Monogamy and proof of no polygamy in religion

[katlike]

The hadiath I have read said mohammed was so afraid of his first wife he eventually became unable to abtain an erection and could not ever function as a male properly again. His "so called" children were the result of Abu Bakr sleeping with his other wives as a favor to him. Their deception resulted in the untimely deaths of those baby boys.
Val Petridis is correct...mohammed's private parts never did work right.
Your honesty is refeshing Val Petridis.
Funny, allah choice mohammed as his example for all of man kind when his choice mohammed was a complete failure as far as men go. No wonder 3 out of 4 people world wide laugh off allah and his prophet.
_________________
[/islam].
FYI~ It takes glass one million years to decompose, which means it never wears out and can be recycled an infinite amount of times.

[Val Petridis]

Sorry I was not notified of this comment, but it is so obvious Allah wanted you to figure it out, even a devoice man can be refered to as having wives, not one of these promotes poligamy, so the Koran did not lie, but was misinterpreted. I cannot remotely see how any of these refers to poligamy, esp with a prphet who had a devoirce or two.
_________________
Val Petridis

[Val Petridis]

My reply was to the comment concerning reference made of the Koran habing mentioned the prophet having many wives and the defence were they lies.. It actually seems like flogging a dead hourse, but with respect
Valto many wives.
_________________
Val Petridis

[Val Petridis]

one last thing concerning the post I am commenting on, as long as one had two wives, as in one after the death or devoirce of another refering to wives in plural is normal and no proof of polygamy.
_________________
Val Petridis

[Val Petridis]

opps, do not forget that wives also refers to female companions that are not married to the prophet.these last comments make each quote easy to interpret
_________________
Val Petridis

[Val Petridis]

I should have said this: in any interpretation of an entire work, one is not allowed to contradict oneself based on the work as it would not be a proper read of the whole book. One cannot also ignore facts listed. The Koran really was written when the prophet had one wife, the widow, so knowing this there is only one way to intrepet the comments redering to wives, that is as companions not wives. I thank my friend for the Quran quotes and if anyone needs I will interpret them, but if one substitutes companion or friend for the word wive as I already mentioneds it gets easy to understand them. I reread the comment and realised they were quotes from the Quoran. Itslike a CChristian saying Christ said three diferent thngs on the cross, how can they all be true? Well I bet you he said more than just these three things. So they are all true. Thus no contridictions.
_________________
Val Petridis

[Haik Monsieur]

[Val Petridis]

Interesting pictoral. Samuel would agree, but he might add someonme spiting too: Unless we are laughing together and thus you portray wisdom, I was not sure the captions intention.
What I wanted to say in addition to the previous comment I made was Muhammad was wise and brilliant to note that Christ represented the only beggoten on the cross, Political bias misinterpreted this section in the Koran but the Arabic is clear on it and in arebic the term used is representative not substitute as in someone else, as you know Muhammed was a devout christian to begin with before furthering Allahs ideas with his wisdom.. The only beggoten or incarnative force is a part of God as Muhommed knew well, and was universally beyond just one incarnation. Some christians had falsy believed that Christ represented the entire incarnation of the only begotten that did not exist beyond his being; Though in christianity, as muhammed posits, christ was one with this essense that went beyond his temporal incarnation, but the essense was universal and more than just the one incarnation though that incarnation shared fully in that essense. Its a temporal presepective concerning atemporal essense. I have a section on this in my blog
it seems the issue concerning poligamy was so well argued that even those who posted after the intepretation my friends and I posted and defemded ignored the above to even claim the Koran lied when it was obvious the Koran meant what the arabic term used to signify wife meant. Its a matter of simple dictionary truth, without bias it makes sense and cannot be interpreted otherwise. Inasmuch as I did look the word up for companion before my good friend posted it, the post was welcomed.
Anything other than that is ignoring what is given and understood to be true. The word ignorance comes from those unwilling or unable to accept what they know is true and substantiated fully based on facts that cannot be contradicted. To contradict such facts one must chose to ignore the facts and thus chose to distort what ios obvious, Lucky for us no one out there is ignorant and unavle to read a dictionary properly and claim they know what they are talking about. I will leave off with this: living in toronto I have met many delightful women including muslims, but we wise people laugh best when laughing last.
Peace and may the prophets wisdom enlighten us all to be as monogamous,just, equitable and well mannered to all people , male female and all the differing ways Allah has decided should praise his being.
_________________
Val Petridis

[natural_person]

Forgive me Val but you seem to be one of the most desperate muslim that I ever ... meet.
Something does not add up as far as your mind is concerned.

Come on !
_________________
INTELLIGENT doesn't mean SMART...
SMART doesn't mean WISE... seek WISDOM

Want to help ?

http://citizenwarrior2.blogspot.com/2007/09/simplest-way-to-fight-terrorism.html

[Haik Monsieur]

[shoeshiner]

Schizophrenia?
_________________
"The curse of man, and cause of nearly all of his woes, is his stupendous capacity for believing the incredible."

