Mohammed coveting others wives

[path]

No wonder islam is so paranoid about men being so weak and helpless in the presence of revealed female beauty (are they really so weak morally that they can't control themselves?)
This is one of the most distressing aspects of Mohammed’s life. Mohammed’s adopted son, Zaid, had married a beautiful young woman with whom he was deeply in love. Then one day, according to early Muslim tradition, Mohammed saw Zaid’s wife without her veil. Her beauty was such that he lusted after her. He asked Zaid to divorce his wife and to give her to him. But Zaid and his wife refused such an outrageous request.

Faced with the refusal of Zaid and his wife to dissolve their marriage, Mohammed had a convenient “revelation” from Allah which not only commanded Zaid to give up his wife to Mohammed but also decreed that there was no evil in a father-in-law taking his daughter-in-law away from his own adopted son! Zaid and his wife were told that they did not have any choice in the matter. They had to submit to the “will of Allah.”

Sura 33:36-38 wrote:

It is not for any believer, man or woman, when God and His Messenger have decreed a matter, to have the choice in the affair. Whosoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. When you said to him whom Allah had blessed and you had favoured, “Keep your wife to yourself, and fear Allah,” and you were concealing within yourself what Allah should reveal, fearing other men; and Allah has better right for you to fear him. So when Zaid had accomplished what he would of her, then We gave her in marriage to you, so that there should be any fault in the believers, touching the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished what they would of them; and Allah’s commandment must be performed. There is no fault in the prophet, touching what Allah had ordained for him.

From: Between Christ and Mohammed: The Irreconcilable Differences Between Christianity and Islam
http://charleswelty.net/1891833545.htm

With a prophet like that setting the example for all mankind you had better cover up the misses (I won't even mention the child bride aisha (PBUH))

 

[path]

What no reply PM, is this morally right or wrong?

 

[Tiassa]

Path ... how does this issue connect to events and situations today? For instance, it's Biblical that God once punished a man for not committing genocide. And despite the economy descended from the "Protestant Ethic" (see Max Weber) we don't generally connect the genocides of the Bible with modern atrocities.

Why should we apply a different rule to Islam? Because it's "in our way" in the West? Should Christianity be banned for bombing abortion clinics and calling for Biblical authority in civil law?

I find your argument fallacious insofar as it pretends that "yesterday" is no different from today. History indicates that this is not so. Much like the trials at Salem, the troubles of the Arabic world are more directly connected to economy than faith.

Look at Christians: given time, they found that money was more important to them than God. "By the grace of God almighty," sings Roger, "and the pressures of the marketplace, the human race has civilized itself. It's a miracle."

If the West stops exploiting its wealth in order to treat Arabs like dogs, if we give Muslims the opportunity to seek new ways of finding God's will and grace in the world--in other words, if we treat Muslims decently and fairly, we'll see considerably different relations across the cultural divide.

What is the significance of your argument?

 

[path]

Tiassa you are assuming I am christian or defending christianity. I am neither It is a simple moral question you are not addressing this particular post

 

[Q25]

my guess is Mohamed like most great leaders or politicians was very greedy and ambitious and wanted it all,power wealth and women and obviously had brains and balls to get it!

 

[Tiassa]

Tiassa you are assuming I am christian or defending christianity.

No, actually, I'm not. Pay specific attention, in my prior post, to the words, "for instance."

It is a simple moral question you are not addressing this particular post

I'll try it in as few words as possible:

• Why the hell does it matter?

Or, to make it a little more specific, you wrote: "With a prophet like that setting the example for all mankind you had better cover up the misses (I won't even mention the child bride aisha (PBUH))"

It's a fallacious issue. Period. Connect it to today's Muslims (hence the question, "how does this issue connect to events and situations today?") and it ceases to be so.

But at present, you're merely presenting a reflection on the past, and at that point we can look to any number of people, not exclusively Christianity.

I do apologize; in the future I will seek to employ more obscure, and therefore less-accessible and less-effective comparisons, so as not to frighten your identity politic.

Quite simply, as I asked before, and as you have refused to address: "What is the significance of your argument?"

