Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!

[S.A.M.]

I wonder why Christians never comment on the fact that Joseph, who married Mary, had already buried a wife he lived with for forty years, whom he married when he was forty years old. The man was almost 90 and the fact she had at least three children means she was sexually active with him. Aisha on the other hand, had no children through the years of her marriage, so there isn't even any evidence that she was sexually active. Yet, people actually worship Jesus, which is kinda like saying, its okay to have kids at 12 with 90 year olds.

Its the same as all the people who expound on Greek rationalism and omit the fact that they buggered little boys.

Its just the hypocrisy of it all.

 

[GeoffP]

Interesting rumours: never heard them before. Your analogy was a tiny bit flawed. Are these justifications used widely in the construction of societal rules for sexual abuse, or do they kind of run contrary to them? Does the admiration of Greek rationalism extend to the complete emulation of every aspect of Greek life?

Hypocrisy, yes.

 

[S.A.M.]

Interesting rumours: never heard them before. Your analogy was a tiny bit flawed. Are these justifications used widely in the construction of societal rules for sexual abuse, or do they kind of run contrary to them? Does the admiration of Greek rationalism extend to the complete emulation of every aspect of Greek life?

Hypocrisy, yes.

I'd say calling a woman with five+ children, Virgin Mary constitutes blindness not abuse.

Just pointing out that all those who have issues with social customs of the last 49,900 years need to take a more objective look at exactly what it is they have issues with. Selective outrage seems to imply its not the sexual "abuse". Or a 12 year old having five or more children with a 90 year old should take precedence.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm

 

[Killjoy]

`
Too much yammering, not enough blasphemous imagery !

I got one.

Anybody here ever see The Three Stooges ?

 

[Bells]

She was? Never actually heard that one. If it were so, is Mohammed equivalent to God? Never heard that one either.

Anyway: again, the issue of her age - whether true or false - isn't a slight on her, Sam, but on that of her once husband. If you don't understand the why of that statement, I can't help you.

Some place his age much higher. What slight should be placed on Joseph's age if some interpretations of the writings and scriptures are to be believed?

The History of Joseph the Carpenter is one of the texts within the New Testament apocrypha concerned with period of Jesus' life before he was 12. [1].

The text is framed as an explanation by Jesus on the Mount of Olives concerning the life of Joseph, his stepfather. Agreeing with Mary's continued virginity, the text proclaims that Joseph had four sons (Judas, Justus, James, and Simon) and two daughters (Assia and Lydia) by a previous marriage. At age 90, after the death of his first wife, Joseph is given charge of the twelve year old virgin Mary. She lives in his household raising his youngest son James 'the less' along with Judas, until the time she is to be married at age 14½.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Joseph_the_Carpenter

 

[Michael]

Er...yes, yes a human being can do such a thing.

Interesting perspective on the age of Aisha, Michael: but how does it figure in legitimizing the heredity of the Caliph? I'm sorry, I missed this one.

I think I read that somewhere else but it did show up on wiki.

References to Aisha's age by early historians are frequent.[3] According to Spellberg, historians who supported the Abbasid Caliphate against Shi'a claims considered Aisha's youth, and therefore her purity, to be of paramount importance. They thus specifically emphasized it, implying that as Muhammad's only virgin wife, Aisha was divinely intended for him, and therefore the most credible regarding the debate over the succession to Muhammad.[3]

I think the Bible is antisemitic. It requires all Jews to accept Jesus or be damned.

I'd agree.

Considering she never remarried for the remainder of her life, she was quite a woman.

Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy God's Apostle, or that ye should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in God's sight an enormity.
—Qur'an 33:53

:scratchin:
hmmmmmm......


The problem is people are idiots. Idiots think: Mohammad consumated his married to a 9-10 year old child and so it must be OK. THAT'S a problem in pretty much all societies everywhere in the modern world and yet another example of a flaw in Islam that will need to be fixed. My suggestion is to rewrite the stories. :shrug: I mean come on - it's a fraking story, rewrite the damn thing. Geeesh!!


What's more important here? Protecting children or preserving a story by the letter? Anyone with an ounce of decency would just change the damn story - at least for the general lay audience.

 

[S.A.M.]

The problem is people are idiots. Idiots think: Mohammad consumated his married to a 9-10 year old child and so it must be OK

I think the idiots are the one who focus on Aishas marriage to the exclusion of all else. Even in threads purportedly on freedom of speech/expression. Mohammed was 25 when he married 40 year old Khadeja and he had only one wife until she died 15 years later - which was not a requirement in his society. After that all his marriages were either political or for reasons other than intimacy.

