72 Virgins as Heavenly Reward

[america4vr]

The description of heaven as depicted by Islam as reward for a devout, strictly adhered to life of a Muslim has always struck me as an eminently revealing aspect into the primitive mind of the Arab mentality and to the very legitimacy of Islam as God's word.

Islam is the only religion, the only belief system in a supernatural deity that entices its adherents with the promise of a decidedly puerile, salacious, beastial, unspiritual nature, with the promise of an eternal afterlife of carnal indulgence without end.

No other religion resorts to the sort of whorish pandering in which Islam exhorts it followers by virtue of the basest of Man's primal urges.

Historically, religions have always looked upon the sex act as being of the Devil, as vile, unholy, unclean, as a necessary evil to be engaged in for the sake of procreation only.

Other religions describe heaven only in the most abstract, following the word of God deemed good, worthy enough as its own reward.

Simply put, this central tenet of Islam's belief system has always struck me as the very indication, proof of its wholly unGodly decidedly terrestrial nature I will ever need.

[Izzy Dunne]

Wonder where the number 72 came from.

As I understand it, these virgins get healed up and become virgins again, so it seems like one or two ought to suffice.

I've never had sex with a virgin, so I can't say for sure, but I'd rather eat at a restaurant where the chef has cooked before, at least for me.

[LucyT]

It’s 72 white grapes; it never was 72 virgins:

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it:80/articolo/7025?eng=y

[vetvetdoug]

Leave it to the Muzzies to turn heaven into a whorehouse. What do women get when they get to heaven?

[Clintonfatigued]

What do they say Islamic women who go to Heaven get? I can’t imagine that 72 female virgins would appeal to many of them.

[GATOR NAVY]

Islam is the only religion, the only belief system in a supernatural deity that entices its adherents with the promise of a decidedly puerile, salacious, beastial, unspiritual nature, with the promise of an eternal afterlife of carnal indulgence without end.

It's pretty simple to me. Ol' Mohammed knew his market. If he was alive today he'd be a Madison Avenue star.

[Mamzelle]

72 plus 28 equals 100—not only are there 72 sloe-eyed maidens, but 28
“ghilman” — pretty young boys. That’s not often mentioned. And booze is plentiful in paradise, too.

[Bushwacker777]

“Historically, religions have always looked upon the sex act as being of the Devil, as vile, unholy, unclean, as a necessary evil to be engaged in for the sake of procreation only. “

Absolute nonsense. Judaism never, ever looked upon sex like this — this only krept into the western Christian church due to so many of the philosophical “fathers” long after the ministry of Christ who had hangups about females (if you catch what I mean) and influenced thinking for years.

[Bushwacker777]

And another thing — if sex is so bad in Judaism (of which Christianity and Islam are offshoots) why (on the wedding night) does a Hasidic Jewish groom hang the bedsheet out in public to show he got himself a virgin bride?

Yes, sex is to be controlled within the bounds of marriage, and procreation is commanded by God (something ignored by most Christians), but it is also reveared.

[Fred Nerks]

http://www.corkscrew-balloon.com/02/03/1bkk/04b.html

“...For example, the famous passage about the virgins is based on the word hur, which is an adjective in the feminine plural meaning simply “white.” Islamic tradition insists the term hur stands for “houri,” which means virgin, but Mr. Luxenberg insists that this is a forced misreading of the text. In both ancient Aramaic and in at least one respected dictionary of early Arabic, hur means “white raisin.”

Mr. Luxenberg has traced the passages dealing with paradise to a Christian text called Hymns of Paradise by a fourth-century author. Mr. Luxenberg said the word paradise was derived from the Aramaic word for garden and all the descriptions of paradise described it as a garden of flowing waters, abundant fruits and white raisins, a prized delicacy in the ancient Near East. In this context, white raisins, mentioned often as hur, Mr. Luxenberg said, makes more sense than a reward of sexual favors...

[AnalogReigns]

While I agree Islam strange and unique...anticipating an afterlife of sexual gratification,

Historically, religions have always looked upon the sex act as being of the Devil, as vile, unholy, unclean, as a necessary evil to be engaged in for the sake of procreation only.

is a statement of pure rubbish, without a shred of evidence. Judaism and Christianity (before Rome elevated virginity to the heights) certainly have no evidence in their scriptures of such a negative view of sex: "be fruitful and multiply" was after all the 1st Command of Genesis 2 (along with the command to avoid one fruit...).

Sex and its full expression in monogamous marriage, as a creation of God, is considered holy--even a part of the sacrament of marriage. It is precisely because Judaism and Christianity have such a high view of the sexual act, that the MISUSE of it is considered so vile and degraded.

So high is the view of sex...in its proper context, marriage alone, that Holy Scripture includes a whole book, which can only be properly understood as an ancient erotic love poem. It is just in accurate wrong to characterize all religions except Islam as looking down on sex. No other religion but Islam that I know of sees an erotic afterlife true, but that's quite different than seeing sex itself as vile--as you characterize it.