Right now it's just anemia from someone else's website.

 

[path]

No, actually, I'm not. Pay specific attention, in my prior post, to the words, "for instance."I'll try it in as few words as possible:

Pay specific attention to the topic in the thread and try and stay on topic or don't post. mmmmmmkay

• Why the hell does it matter?

Or, to make it a little more specific, you wrote: "With a prophet like that setting the example for all mankind you had better cover up the misses (I won't even mention the child bride aisha (PBUH))"

It's a fallacious issue. Period. Connect it to today's Muslims (hence the question, "how does this issue connect to events and situations today?") and it ceases to be so.


But at present, you're merely presenting a reflection on the past, and at that point we can look to any number of people, not exclusively Christianity.

I believe it has very much to do with current events hence this thread. Though I do appreciate your attempt to guide me in the way of "right thinking" according to yourself.

I do apologize; in the future I will seek to employ more obscure, and therefore less-accessible and less-effective comparisons, so as not to frighten your identity politic..

So very kind and patronizing of you. I'm afraid I won't modify my posts to conform to your ideas of PC or right and wrong.

Quite simply, as I asked before, and as you have refused to address: "What is the significance of your argument?"

Right now it's just anemia from someone else's website.

Wait so I started a thread which you try and derail and now suddenly I am guilty of not addressing an issue in my thread?! That is a neat trick you simply MUST show me how to do it one day. The significance is part of a larger issue too big for a thread so I have started a small connected subject for discussion. This is VERY simple

Is a good example for mankind set by mohammed in this passage? Is this the way a Holy prophet who is very intimate with god behaves? Does god change his divine word to suit the man or does man change his behavior to suit the divine word?

 

[rainbow__princess_4]

Allah conviniently ordered that guy to hand over his wife, and God conviniently made all traces of Jesus's diciples disappear...

 

[Tiassa]

What was so hard about that?

Pay specific attention to the topic in the thread and try and stay on topic or don't post. mmmmmmkay

Yawn.

You still don't get it, do you?

I believe it has very much to do with current events hence this thread.

How so?

So very kind and patronizing of you. I'm afraid I won't modify my posts to conform to your ideas of PC or right and wrong.

Good thing I didn't ask you to.

Wait so I started a thread which you try and derail and now suddenly I am guilty of not addressing an issue in my thread?!

I suppose that's one way of looking at it.

That is a neat trick you simply MUST show me how to do it one day

It's easily enough explained.

• Path posts a topic post.
• Tiassa asks Path for clarification, and gives context regarding the nature of the question.
• Path refuses to answer and accuses Tiassa of various wrongs.
• Tiassa responds to correct Path's mistaken notions, and reiterates the question.
• Path, unable to answer directly or honestly, retreats inside a two-bit façade.
• Which brings us up to the present. Mmmmkay?

The significance is part of a larger issue too big for a thread so I have started a small connected subject for discussion

I see.

This is VERY simple

Obviously not, if you're incapable of fitting it all into one post, and also incapable of providing some hint--even the mere mention--of that larger purpose in the topic post. As far as I can tell, the larger issue has something to do with your condemnation of Islam. Which is fine, but inasmuch as I asked you, "What is the significance of your argument?" a vague reference to some larger purpose is the best you can give, and that on the second try?

Is a good example for mankind set by mohammed in this passage?

There you go. Easy enough. Seriously ... what was so hard about saying that up front? Stylized bashing of Islam too attractive an option? I'll read through it and toss in my two cents.

Is this the way a Holy prophet who is very intimate with god behaves?

I'm not sure it's relevant. If the prophet was guided by God, your issue is with God, not the prophet. For you or me that don't hold with that particular explanation of God ... I leave it as a matter of faith. The idea is a mere abstraction until something makes it more concrete an issue, but that's an issue of history itself, and not you or me.

Does god change his divine word to suit the man or does man change his behavior to suit the divine word?

Depends largely on whether God created man or vice-versa. In the case of the latter, man isn't necessarily aware of the fact of that creation, and can still be manipulated or informed by God.

