Pedophilia in the Bible: this is a porn book

[WinterHold]

If Christian Bible makes people to monsters, why did Quran allow marriage to Christians and Jews?

Marriage to Christian "WOMEN" and Jewish "WOMEN" only:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith...e_in_Islam

Sunnies and Shiites ONLY allow it for Muslim Men to marry Christian/Jewish women; under Muslim law explicitly. The Christian or the Jew would have to submit to the Muslim law totally.

And, Muslim women ARE NOT allowed to marry Christian/ Jewish men.

[The Grand Nudger]

..................they're allowed to fuck kafir slaves, tho.............it's recommended. 

[WinterHold]

1. No one is arguing that the Christian Bible makes people into monsters, at least not in this thread.

2. If the premise was true that the Christian Bible makes people into monsters, then whoever wrote the Quran was an idiot for allowing marriage to monsters.

The point I am making, the Quran argues Bible is over all good, otherwise, it would not allow marriages to people of the book.

Atlas, is making it as if, Bible is some horrible book that makes people into pedophiles and other things.

No. What's between your hands today is the "diaries" of Paul and Jesus's followers. It was even proved historically that Rome re-wrote it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Romans

The same problem -of the Muslim Hadith shows in here: where did "Paul" bring his book from?
This is forgery. Plain and simple.

Here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the divine nature of God the Son and his relationship to God the Father,[3] the construction of the first part of the Nicene Creed, establishing uniform observance of the date of Easter,[7] and promulgation of early canon law.[4][8]

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#cite_note-8][/url]

The bible we have today, is a PRODUCTION OF THE BISHOPS OF ROME. This is not the bible God was was talking about in the Quran.
Maybe a few fragments were left; but good luck finding the needle in the pile of grass.

The bible of today is a Roman porn book, mixed with religious mad dreams resulted from the memories Jesus's followers had in the Arena.

[The Grand Nudger]

The guy gets one thing right, even if he gets the rest wrong.  

You do realize that rome's rewrite is what your own magic book was based on.....yes...........? Forgery plan and simple, indeed.

[WinterHold]

The point I am making, the Quran argues Bible is over all good, otherwise, it would not allow marriages to people of the book.

Atlas, is making it as if, Bible is some horrible book that makes people into pedophiles and other things.

So you were responding to Atlas then. Nevertheless, both the Bible books and the Qur'an contain horrendous verses (the Old Testament being more horrific, I'll give you that) and so I don't see it as a shock that the Qur'an allows marriage to "people of the book".

This does not mean, however, that these books necessarily turn people into monsters. What I see instead is otherwise decent Christians and Muslims either reinterpreting horrendous verses to make them seem way less horrific than intended or they play dumb apologetic games even when they agree the acts would be considered horrific if it wasn't their preferred god behind these acts.

MK; there's a reply button that sends a notification to me   you can use that if you want to reply to me.

Grandizer; the difference is that the bible allows atrocities in this life. The Quran has brutal verses, but all are in the afterlife.
No Muslim will rape your son in school because "Moses did it". But a Christian can so easily do it, and the role model is in my OP.
We saw it with the Catholic Church and its pedophile issue.

Yes; books just contain the ideas. The problem is always sourced in the mind of the person. Nobody rapes kids because "they were fooled". Humans -most of the time- know their motives exactly.

[The Grand Nudger]

Liar, lol. What's more important...that you deceive others or that you deceive yourself? What does magic book say?

[WinterHold]

If they can be interpreted in a less horrific way, maybe God being good, the horrific way was never intended?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

You are reading a ROMAN COUNCIL CONCLUSION

---

Sure, you can imagine a god who's less of a cunt than magic book says he is.  You can manufacture any god you like, and call magic book bullshit all day long.  I doubt that anyone here would stop you.  He needs a modern rewrite, a new new testament.

We can always decide the level of "bad" from the brutality of the texts.
The text stands and shows; what would you say about pedophile soldiers? how would you justify it?

