Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

event horizon wrote:As for your quaint belief on the New Testament, I've already invited you to compare the teachings in the New Testament regarding women with those in the Koran. I see you're fond of your old hat interpretation of a verse that says not to speak in church but is preceded by a verse that says for women to speak in church.

(I must have overlooked the previous 'invitation' mentioned above - but never one to pass by an invitation, here is a thread to discuss the points raised by oh sheikh above)

Ok, I guess I'll have to start with the Biblical verses relating to women then from the NT.

Let's start then.

1 Corinthians 11 - Paul says men have authority over women:
11:3 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.

He continues and says women are too dumb to learn in church and must have their husbands teach them:
14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Ephesians 5 also repeats that women are subservient to men:
5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. (5:22-24)
"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife."
5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

1 Timothy also repeats that women should be silent and learn submissively:
2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Women are also to blame for Original sin (this is the reason for women not being able to teach, apparently):
2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.


Oh, and just before these passages, the Bible instructs women to dress modestly - but it's a bit harsh to forbid gold, pearls etc!:
2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

In Titus, women are to be taught to be obedient to their husbands:
2:4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, (2:4-5)
"Teach the young women to be ... obedient to their own husbands."
2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

In Ephesians, women are to be submissive to husbands - but also to revere them (are you listening melika - this is pretty much more than the Iranians teach!):
5:33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

In Collossians, Paul tells men to love their wives (nothing wrong there) and the wives to submit:
3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

Paul repeats that women should not braid their hair or wear gold, and should also submit to their husbands in 1 Peter (I only quote the verse relating to the hair and gold):
3:3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;



Ok, now to the Quran and what God says about women.

Women have rights similar to men (explicit words), but men have some responsibilities over women (agreeing with Paul, I guess):
2:228 Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart, three (monthly) courses. And it is not lawful for them that they should conceal that which Allah hath created in their wombs if they are believers in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands would do better to take them back in that case if they desire a reconciliation. And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them in kindness, and men are a degree above them. Allah is Mighty, Wise.

in 2.282, God says that when a woman give testimony, she needs to have another woman to help her remember (not quite as harsh as the Bible saying women should only learn from men):
2.282
...
And call two witness from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not at hand, then a man and two women, of such as ye approve as witnesses, so that if one erreth (though forgetfulness) the other will remember.

4.11 does say women inherit half that of women (but what does the Bible say on inheritance of women - sheikh?)

God says why men are in charge of women (so agrees with the Bible in this regard):
4:34 Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

God also tells women to dress modestly, but doesn't forbid braiding hair or wearing of jewellry (that's a relief to you melika, surely!)
24:31 And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed.

Wow - I'm going to spend more time correcting your mistakes than actually addressing the points in your OP.

Paul repeats that women should not braid their hair or wear gold, and should also submit to their husbands in 1 Peter (I only quote the verse relating to the hair and gold):

I see that google has failed you again! Paul isn't the author of 1 Peter, apparently this revelation from our resident NT scholar must have slipped through the cracks of two millennium of higher criticism and scholasticism....or you're just pontificating.

What Paul *actually* says, is that Christians should be mindful of what they do in cultures that could misconstrue their worship and practices for something else. That's why Paul says in Corinthians that women should cover their hair and that men shouldn't cover their hair. But hey, if you just read the letter like I've asked you to, you would probably be aware of this.

Women are also to blame for Original sin (this is the reason for women not being able to teach, apparently):
2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

The New Testament doesn't actually discuss Original Sin as you probably misunderstand it to be. Paul's view of OS is the same as Judaism's - that sin entered the world through Adam and that all men will eventually be corrupted by it. Paul never says that babies are born with inherent sin.

1 Timothy also repeats that women should be silent and learn submissively:
2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

And yet, 1 Timothy goes on to talk of female deacons. Weird. Either you're right that women should not teach men according to the author or the author meant something that you won't pick up from quoting two verses in that chapter.

He continues and says women are too dumb to learn in church and must have their husbands teach them:
14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Hey, Paul didn't think women were too dumb when he entrusted them with delivering his letters or appointing them as presbyters, evangelists and deacons.

But on the other hand, the Koran does say that women are too dumb to give testimony - that is why a woman must have another woman in court, because one woman's testimony is only worth half of a man's.

While we're on the subject of the Koran, now we can finally discuss what the Koran says about women.

