(October 14, 2018 at 10:54 am)MysticKnight Wrote: Atlas, the beat them, doesn't mean with hands or miswak or a stick, but is saying to have intercourse, so in case you don't get it. Instead of "miswak", it's suppose to be beat them (with your dick), it's an expression of intercourse, just as "if you touch them" is understood (with your dick) in many verses and not only if you touch them with your hands which would not require major ablution.

So the verse in short is saying Men are to uplift women to the extent even if they fear betrayal/rebellion, they aren't ever to mention to them and leave them regarding this completely and to continue to have intercourse with them. So if they don't disobey them in regards to the two commands men have a right to command, then don't seek a way against them. The next verse shows what to do in the case they do disobey or that there is any breach of agreement which is to go to the Prophet and he will put a judge from each family, and they will try to settle the case.

You took your trolling to the next level.
I hope you are sick. If you were healthy but faking sickness, then you are a very very sad person.

It's not an expression in Arabic; beat =/= have sex, or beat with your penis.
Please stop lying. But I don't think that matters with a troll. Expected.

(October 14, 2018 at 10:45 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(October 14, 2018 at 10:11 am)Deesse23 Wrote: So, because (some) people wont listen to Allah anyway, he wont bother to make proper rules at all?  

Dude, every single human society that has outlawed some *bad* behaviour (knowing some persons will break the law) is better than Allah. Your argument is bad, i cant even tell how bad, because there are no words for "worse than utter suckage", but on the other hand....your track record of bad arguments is already impressive.

The topic is not about "God" being sloppy in his rules.

It sure is. Lets have a look at your opening post.

(October 11, 2018 at 4:03 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: But why does the Quran gives permission for men to hit their wives ?

Who wrote the Quran? Who made this rule? Who is so immoral to allow men to beat their wifes (even if its only in theory) instead of saying "dont fucking beat your wifes. ever". Who is responsible for this atrocity?

(October 14, 2018 at 10:45 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: Our main discussion is about mentioning the beating wives in Islam.

No its not. That is where you are trying to deflect this discussion to.

(October 14, 2018 at 10:45 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: I discussed how it is legal in Islam to treat an eye for an eye, wound for a wound, then how it is legal to treat a wife who beats her husband as a type of rebellion the same way. Unlike the sexist misconception that treats women as if they were "children" or "pets" who can even kill and cheat punishment.

What is the base for being allowed to beat your wife in Islam? Where is it written? In the Quran? By whom? Where does the rule "eye for an eye come from" as well? The Quran? Written by whom?

(October 14, 2018 at 11:12 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(October 14, 2018 at 10:54 am)MysticKnight Wrote: Atlas, the beat them, doesn't mean with hands or miswak or a stick, but is saying to have intercourse, so in case you don't get it. Instead of "miswak", it's suppose to be beat them (with your dick), it's an expression of intercourse, just as "if you touch them" is understood (with your dick) in many verses and not only if you touch them with your hands which would not require major ablution.

So the verse in short is saying Men are to uplift women to the extent even if they fear betrayal/rebellion, they aren't ever to mention to them and leave them regarding this completely and to continue to have intercourse with them. So if they don't disobey them in regards to the two commands men have a right to command, then don't seek a way against them. The next verse shows what to do in the case they do disobey or that there is any breach of agreement which is to go to the Prophet and he will put a judge from each family, and they will try to settle the case.

You took your trolling to the next level.
I hope you are sick.

It's not an expression in Arabic; beat =/= have sex.
Please stop lying.

The word sex is not used in Quran except in the marriage sense. Nikah is the pure word for sex I believe, but Quran uses it ONLY in the sense of marriage and marriage is another word for it. Yes Arabs were that messed up that there was no difference between the word sex and marriage, and you had to tell by context.

Everywhere else it talks about it, it has fill in the gap expressions, it says "go into them" in one verse, and it's understood, "with your dick", another place "if you touch them" and it's understood with your dick.  The word tharb is also used in Quran to mean to travel in some places.

Both "beat them" (with your dick) or "go into them" (with your dick) can be understood here by this word.

I'm not lying.  

None of the expression "go into" "touch" "beat" would mean sex, nope, but Quran never uses the word explicitly, except for the word marriage, and so it didn't want to conflate the two, and so left the original word for sex (nikah) to just mean marriage in Quran.

(October 14, 2018 at 11:06 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(October 14, 2018 at 10:57 am)chimp3 Wrote: I don't give a flying fuck whether the Koran supports or condemns beating women. We know better these days. That is why it is against the law in most civilized nations.

Tracking back all the sentences in the book; they must have a trigger behind them, if an eye is not for an eye; then the book is contradicting itself. I'm sure it doesn't, so she must hit first. That's not your "usual" domestic abuse.

Once again, I don't give a fuck. Make your book say whatever you want. The only rational argument against violence is a secular one.

(October 14, 2018 at 11:03 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(October 14, 2018 at 10:54 am)MysticKnight Wrote: Atlas, the beat them, doesn't mean with hands or miswak or a stick, but is saying to have intercourse, so in case you don't get it. Instead of "miswak", it's suppose to be beat them (with your dick), it's an expression of intercourse, just as "if you touch them" is understood (with your dick) in many verses and not only if you touch them with your hands which would not require major ablution.

