02 May 2010

What to do with an unfaithful wife: The Bible vs. the Quran

Both holy books have specific instructions for a husband that suspects his wife has been unfaithful. Since over half of the world believes in one or the other, I thought it would be good to compare them here.

The Bible's instructions are in Numbers 5.

The first thing to notice about them is that these instructions are from God. It's not just Moses telling the people what to do; it's God.

The LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him, And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband ... and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her. Numbers 5:11-13

And notice, too, that the husband has no evidence here, only suspicion and jealousy. He didn't see his wife with another man and no one else did either.

So what does God tell the jealous husband to do?

Take her to a priest who will force her to drink some "bitter water."

Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest ... And the priest shall ... set her before the LORD ... And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water. Numbers 5:15-24

If she is guilty, the bitter water will "make her thigh rot and her belly swell," and she will "become a curse among her people."

When he hath made her to drink the water, then ... if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, ... her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. Numbers 5:27

But if the woman is innocent, then the bitter water won't cause her belly to swell and her thigh to rot, and she'll get pregnant. (Apparently, the swollen belly and the rotted thigh was God's way of giving an unfaithful wife an abortion -- or worse.)

If the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed. Numbers 5:28

In any case, whether she passes or fails the bitter water, belly swelling, thigh rotting, holy abortion test, the husband is completely blameless. But "the woman shall bear her iniquity."

Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity. Numbers 5:31

OK. That's it. That's what God says a man should do if he suspects that his wife has been unfaithful.

Boy, that's going to be hard to beat! But let's see what the Quran says about it.

Luckily, the Quran deals with the same situation: a man who suspects that his wife has been unfaithful. Except that here the husband claims to be a witness of his wife's infidelity.

For those who accuse their wives but have no witnesses except themselves... Quran 24:6a

Now you might think that would be enough to prove the wife's adultery, but it isn't, becaue just two verses ago, the Quran says that four witnesses are required to convict a wife of adultery.

Those who accuse honourable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never (afterward) accept their testimony - They indeed are evil-doers. Quran 24:4

So what's a husband to do in this case? Well, Allah has that all figured out. The husband can just swear that it's true four separate times and that way he can serve as four separate witnesses.

For those who accuse their wives but have no witnesses except themselves let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies, (swearing) by Allah that he is of those who speak the truth. Quran 24:6

How cool is that?

Oh and then, swear one more time, just to make it all official llke. And this time ask Allah to curse you if you are lying. That ought to do it. (It's sort of like saying, "Cross my heart and hope to die" when swearing. No one would lie doing that!)

And yet a fifth, invoking the curse of Allah on him if he is of those who lie. Quran 24:7

So now there are five witnesses and we can get on with the punishment.

The woman can appeal the case, though, by swearing five times that she is innocent.

And it shall avert the punishment from her if she bear witness before Allah four times that the thing he saith is indeed false, And a fifth (time) that the wrath of Allah be upon her if he speaketh truth. Quran 24:8-9

I don't know what happens then. What do you do when you have two people that cross their hearts and hope to die on opposite sides of the same case? The Quran doesn't say and I don't think the Supreme Court has ever had a case like that.

So that's what the Bible and the Quran say a husband should do with an unfaithful wife.

Which procedure do you think is the best?

36 comments:

Matthew Blanchette said...

Both practices are absurd; the former would hold as much legal weight today as the medieval practice of slicing someone's hand, binding it without looking, and seeing if the wound heals (if the priest so desires, he can pretend to slice the hand, and claim it a miracle if it is unwrapped to be revealed as untouched), and the latter is as ridiculous a practice as slicing open a baby and giving each half to its claimed mother.

Religion can be so stupid when it comes to the law, can't it?

Liz said...

