The barbarism of Islam goes beyond and eye for an eye. That was the Old Testament, a very LONG time ago and Christianity was introduced since; however, Islam STILL uses the ideas of the Old Testament.
Even the Old Testament didn’t have women beated/ostracized when she was the victim of a rape. Also, I don’t recall anywhere in the Bible advocating suicide raids and using children and woman as combatants.
“Even the Old Testament didn’t have women beated/ostracized when she was the victim of a rape. Also, I don’t recall anywhere in the Bible advocating suicide raids and using children and woman as combatants.”
Thank you for letting me know what you can’t recall.
Perhaps you can recall all the times God commanded “his people” to go into a city and slaughter every innocent man, woman, and child, even the animals, such as:
Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and sucking, ox and sheep, camel and ass. [I Samuel 15:3]
Perhaps the style of Old Testament atrocities were different, but in my book, evil is evil.
Only you are making a comparisons between religions. I’m just pointing out the source of some bad ideas. Most of the Koran is stolen from or corruptions of Biblical teaching.
Hank
It is typical for the uninformed to simply assume that Islam got its moral code from the Old Testament. Actually, it didn't. Islam's shari'a law is a direct descendant of the legal code of Justinian dating from the 6th century, which was in force in the ANE by virtue of Late Roman control over the area (you know, the people the Arabs kicked out when they took over). Justinian's code was modified by native Arabic traditions, and the Islamic fiqh gradually took its present form over a couple of centuries of development.
Even the Old Testament didn’t have women beated/ostracized when she was the victim of a rape. Also, I don’t recall anywhere in the Bible advocating suicide raids and using children and woman as combatants.
The OT has none of these for the simple reason that the OT legal code, as we find it dealing with interpersonal interactions and interactions between the individual and the community was intended to be both fair AND decisive. The "barbaric" eye for an eye routine was intended to stop the otherwise typical series of escalating retaliations from happening. In essence, it was intended to both punish the offender, AND keep the victim's extended family (his beit 'ab) from initiating a cycle of violence that could eventually result in widespread wars between entire tribes (as often happened in other Semitic tribal groups such as the pre-Islamic Arabs).
I'm not sure I really agree with the proposition that eye for an eye and so forth is "barbaric." After all, we in the USA still practice "life for a life" (or at least, we do in theory). Most everybody understands that it is fair and just that if somebody intentionally murders somebody else, then that person has forfeited their own life, and can be liable to judicial execution. The only ones who don't understand this principle are the insipidly stupid among us, the sort of people who think that child rapists are just "misunderstood" and "need guidance," rather than serious punishment.
If we actually practiced "eye for an eye" in this country, I can guarantee you that we would not see the crime problem in this country that we have. And what, really, is barbaric? Putting somebody's eye out when they intentionally put out somebody else's, or following the route that our current criminal justice system pursues, which is to house such people (at tremendous taxpayer's expense) among other criminals, from whom they can learn to be better, deadlier, more violent criminals, and then releasing them back into society a few years later so they can prey on more innocent victims.
THAT is barbaric.
Oh, you need to read more...and try a non santized version.