In surah 2:222 of the Koran, 'God' says that women who menstruate are dirty, impure:

They question thee (O Muhammad) concerning menstruation. Say: It is an illness, so let women alone at such times and go not in unto them till they are cleansed. And when they have purified themselves, then go in unto them as Allah hath enjoined upon you. Truly Allah loveth those who turn unto Him, and loveth those who have a care for cleanness.

The next verse of the Koran compare wives to a field that husbands can 'til' - nice analogy there. Women are objects, used for a husband's pleasure.

Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will (one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad).

In surah 4:3, the Koran institutionalizes adultery by allowing husbands to take more than one wife:

"Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four."

In verse 23:6, the Koran once again institutionalizes adultery. Except this time, the Koran talks about men having concubines in addition to their wives:

023:001
Prosperous are the believers
023:002
who in their prayers are humble
023:003
and from idle talk turn away
023:004
and at almsgiving are active
023:005
and guard their private parts
023:006
save from their wives and what their right hands own then being not blameworthy
023:007
(but whosoever seeks after more than that, those are the transgressors)

Their wives *and* what their right hands own. Their wives and their slaves. But would the Koran allow male masters to show their private parts to just any old slave? No, probably not. So there must be a special relationship between the master and the slaves that he can show his private parts to - his concubine.

And finally, for now, the Koran says that if a man touched a woman, he should 'clean' himself with dirt if he doesn't have any water.

Wait, what? Yeah, the Koran says that if a man touched a female, that a) he is now 'dirty' (she probably isn't even menstruating either!) and b) wiping himself with dirt will make him cleaner.

In other words, 'God' in the Koran holds the belief that women are pretty dirty - dirtier than dirt, at least.

Koran 4:43

O believers, draw not near to prayer when you are drunken until you know what you are saying, or defiled -- unless you are traversing a way -- until you have washed yourselves; but if you are sick, or on a journey, or if any of you comes from the privy, or you have touched women, and you can find no water, then have recourse to wholesome dust and wipe your faces and your hands; God is All-pardoning, All-forgiving.

So, the NT says women should be subservient to men and learn from men. I totally agree with the christians who ignore these verses and point out that Paul contradicts himself in other verses which record that there were some named women who perhaps were deacons in churches.

There are fewer 'misogynistic' verses in the Quran - (eh you can count them and let us know exactly how many are in the Quran, see whether they outnumber the selection I gave above - my list from the Bible is non-exhaustive, there's more that I didn't quote!)

Anyway, sheikh baby, you 'invited' this comparison - so over to you.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:So, the NT says women should be subservient to men and learn from men. I totally agree with the christians who ignore these verses and point out that Paul contradicts himself in other verses which record that there were some named women who perhaps were deacons in churches.

There are fewer 'misogynistic' verses in the Quran - (eh you can count them and let us know exactly how many are in the Quran, see whether they outnumber the selection I gave above - my list from the Bible is non-exhaustive, there's more that I didn't quote!)

Anyway, sheikh baby, you 'invited' this comparison - so over to you.

Cheers,
Shafique

Actually the New Testament says that men should learn from women - didn't ya know this, oh scholar of the New Testament?

But hey, I totally agree with you that women in the New Testament actually did perform important roles in the church - such as leading missionary work, being responsible for delivering the letters Paul wrote, holding congregations in their own homes, teaching men (yes, the New Testament says women taught men, gasp - our resident expert does not know this).

I spose it's your opinion that the Koran contians less misogynist passages than the NT. In my view, the Koran contains more and the ones the Koran does contain are quite doozies - that women are unclean, that they're 'impure' because of a biological process, etc, etc.

Perhaps the worst is the one I didn't even address - that the Koran allows husbands to 'discipline' their wives by grounding them to their beds and hitting them if the wife's attitude does not cease and desist.

How could I have forgotten about that one?!!!

Oh well, I'll save that for next time too.

Ok, my last post was sent just as you were posting. So let's see what your replies are - noting that you invited a comparison of Biblical quotes from the NT and the Quran on women.

event horizon wrote:

Paul repeats that women should not braid their hair or wear gold, and should also submit to their husbands in 1 Peter (I only quote the verse relating to the hair and gold):

I see that google has failed you again! Paul isn't the author of 1 Peter,

My bad - I should have just said 'the Bible' says rather than Paul - so, the author of 1 Peter says women should not wear gold and braid their hair (Paul repeats this teaching in another quote I gave).

event horizon wrote:What Paul *actually* says, is that Christians should be mindful of what they do in cultures that could misconstrue their worship and practices for something else. That's why Paul says in Corinthians that women should cover their hair and that men shouldn't cover their hair.