Context is so very important in these situations. Not only that but you have to read these verse in several translations to even claim to know anything of the meaning. Remember that these are translations of the original text, and so they can be interpreted by readers in very different ways. I personally prefer NIV. When looking up these verses I came to see several things I disagreed with you on.
1. These situations happened thousands of years ago, when times were very different, and women held very different positions in society. They were so much less than men. That's why I believe the husband is given the right, in this story, to come to the Priest simply upon suspicion.
2. You make the "bitter water" sound like a poison or a punishment. I don't think this is how the Lord expects us to deal with infidelity today. I think this was a test, at the time, as to whether she was guilty or not. It states that if she was innocent, no harm would come to her.
3. My strongest disagreement with you is the claim that the swelling in her thigh/abdomen was an abortion. I completely disagree. I believe God was making her infertile, not killing a child that lived in her womb. Infertility, at times, was a punishment in the Bible, seeing as producing offspring was so high a priority in that day and age.
4. Why should the husband not be blameless? Like I said, at that time women were less than men. He didn't go to her and argue, and fight, and cause pain in their relationship, he went to the Church, to someone wiser, and respected, who could bring the situation before God, and bring clarity.

After all I've said, again I want to say, I could be wrong. I am acknowledging that. These are my interpretations of what I've read, and therefore, I am not speaking for all Christians, or even for God; just for myself, in hopes you will be willing to read what I've said with an open mind, rather than scrutiny.

Sabriell111 said...

I feel very sorry for you Liz. The fact that you can read the verses and twist them into your own justifiable version is saddening. Especially considering your name, Liz, which I'm assuming you are a female. So as a female, you should take offense to God's judgment of women, right? You think it's ok that per God terms if your husband even slightly suspects that you've committed adultery regardless of the circumstances that you would have to be put through those tests. Do you think that men should be held to this regard too? It should be fair, right?

Regardless of whether you pull your verses from the watered-down translation, the loose translation, the misogynistic translation, or whatever other translated bible you'd like to read out of, those versions suit the author and that author wasn't god. Aren't you angry that you are pulling verses from a book that was translated hundreds and hundreds of times over throughout the last couple thousand years. So your version that you pull those verses from may not even be right.

What saddens me the most is that as a female, you can justify these actions. Regardless of whether the situation was different thousands of years ago does not justify the male-chauvinism of your god. As a female, you should be apalled. Women should never be less than men in any circumstance, as men should never be less than women. As a female myself, your justifications for your god makes me very sad.

I'll read with scrutiny b/c no idea, opinion, etc. will ever be made stronger w/o scrutiny.

MD1985 said...

Sabriel111:

Don't you think that you, the author of this site and anyone who comments in favour of what the author writes may also "read the verses and twist them into your own justifiable version" as much as what you think Liz does (and therefore what I must do also?)

I think the thing you need to remember about more recent translations are
1) they are translated from the Greek and Hebrew texts and manuscripts not from other translations (apart from maybe the Message Bible)
2) I would think that being a more recent translation would be in their favour as there have been recent discoveries that would help translation and understanding of the original manuscripts and
3) more time has passed since early translations, therefore translators would have had better resources and one would think a better understanding of the Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic language and manuscripts.

I think we need to remember that when Jesus came to establish a new covenant, it meant that the old one was redefined or replaced by the new. Jesus didn't follow the old covenant laws in regards to women. He treated them equally.

Examples are found right throughout the gospels:

He spoke to the Samaritan woman even though under Jewish rules this didn’t happen (John 4:7-10). He ignored rules/laws about impurity (Mar 5:25-34). He taught Mary and Martha (females) about the gospel (Luke 10:38). When travelling through cities to preach and spread the good news - He had female companions with Him (Luke 8:1-3). The first people He appeared to after he resurrected were females! He even changed the doctrine to be equal in regards to men and women being unfaithful (Mark 10:11)

Ephesians 5:25 says
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her

If anything Jesus very much cherished females. He loved them and new how precious they were and He had great concern for widows. And since Jesus WAS God, i would say He certainly wasn't showing the characteristics of a male-chauvinism God. IMO

1 Cor 11: 11 - 12 says

Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God

To me that sounds pretty equal.

MD1985 said...

Oh and you can't tell from my sign on name but I am female also :)

Nick said...

@MD1985

So what is your stance on gay marriage? I ask because you say the old covenant was replaced by the new covenant and the new covenant doesn't condemn homosexuality, only homosexual prostitutes.

Srinivasan said...

