Women in Mosques
Sep 17th, 2007, in News, by PatungWomen are not allowed in the Sultan mosque in Ternate.
Women & Their Unholy Voices
While almost all mosques in Indonesia allow women to come inside and pray, although they have to sit behind the men, the Sultan mosque in Ternate, North Maluku (Maluku Utara, Malut) (map) is unique in forbidding women from entering.
Djafar, a local figure, explains:
Only men can pray in this mosque, women are not allowed. This is an old tradition and has never been broken.
The mosque’s cleric, Ridwan Dero, says the reason for the banning of women is to protect the holiness of the place:
If women pray here then their menstruation might suddenly start. Apart from that the men who come to pray here might be bothered by seeing women or hearing their voices.
There are no exceptions to the rule at any time.
Men & Their Holy Trousers
The men who come are required to wear long trousers – wearing of sarongs only is not sufficient – and they must also have the top of their heads covered by a kopiah or sorban.
Ridwan Dero explains that by wearing trousers the men show that they have truly prepared themselves to face God. Dero says that when men are standing up while praying, and wearing trousers, the position of their legs forms the words “lam alif“. Lam alif represents the two statements of the Muslim confession of faith, “there is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet”. In this way men who wear trousers show in physical, visible form that they believe in the confession of faith.
Guards are on hand, perhaps similarly to those at the Baiturrahman mosque in Aceh, who advise men who arrive in only sarongs to go home and get changed, or just go to another mosque.
Similarly the wearing of headwear is required as a sign of respect to God. The guards have spare caps to lend to visitors should the latter have forgotten their head-wear. mediaindo
The Menara mosque in Semarang, Central Java, is another old mosque which does not allow women, although the reasons are not stated. It is used mainly by Indonesians of Arab descent. indosiar
219 Comments on “Women in Mosques”
-
Odinius says:
And on this bit
As a matter of fact Christians are still sending their missionaries to remote places nowadays. Remember those Korean missionaries, where two of them were killed by the jihadists? You may be right when the European colonialised a territory the Christian missionaries tried to spread Christianity to the local people. And what is the outcome? We have many good Christian schools, beautiful (if not burnt down yet like the Carmel church) churches, and good kaffir hospitals and kaffir entertainment and modern way of living (unislamic way). Or may be you would prefer if we were invaded by moh’s army? You and me, all of us here will look and behave just like our beloved osama (watch his latest video, he look just like moh pbuh). Another advantage is we can have four very young wives and unlimited concubines. And we get to subjugate the kuffar too, how fun right? And our muslim sis will all look like burqa queen, very sexy!
…is quite rich. Europeans conquered almost the entire globe. Everywhere they stole the riches and subjugated the masses. Christians were given preference for civil service and security jobs. Isn’t that what you Islam-bashers call “dhimmitude?”
Again, look for symmetry. You’ll find it in spades, both good and bad. Built churches? Built mosques. Modern European schools and science? Medieval Arabs sustained classical science lost by Christian Europe. Modern European colonialism? Medieval Arab colonialism. Modern European slavery? Medieval Arab slavery. Beheading heretics? Burning heretics!
No religion is great or terrible unless the people who follow it make it so. There happens to be a bigger problem at the moment with radical Islam than radical Christianity, but that neither implicates all of Islam nor lets all of Christianity off the hook. There are sensitive, tolerant people from both faiths. These people need to find each other, and leave the intolerant behind.
-
Julita says:
Jlta: I am sure, Patung has his own opinion about things but yet he is just like ‘Patung’ giving people their say. That could be not easy.
Hassan: it’s rather irritating to have your faith insulted every other time. Wouldn’t you feel the same way if yours were constantly harassed by ignorant people?
Jlta: I know very well how you feel.