[Mr. Silverback]

No problem with the post itself, but this is not breaking news.

[foobarred]

I actually have a a theory where the whole 72 virgins might work:

They never say whether the virgins are male or female. I assume a lot of these suicide bombers are virgins themselves. So what happens is they blow themselves up, and end up with a group of 71 other suicide bomber/virgins.

[america4vr]

I might provide specific instances that describe sex in such a manner but nevertheless it seems I have misspoken regarding the attitude of sex in religion and present my mea culpa on this to you all.

I stand corrected.

It nevertheless does not change my attitude on Islam's depiction of Heaven and remain unapologetic that essentially Muhhammad is Allah's self-described pimp

[gesully]

It was misinterpreted. What the jihadists get is one 72-year old virgin.

[CzarNicky]

After dealing with islamic men 72 female virgins might be more appealing.

[Creationist]

Historically, religions have always looked upon the sex act as being of the Devil, as vile, unholy, unclean, as a necessary evil to be engaged in for the sake of procreation only

I know what you are trying to convey in your thought, but the word religion can does not meet the criteria.

There were ancient "religions" that the sacrifice was treated like a god with the proverbial sex, drugs and rock and roll before the big day.

The gods of the Romans and Greeks did not exhibit this phenomena described above.

I am sure what you are trying to say is that Christianity (papal) has been done on sex as vial, Ect.

Well, that is not what it is supposed to be. Jesus created woman for man as a help mate and companion, that is one man with one woman. (Please do not bring up the multiple wives mentioned in the Bible, because God never gave that idea his seal of approval, and everyone of those stories you will note that the guy always had trouble in his life because of it).

Any Holy Bible based form of Christianity that claims that sex with ones marital partner (man and woman, said for clarification) is wrong has their own demons in the fight.

The forms of sex that are wrong in the Eyes of God found in the Bible are, Fornication, adultery, bestiality, effeminate, lovers of themselves.

The word of God does not proclaim that man and woman are to have sex only to procreate the population, that is man driven ideals.

[B4Ranch]

-———They never say whether the virgins are male or female goats. -—————

[Continental Soldier]

“Historically, religions have always looked upon the sex act as being of the Devil, as vile, unholy, unclean, as a necessary evil to be engaged in for the sake of procreation only.”

That statement is total bullshit. Most religions in our world history favored sex and designed and performed ceremonies to celebrate it. It was only with the advent of Christianity that such a healthy practice fell into disfavor. For reasons, perhaps known to others, Christianity brought women into ill repute and denied them their previous role in religious worship. That statement, quoted above, suggests to me that you may be the last of the Cathars. ;)

[Admin Moderator]

Activism/Chapters - Activism, protests, news and business of Free Republic Chapters. Freep this poll should be placed in vanity. General news stories about activism should be place in news. After action reports from Freeps are allowed here.

Announcements – Notifications of Activism events, FR business

Breaking News - Not every story is breaking news. Breaking news should be news that affects most of us. There are some exceptions. If there is a hot current event happening, check breaking news. Most likely, it's there already, please check first, then use our search function.

Editorial - Editorials are opinions. Some vanities, if well written and thought out can be considered editorial material.

Extended News - Extended news is for stories which have been posted previously and have updated or newer information.

Free Republic - This category is reserved for Free Republic business.

Front Page News - Front page is for stories which are not breaking news, but would be found on the front page of a newspaper.

[Shery]

I’ve asked that question, but it brings a look of shock to everyone’s face! How dare anyone question the Quran!

[meandog]

[x_plus_one]

72 houris = 72 female demons = take your pick on their level of chastity. What kind of culture has nothing better to offer than demonic females in the afterlife?

[najida]

You’ve got some major issues with sex doncha darlin’?

[Cold Heat]

The white grape is a simply a code word, a visualized representation of a beautiful virgin. It's just more evidence that this religion was severely damaged by centuries of uncontrolled savagery of the mind, body and spirit of the original intent.

Not to say that this is uncommon. But it is the worst of all the cases where this happened over time.

[generalhammond]

What do Islamic women have to look forward to?? A damn good question. Here's a snippet I cut from a web encyclopedia:

Ordinary Muslim women may also go to heaven, where each is said to have just one husband, usually her earthly husband. Thus the hur appear to join earthly wives as additional heavenly companions for men.

In other words, they stand in line behind the whores for attention from their earthly husband. Islam sucks, don't it.

[AnalogReigns]

“For reasons, perhaps known to others, Christianity brought women into ill repute and denied them their previous role in religious worship.”

This is also a bogus statement. At the height of civilization, before Christianity...the Greco-Roman world, women were considered but property (much as in the Islamic world they still are). Its not even very common to find Greek statues of women—so inferior were they considered to be in this most-enlightened of pagan societies. Jesus had female followers, and the gospels record his conversations with them—clearly he gave women dignity like no other Rabbi—or pagan religion—before Him.