H. L. Mencken

[natural_person]

Not only that but Val seems to be a Westerner just by considering his mode of writing. Could it be the process of brainwashing taking place rapidly and forcefully, in full swing ? I heard that it's very intense somethimes. And compulsive ???
_________________
INTELLIGENT doesn't mean SMART...
SMART doesn't mean WISE... seek WISDOM

Want to help ?

http://citizenwarrior2.blogspot.com/2007/09/simplest-way-to-fight-terrorism.html

[Val Petridis]

Very interesting.
Well let me see, a quick comment on the comments:
Samuel pointed out that when things are beyond people and they fear it for its truth they laugh; make fun of you and call you crazy yes spit. It’s odd that invoking this section of the Old Testament caused a vindication of Samuel. It is well known that when something causes an upheaval of ideas that people were socialised to believe from birth that grey push them away by calling them insane, alienating them as not of us "western, so to avoiding jiving to come to terms with this. It’s actually a real psychological problem, but alas, I know the pain you feel realising that the truth was not what you had been brainwashed to believe. When someone points out the truth by interpreting something people had been taught to have blinders on when reading, the first reaction is shock, can I have been so blind? They think, "No I cannot face it, the speaker of such truths must be insane or reading this with eyes alien to mine, like westerner eyes". I will deny the evidence of truth by calling it insanity, sweep it under the rug, hide my head in the sand and hope it goes away. Enlightened Muslims have actually agreed and reported similar ideas of monogamy, but they are smart and do not fight what is pointed out and obvious, esp. since these interpretations were done by them even before I spoke to them. Knowledge is universal as is Allah and to claim to cultural non understanding is claiming to ignore what you know makes sense. I thank my friends the last few posts for proving me right by simply fully proving Samuel right and acting like those he warns of.
So if the Koran is interpreted as Monogamous and only culture can force an interpretation that does not fit what is written, then that cultural idea does not have fidelity with the text it claims to be drawn from and yes is a transgression from the laws of Allah, risk whatever beliefs you cling to that do not coincide with what is written and may Allah have mercy on your soul for disobeying Allah's teachings. Are you willing to take that chance? I guess I made my case so strongly that rather than debate a sad attempt to discredit me based on not being able to debate me based on the details led to the droll remarks about the sanity, desperation and non-compatibility (western). I am sorry the way one attempted to disclaim the truth properly interpreted from the texts was to ignore it and defend the misinterpretations the text does not support. I am sorry the truth of the text is incapable with held beliefs not supported by the text and these held beliefs can only be maintained if the ideas that fit the text are ignored as western, desperate and insane. I guess these commentators were desperate to substantiate beliefs they felt threatened of realising are not blessed by Allah; might have drove them a little insane, the truth disturbed them, but I suspect that is because they are sane and know what these interpretations mean. I guess it’s something they will have to deal with where ever they are and get past the social cultural ideal they were brain washed with from birth to realise a clear reading of the Koran and Hadith lend no credence to their beliefs. I was the one who read the text expecting to find polygamy and without bias found monogamy, as you can all see.
_________________
Val Petridis

[Val Petridis]

To simplify things so we can all understand things without any conflict:
When interpreting the Hadith and Koran either one is able to prove that the texts promote monogamy or polygamy without ever being able to interpret a prohibition of one. It is safe to say most Muslims are monogamous, they have one wife. My interpretation of being just is being monogamous was told to me by a Muslim cab driver who said “they had determined that to serve justice you must be monogamous” I later realised the section this determination came from. Now if I and others, including Muslims from the east, are able to determine a prohibition of polygamy, it means the cultural idea of polygamy is prohibited by the Koran and the hadith. I have found no section allowing you to marry more than one person and remain blessed, just and not transgressing against the Koran or the word of Allah Based on the prohibition of polygamy as infidelity of justice risking belief in polygamy is risking injustice and injustice is according to the Koran punished by Allah. I prefer to obey Allah and serve Allah justly as the word of Allah teaches and is interpreted as saying based on what is written.
_________________
Val Petridis

[Nymph]

Val Petridis, I find you to be an interesting person with an unusual perspective.

What I think the others might be missing is the fact that you are very broadminded and actually rather subtle-minded as well.

No one can prove really which hadiths are authentic and what are not without travelling back in time, so I tend to be less inclined toward literal interpretations and more inclined towards analyzing what a person's beliefs say about them.

Anyway, literal interpretations are the lowest form of spirituality.

Schizophrenics are dully literal people; great artists, poets and holy people divinely metaphoric.

I think our modern materialistic society is on the schizophrenic spectrum...

So, that aside, I am impressed with your ecumenical approach, and also impressed with Ba'hai's approach of integration, even acceptance of those who don't follow Ba'hai. I, too, have found many similiarities between the spiritual paths of religions once you get past the cultural biases. Including Islam- but not normal Islam, only Sufism. Regular Islam is rather horrific.

I wish more people took your approach. Most people are rather sectarian-whether their religion is Islam, hedonism, Republicanism, or fundamental Christian and so on. It is the 2 year old approach to life-me me me-I'm right you're wrong.

But still, I don't see what good comes in sanitizing Mohammed. Plenty of people are very happy to think it is halal to marry 9 year old girls, or take right-hand possessions. Like that commentator said, "I don't see what good Mohammed brought, but plenty that is evil."

Only that if Muslims change their self-identity to believe in one of tolerance, equality and respect for all-then I could see the good in it. But mostly, I believe Mohammed and company belong in the scrapbin of history.