So, which cultures don't allow women to wear gold or braid their hair? (Sorry, a genuine question)

And why is this instruction in the Bible?

event horizon wrote:

Women are also to blame for Original sin (this is the reason for women not being able to teach, apparently):
2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

The New Testament doesn't actually discuss Original Sin as you probably misunderstand it to be. Paul's view of OS is the same as Judaism's -

Huh? Judaism does not have a concept of original sin. In fact early Christianity didn't either - it was introduced by Augustine of Hippo (but he used this verse to justify it).

Anyway, it's moot either way - the Bible blames Eve for eating the apple. Whether it is OT or NT.

event horizon wrote:

1 Timothy also repeats that women should be silent and learn submissively:
2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

And yet, 1 Timothy goes on to talk of female deacons

So, the Bible contradicts itself - we've already established this fact. However, the verse above (and the others quoted) are quite clear - women are subservient to men. Do you disagree?

event horizon wrote:

He continues and says women are too dumb to learn in church and must have their husbands teach them:
14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Hey, Paul didn't think women were to dumb when he entrusted them with delivering his letters or appointing them as presbyters, evangelists and deacons.

So Paul changes his words depending on the audience - fair enough. However, 14.35 is pretty harsh - don't you agree?

Paul also only seems to name certain women as deacons and reserves the misogynistic teachings above to general pronouncements for all women. 'Let your women be silent'.. he says - I've asked you before, who are the men he is addressing? Have you found an answer now?

event horizon wrote:But on the other hand, the Koran does say that women are too dumb to give testimony - that is why a woman must have another woman in court, because one woman's testimony is only worth half of a man's.

Really, where does it say this? I quoted God saying that women can give testimony and should have a deputy to help them if they forget (implying if they haven't forgotten, their testimony is fine). Do you have a wierd translation of the Quran?

event horizon wrote:While we're on the subject of the Koran, now we can finally discuss what the Koran says about women.

In surah 2:222 of the Koran, 'God' says that women who menstruate are dirty, impure:

They question thee (O Muhammad) concerning menstruation. Say: It is an illness, so let women alone at such times and go not in unto them till they are cleansed. And when they have purified themselves, then go in unto them as Allah hath enjoined upon you. Truly Allah loveth those who turn unto Him, and loveth those who have a care for cleanness.

Yes, but what does the Bible have to say on the subject?

event horizon wrote:The next verse of the Koran compare wives to a field that husbands can 'til' - nice analogy there. Women are objects, used for a husband's pleasure.

Islam doesn't have the same hang-ups over sex that Christianity does - what's wrong with the analogy of a woman being like fertile earth and the man planting a seed? Perhaps when you're a bit older you'll appreciate the analogy - or you can ask whoever dates you first for her views.

event horizon wrote:
In surah 4:3, the Koran institutionalizes adultery by allowing husbands to take more than one wife:

"Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four."

You have a strange definition of adultery!

event horizon wrote:And finally, for now, the Koran says that if a man touched a woman, he should 'clean' himself with dirt if he doesn't have any water.

Wait, what? Yeah, the Koran says that if a man touched a female, that a) he is now 'dirty' (she probably isn't even menstruating either!) and b) wiping himself with dirt will make him cleaner.

LOL - nice one. God says that when we have s.ex we need to have a ritual bath before praying. Both men and women. So, by extension - men are as 'dirty' as women. You really have a misogynistic way of viewing women by ignoring them in this way!


So, my previous comments stand -

The Bible has more misogynstic verses than the Quran and makes women submissive to men.

What does the Bible say about women inheriting from men?

Cheers,
Shafique

Ok - so shafique believes that polygamy and concubinage are ok.

Now, his other views are a little off, so I have to ask him, which Koran is he reading from?

Really, where does it say this? I quoted God saying that women can give testimony and should have a deputy to help them if they forget (implying if they haven't forgotten, their testimony is fine). Do you have a wierd translation of the Quran?

Good point. Where does the Koran say that one woman can give testimony but that two is better. I didn't see that in the verse you quoted - it just says that one man can give testimony and, if not a man, then two women.

Islam doesn't have the same hang-ups over love that Christianity does - what's wrong with the analogy of a woman being like fertile earth and the man planting a seed? Perhaps when you're a bit older you'll appreciate the analogy - or you can ask whoever dates you first for her views.

That's news to me, perhaps you have more information on the teachings of the New Testament with regards to s.ex than I do. But it doesn't seem like I'm not the only one who objects to the verse that compares women to fields that their husbands can till as they please. The verse was listed on skeptics annotated quran.