To Liz and MD1985,

No religion which claims its supreme deity is a LORD can be said to exercise equality of the sexes. Why is your lord God? Why can't your lord/lady be Goddess?

MD1985 said...

Nick - i wish i could answer you on what my beliefs were on this subject. But right now i am in the process of seeking about this subject - trying to find an answer myself.

Right now i believe that the bible speaks of people acting out of delibrate perversion - just like it speaks of the same thing for "straight" people who also act out of delibrate perversion.

I don't know that there was the awareness of homosexual people then, that there is today - as in people who are genetically same sex orientated.

But like i said - i am still seeking when it comes to this subject and haven't formed a final view.

Sorry if that sounds like a cop out, but i wouldn't like to comment with a half heart or a lack of conviction.

MD1985 said...

Srinivasan:

God is God - He is above gender. We may have titles like "Father" and "Lord" and refer to Him as "He" or "Him". But being God means He is God - therefore gender nuetral - above gender - superior to gender.

I hope that makes sense.

Srinivasan said...

MD1985,

Thanks for attempting an explanation. It still doesn't make sense to me, especially when you repeatedly use gender-specific words to address your God.

Maybe the problem is the inadequacy of language. We have not invented a God-friendly language yet, one which has a whole separate set of nouns, pronouns, etc to use in reference to God. I guess that's what you are trying to tell me.

In any case, if I had a God, I would refrain from calling him Father: that would make me a bastard.

skanksta said...

@ MD1985 & Liz,

"Don't you think that you, the author of this site and anyone who comments in favour of what the author writes may also "read the verses and twist them into your own justifiable version" as much as what you think Liz does (and therefore what I must do also?)"

Do you even BELIEVE that ?!

That would (sort of) wash, but if you read Steve's blog....

There are HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of passages showing,

- god to be cruel
- god to be unjust
- women to be inferior
- justifications of S-L-A-V-E-R-Y
- gays to be hated
- genocide to be condoned
- genocide to be rewarded
- god killing babies
- god punishing people for things they didn't do
- god to want sacrifice of animals and
- people burnt alive
- people tortured for not believing in god
- people with other gods to be killed

etc. etc. etc.

We are NOT talking about a few 'odd' passages, we're talking about sentence after sentence, verse after verse, page after page and book after book of horrid stuff like this.

Have you even seen the post on 'context' ?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfrO6LJyhII

Sabriell111 said...

MD let me just first say that the religious also twist verses into their own versions as well. The bible doesn't specifically say anything about abortion, but the religious right still find verses they can twist into their own liking to justify their hatred towards abortion. Southerners in America used verses in the bible to justify the act of slavery, though any normal person knows that slavery, especially the practices here in the states, is ethically wrong. If I'm doing any twisting, it is nothing more than an unbiased, logical, rational interpretation of what was written. Maybe the author should have worded this stuff a little better so it doesn't need to be left to the reader to interpret what's actually being said. I don't have to make this stuff up, it's all right there.

Jesus never rejected the teachings in the Old Testament.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)


"Whoever goes against the smallest of the laws of Moses, teaching men to do the same, will be named least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who keeps the Law of Moses, teaching others to keep them, will be named great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:19)

I'll agree that Jesus was more tolerant of women, but if he were so accepting why out of all 12 disciples was not one of them a woman?


When I was younger and went to church, I remember my grandmother teaching me that woman served man and man served god. And I saw that behavior all over the church. I came across this verse: 1Cor. 14:34: Let your women be silent in the churches; for it is not permitted to them to speak, but to be in subjection, as the Law also says.
1Cor. 14:35: And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for a woman to speak in a church.

I'm sorry, but I feel that you are indoctrinated to believe those things and if you looked at this from a different angle and actually started asking the right questions, you may get the right answers. And not from your pastor or your sunday school teacher, or your congregation. Start asking the right questions and you'll get your answers. You may not like them, but please don't revert to cherry picking bible verses to justify your needs.

I would love to believe that we had a creator and that when I died I could go to a magical place for eternity with my friends and family and be happy. But that's all wishful thinking and fairy tales, an adult Santa Claus story. I'm sorry, but that's just not reality.