____________________________________
Sputiam:Priest/clerics/monks and popes are not authorise to speak on behalf of God. Only messnges like abraham, Moses, jesus and Mohamed has that authority, and even then, only those words that were transmitted through them by God.Jlta: My Faith is not a dead and antique Faith as some people think. Connection/communication between heaven and earth continues. Somebody have to keep the fire burning and with the world as it is now where all of us make electronics, TV, “music”, “dances”, money our priority. There has to be someone to remind us and our children about life, after life, love, morality, compassion, tolerance etc. Yes, our children need them especially when parents are not able to do that. Jesus authorization started with Peter now to the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI, that is for Catholics, perhaps not for you and that is fine.
___________________________________
Korrill: First off: What is the relevance of me bringing up the issues of the book of Matthew not being written by Matthew.Jlta: How the stories/history, poem, figure of speech, parable, allegory, fables, languages written, how they were transmitted to people at that time, custom, tradition, the unknown writers of the Bible from the time of Genesis, came along can we comprehend that? Compared to us, we just the new sprouts and try to change when others have studied have been looking after this for centuries. Yes, they did not get names of the writers anymore so sometimes they have to be agreed upon and have a name. As the truth of Jesus’ teaching before He left this world, He told his apostles that He is going to send a Helper, the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete to help His Apostles see how many words there are for the same meaning, does it really matter. One can be uncle, father, brother, son and it is the same person, and does it matter? It is Faith and one have to have Trust otherwise we will break our heads or specializing in the study.
Interpretation of the Bible in the Catholic Church is uniformed, all over the world from the one source. At Mass everyday as well as Sundays the readings, gospels etc. are the same all over the world and the same interpretation. There is a magisterium, priests cannot do, interprete as they like, this is the difference with others. All written materials including the Holy Bible, to show that it was checked by the church have a ‘Nihil Obstat’ and ‘Imprimatur’ So as we read, we know where they come from.
______________________________Korrill: and the Council of Niceae?
Jlta: How excellent! That they IN LINE WITH THE HOLY BIBLE, could talk, discuss, and agree upon among all denominations, it was ecumenical. Yes, about religious as well as non-religious matters. Honestly, I hope that at this critical time more denominations can sit, talk together, instead of bickering at each other; and work on how to help the world, reach into one’s purse, role our/their sleeves. Spread tolerance, peace, love, and compassion throughout the world. So, so many people, nations need this. In the TV we see nuns, priests putting their life in danger for this and the successful outcome in the ongoing torn out world.
_____________________
Jlta: Thanks Korrill for your posting as always it gives me a chance to show the beauty of my Faith. It is for all especially my fellow believers.
____________________
Jlta: Andrew, sorry, I looked up as you said I should. Main aims of colonization and Christianity/evangelization never came up together. It is more a nation/country go for their own purpose and later on the religion spread. It makes sense.Friend, you have kept for 15 years the bitter words (you said) you heard (from a priest’s sermon) as I have experienced mine. In general the saying are “RC would go to hell, they pray to statues, they confess to a human being, they pray to the dead, their prayers are boring like counting the beads etc. etc. etc”. and it does not bother me a bit because they do not know what we RC have. That is very sad. Andrew, be still and just ask ‘What would Jesus do? And you definitely will find the answer. In life, we often face this, continue asking Him it will make us a stronger and peaceful person. Take care.
-
Korrill: Furthermore, christianity is also plagued with the virtues of self-righteousness and intolerance – the belief that because we are right, every one else must be wrong.
Jlta: Hm, hm don’t you think you have said enough about Christianity especially the Catholic church. Why? What have been bothering you, I wonder? So much hate! Or perhaps you think you know better than Vatican!
____________________________
Korrill: And christians don’t like to be questioned about their faith or about tenets in the bible. They retaliate with jeers and insults – just like what you are doing now.Jlta: I thank you for your posting from the start, did not I. They make me to come up with explanation.
________________________
Korrill: “What would Jesus do?”Jlta: Exactly, how knowledgable you are. It is a healing by itself when one know how to use it, bless them. It is for a believer to reach a placid, peaceful condition in hard times especially when facing others. Let hem have it Korrill.
-
Masya Allah,
For whom who didn’t understand Islam, please give your time to learn it first, and after you understand it, please give your time to make a difference between Islam and Culture, this article was not talking about Islam as religion but its talking about how culture influence the religion.