So, the Bible contradicts itself - we've already established this fact. However, the verse above (and the others quoted) are quite clear - women are subservient to men. Do you disagree?

Was this before or after the fact that we established that the Koran contradicts itself - I believe you had a brilliant comeback, but I forgot it, otherwise I would have used it here.

Truly brilliant.

So Paul changes his words depending on the audience - fair enough. However, 14.35 is pretty harsh - don't you agree?

Sure, when it's read out of context. Of course, you do realize that Paul's audience in an earlier chapter of the same letter would have been the *same* audience reading the fourteenth chapter?

Paul also only seems to name certain women as deacons and reserves the misogynistic teachings above to general pronouncements for all women. 'Let your women be silent'.. he says - I've asked you before, who are the men he is addressing? Have you found an answer now?

I've told you this before, read the letter first before pontificating. But yes, I'm sure you're correct that just because Paul commissions individual women to teach, minister, evangelize, etc, that should have no bearing in understanding this passage. That is what you meant, right?

But what about his general pronouncements which take for granted that women indeed speak in church, oh wise one?

You have a strange definition of adultery!

I believe that marriage should be between two consenting adults. Not two women and a man or a dirty old man and a child. But I guess I'm just old fashioned.

LOL - nice one. God says that when we have s.ex we need to have a ritual bath before praying. Both men and women. So, by extension - men are as 'dirty' as women. You really have a misogynistic way of viewing women by ignoring them in this way!

Sorry, the passage doesn't say that.

The Bible has more misogynstic verses than the Quran and makes women submissive to men.

Interesting view point. Are women not submissive to men in the Koran?

Huh? Judaism does not have a concept of original sin. In fact early Christianity didn't either - it was introduced by Augustine of Hippo (but he used this verse to justify it).

Anyway, it's moot either way - the Bible blames Eve for eating the apple. Whether it is OT or NT.

Google expert on the roll. Augustine was using a faulty translation of the New Testament when he formulated his views regarding OS. I said that the NT view of original sin, as you called it, is the same as Judaism's - that sin entered the world through Adam and Eve and that all will be corrupted by it.

If you have a problem with the name, then so do the Orthodox, who are Christians too. But the Christian concept of sin is the same as Judaisms'.

Thanks, a lot of unsubstantiated beliefs, but a bit thin on actual quotes from the Bible (in contrast with my first post which was actually mostly quotes from the bible and a few quotes from the Quran).

The sheikh does protest a bit too much.

Anyway, let's deal with the first point about his view of adultery. Islam is pretty clear that s.ex outside of marriage is not allowed, so I am still intrigued that sheik boy thinks Islam condones adultery. He must have a strange definition of adultery.

As for the rest of the post, he seems to be trying to focus on the contradictory verses (without quoting them - which is weird) of the Bible that contradict the clear verses telling women to be subservient to men.

I also asked what the Bible says about women inheriting.

As for Original Sin, is the sheikh denying that this was coined by Augustin of Hippo, who blamed Eve for bringing sin into the world. This concept of 'Original Sin' is not to be found in Judaism, but of course, perhaps the sheikh will correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyway - it is fascinating that sheikh boy chooses not to comment on most of the verses of the Bible I quoted verbatim (and doesn't seem to have read the verse I quoted from the Quran which says one woman's testimony is equal to a man's - and only stipulates that she has an aide to assist her)

Cheers,
Shafique

Anyway, let's deal with the first point about his view of adultery. Islam is pretty clear that s.ex outside of marriage is not allowed, so I am still intrigued that sheik boy thinks Islam condones adultery. He must have a strange definition of adultery.

Hey, I just don't see any actual difference between adultery and polygamy/concubinage. One is institutionalized and fully accepted in Islam while the other, you just need to get her married to you or for her to be your concubine/slave girl.

Well, I guess that is a huge difference. What am I thinking?

As for the rest of the post, he seems to be trying to focus on the contradictory verses (without quoting them - which is weird) of the Bible that contradict the clear verses telling women to be subservient to men.

I agree - your view of the Bible's passages (without reading the chapters in full, no less) contradicts what the Bible says.

As for Original Sin, is the sheikh denying that this was coined by Augustin of Hippo, who blamed Eve for bringing sin into the world. This concept of 'Original Sin' is not to be found in Judaism, but of course, perhaps the sheikh will correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes, I denied that when I said that OS isn't found in the Bible as you would think of it as. I then said that Paul's concept of "Original Sin" - that sin entered the world through Adam and all men will eventually be corrupted by it (and then I said that Paul didn't say that babies are born with inherent sin) is identical to what Judaism believes.