There are morons in every society but I doubt there are many men who will marry 9 year old girls because someone else did it too. Islam is one of the few religions where women have the option to say No to marriage and have done, on occasion, even in the ceremony itself. 1400 years ago, that was quite an accomplishment. Those who ignore Mohammed's history and only pick on Aishas age to justify marriage, will find some reason or the other regardless of what Mohammed did or said. This is one of the occasions which probably underlines his own wishes that no should write down anything he said or did, except for the Qur'an. Clearly he was as aware of the dangers of blind followers as anyone else. And for his sins, he earns the repudiation of those who live in different times, where they can achieve liberty only by drawing him as a dog or accusing him of pedophilia. I can't access the facebook page, but I bet most of those declaring their freedom of expression needed to be really vile and offensive to feel truly liberated. I'd like to see those pictures if you can access them, just to know exactly how freedom is defined by those who presume to judge Mohammed.

 

[Yosef]

@Michael

The stories will not be changed for any earthy reason! I would like to tell you that the Holy Quran is being recited daily by 100's of millions of people. There are 9 million people living on this earth who can recite it all by heart. There are 100's of millions of blessings sent by people living upon this earth to the final prophet of God: Muhammad son of Abduallah.

I suspect that many westerners cannot distinguish between ultimate truths and earthy political / economical disputes / situations.

 

[GeoffP]

I'd say calling a woman with five+ children, Virgin Mary constitutes blindness not abuse.

Interesting choice of terms: wouldn't virgin refer to Jesus' birth? And they say intellectual dishonesty is going out of style.

Some place his age much higher. What slight should be placed on Joseph's age if some interpretations of the writings and scriptures are to be believed?

"The History of Joseph the Carpenter is one of the texts within the New Testament apocrypha concerned with period of Jesus' life before he was 12."

:shrug:

I suspect that many westerners cannot distinguish between ultimate truths and earthy political / economical disputes / situations.

Nor internet posters, seemingly.

Anyway: I have been partially responsible for drawing this thread off-topic. What to say to the notion that only negative drawings of Mohammed are considered offensive? How about some broad comments about the phenomenon? Although I was curious about this comment:

Islam is one of the few religions where women have the option to say No to marriage and have done, on occasion, even in the ceremony itself.

In which other religions do women have no such right?

 

[Bells]

:shrug:

*Sigh*

The New Testament apocrypha are a number of writings by early Christians that give accounts of Jesus and his teachings, the nature of God, or the teachings of his apostles and of their lives. These writings often have links with books regarded as "canonical". Not every branch of the Christian church agrees on which writings should be regarded as "canonical" and which are "apocryphal"

-------------------------------

The word "apocrypha" means "hidden writings" and comes from the Greek through Latin. The general term is usually applied to the books that were considered by the church as useful, but not divinely inspired. As such, to refer to Gnostic writings as "apocryphal" is misleading since they would not be classified in the same category by orthodox believers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha

 

[Norsefire]

Obviously in this day and age, few people would approve of a marriage with such drastic age differences; but Muhummad lived in a different age. To paint him as a pedophile is to say that he was sexually interested in the girl, when in fact it was most probably an interest in family lines, wealth, and power.

As for this "holiday", the only people that would celebrate it are immature, childish morons who like insulting others. Oh well.

 

[GeoffP]

*Sigh*

The New Testament apocrypha are a number of writings by early Christians that give accounts of Jesus and his teachings, the nature of God, or the teachings of his apostles and of their lives. These writings often have links with books regarded as "canonical". Not every branch of the Christian church agrees on which writings should be regarded as "canonical" and which are "apocryphal"

*Sigh*.

 

[GeoffP]

Obviously in this day and age, few people would approve of a marriage with such drastic age differences; but Muhummad lived in a different age. To paint him as a pedophile is to say that he was sexually interested in the girl, when in fact it was most probably an interest in family lines, wealth, and power.

As for this "holiday", the only people that would celebrate it are immature, childish morons who like insulting others. Oh well.

I agree that the insulting of Mohammed merely for the sake of doing so is kind of childish, yes. But the drawing issue is meant to draw attention to the fact that extremists are trying to intimidate and threaten actions in Western countries. And that's the ultimately childish thing about this: that extremists are trying to dictate to us on a level so incredibly childish as to defy belief: drawing things. The rage about this is so petty and ignorantly informed (not to mention having been actually duplicitously and intentionally stirred up by Islamic extremists) that it does deserve some commentary. Perhaps it will stir up some introspection. But, as Michael opines, probably not.