Catherine said...

MD1985: "He is above gender"

Then why are you calling God "him"?

MD1985 said...

@ Skanksta:

Do you actually read THE BIBLE or do you base your opinion and views of it on what you read on this site? Do YOU really believe that if God was the God that you just quoted him to be that there would be so SO many faithful and devoted Disciples of Christ? Do you think if we didn't know a loving, caring, providing, protecting, AWESOME, healing, loyal, faithful, wonderful, amazing God that there would be so much Joy in what we believe?

THAT is what i really believe He is. And THAT is why i am who i am. Not because I am broken, not because i am lost, not because i am weak, not because i need something to believe in. Because of who HE is!

Try reading the bible.

@ Srinivasan - re your last line: It's funny cause I do consider Him a Father and that makes me a most loved, blessed and highly favoured Daughter of the King... not a bastard.

@Sabrielle:
I am very aware of when Christians have used the bible to justify acts of cruelty and hatred (just look at Fred Phelps and his disgusting use of God’s word to condemn homosexuals and pretty much anyone else that isn’t him) – I guess that’s the difference between “being religious” and “being in relationship with God”.

Love by God’s standards are very clearly stated in 1 Corinthians 13, I believe anyone or anything that does not adhere to this standard is not showing, acting in or could even understand God’s Love as it was intended.

Re: Jesus coming to fulfil the law – I actually already posted about MY understanding of this scripture in another post, so I am going to copy it to save from typing it again…
I believe Jesus DID fulfil the law – Once a year under the old law the High priest would enter the Holy of Holies and the sins of all people would be put on to the head of a lamb or goat etc and that animal would be sacrificed. But if you read Heb 9:11 - 14 you will see He fulfilled the old law (blood sacrifice) once and for all when He offered Himself unblemished (without sin) to redeem mankind.

God's law still stands; it's just that when we don't meet it, Jesus is our advocate. The Substitutionary Atonement for our sins.

Re: Women in the church: I am still studying this subject. But in my seeking so far these are things I have learnt:
1)Paul was talking to a small Corinthian church in a large city of Pagans.
2)Since the church’s roots were pagan, and there was a lot of impurity, sexual immorality and disputing going on in the city, Paul was giving them GUIDELINES to bring this early church to a place of uniformed beliefs as there had been much division in the church about such subjects.
3)He was trying it minimise the division and arguing amongst the believers by giving them GUIDELINES (that word again) not laws. You have to put those verses into context of who Paul was talking to and what was going on at the time in that place.

Also – I HAVEN’T always been a Christian. I DID see things from the other side. I DID start seeking. And I DID get the right answers. The TRUE answers - they are just not the answers you think are true. And I can tell you that having experienced both sides – its not even a matter of choice for me – where I am now is where I am meant to be – I feel home here.

Your description of Heaven is nothing like my understanding of it (from the scriptures - read Revelation). I expect that whichever of my loved ones are there, i will not have any particular relationship with them at all - they will be fellow servers of God, even my own husband will just be another believer there (Matt 22:30).

Yes, it will be perfect, and painless and beautiful, but you make it sound like we all just believe so we can go to this magical land - Heaven is FAR FAR beyond anything we can comprehend and we will alone serve God for all of eternity.

beautifulblack said...

Xtianity is nothing more than a goulash mix of pagan beliefs with xtian added flavorings to make the shit palpable.

Xtians follow 2 main topics in OT: homosexuality & tithing (which applied to FOOD NOT money)

They conveniently overlook not eating of certain animals, menstrual women r unclean for period of time-anything she touches is unclean, semen emission renders men unclean til evening-even intercourse the couple's unclean til evening, killing disrespectful kids, after childbirth mom must wait 33 days b4 touchin anything 'holy', its a never ending list...shudnt practice witchcraft-but these 'prophets/profits' are nothing more than 'witches' wearing tailor made couture-and xtians RUN to those fortune tellers! A rose by any other name is still a rose!
But we-the Atheists-are lost??