[The Grand Nudger]

A conclusion that you re-assert.  Whore of Rome.

How would -you- justifty pedophile slaving soldiers...which you must insist god approves of, or risk arguing against your own magic book? It;s easy for me. I don't believe in magic book, and don't care about magic book or the lies upon which it stands.

[WinterHold]

Well the Quran talks about the story of man of deep knowledge meeting with Moses, and does some things Moses finds morally wrong,  like even kill a boy.

But if anyone takes that as permission they can act for wise reasons for sake of God and kill an innocent boy, they are crazy.  That man in the Quran, referred to as Khidr (the Green One), was acting beyond the realms of good and evil known to humans, he was acting on another level.

But we humans cannot act according to his paradigm, because he was directly being commanded by God, just as the Angel of death takes life by God's command and organizes with his helpers the time of a person's leaving this world,  this man was similarly an Agent that was above the law.

I think going to a holy book with narrow paradigms, is not helpful to understand a very complex issue of what it means to be human.

I have certain criticism to your view; you can't read Arabic; don't you?
For the original story; I put it here with translation:

---

Sura 18, The Quran:
( 65 )   And they found a servant from among Our servants to whom we had given mercy from us and had taught him from Us a [certain] knowledge.

( 66 )   Moses said to him, "May I follow you on [the condition] that you teach me from what you have been taught of sound judgement?"

( 67 )   He said, "Indeed, with me you will never be able to have patience.

( 68 )   And how can you have patience for what you do not encompass in knowledge?"

( 69 )   [Moses] said, "You will find me, if Allah wills, patient, and I will not disobey you in [any] order."

( 70 )   He said, "Then if you follow me, do not ask me about anything until I make to you about it mention."

( 71 )   So they set out, until when they had embarked on the ship, (the word doesn't exist in Arabic :al-Khidhr)(Original: "he") tore it open. [Moses] said, "Have you torn it open to drown its people? You have certainly done a grave thing."

( 72 )   [(the word doesn't exist in Arabic :al-Khidhr)(Original: "he") ] said, "Did I not say that with me you would never be able to have patience?"

( 73 )   [Moses] said, "Do not blame me for what I forgot and do not cover me in my matter with difficulty."

( 74 )   So they set out, until when they met a boy, al-Khidh r killed him. [Moses] said, "Have you killed a pure soul for other than [having killed] a soul? You have certainly done a deplorable thing."

( 75 )   [(the word doesn't exist in Arabic :al-Khidhr)(Original: "he") ] said, "Did I not tell you that with me you would never be able to have patience?"

( 76 )   [Moses] said, "If I should ask you about anything after this, then do not keep me as a companion. You have obtained from me an excuse."

( 77 )   So they set out, until when they came to the people of a town, they asked its people for food, but they refused to offer them hospitality. And they found therein a wall about to collapse, so al-Khidh r restored it. [Moses] said, "If you wished, you could have taken for it a payment."

( 78 )   [(the word doesn't exist in Arabic :al-Khidhr)(Original: "he") ] said, "This is parting between me and you. I will inform you of the interpretation of that about which you could not have patience.


( 79 )   As for the ship, it belonged to poor people working at sea. So I intended to cause defect in it as there was after them a king who seized every [good] ship by force.

( 80 )   And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would overburden them by transgression and disbelief.

( 81 )   So we intended that their Lord should substitute for them one better than him in purity and nearer to mercy.

( 82 )   And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure for them, and their father had been righteous. So your Lord intended that they reach maturity and extract their treasure, as a mercy from your Lord. And I did it not of my own accord. That is the interpretation of that about which you could not have patience."

---

That is the original story. The of the name "Al Khidr" doesn't exist in the source. It is a Hadith applied on the original verse. This was a man we know nothing about him. But I agree with you on this one in some points; the man was getting revelations from God to do what he does; mainly just like Abraham. But this one did kill the boy.