 

[Tiassa]

A Note to Fellow Posters

The topic link isn't exactly specific, is it? It's Chapter 8.

Path

I'm having some difficulty with Morey's essay because it starts absurdly.

This whole argument makes less and less sense as I read. More when I figure it out.

 

[Eluminate]

basicly (i m ignoring tiassa from now one since he is completely biased)
mohammeds examples sets up a very clear example...
His example is this; if you say god orders you to do something even if you make it up thats all the excuse you need. If someone doesn't believe you they are an infedel and non believer thus irrelevant since god directs you to act the way you want and they should be smitten or killed since they are going against gods/yours wishes.

This is what his example for the followers was. So the only solution i see is to kill all muslim scum right now who try to impose this example in our countries. And let it be a warning to those who still live after.

 

[path]

Tiassa I am not going to begin bickering with you over this. If you are having a hard time with the article then simply refer to the passage in the koran to keep it simple for yourself. The issue is part of the larger issue of the koran being "the immutable word of god" given directly to man via mohammed and as such is infallible. This leaves islam open to misinterpretation and fanaticism and using mohammed as "an example for mankind for all time" opens islam up to various breaches of modern morality. I think you will agree that in christianity it is also the faithful who see the bible as the divine word of god instead of parables inspired by god to help guide peoples lives who are the most fanatic and most likely to misinterpret it's message.

 

[Zero]

path, learn to respond when someone who sees through your little mind tells you about it. This thread is obviously not meant for any educated discussion; it's just another one of those anti-Muslim threads. If you actually wanted someone to "Pay specific attention to the topic in the thread and try and stay on topic", you wouldn't have called out Proud_Muslim in your second post.

You're quite obviously here just to flame and contribute to the anti-Islam hype that's been circling around here. Since we have enough people doing the same thing, your presence is not needed. You may leave now.

Isn't it stupid to think that tiassa, who goes out of his way to create those hugely long, elaborate, verbose posts of his would "have a hard time with the article"?

-- Long live the Female Messiah!

 

[path]

OK I will respond to this

Path ... how does this issue connect to events and situations today? For instance, it's Biblical that God once punished a man for not committing genocide. And despite the economy descended from the "Protestant Ethic" (see Max Weber) we don't generally connect the genocides of the Bible with modern atrocities.

What in the world does this have to do with the SPECIFIC ISSUE of whether that occurence from mohammeds life is morally right or wrong? Honestly

Why should we apply a different rule to Islam? Because it's "in our way" in the West? Should Christianity be banned for bombing abortion clinics and calling for Biblical authority in civil law?

Please feel free to quote me directly where I say we should.

I find your argument fallacious insofar as it pretends that "yesterday" is no different from today. History indicates that this is not so. Much like the trials at Salem, the troubles of the Arabic world are more directly connected to economy than faith.

It is no doubt connected but I think part of the reason the muslim world is in the state it is in today has MUCH to do with islam. But AGAIN HOW DOES THIS RELATE to whether the occurence I posted was morally right or wrong?

Look at Christians: given time, they found that money was more important to them than God. "By the grace of God almighty," sings Roger, "and the pressures of the marketplace, the human race has civilized itself. It's a miracle."

Again ibid

If the West stops exploiting its wealth in order to treat Arabs like dogs, if we give Muslims the opportunity to seek new ways of finding God's will and grace in the world--in other words, if we treat Muslims decently and fairly, we'll see considerably different relations across the cultural divide.

What is the significance of your argument?

What was I trying to get people to discuss again?? Oh yeah now I remember Mohammeds morality.

If you wish to discuss these issues just start a thread I will contribute what I can (no doubt some smart remark will follow).

 

[path]

path, learn to respond when someone who sees through your little mind tells you about it. This thread is obviously not meant for any educated discussion; it's just another one of those anti-Muslim threads. If you actually wanted someone to "Pay specific attention to the topic in the thread and try and stay on topic", you wouldn't have called out Proud_Muslim in your second post.

I am accustomed to responding to the topic in a thread I was unaware that isn't the norm here. PM is the self declared "shield of islam" and he undoubtedly knows alot more about the subject than you so I naturally asked him to respond could have been Flores too for that matter.

