Thursday, June 20, 2013


And here I thought Islam was barbaric!


Xavier Onassis said...

Lone Ranger said...

Muslims love Christians and Jews.


I just smeared Islam.

Joe said...

XO: I'v seen the video. So what? Every single news clip you've ever watched, including this one, is "cherry picked." Otherwise the entire newscast would be about one event and would sometimes have to last hours.

The important thing is whether these particular clips coincide with what Koran teaches. They do.

Sura 4:34 in the Koran indeed permits husbands to hit their wives: "As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, (first)admonish them,(next) refuse to share their beds, (last)beat them..."

Muhammad: "You have rights over your wives and they have rights over you. You have the right that they should not defile your bed and that they should not behave with open unseemliness. If they do, God allows you to put them in separate rooms and to beat them but not with severity. If they refrain from these things, they have the right to their food and clothing with kindness. Lay injunctions on women kindly, for they are prisoners with you having no control of their own persons."

Islamic historian and translator, Maududi: "But the fact is that there are certain women who do not mend their ways without a beating."

Let's try instituting that as a cultural norm here in America.

Good idea?

LR: Better watch your back. XO will be out to get you.

Xavier Onassis said...

Genesis 19:8 - "Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof."

Leviticus 21:9 - "And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire."

Deuteronomy 22:20-21 - "20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 - "23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you."

Deuteronomy 22:27-29 - "27 For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days."

Your Bible is full of cruelty to women, treating them like cattle and slaves, killing them or selling them for any number of crimes against men.

Don't even try to pretend that Christianity is better than Islam.

All religions are the same. They enslave people with mystical nonsense.

sue hanes said...

Joe - I always say that there is nothing so good as organized beatings. And good to avoid beating on the face - that way no one can see it.

Ducky's here said...

The husband is the head of the family. That guy could be speaking from the pulpit of any evangelical church keeping women subordinate.

Joe said...

XO: Nothing you quoted has anything to do with Christianity. Christianity is a product of the New Covenant, everything you quoted is under the Old Covenant.

Genesis 19:8 - a report of how depraved Lot was.

Leviticus 21:9 - an instruction of how much commitment and righteousness it would take to do what is impossible: be worthy of priesthood by the rule of law.

Deuteronomy chapters 11 through 28 - A long list of laws from Moses, the priests and levites attempting to please God, which could not be done.

Was there mistreatment of women? Yes, and every single bit of it denounced by God in the end. All of it.

Study the New Covenant (which is a covenant of mercy, grace and forgiveness for anyone who turns to Christ), especially Jeremiah, John, I Corinthians and Hebrews, chapters 6-10, and you will find the difference...if your heart is not too hard and your mind not too bigoted.

Joe said...

Ducky: "The husband is the head of the family. That guy could be speaking from the pulpit of any evangelical church keeping women subordinate."

Wrong, numskull. While there are some preachers who seem to miss it, if they read the preceding verse they know the submission is to each other, not one over (or under) the other. (Ephesians 5:21).

And the discussion is about the church, anyway, and the husband/wife relationship is an illustration of the church's position in Christ.

Ducky's here said...

Now I get it - the evangelical way

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "Nothing you quoted has anything to do with Christianity. Christianity is a product of the New Covenant, everything you quoted is under the Old Covenant.

Was there mistreatment of women? Yes, and every single bit of it denounced by God in the end. All of it."

So, what you're saying is, there was an Old Testament God that was different than the New Testament God? Polytheism?

Or are you saying there is still only One God, but that he isn't infallible, he isn't all knowing or all seeing, Me makes mistakes, just like you and me.

I created Adam and Eve and put them in Paradise.

Oh crap. That didn't work. Expel them from paradise. Problem solved.

Oh crap. That didn't work. Get Noah to build a boat, flood the world and repopulate.

Oh crap. That didn't work. Now they're all slaves in Egypt. Send Moses!

Oh crap, that didn't work!

They clearly need more than 10 Commandments. Let me dictate to them a complex legal code that dictates to them when, and under which conditions they can pimp out their wives and daughters as prostitutes, how they can treat their slaves, how many wives, concubines and whores they can keep in their homes and under what circumstances they can be stoned to death, when it is OK to invade another peoples land, kill every man, woman and child and claim that land as your own.

There. That should do it.

Oh crap. That didn't work.