So the verse in short is saying Men are to uplift women to the extent even if they fear betrayal/rebellion, they aren't ever to mention to them and leave them regarding this completely and to continue to have intercourse with them. So if they don't disobey them in regards to the two commands men have a right to command, then don't seek a way against them. The next verse shows what to do in the case they do disobey or that there is any breach of agreement which is to go to the Prophet and he will put a judge from each family, and they will try to settle the case.

No no no no..... This is the same bait and switch right wing Christians use.

"Uplift" means to treat like expensive property, not equal human beings. You may not personally view it now that way, but in antiquity that was the social norm. Females BACK THEN were PROPERTY, not human beings. 

Women in America have had a longer history bucking this bullshit, although you wouldn't know it with our current news headlines.

Skip the holy book. Skip any holy book for that matter.

Females are EQUAL TO MEN. You don't beat them for the same reason two men need to learn to settle their differences without violence. BECAUSE THEY ARE HUMANS.

Women ARE capable of leading, in politics and even being the breadwinner of the family. Women do not need men telling them what to do or how to behave based on the patriarchal mythology of antiquity. 

The reason women in Saudi Arabia are getting assaulted for driving now is the same fucking religious bullshit white Christian men used for excuses for beating up Susan B Anthony for fighting for women's right to vote here.

I beat men who beat me without any shame.
Why would a woman cheat the same treatment? My bad is to inflict more damage on her than what she did to me, but if she is really equal, then she should also be punished like a man.

(October 14, 2018 at 11:06 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(October 14, 2018 at 10:57 am)chimp3 Wrote: I don't give a flying fuck whether the Koran supports or condemns beating women. We know better these days. That is why it is against the law in most civilized nations.

Tracking back all the sentences in the book; they must have a trigger behind them, if an eye is not for an eye; then the book is contradicting itself. I'm sure it doesn't, so she must hit first. That's not your "usual" domestic abuse.

Fuck the gender crap. Fuck the religion crap. 

The reason women OF EVERY RELIGION worldwide are still economically treated as less, is because of too much of the world's men OF EVERY RELIGION using them as excuse to stick to a patriarchal past.

I have the same problem with hitting women as I do men hitting other men. It is easy to use a religion to justify either. It is hard for far to many men to accept that females are equal to them.

(October 14, 2018 at 11:06 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: if *book writes nonsense* then the book is contradicting itself. I'm sure it doesn't, so *insert silly rationalisation.

And here is the main problem with your epistemology: "I have a book, and its never wrong....except for when its obviously wrong, then i am going to re-interpret it". Thats your epistemology. Plain and simple.

(October 14, 2018 at 11:09 am)MysticKnight Wrote: Uplift = opposite of degrade.

I believe in defining what men are with respect women, God would say, they are to uplift them  (ie. the opposite of degrading them).

The translations including ["beat them" (lightly)] shows over all the people and Muslims included couldn't digest this message.

Even in a verse in which men with regard to women are being emphasized, they make the worse of it... instead of trying to see the verse in the most positive sense in can be seen. They follow instead what Satan cast regarding it, what his minions propagate about it, and are immersed in believing in the sorcery as opposed to the clear bright signs of God's book.

Still not getting it.

Treating females like property is not elevating them to being equal.

In antiquity the idea of "being kind" to females wasn't about equality as human beings. In antiquity being kind to females was more like not touching an expensive vase or waxing your expensive BMW. It isn't the same type of value of equality. It was value of property.

(October 14, 2018 at 11:15 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(October 14, 2018 at 10:45 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: The topic is not about "God" being sloppy in his rules.

It sure is. Lets have a look at your opening post.

(October 11, 2018 at 4:03 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: But why does the Quran gives permission for men to hit their wives ?

Who wrote the Quran? Who made this rule? Who is so immoral to allow men to beat their wifes (even if its only in theory) instead of saying "dont fucking beat your wifes. ever". Who is responsible for this atrocity?

No, I'm speaking in this topic about why such a sentence exist in its pages.
not about if this is a good or a bad sentence.
Again: I'm speaking why such a sentence exist, not about this sentence being good or bad.
How you changed the subject of the OP from discussing a sentence to discussing God is beyond me.
In other words; your judgement on God doesn't concern me.
And doesn't concern my OP.

Quote:

Quote:AtlasS33 Wrote: Our main discussion is about mentioning the beating wives in Islam.

No its not. That is where you are trying to deflect this discussion to.

But the title of the topic is

Quote:RE: Beating women in Islam

??????

Quote:What is the base for being allowed to beat your wife in Islam? Where is it written? In the Quran? By whom? Where does the rule "eye for an eye come from" as well? The Quran? Written by whom?

Read from this post onwards, to find the answer for your questions:

https://atheistforums.org/thread-56875-p...pid1829893

All praise to God most Humans in this century won't accept beating women.

All praise to God it will shatter the idols of the past, who taught 4:34 taught to beat women.

All the talk of them being pure and knowledgeable and righteous, is proven to be just that, nothing but talk.


It's one of many verses they distorted and took side of the sorcery over the bright signs and manifesting luminations of God's book.