-
Korrill says:
@ Julita: Whoever said I hated christianity? I don’t “hate” it. I just strongly disagree with it – its tenets, practices, attitudes, etc. This is also my views on many other religious sects. I wrote of the ills of christianity to make people aware of its history and darker aspects. I did not write about Islam because a lot of others have already written about it.
The response I wrote about how christians react to questioning is not in itself an insult. I’m sorry if you were offended but my response was not for you, specifically. Mostly I was being sarcastic towards Augusto who was, at the time, the giving the perfect example of a typical christian response. (But then again, it is also the typical response of people of other faith systems)
You ask what’s bothering me. Before I answer that, please answer my question first: Why do you believe?
Search your heart before you answer. I HATE stock answers.
-
Korrill: Why do you believe?
Jlta: To ME, the world does not just exist without a Creator. Like a watch would not exist if nobody makes it, again it is me. -
@ Julita: Stock answer. Is that really the only reason you believe in christianity? If so, then I believe you really have a lot of soul searching to do. For if you only believe because you say the world must have been created by someone, then you should be a Jehovah’s Witness, not a christian since it was not Jesus himself who created the world.
Again, my question: Why do you REALLY choose to believe in christianity? Why did you choose to be a christian?
-
Also, about the council of Nicea: They were not there to simply “discuss” matters IN LINE WITH THE BIBLE. They were there do discuss what that line would be.
That first council was meant to establish biblical canon. They were discussing what ideology or belief would be included in the bible. Many of the ‘gospels’ existing at that time such as the Shepherd of Hermas, The Gospel of Judas, The Gospel of Thomas, etc., were declared heretical because they did not conform to the ‘official’ declaration of Jesus being both god and man (homoousios).
Sects such as Arianism, Manicheanism, Valentinians, Basilidians, etc., were declared as heretical because they continued to preach tenets contrary to the official dogma such as that Jesus was merely another prophet of God and not a god himself.
And if you say these were later sects that deviated, think again. These sects existed long before the official canon was established by the council of Nicea.
-
dewaratugedeanom says:
Hassan said
Augusto: Your rantings are not original. I bet you copy pasted the whole lot.
Whether Augusto copypasted the whole lot is not relevant. The only thing important is that the content makes sense. Which it does.
If men and women were intermingled in those lines, some of those men and women WILL have other things on their mind rather than remembering Allah SWT alone, that is human nature. Especially if the women or men directly next to you are beautiful or handsome, depending on your gender.
If I were Allah I would be outraged to see my beautiful creatures come to worship me in the back of the mosque hidden in burqa’s and potato-bags. Did Allah really decide this?
In Balinese Hindu temples men, women and children, married or not, all sit mixed next to each other to pray. No one takes offence. Nothing improper happens, even if the women consider it their religious duty to make themselves and their offerings as attractive as possible as a token of gratitude for the godgiven beauty of life.
How unfortunate for the Javanese that Islam forced Majapahit out of Java!
-
Korrill said
I believe that there is a world of difference between CONSUMATING a marriage with a 9 year old who sees you as her husband as compared to forcefully having sex with a child who sees you as her guardian.
C’mon Korrill, let’s stay serious. I heard this sh*t before from pedophiles saying that the child agreed.
-
@ dewaratugedeanom: There’s still a difference. Pedophiles may have said that the child agreed but then again, were they married to the child? Did the parents of the child give their child willingly to the pedophile knowing the pedophile would have sex with their child?
The differences are there: Cultural, moral, and legal.
In the instance of Mohammed marrying Ayesha: 1. It was acceptable to the community; 2. Mohammed, recognizing the act as acceptable, would have no guilt over consumating their marriage; 3. THEY WERE MARRIED! Do I really have to stress that fact out?
In the instance of pedophiles: 1. The community abhors it; 2. Pedophiles know it is wrong which is why they take great lengths to make sure no one finds out; 3. IT’S CONSIDERED RAPE OF UNDER-AGE! There are laws in the land specifically barring such a union.
-
@Korrill
The differences are there: Cultural, moral, and legal
The same goes for slavery. Does it mean we have to condone it?
