relations with his slave girls again. To free Muhammad from his promise to Hafsah was the object of this chapter.
Ibn Sa'd's "Tabaqat", gives a clear description of other background details. Muhammad was having sexual relations with Mariyah, his Coptic slave. Mariyah and her sister, Sirin were slaves given as gifts to Muhammad. Muhammad gave Sirin to Hasan Thabit, the poet. Ibn Sa'd says that Muhammad "liked Mariyah, who was of white complexion, with curly hair and pretty." [Taken from Ibn Sa'd's "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir" (Book of the Major Classes), p151].
Ibn Sa'd also writes that Mariyah bore Muhammad a son named Ibrahim. He died 18 months later. Sa'd writes: "If he had lived, no maternal uncle of his would have remained in bondage", p164. This shows that there were other Coptic slaves owned by the Muslims.
surah 24:34 says that one must not be left to prostitution. But this is part of a network of statements that manipulate a slave girl to be treated like a prostitute - rather than being cared for financially as by a family member, she has the option of remaining in the possession (either as slave, or as "wife"), to be fed and such. What the man gets back is incomparably more than he gave. If a woman isn't helped to live without a sexual price on her, how is this better than prostitution?
Bukhari Vol 5-#459
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: "I entered the mosque and saw Abu Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu said, "We went out with Allah's messenger for the Ghazwa (attack upon) Banu Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus we said "How can we do coitus interruptus without asking Allah's messenger while he is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said "It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.""
Thus, being away from women already had, they found captive-taking most useful to their first priority.
Bukhari Vol 5-#637 Narrated Buraida: The prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus ([one fifth] of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)? "When we reached the prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes" He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus."
The note for this Hadith says "Buraida hated Ali because he had taken a slave girl form the booty and considered that as something not good."
Abu Dawud, vol 2, chapter 683 - "On the Marriage of a Slave without the Permission of His Masters"
#2074- "Ibn Umar reported the prophet as saying: "If a slave marries without the permission of his master, his marriage is null and void."
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, a scholar and Islamic historian says in his book "Zad al-Ma'ad", part 1, p160:
"Muhammad had many male and female slaves. He used to buy and sell them, but he purchased more slaves then he sold. He once sold one black slave for two. His purchases of slaves were more than he sold."
"Muhammad had a number of black slaves. One of them was named 'Mahran'. Muhammad forced him to do more labor than the average man. Whenever Muhammad went on a trip and he, or his people, got tired of carrying their stuff, he made Mahran carry it. Mahran said "Even if I were already carrying the load of 6 or 7 donkeys while we were on a journey, anyone who felt weak would throw his clothes or his shield or his sword on me so I would carry that, a heavy load". Tabari and Jawziyya both record this, so Islam accepts this as true."
Let's read a little bit from the Bible, shall we? :D
Deu 20:13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:
Deu 20:14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, [even] all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
Deu 21:10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive,
Deu 21:11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;
Deu 21:12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;
Deu 21:13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.
Deu 21:14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.
Deu 22:20 But if this thing be true, [and the tokens of] virginity be not found for the damsel:
Deu 22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
Deu 22:28 If a man find a damsel [that is] a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
Deu 22:29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty [shekels] of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.
What an amazing way to treat women. Stone her if she is not a virgin, well, let the city judge first if there is blood on the cloth after the first marriage night or not, and then stone her. I guess whoever wrote the Bible didn't know that only 30% of females bleed when losing their virginity,so that makes about 70% of women who would be stoned innocent. If you capture a woman or a little one :confused: during war, you can force them to be your sex slaves, and dispose of them after you are done. And if you catch a virgin in the field :D and rape her, well, you should pay to her father and make her your wife. Wow. And you come here and tell me something about how women should be treated?!!! Unbelievable.
This has become a "my religion is better/worthier/more superior than your religion" discussion, so I'm going to close it.
Amra and Mililalil XXIV feel free to continue your debate via PM.
Oh, and as always, see the Religious Texts Forum Rules if you are confused by this decision to close.