Replies

if you really want to contort the message

But the "core" message never changes. The more you are a to-the-letter "believer" the worse you become. As far as the Jews are concerned, I don't know about the reformed, conervative, Hassidic, etc. No idea what theological diffferences exist between them. Don't care either. But the fact is the the OT treats women as gullable and guilty of sin just as the Koran does. I detest all religious "fundamentalists," but absolutely despise "reformed" or "attenuated," or "protesting" believers -- people who spiced up their religious beliefs to make them into something less ridiculous than what the holy books make them.

Christianity and Judaism (two worlds apart) are separate subjects. From what I gather, Islam is the only major religion that professes conversion (submission) by force and treats anyone who is a non-believer, a Pagan (or a Jew) as less then human.

But thenkas for the info. I will look up Hadith. Have a link perhaps?

First, I disagree that the "core" message never changes. With revelation, it certainly does become clearer. Abraham had no real idea of what the Messiah, or the Resurrection, entailed. He worked on the basis of the revelation he was given. Even Paul did not have the advantage of the "Holy Bible"---any of the letters written by John, Peter, James, etc. were not availble to him.

The Jews had the "core" of God's plan, but certainly didn't have all the details. They had to walk by faith on what they had. Remember, prior to Exodus, the Jews didn't even have the "ten commandments," so technically it wasn't breaking God's law to kill. You can't be charged with a crime that isn't on the books. As for "reformers," I think you are being way too harsh: what makes you think that the original inspired message cannot be perverted or corrupted by sinful men? The Reformation sought to RETURN to the original Gospel, not amend it.

Again, however, this may or may not apply to Islam. There are rules for reading the Bible, but these same rules may not apply to the Koran or Hadith.

re: "Gullible and guilty women" in the OT

Considering that the OT predates the Qu'ran by thousands of misogyinistic years, you might take note of Deborah the Judge and Esther the clever liberator of her people. Miriam, Zepphorah? Rahab the canny harlot was in the line of Christ. How about Ruth (also a pagan, and also in the line of Christ) and her independent mind? Leah and Rachel provided an object lesson of the struggle in a polygamist household, Sarah and Rebecca had thier own hearts and wills, and their personalities were clear in the old texts. They were PEOPLE, not concubines, little girls, objects of a prophet's self-justifying lust, or captive rape victims.

And in the New Testament, Christ ministered early and often to the women. Called one, "daughter of Abraham." Spoke out against exploitation of divorce...

Not exactly, "Talaq, talaq, talaq"--"I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you"--which was an innovation under the Koran to leave an unwanted wife helpless and destitute.

I've been doing some looking at Islam for the first time, myself. I see nothing approaching equivalence between the OT and the violence of the Koran. The closest thing to it was God's injuction to the conquering Hebrews to dispose of the pagan Canaanites swiftly and ruthlessly--and the Jews disobeyed. This was only one such directive, and it contained the promise that Israel held the divine deed to the Holy Land.

Perhaps we have the descendents of those pagans now to deal with, ourselves.