-
@ dewaratugedeanom: Please elaborate? What slavery are you talking about? I am not quite familiar with any form of slavery still in existence.
-
Pena Budaya says:
The differences are there: Cultural, moral, and legal.
In the instance of Mohammed marrying Ayesha: 1. It was acceptable to the community; 2. Mohammed, recognizing the act as acceptable, would have no guilt over consumating their marriage; 3. THEY WERE MARRIED! Do I really have to stress that fact out?
In the instance of pedophiles: 1. The community abhors it; 2. Pedophiles know it is wrong which is why they take great lengths to make sure no one finds out; 3. IT’S CONSIDERED RAPE OF UNDER-AGE! There are laws in the land specifically barring such a union.So if you were marrying 9 year old girl, having sex with her and the marriage is accepted by certain group, then you were not a pedophile? Jezz…what an easy way to escape a crime! Please read this information about pedophilia action means : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia It doesn’t count whether you were marrying the kids or not.
Have you heard the trial case of Warren Jeffs? I wish Muhammad lives in this era.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Jeffs
-
@ Pena Budaya: I know what pedophilia is. But what you fail to realize is that that definition does not apply to all sectors. The one you showed was western law. In the place and time of Mohammed, that was not a law they ascribed to. That is western law. He did not belong to just a “certain group” but lived in an entirely different country with its own set of laws.
We’re not talking about an excuse here. We’re talking about the legality of the acts in question and in the case of Mohammed, it was legal but in the case of the pedophiles it was not.
And yes, if you wanted to have Mohammed punished for marrying and having sex with a 9 year-old, he should have been in the US or any western country that imposed that law.
FYI: The difference is still there.
-
Oigal says:
“I heard this sh*t before from pedophiles saying that the child agreed.”
Fully agree.
That is western law. ???? What a repugant defence.
-
Korrill: @ Julita: Stock answer. Is that really the only reason you believe in christianity?
Definitely NOt the only reason my friend, but I do not have to let the world know my personal conversion, do I?
The important thing for me now is ‘for you to keep your promise, gentleman. Perhaps we can see where those bitterness come from.
______________________-
Korrill: Jehovah’s Witness, not a christian since it was not Jesus himself who created the world.Jlta: Do you know who built the RC church? With your knowledge I am sure you know “Peter”¦”¦”¦..I will build my church”¦”¦.” Was it Jesus, Jim Jones or John?
Never heard about Jesus built the world, I know he born into the world. Oh, you must know that, Christmas!
_____________________
Korrill: Also, about the council of Nicea: They were not there to simply “discuss” matters IN LINE WITH THE BIBLE. They were there do discuss what that line would be.
Jlta: They did take data from the Holy Bible.
To me it is Faith, any other thing do not really much matter. You remember the many, many documents they collected along the ages and from so many sources and languages, don’t you think they should get organized what is good and not contradicting to the teaching, a kind of plan, for the follower of Christ. We see how confuse Islam is now, perhaps they include all from whatever source. Just imagine when God said ‘This is my Son”¦”¦..” and in the other part of the Bible saying he is just a prophet. Again, Korrill, Jesus said I will send you the Helper . I really believe He was present in their work in Niceae too. If one believe then believe, know that one is on the right track and I definitely know I am.
Thanks again. -
Um…first of all, people. Where do you think this info about Aishah comes from? The Quran? Nope. The Sunnah. So, for many Muslims, this is either controversial or apocryphal.
see:
http://www.submission.org/women/Aisha.html
As for marriage to minors, maybe you might want to look it up in Christian Europe at the same time. It was very common, for example, in England until the Church forbade it in 1175. But just to note, it was still ok as long as it served an urgent political need.
Check it
So the conclusions here are:
A) The marriage of Muhammed to a 9 year old is disputed and not central to Islam.
B) This was not an unheard of practice at the time, most notably in non-Mulsim Europe. -
@ Julita:
The important thing for me now is ‘for you to keep your promise, gentleman. Perhaps we can see where those bitterness come from.