You're quite obviously here just to flame and contribute to the anti-Islam hype that's been circling around here. Since we have enough people doing the same thing, your presence is not needed. You may leave now.

If you consider quoting an occurance from koran and hadith flaming then you obviously have a low opinion of islam. Thank you for dismissing me should I dismiss you back

Isn't it stupid to think that tiassa, who goes out of his way to create those hugely long, elaborate, verbose posts of his would "have a hard time with the article"?

Yes I must be stupid to think that those

hugely long, elaborate, verbose posts

addressed this topic.

-- Long live the Female Messiah!

Finally something we can agree upon

 

[wissam37]

No wonder islam is so paranoid about men being so weak and helpless in the presence of revealed female beauty (are they really so weak morally that they can't control themselves?)
This is one of the most distressing aspects of Mohammed’s life. Mohammed’s adopted son, Zaid, had married a beautiful young woman with whom he was deeply in love. Then one day, according to early Muslim tradition, Mohammed saw Zaid’s wife without her veil. Her beauty was such that he lusted after her. He asked Zaid to divorce his wife and to give her to him. But Zaid and his wife refused such an outrageous request.

Faced with the refusal of Zaid and his wife to dissolve their marriage, Mohammed had a convenient “revelation” from Allah which not only commanded Zaid to give up his wife to Mohammed but also decreed that there was no evil in a father-in-law taking his daughter-in-law away from his own adopted son! Zaid and his wife were told that they did not have any choice in the matter. They had to submit to the “will of Allah.”

Sura 33:36-38 wrote:



From: Between Christ and Mohammed: The Irreconcilable Differences Between Christianity and Islam
http://charleswelty.net/1891833545.htm

With a prophet like that setting the example for all mankind you had better cover up the misses (I won't even mention the child bride aisha (PBUH))

Whatt a big fat lie!!!! I think if you start a thread you owe it to your readers to state the truth and let them debate on it you have no right to post lies with no proof and everyone here are reading your crap, Common bring something solide man!!!

 

[path]

So the koran is a Lie?? or has lies in it?

 

[wissam37]

So the koran is a Lie?? or has lies in it?

The quran is perfect up to this day, no matter what you try to murky it, Zaid had already decided to divorce his wife although the prophet warned him not to divorce her, the prophet married her later when god asked him to, So that ppl will have no discomfort with the idea of marryring the adoptive son's wife after she get divorced.
It's just an option that may happen in someone's life so they would know it's okay to do that.

 

[path]

The quran is perfect up to this day, no matter what you try to murky it, Zaid had already decided to divorce his wife although the prophet warned him not to divorce her, the prophet married her later when god asked him to, So that ppl will have no discomfort with the idea of marryring the adoptive son's wife after she get divorced.
It's just an option that may happen in someone's life so they would know it's okay to do that.

So there really was no need for god to include that sura in the koran then?

 

[munim_786]

my guess is Mohamed like most great leaders or politicians was very greedy and ambitious and wanted it all,power wealth and women and obviously had brains and balls to get it!

Mohaamed (saw) was not rich. he got booty from wars but they all went to his followers, family, and poor people. there was times when he had lighting an not even any food. although people were ready to die for him with questioning and would offer anything to him but he did not ask people for money, food etc. as a sign if his perseverance and obediance to Allah.

he was offered ENTIRE LANDS and HUMONGOUS amounts of money to stop preaching and denouce prophet hood. did he accept? NO he stuck ith his simple modest way of life.

as for women, Mohammed (saw) was a virgin till he was married and 25 (VERY late for the times) with his first wife Khadija who was 15 years older then him. his next wife was an old pensioner. he did have more wives but they weren;t for his needs (if you make another thread i will answer) AND REMEMBER at the time Saudi was the easiest place to get some quick p :m: ssy. this was for all classes. 10 year olds could easily do it. Mohammed (saw) was from a respected tribe he could of get a good attractive big boobed slaggish female but he chose not to. he was a virgin tilled married and did not have sex at any time of his life outiside of marrage EVER.