If a man came today though and said "he is getting revelations to kill his son"; I will deem them crazy. It happened only for Abraham and the man in the story above; anybody else is not covered.

---

If they can be interpreted in a less horrific way, maybe God being good, the horrific way was never intended?

The way I generally interpret what I read is to take the words and intended meaning literally by default, allowing the overall context to determine whether I should adjust my initial interpretation in order to be in line with the context. What I don't do by default is romanticize the overall meaning of the text just so I can feel better about it.

There are two main styles of broadcasting the info in my opinion:
1-Direct meaning
2-romanticizing of the meaning i.e (covering the real meaning behind word gymnastics).

The first is the honest, scientific way. The second is the way of poets, musicians...etc.

For example; symbolism is immense in poetry and musical products; to save time and produce beautiful tones. But when a person uses number 2 to sell me something; I realize immediately that they're hiding something.

Why not tell me directly ? If I want music; I'll go to musicians.

---

The way I generally interpret what I read is to take the words and intended meaning literally by default, allowing the overall context to determine whether I should adjust my initial interpretation in order to be in line with the context. What I don't do by default is romanticize the overall meaning of the text just so I can feel better about it.

I understand, but trying to seeing reasons that justify, aren't necessarily romanticizing it.

The OP. Please justify the verse in it.

---

If you say so..  Maybe you could present a demonstration specific to the point of contetion in thread?  Explain the justification for acquiring a sex slave and fucking the dogshit out of her?

I can try to a Christian if they are confused about it.  But the loud Atheists who constantly respond here will just tear me apart through their cultural framework, without reasoning, but just insults and attacks.

So if  a Christian is confused about it, they can pm me.

You don't have shame; really?
The verse is speaking "OFFICIALLY" about the rape of kids. Literally telling "The Jewish soldiers" to take the "Little ones" and do with them "As they Please".............

---

Do you lack confidence in your justification or do you realize how fucking shameful it will inevitably be?

I fear there is no benefit for me justifying it to you guys. Because it has no place in this century for sure and you will constantly judge it from your framework.

Do what the Quran say, and care about yourself only in terms of faith:

Sura 5, The Quran:
( 105 )   O you who have believed, upon you is [responsibility for] yourselves. Those who have gone astray will not harm you when you have been guided. To Allah is you return all together; then He will inform you of what you used to do.

---

No, they didn't necessarily deserve it.  It's a consequence they face due to their society.

That is why it's also good to free slaves.

---

  That it;s meant to be used as a threat to competing nations..to scare the piss out of them that the armies of the faithful (often slave armies themselves) might just show up and chain-rape their daughters.

For people who saw glory in battle, this would be a huge thing to deter them, as ancients would find this the biggest consequence. More harder then even the slaughter of their heroes and men.

Then God is ordering his servants to be as bad and evil as non-believing armies; bombing and killing civilians? but in the past it was even worst: those who don't get killed by arrows and catapults get enslaved; and their daughters sexed.

That is deterrence?
The same filthy deterrence non Muslims do daily in military campaigns ?

Then God is a joke..

---

I understand, but trying to seeing reasons that justify, aren't necessarily romanticizing it.

But if we already know what the justifications were historically, then why try to come up with better and fairly new justifications just to suit the sensibilities of the more civilized religious mind? It doesn't come off as honest to me. People back then didn't know any better compared to us, so they did shit back then that was considered ok to them but is now clearly seen as barbaric to us, and so naturally ancient writings are going to contain verses and passages that just aren't going to appeal morally/ethically to us. And this includes the Qur'an, whether you like it or not. There is nothing special about the Qur'an that would make me want to reconsider my interpretations of the more aggressive verses in it just based on your "what if" argument.

You didn't read the Quran alone without Sunni/Shiite interpretation using the Hadith.

Read it alone. And let your mind judge; with all its experiences and knowledge.
Learn Arabic and linguistic comparison too.

Surprisingly you will find that across history; there always this small faction that had a certain understanding.
You will belong to them then.

