Why can't people just leave the Jews alone?

[godnotgod]

No, not illegitimate in the least, unless you know of some written codes from back then that detail marriage laws.

Sarah was Abraham's lawful wife; Hagar was not. Isn't that enough? Weren't the vows of husband/wife violated? I don't know of any codes that said it was OK for a married man to have sex with another woman, unless it was a polygamous marriage.

 

[Shad]

It is ideally to be read in Arabic, and I did not make that up. Nor did I say it had to be read in Arabic. I had both an English and Arabic copy, the former of which I donated to a school library near me, so obviously in can be read in any language.

Sorry I was assuming the classical cop out of "You must read it in the original language argument" It is habit since I see a pattern of arguments from Muslim posters here that rely upon apologetics to make arguments for them. It is like interacting with parrots at times.

 

[rosends]

Sarah was Abraham's lawful wife; Hagar was not. Isn't that enough? Weren't the vows of husband/wife violated? I don't know of any codes that said it was OK for a married man to have sex with another woman, unless it was a polygamous marriage.

biblically, concubines abound. What vows do you mean -- I see none in the text.

 

[Lyndon]

To think you can understand Arabic simply by reading the mostly very bad translations available online is absolutely ridiculous, and not at all rational. Same I'm sure goes for Hebrew, except I think the translations tend to be better, but still not ideal.

 

[Shad]

To think you can understand Arabic simply by reading the mostly very bad translations available online is absolutely ridiculous, and not at all rational. Same I'm sure goes for Hebrew, except I think the translations tend to be better, but still not ideal.

Incorrect as these many of these translation were authorized by Islamic universities which cover Arabic, different schools of thought, different judicial branches of Islam. You know like Al-Azhar University... Many were made in collaboration with Muslims which Arabic was their native language in the case of Pickthall. You are tossing out excuses without any basis at all.

 

[godnotgod]

biblically, concubines abound. What vows do you mean -- I see none in the text.

The text indicates Sarah was his WIFE. You know. as in 'marriage'? as in 'vows'? The text also indicates that Hagar was a slave-servant, not a concubine.

 

[Lyndon]

The definitive translation of the Holy Koran is the King Fahd Saudi edition and from my detailed search it is not even available online.

 

[rosends]

The text indicates Sarah was his WIFE. You know. as in 'marriage'? as in 'vows'? The text also indicates that Hagar was a slave-servant, not a concubine.

Actually, the Hebrew literally means "woman" (as if "he took a woman"). We interpret it as wife but there is no different biblical word for "wife". There are also no listed rules about monogamy -- the biblical narratives tell of a variety of situations in which there was more than one woman. Jacob had two "wives" and each gave her maidservant as another person to have children with him. The 12 tribes are all equally legitimate.

 

[godnotgod]

The definitive translation of the Holy Koran is the King Fahd Saudi edition and from my detailed search it is not even available online.

Here 'ya go:

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=17293558173

also try bookfinders.com

 

[Lyndon]

Thats not it, you can buy it on Amazon, what I meant is the text is not available online.

 

[Shad]

The definitive translation of the Holy Koran is the King Fahd Saudi edition and from my detailed search it is not even available online.

Amusing. So did you bother reading what you cite? The verse agrees exactly with the view I put forward and even adds commentary of being a "light" beating. Page 100.

 

[Flankerl]

Sarah was Abraham's lawful wife; Hagar was not.

And which law was that?

 

[godnotgod]

And which law was that?

If she was his wife, as the scripture tells us, then there was a marriage which involves law, but whether it be religious or civil, or both, I don't know.

 

[columbus]

If she was his wife, as the scripture tells us, then there was a marriage which involves law, but whether it be religious or civil, or both, I don't know.

That is not true in the culture of the time.
Marriage was a man acquiring female chattel. There was no legal limit to how much. As long as he wasn't infringing on another man's chattel, he could have sex with any female he wanted.
It was a completely world, ethically. You're imposing your views of marriage on people who hadn't invented them yet.
Tom

 

[godnotgod]

That is not true in the culture of the time.
Marriage was a man acquiring female chattel. There was no legal limit to how much. As long as he wasn't infringing on another man's chattel, he could have sex with any female he wanted.
It was a completely world, ethically. You're imposing your views of marriage on people who hadn't invented them yet.
Tom

So, according to what you're saying, Abraham and Sarah never had an official marriage ceremony?

 

[Aupmanyav]

For OP: Have Jews left other people alone?

 

[Flankerl]

So, according to what you're saying, Abraham and Sarah never had an official marriage ceremony?

Well do you have any for it in the scripture?

 

[Shad]

For OP: Have Jews left other people alone?

No which is ironic. The world is too small for any group of people to isolate themselves while still feeding off the global market tit. Israeli is part of the global community thus can never be left alone in any true form. Beside if Israeli Jews wish to be left alone they can get their government to reject the funds my government, among a great many others, sends them. Until that happens everyone has a right to talk about, criticize, etc specific issues.

 

[rosends]

No which is ironic. The world is too small for any group of people to isolate themselves while still feeding off the global market tit. Israeli is part of the global community thus can never be left alone in any true form. Beside if Israeli Jews wish to be left alone they can get their government to reject the funds my government, among a great many others, sends them. Until that happens everyone has a right to talk about, criticize, etc specific issues.

First off, you confuse "Jews" with Israel. Next, you confuse receiving funds with intruding on other people - the question was whether Jews intrude on others. Third you intimate that receiving funds makes one open to being intruded upon. When I give that guy on the street a dollar, I don;t have the right to go through his stuff.

 

[Shad]

First off, you confuse "Jews" with Israel. Next, you confuse receiving funds with intruding on other people - the question was whether Jews intrude on others. Third you intimate that receiving funds makes one open to being intruded upon. When I give that guy on the street a dollar, I don;t have the right to go through his stuff.

I did not confuse anything. I made a specific comment about a specific group. Hence why I specified Israeli and made specific points about Israeli. Just as many others made specific points about Israeli. I have no issue with Canadian Jews for the most part as they support secularism to the point of disbanding their own civic courts granted by the government. That is a huge step for any group which still maintains it's identity. I question those that provides funds for Israeli from their own pockets but it is their money not tax payers money. I am not the one giving my dollar away. The government is using my tax money to support a questionable government. I want funding from Palestine cut as well due to their questionable government. Any funding should be done by an organization that is foreign and independent from both governments so not a dollar touches the hands of either government. This is not the case with my government. When a government accepts my tax payer money yet does question acts or even is headed by a questionable organization I have the right to question this as a citizen. Your whim does not override my rights as a citizen.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/specific

Maybe you should read the OP again when it makes specific remarks about "their land" and "their Temple".... The OP already includes specific remarks about the same group I did so my comment is not out of line or off-topic.... The OP already is talking about Israeli....