Let me clone myself in a human, so that human can deliver a bunch of sermons that are the EXACT OPPOSITE of everything I've taught them before, be martyred, become me again, and also become a Holy Ghost so now there are 3 of us...except not really because we are all still me.

O.K. That should do it.

So now all 3 of us, or Me...whatever...will go into hiding and hope that the people can muster enough "faith" to make sense of all this nonsense.

I, We, whatever, will not perform any more miracles or answer any more prayers. No more burning bushes, no more parting the Red Sea, no more inscribing stuff in stone tablets with my own finger, no more Passovers, no more Hanukkah miracles. Complete radio silence.

Lose a leg in combat? Pray all you want. That leg is gone! Sucks to be you.

UNTIL, I snatch up all the dead people and the Righteous, send 'the Jesus me' back to Earth (the rest of the universe is of no concern to me...collateral creationism) to be the exactly the opposite as he was the first time around and KICK ASS!

Then a lot of other completely illogical and irrational stuff happens and I'm tired of typing.

One word summation. Ridiculous.

Spin Masters and Word Smiths have spent 6000 years trying to weave all of this nonsense into a coherent narrative and they have failed.

Lone Ranger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lone Ranger said...

You ever notice that whenever ignorant bigots want to smear Christianity, they dive into the Old Testament -- written more than a thousand years BEFORE the birth of Christ? It never fails.

Xavier Onassis said...

Tonto's Catcher - Is there one God? Or are there two? Is the Old Testament God different from the New Testament God? Simple question.

Are Yahweh and Jesus different deities or are they different manifestations of the same deity?

Xavier Onassis said...

There is no way to weave the Old and New Testament into a consistent narrative that speaks of a single, monotheistic, All Powerful, All Knowing, All Seeing, Infallible God.

The best evidence against all of those claims is The Bible.

Ducky's here said...

Well Ranger, I guess it has something to do with the fundamentalist tendency to jump from the OT to Revelations and ignore most of what's in between, especially the Sermon on the Mount.

Lone Ranger said...

Fundamentalist? Exactly which of the fundamentals of Christianity would you like to flush?

Xavier Onassis said...

Tonto's Catcher - "Exactly which of the fundamentals of Christianity would you like to flush?"

How about all of them?

There is no historical evidence, not one shred, that any of the events in the Bible actually took place.

Bronze Age, mystical goonbabble! All of it.

Joe said...

XO: "...Old Testament God that was different than the New Testament God?"

What a very stupid conclusion to draw from my remarks. It is a perfect example of your total inability to think in a straight line.

You are as blind as the Bible says you would be. You prove the Bible.

And just as the Bible says, you can't see it.

"... no historical evidence..."

Oops! You're giving another perfect example of your lack of knowledge.

The Nuzi Tablets. The some 20,000 cuneiform clay tablets discovered at the ruins of Nuzi, east of the Tigris River and datable to c. 1500 BC, reveal institutions, practices, and customs remarkably congruent to those found in Genesis.

Genesis 23 reports that Abraham buried Sarah in the Cave of Machpelah, which he purchased from Ephron the Hittite. Second Samuel 11 tells of David’s adultery with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite. A century ago the Hittites were unknown outside of the Old Testament, and critics claimed that they were a figment of biblical imagination. In 1906, however, archaeologists digging east of Ankara, Turkey, discovered the ruins of Hattusas, the ancient Hittite capital at what is today called Boghazkoy, as well as its vast collection of Hittite historical records, which showed an empire flourishing in the mid-second millennium BC.

Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. In addition to Jericho, places such as Haran, Hazor, Dan, Megiddo, Shechem, Samaria, Shiloh, Gezer, Gibeah, Beth Shemesh, Beth Shean, Beersheba, Lachish, and many other urban sites have been excavated, quite apart from such larger and obvious locations as Jerusalem or Babylon. Such geographical markers are extremely significant in demonstrating that fact.

The Moabite Stone. Second Kings 3 reports that Mesha, the king of Moab, rebelled against the king of Israel following the death of Ahab. A three-foot stone slab, also called the Mesha Stele, confirms the revolt by claiming triumph over Ahab’s family.

The list of correlations between Old Testament texts and the hard evidence of Near Eastern archaeology is over 1,000 examples long.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - The Nuzi tablets? Nowhere do the Nuzi tablets make reference to any of the characters or events in the Bible.

Nor does any other historical text.

