with the recent leak and viewing of the elders video on the new standard construction kingdumb halls the rank & file brobots have officially become employees of a billion dollar publishing and now real estate company, equipped with 7 ceo's and many businessmen as shrewd and as money hungry as any rival fortune 500 company.. the new kingdumb halls look like (i have to give it to them) expertly designed commercial properties that any major office, restuarant or commercial leasing company would package as a ultra versatile space!!!
the old kingdumb halls where a tough resale to the general public because of the custom designing aspects of the old kingdumb halls.
they have completely done away with that issue with these new versatile properties which can be converted to an office/restaurant/repair garage/clinic.
I guess the comment in last years KINDUMB MINISTRY: Will this be our last memorial? Was a bit of satire also... because I think we all know the answer to that one now... A BIG FAT HELL NO!!! Ha
No kidding. When I saw that I was so annoyed. I was still going at that point.
this is what obama recently had to say about religion and how it is causing problems in the world... the prophecy is coming true!!!
we apostates are doomed!!!.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=afndil42e20.
I believe wholeheartedly that the harlot in religion represents religion and that the beast a world power. But I fully believe the Watchtower is wrong about who the beast is and now it will play out. They have to be wrong, otherwise they are true- and they are not.
government against religion is kind of inevitable though, I'm not sure how much of a prophecy that really is.
much has been said about muslims and iraq but little historical information has been given to understand the context.
context is important in understanding anything especially with regards to conflicts.
islam and the conflict in iraq requires knowledge of at least four different parties with a general understanding of their ideology.. islam was founded around 622 c.e.
I think I stated elsewhere that I honestly believe the solution is the eradication of all religion. Make religion illegal. It'd take a few decades of fighting no doubt but eventually people wouldn't know the words Islam, Christian, or Jew (in the religious sense, not saying kill all Jews).
for god so loved the world he gave his only begotten son and then took him back.
that's not love, its a big legal loophole.
people have technically died in the past, and by the standards of diagnosing death in bible times you could definitely beat 48 hrs and return.
@kaik
unless your wife travels to Jerusalem to sacrifice the first fruits of her flock every year, then we are talking about a very different Judaism. I have no problem admitting I know nothing about modern day Judaism. But it's a completely different religion from the days of Christ, and even more so from before that.
with the recent leak and viewing of the elders video on the new standard construction kingdumb halls the rank & file brobots have officially become employees of a billion dollar publishing and now real estate company, equipped with 7 ceo's and many businessmen as shrewd and as money hungry as any rival fortune 500 company.. the new kingdumb halls look like (i have to give it to them) expertly designed commercial properties that any major office, restuarant or commercial leasing company would package as a ultra versatile space!!!
the old kingdumb halls where a tough resale to the general public because of the custom designing aspects of the old kingdumb halls.
they have completely done away with that issue with these new versatile properties which can be converted to an office/restaurant/repair garage/clinic.
Man I hate that I'm one of those that has trouble telling satire from reality. Lol dammit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl6e4emx-4k
I don't even know what to say other than to ask if you are actually Rezza Aslan trolling us
Haha man I wish i was! I'd have a promising career for a change, I've had so many jobs... Omg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl6e4emx-4k
Well. I think we'll all have to agree to disagree on this one.
no opinion is wrong. And at this point that is what we are arguing. I know the Quran is not endorsing domestic abuse, but cofty, for example, feels even one slap is abuse even if a woman is mistreating and demeaning her mate severely. I disagree. But that doesn't mean I would ever beat my wife.
as far as the crusades comparison, I do understand where your coming from Simon. And it's a good point. I just don't agree. The pope was the closest thing to a world power at that time, every king was under his authority. Out of fear of excommunication they endorsed and supported the crusades. Muslims are not being forced to support ISIS.
Personally, I feel the entire world, and us in particular here, are extremely biased against religion. I do not feel Islam is reflective of the Quran. Therefore while I do not agree with Islam, I do not condemn the Quran just because it's linked with a group that does things I don't agree with. The Quran is not where they get these teachings or ideas from, and I think what is happening here is we are assuming since the Quran is islams book that their traditions must come from it. This is logical, but not the case.
you guys might disagree, and that's fine. But that's how I feel about it. I think any further discussion might come across like I'm trying to push my views on you and I don't want to do that. Since I've already positioned my thoughts on the matter for considerstion, and they've been considered, I'll excuse myself.
I promise I've read and seriously considered all your posts as well. So I hope this does t leave anyone feeling I haven't somehow. I don't feel any disrespect toward you for disagreeing or anything. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl6e4emx-4k
The point is men are given power over woman in the Islamic faith/culture.
This is is true. But I'm not arguing in favor of Islam. As I've said, they don't follow their book. I'm only defending the Quran.
as far as other posts that have been made since my last long one. I don't understand why slapping a person who is mistreating you should be wrong. It's not saying beat the hell out of her, it's saying slap her if she won't listen and stop mistreating you. If that doesn't work it directs the couple to separate so there can be peace.
If I mistreated my wife she would slap me. And I think any who are married here would agree, if we treated our wives like dirt, they would slap us. If my wife mistreated me severely enough (which this is talking sbout) I would slap her. This is normal human behavior being restricted so as to AVOID mistreatment. The directives in the Quran are saying to only go so far to try to stay together. If that doesn't work it says they should divorce.