Or perhaps my previous quote confused you even more when I said that Augustine formulated the concept of Original Sin - he was using a faulty Latin translation of St. Jerome's vulgate:

event horizon wrote:Augustine was using a faulty translation of the New Testament when he formulated his views regarding OS.

I can see why that would have confused you. My bad.

Anyway - it is fascinating that sheikh boy chooses not to comment on most of the verses of the Bible I quoted verbatim (and doesn't seem to have read the verse I quoted from the Quran which says one woman's testimony is equal to a man's - and only stipulates that she has an aide to assist her)

I have, you took a number of passages out of context without even reading the chapter. I mean, you even claimed that I Pet was written by Paul. How seriously do you expect me to take your analysis of the NT?

On the other hand, I haven't seen you address the passages I quoted from the Koran. Perhaps you can start off where the Koran says that one female witness is fine but two is better. The multiple translations I have at hand all say that two women must be substituted if a man is not available to provide testimony.

To summaraize:

The Koran allows polygamy where a man may marry multiple women. The Koran also allows concubinage/slave girl relations - where a Muslim master may have an unspecified number of slave girls.

The Koran says that menses is filthy and that women are impure when they are experiencing it.

The Koran allows a husband to discipline his wife - he may first ground her to her room and, if that is not enough, he may beat her.

The Koran says that touching a woman makes him impure and then advises men to clean themselves with dirt if they do not have access to water.

The Koran says that two women must give witness if a man cannot. The Koran does says that a woman is too dumb to give testimony in the court of law by herself, so she must have a companion to remind her of the testimony. I looked through various translations of the Koran, but I couldn't find any translation that says one woman in place of a man is acceptable - the Koran is categorical that two female witnesses must be present.

The Koran also compares women to fields that their husbands can till as they please. Although shafique does not seem bothered with such a suggestion that women do not have any say in coitus - they are just fields, after all.

Still no new quotes from the Bible. Why am I not surprised?

Adultery - we agree that Islam does not allow s.ex outside marriage it appears (even though you seem to be under the impression that Islam allows concubinage - what a quaint belief/interpretation, sheiky)

As for the rest, I still make the point I have quoted the Bible verbatim in my first post - and the passages speak for themselves.

You still haven't answered the question about which women are forbidden to braid their hair or wear gold and pearls. Why is that?

Cheers,
Shafique

Well, that is certainly an interesting belief of yours that the Koran does not allow concubinage/slave girl relationships.

Perhaps you can address the quote above from the Koran about Muslim men not having to cover up in front of their wives or what their right hands own?

Hey, if you want to believe that Islam says it is ok to have s.ex outside of marriage - I can't stop you. God however says quite clearly that s.ex is only permissable in marriage and that one of the categories of women that men are allowed to marry are those 'who the right hand possesses'.

Was my question about which women aren't allowed to braid their hair and wear gold/pearls too difficult for you?

Cheers,
Shafique

Except that the passage quoted says that men do not need to cover up in front of their wives *and* their slaves. So, are you arguing that the Koran allows Muslim slave masters to prance around naked (abu Ghraib style) in front of any old slave of they own?

We can address the issue about whether Islam allows s.ex outside of marriage in the thread about concubinage you've just set up.

Which means you can address this question about the Biblical verses saying women can't wear gold and pearls, or braid their hair:

shafique wrote:Was my question about which women aren't allowed to braid their hair and wear gold/pearls too difficult for you?

Cheers,
Shafique

Well, I'm not convinced that the NT saying that women should not wear gold while at mass is a 'misogynist' passage. Certainly slapping your wife because she consistently burns your toast in the morning is more 'misogynist'. Or, as you would say, 'logical'.

I asked which women should not wear gold and pearls, or braid their hair.

You seem to be implying that this refers to women attending mass.

Can you please let me know whether this is correct and whether Christian women follow this instruction today (and if not, why not?)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I asked which women should not wear gold and pearls, or braid their hair.

You seem to be implying that this refers to women attending mass.

Can you please let me know whether this is correct and whether Christian women follow this instruction today (and if not, why not?)

Cheers,
Shafique

Let's see what the opening line of chapter 2 says:

1 Timothy 2
Instructions on Worship

Seriously. You want me to take you seriously.