One would think that if the entire planet was flooded by God and repopulated by a crazy old guy with an ark full of animals, or if Moses had freed the Israelites by pulling down biblical plagues, parting the Red Sea and drowning the Egyptian army, or if a virgin gave birth to a carpenter who was crucified by the Romans and later rose from the dead, that there would be some passing mention of these remarkable events in the historical accounts written during those periods.

But there is no mention of any of that. Not. One. Reference.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Another thing people like X.O. and Ducky, and their ilk, seem to miss, is that the O.T. has a lot of reporting of historical events (such as Lot's offer of his daughters to perverts) without any hint of approval of what happened.

Also, laws specifically addressed to Israel as a theocracy were for purifying them as an instrument of God. These particular laws applied to no other nation or people.

The claim that all religions are the same demonstrates nothing but the total ignorance of the subject on the behalf of the claimant.

Ducky's here said...

Glenn, there is a considerable difference of opinion concerning the nature of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. In fact, sexual preference is not high on the list.

Since you run an apologetics ministry which, as I understand it, by its nature tries to define accurate interpretation, I wonder where you studied. Or is it just a matter of parroting the Focus on the Family or whatever dogma.

Start with this one. There is nothing in the historic record to indicate the flight from Egypt or the fall of Jericho ever conformed to biblical events.

It's a complex matter but you will have us condemn an entire group of people for no more than their sexual preference because of an off hand interpretation of a chapter in Genesis.

But anyway, where have you received your training in history or archeology?

Ducky's here said...

... I might add Glenn that scripture was used to justify slavery for some time in the American south.

I'd be careful how you use it.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

There was never a "difference of opinion" about Sodom and Gomorrah until the homosexualists wanted to rewrite the Bible to conform to their perversion. It is dishonest to say otherwise. The main story is about homosexual assault attempts. Period.

When you say, "There is nothing in the historic record..." you discount the Bible as historic record. Typical.

I don't condemn anyone - I condemn behavior. Homosexual behavior is condemned by God throughout the Bible, and I never bother using Genesis as my support.

Just because people twisted Scripture to claim it supported slavery, that doesn't mean it supports slavery. People twist the Bible to form all sorts of cults. Don't blame the Bible for how people abuse it.

Sort of like how the liberals abused the Constitution and twist it beyond all meaning of the writers'.

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - "...homosexualists..."

You do realize that's not even a real word, right?

"The main story is about homosexual assault attempts. Period."

WOW! If that is all you got out of that story, you have some serious suppressed sexuality issues (which I've always suspected was the case). You should get some help.

"Homosexual behavior is condemned by God throughout the Bible, and I never bother using Genesis as my support."

No! It isn't! That's a lie! There is brief mention of homosexuality in Leviticus sandwiched between prohibitions on mixed fabrics and shellfish!

Have you ever even read the Bible????

"Just because people twisted Scripture to claim it supported slavery, that doesn't mean it supports slavery. People twist the Bible to form all sorts of cults. Don't blame the Bible for how people abuse it."

You are INSANE.

Read a book!

Glenn E. Chatfield said...


“Homosexualists” is indeed a real word. A homosexualist may or may not be a homosexual, but they give full support and sanction to the homosexual agenda. It was a word coined quite a while ago. You need to study up on these things if you are going to discuss them.

So, if I say the main story about what was happening in Sodom and Gomorrah, that thereby says I have “serious suppressed sexuality issues.” Non sequitur.

If you think Genesis and Leviticus are the only mentions of homosexuality, it proves you don’t know the Bible. Of course we already knew that.

I have read the entire Bible at least once a year since 1974, and I read sections of it almost daily. Now, how much of it have you read - and even understood in context. Or do you just like regurgitating atheist talking points which have been rebutted ad nauseum?

What is insane are people like you with such stupid links you send us to. Plain and simple that these people have no idea what they are reading. There is NOTHING in the Bible which justifies slavery for Christians. NOTHING, NADA. The Bible reports that slavery took place, and there were even rules for the nation of Israel in regards to slaves. (Israel and no one else). And even then, those slaves were not at all like the slaves in the U.S. and other countries during the last few centuries, nor were they like current slavery in so many Muslim countries. Nice try, but you demonstrate your ignorance again.

Read a book yourself - something not full of revisionist history by liberal atheist liars.

Joe said...

XO: The funny thing is you have deluded yourself into thinking you're making sense! You are not making sense. You are twisting facts, truth and reality to fit your preconceived agenda. It is pitiful and I feel sorry for you. Very sorry.

See, I told you you were blind.