If we are unwilling to give the benefit of the doubt and consider what is really being said, then we can vilify any book and any man of our choosing. If we let it speak for itself however, and consider the social and cultural context around its development, there is nothing evil or vile about this book. the Quran stands as a witness against Islam, and especially ISIS, in the same way the bible does against Christianity, and especially Catholicism. But the books themselves are being almost crucified by society today, and only because of being misrepresented and slandered either on accident or on purpose.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl6e4emx-4k
also @simon
i afraid I still have to disagree. When the crusades began there was no world power, England hadn't colonized the states yet. As far as the known world was concerned, all of civilization was over in Europe. The Kings of Europe were under the power of the pope still. The pope said jump and they asked, how high? When the ottoman empire spread into Spain (against the direction of the Quran I might add), this was at a time when all of Islam was on the offensive. The pope then sent for the Kings to send their armies to fight them back. All Christian men able to fight tried to join the crusade if they were able. It is documented that wives would lock their husbands in a room and not allow them to leave, keeping them prisoner. The church was very successful in recruiting ridiculous numbers into their army to fight Islam. This for me is the difference. The central and primarily (and at the time, ONLY) authority for all Christians in the then known world sanctioned, approved, and encouraged the crusades. They proscribed for their worshippers that joining the army was the greatest calling in the world, and of they did so all sins would be forgiven them. They did not direct this for only a few or a handful, but for all Christians in the known world of the day. This, to me, is vastly different from ISIS and there little handful of radicalized fools.
If the church were to try something like that today, it would not reflect on all Christianity because since then Christians habe splintered into 10s of 1000s of groups. What the Catholics do does not reflect on baptists or Methodists and vice versa. The same is true of ISIS, and other dempnominations of Islam. However, back at the time of the crusades there was only a single Christian denomination. Therefore, since that one denomination sanctioned and approved it, it reflects on all of them at that time and the Catholic Church today.
Atrocities like this, as well as the false teachings of Catholicism, is the reason for the reformation, and the development of all the different Christian groups today. For this reason, because they took action to sever themselves from this past, the crusades no longer reflect on all Christianity. Compared with Islam however, they are already splintered. If there had been other denominations of Christianity around during the crusades then the crusades would only reflect on the ones who took part and sanctioned them. The same should be true of Islam, which does not as a whole sanction and endorse ISIS. This just like the crusades would not reflect on multiple denominations if they had existed, ISIS does not reflect on Islam as a whole.
i feel like this response was long winded, but I'm hoping more words made me easier to understand. I'm not great at articulation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl6e4emx-4k
None of the citations from the Hadith matter. The Quran is the authority as it came through Muhammed and the Hadith did not. None of those citations are suppored by the Quran. I again stress review of the link I posted above.
Regarding the two verses provided that ARE from the Quran. 4:34 and 35 says,
"Hushands should take good care of their wives, with the bounties God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have then guard in their husbands absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them of the teachings of God, then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you you have no right to act against them: God is most high and great."
The word translated 'High-handedness' is Nashaza from which Nushuz is derived means 'to become high, to rise. This high handedness is also condemned for husbands in verse 128. The word applies to situations where a person assumes a sense of superiority over the other. The Quran here directs a husband to use a slap as the LAST resort to such high handed behavior and to first try lovingly reminding them of God. Then in verse 128 this same sense of superiority is condemned for men as well, further showing than man and woman are viewed not as one superior to the other but as equal. This also flies in the face of the hadith, which is not from Muhammed and full of garbage.
38:44, "'Take a small bunch of grass in your hand, and strike her with that so as not to break your oath...'"
to what oath was this referring? the footnote reads:
"Quranic commentators explain that, when his wife blasphemed, Job swore that if he recovered from his illness, he would beat her with 100 lashes. When he recovered, however, he regretted his hasty oath, so God gave him this instruction."
so neither one of the verses you've quoted from the Quran actually support mistreatment of women. They encourage avoiding such treatment at all costs, and Job had made an oath he regretted but had to fulfill. So a way out was made that he could do so without causing any harm to his wife.
The hadith and the Quran are different books. One is taken as inspired word from God through Muhammed, which is the Quran. Then Hadith obviously contradicts the Qurans treatment of women, it is therefore false. It did not originate with Muhammed, and Muhammed would not have enjoyed mistreating women for amusement.
@cofty
it does not proscribe beating. A man should treat his wife as most precious according to the Quran. The scenario described in these verses would be like this:
My wife is treating me as some stupid inferior imbecile. She does not listen to anything I say and she demeans me in public and in private. I first appeal to her faith in God to explain how such behavior is wrong. It does not stop. I then deny her her marital due while also reminding her of God and how it's wrong to act superior. She does not stop. Even now, if my wife did this and I tried everything to get through to her that treating me this way is wrong, I would slap her.
The reverse is also true. If I am behaving that way toward her, this is also wrong in the Quran. I, as the husband, may be the head of the house, but I am not SUPERIOR to my wife. Acting as though I am is condemned in the Quran. And in the verses 128 and after if I am treating my wife this way the Quran says its best we part ways.