You still did not answer my question, my dear. What would constrain me to keep my promise? From your answers to my other points, I already get an idea of what your reason for believing is. Still, I want you to look within yourself and tell me. Unless you can do that, then the answer I give you will be worthless.
To me it is Faith, any other thing do not really much matter. You remember the many, many documents they collected along the ages and from so many sources and languages, don’t you think they should get organized what is good and not contradicting to the teaching, a kind of plan, for the follower of Christ. We see how confuse Islam is now, perhaps they include all from whatever source. Just imagine when God said ‘This is my Son”¦”¦..” and in the other part of the Bible saying he is just a prophet. Again, Korrill, Jesus said I will send you the Helper . I really believe He was present in their work in Niceae too. If one believe then believe, know that one is on the right track and I definitely know I am.
Correction: Many documents, ONE language. The early manuscripts were all written in greek. What was different was the dogma each had. To give you a more simple perspective:
Christians who had NO belief in a human Jesus:
Docetists: “Jesus was God himself, disguised as a man.”
Valentinians: “Jesus as a symbol: Resurrection from Ignorance”
Marcionites: “2 Gods, Jesus Beamed Down…”
Manicheans: “The Spirit Can’t be Trapped…”
Christians who believed in a human Jesus but had NO belief in his divinity:
Basilidians: “Jesus Not Crucified …”
Ebionites: “Christ a man chosen by God on whom the Holy Spirit rested and made divine.”
Alternative beliefs:
Arianism: “Whatever Jesus was, he was less than God.” (A creed that went against the Orthodox dogma of the Holy Trinity which states that Jesus was the equal of God. The Holy Trinity was a belief that was unacceptable to many at the time who believed that there can only be one God.)
Christians who believed in a divine man-god Jesus:
Orthodox: “Jesus both man and god (homoousios)
The orthodox system was the one that eventually dominated the scene due to the favor of Constantine. It became the official dogma of the christianity after the council of nicea in 325 (sorry for my earlier mistake). This was not to say that it was accepted by many of the people at the time. The orhodox creed had to be BRUTALLY ENFORCED upon the people with threats of torture, execution, exile and repression for it to finally be accepted. Those who refused to accept were usually subjected to any of these penalties – most commonly torture and execution.
Christianity did not originate from one belief before branching off into different sects. It started off with different sects which was forcefully united under one creed. And with this as the case, how can you be sure that the bible that you read now is really the truth and that the other books described as heretic were really lies?
The bible (holy scriptures) did not define the council of Nicea. The council of Nicea defined the bible.
-
Hassan says:
dewaratugedeanom:
I think you’re mistaken, this is not faithfreedom.org, the place where religious trolls like you usually hang out.
You see Hassan, this is the Internet, where speech is still free, wether muslims like you like it or not.
First of all, you sounded as if you’re admitting that you’re one of those religious trolls I mentioned. Secondly, I’m aware that there’s such thing as free speech, thank you. But there’s also those who abused free speech. Free speech should be used responsibly and within certain ethical corridors. Free speech does not mean that anything goes, that anyone can go around humiliating each others on matters of race, gender and religion. That is an abusive behavior.
Here’s the logic: You shouldn’t use the N word to a black person, but you want to be able to insult Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, etc in front of the followers of those religions? Take the challenge, go to a black ghetto and yell out the N word out loud so that everyone can hear you. When the mob surrounds you, just tell them that what you’ve done was just an act of free speech. Don’t just hang around the keyboard and type insulting comments, walk the talk and do it in the real world.
Can you? Don’t chicken out now!Whether Augusto copypasted the whole lot is not relevant. The only thing important is that the content makes sense. Which it does.
Off course, the hateful words of a bigot made sense to another fellow bigot. A bigot is what a bigot does, I suppose. That makes sense.
If I were Allah I would be outraged to see my beautiful creatures come to worship me in the back of the mosque hidden in burqa’s and potato-bags
But you’re not God, if the laws of the way of things in this universe were left to individual humans and their different values and whims, then surely there will be chaos. If you wanted to call a dress that was worn by women to show their faith to their God as potato-bags, then it’s up to you.