Xtians r quick 2 say homo is an abomination-well that's not the only thing their holy book says is an abomination-prov 6:16-19 says these are ABOMINATIONS also: haughty eye, lying tongue, killing the innocent, plotting evil, quick 2 do wrong, shit starter etc ...these actions are never addressed as abominations-ONLY homosexuality...wonder why??

beautifulblack said...

@md1985 no offense sweety, but the thought of telling a narcisstic puppetmaster, he's holy holy holy holy holy holy holy holy holy forever and ever makes me wish I was chum 4 sharks-now. R streets of gold some sort of bribe that'll make u WANT to 'holyize' him for an eternity??

Nick said...

@MD1985
"Also – I HAVEN’T always been a Christian. I DID see things from the other side. I DID start seeking. And I DID get the right answers. The TRUE answers - they are just not the answers you think are true. And I can tell you that having experienced both sides – its not even a matter of choice for me – where I am now is where I am meant to be – I feel home here."

I can do that too and the stories match up perfectly.

I HAVEN'T always been an unbeliever. I did see things on the other side. I did start seeking. And I did get the right answers. The TRUE answers - they are just not the answers YOU think are true. And I can tell you that having experienced both sides – its not even a matter of choice for me – where I am now is where I am meant to be – I feel home here. I stopped living according to the whims of a book written by men and started living by what feels right, by what fits the natural moral code of humans.

And since you're a women here's a verse for you.

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (I Corinthians 11:3)

And since you believe in the bible, read this next verse and we'll expect no arguments from you, remain silent like you were commanded.

"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

And that was in the new testament.

Darren Delgado said...

MD1985 wrote...

I think the thing you need to remember about more recent translations are
1) they are translated from the Greek and Hebrew texts and manuscripts not from other translations (apart from maybe the Message Bible)
2) I would think that being a more recent translation would be in their favour as there have been recent discoveries that would help translation and understanding of the original manuscripts and
3) more time has passed since early translations, therefore translators would have had better resources and one would think a better understanding of the Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic language and manuscripts.


Don't you think that an all-knowing God would have provided a much clearer version of his word, and update it occasionally with revisions instead of letting it be misinterpreted over and over, and used to justify things like slavery and other horrific crimes?

I mean, yeah, you can take Bible verses to justify anything, but that just shows that it's a jumbled worthless self-contradictory mess. So much so, in fact, that even different sects within Christianity disagree over what it says so vehemently that they are willing to kill each other over it.

If it's so valuable, why wouldn't God step in and tell people what he really meant?

I think we need to remember that when Jesus came to establish a new covenant, it meant that the old one was redefined or replaced by the new. Jesus didn't follow the old covenant laws in regards to women. He treated them equally.

So were the Old Laws that God made wrong? Were they lousy laws, or did he just change his mind?

MD1985 said...

@ Nick,

Wow, i don't understand what i am saying that is making you respond and react so cruelly.

All i have done is spoken about what i believe, not once have i made a judgement on you, made personal attacks on you, or said anything mean and degrading.

That is ALL i have received since commenting on this blog.

If my love for the Almighty God rubs you the wrong way I will not apologise for that but how dare you speak to me that way behind a silver screen - how gutless.

I will stop commenting here, and you can all go back to feeling good about the fact that you all agree with each other.

I will pray God softens your heart to Him and reveals His love to you all.

AlteredStates said...

It doesn't really matter which Book you use. If a person is dishonest they won't stop at adultery, their "sins" will follow them everywhere they go. More correctly; they will continue to break God's law no matter what anyone says or does.

There is more to adultery than the act itself. James 2:10-11 "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.
11 For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker".

Along with the act of adultery, there is lying to your spouse and probably to other family members and friends, and breaking of a vow with God. That, in turn, may cause other believers to stumble because of how this type of betrayal affects other believers.

In addition, when these Books were written, they were written to very primitive, uneducated people who lived by "an eye for an eye" rule. Forgiveness was not their forte. This attitude has carried over to recent history, i.e. "Salem Witch Trials" and even to today's news stories. How many of today's ministers of all faiths have been found out to be phonies; committing every sin in the Book, even after preaching against the exact same thing that they get caught doing? I mean, these people give Christianity a bad name (pun intended).