A simple, yes, it applies to women attending mass because 1 Timothy is about worshipping (which, I would contend does not say only at mass - Christians I know don't limit worshipping to mass) - but hey, I just wanted to be clear about your answer.

But, you didn't answer my other question about whether women follow this Biblical instruction today:

shafique wrote:I asked which women should not wear gold and pearls, or braid their hair.

You seem to be implying that this refers to women attending mass.

Can you please let me know whether this is correct and whether Christian women follow this instruction today (and if not, why not?)

Cheers,
Shafique

With verses on wife beating, rape in marriage (till your wife whenever you please), concubinage and polygamy, it's odd that you're singling this verse out.

Perhaps you would not wish to address the misogynist passages in the Koran?

I'm just tackling one verse at a time (I listed quite a few verses from the Bible, I'll come to those after we've dealt with this instruction - eg those ones telling women to submit to men). Concubinage has it's own thread and the Quran is pretty clear about s.ex outside of marriage.

So, do all Christian women today not wear gold and pearls, or braid their hair when they go to mass?

Cheers,
Shafique

Great - you can address the misogynist passages in the Koran and I can address the ones in the NT. I don't believe that the passage on women wearing gold during mass is misogynist, but I do think the passages in the Koran allowing marital rape, concubinage, polygamy, wife beating, viewing women as filthy during their monthly cycles, and requiring two women to testify in court in place of a man as definitely misogynist.

Which of these passages would you first like to address?

Fair enough -you don't believe telling women not to wear gold and pearls in church is misogynistic.

However, why are you evading the simple question.

Let me repeat it,

..(Do) Christian women follow this instruction today (and if not, why not?)

Once you answer this, I'll address your questions (one at a time). Hey, you can even pick which verse of the Quran you want me to address (although, I've actually addressed most of the points - including some in my very first post - already)

So, do women have to follow these instructions today and not braid their hair and wear gold/pearls? If not why not?

Cheers,
Shafique

Ok, you take the lead - care to comment on the passages allowing polygamy, concubinage, marital rape, etc, etc,?

I said I would comment on any verse you like, and I'd do them all - one at a time. After I address one verse, then I'll ask you about one verse from the Bible (I have a lot more verses than you do) - and after you address the questions on that verse, I'll address the next verse you choose from the Quran. See how that works?

However, you need to answer the question about the Biblical verse concerning women not wearing gold and pearls and having braided hair. Does this instruction apply today, or can women ignore this verse of the Bible?

Once you answer the question, I'll happily address any one verse you would like clarity on.

Let me know if you are still confused about the question.

Cheers,
Shafique

I remembered another 'misogynist' passage in the Koran. This one gives old men the green light to marry little girls:

Koran 65:4:

And (as for) those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, if you have a doubt, their prescribed time shall be three months, and of those too who have not had their courses; and (as for) the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah He will make easy for him his affair.

As for your women who have despaired of further menstruating, if you are in doubt, their period shall be three months; and those who have not menstruated as yet. And those who are with child, their term is when they bring forth their burden. Whoso fears God, God will appoint for him, of His command, easiness.

Women who no longer have their courses, check.
Pregnant women, check.
Girls who have not had their periods yet, check.

I see you're resorting to the 'ostrich' technique of arguing now - ignoring the question asked of you.

I'll patiently wait for your answer about whether Christian women today follow the Biblical instruction not to wear gold and pearls, or braid their hair - and why not (if the answer is no).

I fully understand that you don't want me to address the Quranic verses one at a time - you rely on 'spin' rather than facts to make your Islamophobic case. But the offer is still open - answer my question about an NT verse and I'll address one Quranic verse in return.

I guess you're not just 'ostrich' but 'chicken' too?

Cheers,
Shafique

Ok - let me know when you've read the letters you've quoted from. If you're going to pretend to be a NT scholar, you should also pretend that you've studied (or at least read) what you're pontificating on.

I'll help you out - when you incorrectly claim that someone is the speaker or an author of a passage or letter of the New Testament, I'll be generous enough to point out your errors.

After all, we can't have a NT scholar that incorrectly attributes letters and quotes to the wrong people, now can we?

Was my question really that difficult?

All I asked was:

shafique wrote:I'll patiently wait for your answer about whether Christian women today follow the Biblical instruction not to wear gold and pearls, or braid their hair - and why not (if the answer is no).

After you answer, I can tackle a Quranic verse of your choosing. Can't be fairer than that (and I won't ask you to read something else - I'll just explain the verse to you).

Cheers,
Shafique