-
dewaratugedeanom:
In Balinese Hindu temples men, women and children, married or not, all sit mixed next to each other to pray. No one takes offence. Nothing improper happens
The Islamic prayer arrangement goes further than merely to prevent improper things from happening, it was also intended to help Muslims to focus on Allah SWT alone, and not thinking about anything else but the thought of Him during our worships.
In the Balinese praying ritual you mentioned, surely nothing physically improper will happen as it was done in public. Only retards and perverts would do such things. How about improper thoughts? Can you guarantee that during the praying ritual, no one will have any improper and stray thoughts at all?
How unfortunate for the Javanese that Islam forced Majapahit out of Java!
Ahh yes, the Balinese were always the lucky ones and never ever made any mistakes whatsoever, if anything bad happens then surely it was the Javanese’ fault, right? 😉
-
Pena Budaya:
So if you were marrying 9 year old girl, having sex with her and the marriage is accepted by certain group, then you were not a pedophile? Jezz”¦what an easy way to escape a crime!
Let’s not use double standard, shall we? I quote this from another website:
According to the “Oxford Dictionary Bible” commentary, Mary (peace be upon her) was 12 years old when she became impregnated.
So if I want to be as silly and ridiculous as some of you, I would respond to them by saying that Mary was psychologically and emotionally devastated for getting pregnant at a very young age. And speaking of “child molesting”, since most Christians believe that Jesus is the Creator of this universe, then why did GOD allow himself to enter life through a 12-year old young girl’s vagina?
Please note that we Muslims love and respect Allah Almighty, Mary, Jesus and Allah’s Message to the People of the Book (The Jews and Christians). In other words, we Muslims would never make fun of Christianity through such childish topic like this one as many ridiculous Christians do make fun of Islam through our Prophet’s (peace be upon him) marriage.
So, the conclusion is, women’s average age of adulthood somewhat differed throughout the ages. It might be 16-18 nowadays, but it was 9-12 in those days.
What, today’s laws and standards must be applied on all ages? -
Sylvester says:
According to the “Oxford Dictionary Bible” commentary, Mary (peace be upon her) was 12 years old when she became impregnated.
Ho ho ho, this is must be from an idiot bible scholar, maybe from a radical moslem.
Mary was engaged to Josef at that time and according to Jewish tradition it was impossible to arrange any engagement at that very young age. The only 12 years old thing is that Jesus went to Jerusalem and spent hours discussed with Jewish imams when he was 12 years old. Radical islamic scholars always forge Judaism and Christianity. -
Korrill said
@ dewaratugedeanom: Please elaborate? What slavery are you talking about? I am not quite familiar with any form of slavery still in existence.
I was specifically referring to the slavery in Muhammad’s days, but by extension also to all forms of slavery in all times. You certainly are aware that in Muhammad’s days women-slaves could be used for anything, including sexual gratification.
-
Hassan said
Free speech does not mean that anything goes, that anyone can go around humiliating each others on matters of race, gender and religion. That is an abusive behavior.
You put race and gender on the same level as religion which is (or should be) an act of free choice. Does it mean that I’m also not allowed to speak out against nazism or other totalitarian ideologies with blood on their hands?
I have no intent whatsoever to insult or humiliate muslims. I only try to open their eyes, and I apologize if it hurts to see the truth. -
dewaratugedeanom:
Does it mean that I’m also not allowed to speak out against nazism or other totalitarian ideologies with blood on their hands?
Well, then name a group of people, or a belief system, or an ideology, etc. that doesn’t have blood on their hands. You should speak against all of them. Well, looks like you have a tough job ahead of you if you wanted to be consistent with your words. No, dewaratugedeanom, you’re just trying to give a misleading and false justification to your hostile hatred towards Muslims and Islam.
I have no intent whatsoever to insult or humiliate muslims.
I have said it before, an insult toward a person’s religion is a direct affront towards the person him/her self, because religion is one of the factors that determine a person’s identity. You are insulting Muslims, repetitive attempts after being reminded about your actions shows your intent. Your stock answer is a typical faithfreedom.org or any other Islam-bashing websites’ smokescreen excuse.