Indecently, these preachers who don't "practice what they preach" will be judged more strictly, James 3:1 "Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly". See ya. :)

Nick said...

@MD1985

If quoting verses from the bible is cruel to you then you are in the wrong religion.

And how do you expect us to answer when you say that you have the right answers, the true answers. and you tell us we should read the bible. I told you the truth, I have read the bible, and I didn't find the right answers, the true answers.

srizals said...

You didn't finish up the story, what happened to the wife and husband after they have taken the oath that they are both on the right side?

Finish your story.

If not, those who are not that dwindling in whatever you are in, won't be that convinced that you know what you need to know to talk about it in the first place.

Ps.
1. The four witnesses requirement showed just how hard it is to apply the punishment in the first place. It can only be applied when the requirements are fulfilled, for no one in the right mind would do it openly in front of strangers like a chicken.

2. A husband that can't bring four witnesses have to swear the oath, and no earthly rules and regulations nor punishments fall upon the accused wife nor the accuser husband. (The curse of Allah will fall upon the liar, remember?)

3. What's your solution in dealing with this matter?

4. Be a kind moderator and publish me, if you are truly dwindling in ubelief.

5. A copy of this is going to be out in my blog.

6. Good luck!

Nick said...

@Srizals

I won't answer for Steve, I'll merely point out what he has already written in this post, if you read it all you will see it there at the end.

Here it is
"I don't know what happens then. What do you do when you have two people that cross their hearts and hope to die on opposite sides of the same case? The Quran doesn't say and I don't think the Supreme Court has ever had a case like that."


I don't think anyone here expects Steve to know everything, if you know what happens next in the Quaran then post it and I'm sure he will add it in, if what you say is true to the Quran.

Steve Wells said...

I give up, srizals.

The Quran is mostly just gibberish to me. What does it say to do if both husband and wife cross their hearts and hope to die? One of them must be lying, right? How do you know who is lying and who is telling the truth?

RonBurgundy said...

If you read any comments, please be sure to read this one!

I'm 16, I know nothing about life... But i know 1 thing, God is bigger than all of us... And he knows a lot more than us... How do you all expect to understand God when God knows a billion times more than you... We can't comprehend God and can will never understand why he commands us to do things, and yes the Bible gets weird (read revelations or song of songs), but why try understand what we cant.

I guarentee 1 thing, if the Bilble was followed thotoughly, reletnlessly and LITERALLY we would have an ideal society... But no, instead we choose to question, to try understand...

Please, I beg of you God is great and all-knowing... we are little and pretty dumb, don't argue something that you know nothing about.

Nick said...

@RonBurgandy

You are the poster child in obedience for every dictator and tyrant that ever existed. It is sad that people see themselves as so small and insignificant that they are unable to function without the control of someone stronger and bigger than them.

And maybe you should completely read the bible before you say we should literally follow everything it says.

srizals said...

Then, he shouldn't have meddle with things larger than him now, won't it Nick?

Isn't it obvious Nick? You can't prosecute nor inflict on others with punishment without proper evidence.

It also shows that Islam is not obsessed in punishments. Rather than making an error in punishing, it is better to make an error in releasing. So they prefer to let go and let God.

You can't just interpret the verses of the Koran without proper understanding and most of all knowledge. Since you're not a scholar of the Koran, it is unwise to act like one.

The wife and husband have to be divorced, since there is no longer any trust between them. By the way Nick, what is the atheist's solution if the matter arises? Or Steve would care to explain his ways in dealing of a matter he had made such a fun of.

If not, what's the point of arguing? Just for the sake of making fun of things? Where's the reason in that for an atheist?

Nick said...

@srizals

First, I am not an atheist, I will forgive this since you couldn't have possibly known. I merely am not a follower of any branch of christianity or islam.

Unless the Quran lists what to do it is very open to interpretation. Why should you have to be a scholar to know what a religious book wants you to do? This leaves numerous situations open for abuse.

How would I handle this situation? Well first of all I would look at the unhappy couple and say "That is private business, why are you comming to me with this? You two need to decide on working it out or getting a divorce" There problem solved.