---

That's not what magic book says..but now you're telling me that it's just bad luck?  Guilt by association?

I explained as is.  You been told the place it had in the past. There wasn't war tribunals, and not every society could afford to have war prisoners and feed them,  as they couldn't even feed themselves often.

And for a people who saw glory in battle and conquest, yes, this would make them think twice or three times before they attack and be at war with the believers, who are at peace with who offers peace and will fight those who wish to oppress them and fight them.

Then that God is not worthy, AND not capable. He could've give people to afford.

---

For people who saw glory in battle, this would be a huge thing to deter them, as ancients would find this the biggest consequence. More harder then even the slaughter of their heroes and men.

Do you even know people?  Telling me that you're going to rape my daughter isn't a deterrent to war..it's a reason for me to burn you out of your bed while you sleep.  Thankfully, I'll leave your little girls alone when I;m done dealing with you.....because I'm not a godamned monster........

Does allah know the people he's supposed to have created?  Wouldn't he understand this basic fact about us, even if you don't?  Is this his justification, does he approve?

He's not defending Allah. He is defending the writer of the bible.
That's ancient Rome. The difference is huge. Again: bring me one verse from the Quran that approves crimes like this.

---

Whether you acknowledge it or not, the ancients had our sense of compassion and justice, and this how they dealt with war. This how they deterred war, they made consequences for it. 
Otherwise, no one would care for peace, the worst thing that can happen if it were not for spoils of war, is you change rulers, and that is no big deal.

War never change.
Until this moment, women and children are being raped and the justification is the porn book you defend; sometimes they quote Sunni Hadiths, sometimes Shiite Hadiths, sometimes they quote George Bush.

But pedos do find a very nice sources in all the previous.

[WinterHold]

I think I understand people think twice of attacking, if there was no slavery,  people would say, the least that happens to us, is we have to live under their authority so why not just attack them and see what happens.

Wonderful, you've finally stuck on something.  So to clarify...you've romaticized not only the institution, and the motuivations of other people, you've romanticized the justification itself as a threat.

This is the point where reality falls on all of this horrid shit like a ton of bricks.

It was not a threat.  The caliphate -did- engage in slave raids, utilizing slave armies, deep into territories that posed no threat and had no animosity or other contact with them based upon thew market value of the women as judged by standards of beauty at the time.  Thy also purchased these sex working human chattel from other slaving cultures that -did- attack them whenever the price was right and demand exceeded supply.  The quran offered the justification for this trade in the form of an exhortation to buy and fuck a slave if you couldn't afford (or did not have the personal disposition) to have a wife in the manner prescribed by magic book.

-now recall, you've done all of this for no other reason than your need to engage in slavery apologetics on behalf of magic book.

You always throw this accusation based on an invisible verse that obviously only you can see.

Just like MK; you tend to romanticize in explaining the Quran, but in reverse.
Where is the verse that allows slave trade in the Quran?

Please post it.

---

The Caliphate fought wars they had no right to. They did it out lust and greed of spoils.

They twisted the Shariah to suit their purposes and they assaulted people who they had no right to attack in the first place.

But the Shiite institution twisted the Sharia even more.

---

They did exactly what magic book told them to.   Magic book -contained- the justification and regulations of the slave trade along with positive advice that a man should avail himself of it to keep from doing bad things.

Does god approve?  Did god only approve in that century, has he changed his mind since?  Has magic book been rewritten to comport with allahs new opinion on the subject, in this century?

Is magic book an outdated collection of dusty old shit about how to live your life then with no bearing on how you should live your life now?

Was the trafficking of children for the purposes of sex good then, and bad now?

No. The did exactly what revenge and hatered told them to do. It is real that the Ummayad Caliphate butchered the Ali and his followers, and gave them the worst massacres ever.

The Shiite faith originated from the massacre; groups of men and women turned fanatics by the pain, built a religion oriented and evolved around revenge from the Sunnies.

It has nothing to do with the Quran.