I only try to open their eyes, and I apologize if it hurts to see the truth.
I don’t see any truth in your words, and neither will my fellow Muslims. I only see made up slanders and ridiculous insults in your statements. Your “truth” is nothing but propaganda. People don’t buy those kind of stuff, whatever their religion might be. You can’t make anyone see your way by insulting and slandering them and the things they hold dear, even a child knows that.
Faithfreedom and those similar organizations had deceived you and turned you into a zombie bigot and made you think that you are doing the right thing, while you’re just causing mischief and frivolity in view of peace and harmony in the society.
-
Sylvester:
Radical islamic scholars always forge Judaism and Christianity.
Then Jews may argue that Christians forged their religion. I like the sound of that: Paul (Paulus), the radical Christian, forged form Judaism and hijacked Christianity 😉
Let’s honestly compare:
A. The faith that Jesus (pbuh) the messenger brought, “Nasrani” in Indonesian. Some of the teachings are:
1. Circumcision. Jesus was circumcised at the age of 8 days.
2. Prohibition of alcohol. Jesus never drank alcoholic beverages. Ever.
3. Prohibition of pork. Jesus never ate pork or swine’s meat in his life.
4. Jesus is a messenger of God.B. The faith that Paul created, “Kristen” in Indonesian.
Some of the teachings are:
1. Circumcision is not necessary.
2. Alcohol is allowed.
3. Pork is allowed.
4. Jesus is God.And I thought “Christians” are supposedly a person who follows Jesus.
-
The faith that Jesus (pbuh) the messenger brought, “Nasrani” in Indonesian. Some of the teachings are:
1. Circumcision. Jesus was circumcised at the age of 8 days.
2. Prohibition of alcohol. Jesus never drank alcoholic beverages. Ever.
3. Prohibition of pork. Jesus never ate pork or swine’s meat in his life.
4. Jesus is a messenger of God.Islamic fake, lies
Jesus drank wine during the last supper in the Bible.
Jesus said everything God created is good, including pork. What bad is come from bad human mouth.
I have to say that aluang is better than you, Hassan, in debating. -
Korrill: You still did not answer my question, my dear. What would constrain me to keep my promise? From your answers to my other points, I already get an idea of what your reason for believing is. Still, I want you to look within yourself and tell me. Unless you can do that, then the answer I give you will be worthless.
Jlta: Hm, many reasons ‘the answer I give you will be worthless’ this is a blog Korrill. You just want to play your game bad mouthing religions, the church, your chance, and not even being able to keep your words, sad indeed. A gentleman?
Comment on “Women in Mosques”.
Copyright Indonesia Matters 2006-20
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact
Dear Augusto,
If you’d bothered to read my post at all, you’d have seen that i did NOT address the “islam bashing” paragraph to you, but as a “general comment” to “no one in particular.” So maybe you should have read more carefully; instead you have inadvertently convinced me I SHOULD have addressed it to you in particular, as you obviously have a lot of anger and, yes, hatred of Islam. Hatred of a faith…that makes you intolerant of that faith.
This is the perfect illustration of why you are such a bigot. How did you conclude I am a muslim? Is it because I don’t hate Islam and think Islam is no better or worse than other religions, which also include both worrying passages in holy books and worrying people who abuse those books? Funny, you did the same thing to Korrill! So everyone who disagrees with you is “one of them!” By extension, then, your mentality must be “those who are not with us are against us.” You know who said that first? Lenin. And you know in what context? Justification for destroying Russia’s social democrats, despite the fact that they were both leftists. In other words, intolerance of difference. Just like you have displayed in this last post addressed to me, but hilariously, when you don’t even know what the difference is!
In reponse to Korrill’s significantly more intellectual posts, you wrote:
And here you have just amazed me with a complete inability to see the symmetry of your intolerant mindset with that you claim to be so opposed to. I won’t spell out for you something that should be quite obvious, so think about it, mate. Self-reflect.