And if religion stopped trying to interfere with my life by trying to control the laws and government and telling me how to live then my, as you put it, "making fun of things" would disappear and I wouldn't care what others religious beliefs are. Sound fair?

WayPastDueToo said...

Great article! My earliest experiences with the Bible were jarring because of the undeniable injustices against women. And as if that weren't enough, God was either the one calling the shots or condoning them. I just didn't get it. How could a JUST, LOVING and FAIR God treat women with such disdain and injustice?

Reading the Bible was a HUGE reason I ditched my faith after 28 years!

srizals said...

Tell me Nick, when and where did any Muslims try to control you and Steve? Is there any specific web pages or blogs that dedicate themselves to attack your belief, as this blog have?

Are they a mere reaction to a deliberate action of arrogance? If you don't believe it, why bother? Isn't this just an act of trying to prove that some unbelievers are smarter than others?

The Koran is simple. But there are certain verses that can be corrupted in terms of interpretation, some are open for interpretation, since sometimes not all things are applicable exactly the same. Haven't you heard of autonomy before?

But you can always refer to the original text and compare interpretations by authorised and well-recognised organisations.

Where have you been studying lately? Would you go to anyone that claimed he is a supreme master of knowledge or compare and check your understandings to a legitimate and legalised institutions and sources with calibre?

If any mad men or not that intellect decide to say something about anything, would you be a believer Nick?

If anyone can be an interpreter of anything, what kind of discipline of knowledge is that? There must be a set of rules governing things now, don't you think so? Without it, we would only be following hunches, and blind assumptions, despite being so intellect.

What makes Steve's interpretations and understandings of a book completely out of his league, as a valid and genuine source beyond any reasonable doubts? Is he a god? I mean an alternative god to the lawless and the free? I think after ridiculing everyone else, he should offer alternatives. And not just present a half cook information that has no value to influence anyone but himself.

Sorry for judging you as an atheist, are you an agnostic then?

skanksta said...

Szrizalls,


Don't suppose I'll get an answer on this old thread, but...
1)Why shouldn't people (politely) ridicule beliefs? It happens all the time in politics, science and sports.

2) The "alternative that Steve needs to offer" is obvious - stop taking ancient religious books seriously.

srizals said...

Skanksta,

1. A belief is higher than all of them. Steve is trying to degrade it lower than them. Discussions with respect is not a problem. Degrading is.

2. No, that is not what he is doing, he's just trying to undermine a superior way of life that would safe guard mankind. He's offering anarchy.

skanksta said...

1) Why is "belief higher than any of them ?" AND how is quoting the text of books degrading ?!

2) What is offering "a superior way of life" - I'm not clear...
The Eastern Orthodox church ?
Thor Worship ?
Mormonism ?
Sunni Islam ?
Hinduism ?
Methodism ?
Buddhism ?
Shiia Islam ?

srizals said...

Skansta,

if you have been reading Steve, you can see that he is just making fun of things without proper research, for example comparing with other point of views or sources, except based on his own understanding.

1. Why a belief is higher than a man's creation? Go check the abortion law in the USA. It is based on a lie and murderous in nature and yet it is all legal and accepted by the highly civilised and advanced society.

2. Not a superior way of life that matters, but which it the truest? That is the question. How to know?

a. Check out how the believers of the belief had behaved in the past and in the present. Are they destructive in nature? Check the percentages too.

b. How do its rules and regulations adhere to the rules of nature of goodness and compassion, for example, regarding marriage and holiness.

c. Check out the belief system they are offering. Is there any contradictions, awkwardness and tyranny?

d. Check out their behaviours in celebrating ceremonies and religious conducts.

e. Check out how they have been treating others that have different belief than them? Are they showing any tolerance or oppressive in nature.

f. Steve has purposely forgotten the gospel of Barnabas. Why?

srizals said...

Brilliant! Show it to the world. Show us just how low can you go.

beautifulkaterina said...

Ok how come neither book deals with if the HUSBAND commits adultery! Why is that??? Oh yea, that is because MEN wrote that crap!