 

[S.A.M.]

extremists are trying to intimidate and threaten actions in Western countries

:roflmao:

Seriously, how many countries have "westerners" occupied and erased of their cultures? How many are they currently occupying? Thats some tunnel vision there.

What are they afraid of exactly? That other people will emulate their behaviour?

 

[iceaura]

I wonder why Christians never comment on the fact that Joseph, who married Mary, had already buried a wife he lived with for forty years, whom he married when he was forty years old

Probably because they never heard that one. It's certainly not in the Christian Bible.

I think the idiots are the one who focus on Aishas marriage to the exclusion of all else.

Nobody much does that, except maybe some of these people:

The stories will not be changed for any earthy reason! I would like to tell you that the Holy Quran is being recited daily by 100's of millions of people. There are 9 million people living on this earth who can recite it all by heart. There are 100's of millions of blessings sent by people living upon this earth to the final prophet of God: Muhammad son of Aduallah.

I suspect that many westerners cannot distinguish between ultimate truths and earthy political / economical disputes / situations.

So we see that this:

There are morons in every society but I doubt there are many men who will marry 9 year old girls because someone else did it too.

misses the point. There are plenty of men who will justify screwing 9 year olds on the basis of such stories, setting up entire societies based on that and similar aspects of old myths and stories, if they are enshrined in religious reverence and protected from ordinary criticism - and mockery.

Islam is one of the few religions where women have the option to say No to marriage and have done, on occasion, even in the ceremony itself. 1400 years ago, that was quite an accomplishment.

1400 years ago, that may have spoken in its favor, in that time and place. My own ancestral culture included that option long before then, as did many others, but for an Abrahamic religion that probably was - even is, some places - quite advanced.

Of course, if it were based on a norm of marriage at age twelve to grown men, it wouldn't mean quite as much in practice.

Mary was twelve years old when she gave birth to Jesus. Do you blame God for that immaculate conception?

The entire account is publicly criticised and even mocked, as a story, throughout the literate and educated world. In those kinds of details, it is not even known to most Christians.

What are they afraid of exactly? That other people will emulate their behaviour?

That would be among the legitimate fears, yes. There are others.

 

[S.A.M.]

misses the point. There are plenty of men who will justify screwing 9 year olds on the basis of such stories

Perhaps we should have some statistics on how many 9 year olds are screwed on the basis of such justifications and how many are screwed apart from them. Because if we are making a point about the effects of myths about other people, lets not be doing them based on other myths about people.

That would be among the legitimate fears, yes. There are others.

What would you suppose is the basis of such fears?

 

[Yosef]

What would you suppose is the basis of such fears?

I think many fears would have vanished if they had lived a godly life. Because the belief in God opens the heart to all creation. It establishes tolerance, love and understanding. It would make us all more receptive to other human beings. It would increase our helping behavior towards people in need.

Why to reject the great gift. Why not to be in a good relationship with the sustainer of all life, God Almighty?!

 

[GeoffP]

Seriously, how many countries have "westerners" occupied and erased of their cultures?

Er...so what is your point here? That this is okay, if done to Westerners? That it is okay if Arabs or Muslims do it? (They have their own tally to answer for.)

What are they afraid of exactly? That other people will emulate their behaviour?

Actually, you argued above that it wasn't a positive thing. But now you're implying it's neutral. So which is it: justifiable punishment, or justifiable non-punishment?

I would have at least thought that you'd care about the Muslim victims of the trumped-up charges of Danish, er, "apostacy".

 

[TBodillia]

A bit off topic, but the entire thread seems to be off topic...

I really think it is great that Islam doesn't allow Mohammed to be depicted in any form. I can't go an entire day without seeing an image of Jesus somewhere. Jesus on the crucifix, Jesus on a bumper sticker, Jesus in the newspaper (some ad asking Christians for help), Jesus on the news because someone found toast with His image...

No where in the bible does it give a physical description of Jesus, but every single Christian kid knows exactly what He looks like.

I just try to imagine what the world would look like if the Christians took the Islamic view on this 2,000 years ago. It puts a smile on my face.

 

[GeoffP]

All those images are wrong, of course. Although that's not really related to the topic.