The ascetic movement within Christianity (starting in the 200s AD) coalesced with pagan views of spirituality (that spirit is good, and material/body is bad...) to elevate the state of virginity to a higher level of spirituality (something the bible never says...) and hence women and a sexual life (yes in marriage) in general were disparaged—and continued to be so up through the middle ages.

While honoring marriage by performing his first miracle at a wedding, Jesus made it clear that sex & marriage were not a part of life in heaven
“At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” (Mat. 22:30)
and the Apostle Paul made it clear that he wished due to their difficult times people would be like he was (single) (I Cor. 7:26ff)...these teachings in no way make marriage a 2nd class way of a Christian life—as the ascetics and the typical view in the Middle Ages made it out to be. (I Cor. 7 is actually also where St. Paul commands married people that they owe it to their spouse to have sex...).

No, Christians didn’t worship fertility goddesses and gods like almost all pagans did in the ancient world...and, they also didn’t do the human sacrifice of babies—that most societies did as well. Many of the first generations of Christians went to their deaths simply because the refused to worship one more particular “god,” namely the Roman emperor. (To your average pagan, adding worship of one more god was no big deal...).

To say though, as does the usual politically correct liberal feminist spin of history, that Christianity itself disparaged sex since they stopped visiting temple prostitutes...(the usual “celebration” of sexuality in the ancient pagan world) is as much bunk as the claim that all religions but Islam disparage sex.

The extreme asceticism of the medieval church was indeed wrong, but that doesn’t make the pagan infanticidal darkness which was before a loving paradise.

Islam has a sensual heaven because first, they haven’t paid attention to Jesus teachings, and psychologically, probably just because their normal lifestyle is so segregated between the sexes. The “asceticism” they practice, by never interacting with women except for sex.... breeds frustration....and hence they see heaven as endless sensuality. It is a corrupt religion truly—mainly because they are blind to the bible.

[RightWhale]

The problem is that documentation has been revealed that supposedly might show the Koran was not composed as stated in history. Some of it existed long before the official date of composition and the present version was composed, redacted much later. The sidebar of the image of 72 pure white grapes that might be very appealing to someone who has never seen pure water because he lives in the middle of a dusty hot desert and can only imagine what it might be like is not the issue.

[TChad]

Leave it to the Muzzies to turn heaven into a whorehouse. What do women get when they get to heaven?

They get free cell phones, so they can chat eternally with the other virgins while jihadi-boy covers his ears and says "Please Allah, please make them shut up!"

[najida]

Actually, her job in heaven is to take care of the houris. (no joke)

[america4vr]

Thank you for your understanding. I have difficulty sometimes deciding which category to post my comments to.

[xp38]

While the grape thing is interesting the its hard for me to think todays jihadis are blowing themselves up for them. I think it has to do more with the all consuming vision they have of Islam and its supremicist outlook along with sex thing.

[america4vr]

LOL. Very well said. From my description of it, it would seem so.

[NYer]

I actually have a a theory where the whole 72 virgins might work:

You all seem to have ignored LucyT's post and link. Too often on FR, folks tend not to read those links, so here is the information. This is the most plausible explanation for how the Koran was b*dized over the centuries.

---

The Virgins and the Grapes: the Christian Origins of the Koran

A German scholar of ancient languages takes a new look at the sacred book of Islam. He maintains that it was created by Syro-Aramaic speaking Christians, in order to evangelize the Arabs. And he translates it in a new way

by Sandro Magister                                

ROMA - That Aramaic was the lingua franca of a vast area of the ancient Middle East is a notion that is by now amply noted by a vast public, thanks to Mel Gibson´s film "The Passion of the Christ," which everyone watches in that language.

But that Syro-Aramaic was also the root of the Koran, and of the Koran of a primitive Christian system, is a more specialized notion, an almost clandestine one. And it´s more than a little dangerous. The author of the most important book on the subject - a German professor of ancient Semitic and Arabic languages - preferred, out of prudence, to write under the pseudonym of Christoph Luxenberg. A few years ago, one of his colleagues at the University of Nablus in Palestine, Suliman Bashear, was thrown out of the window by his scandalized Muslim students.

In the Europe of the 16th and 17th centuries, mangled by the wars of religion, scholars of the Bible also used to keep a safe distance with pseudonyms. But if, now, the ones doing so are the scholars of the Koran, this is a sign that, for the Muslim holy book as well, the era of historical, linguistic, and philological re-readings has begun.

This is a promising beginning for many reasons. Gerd-Rüdiger Puin, a professor at Saarland University in Germany and another Koran scholar on the philological level, maintains that this type of approach to Islam´s holy book can help to defeat its fundamentalist and Manichean readings, and to bring into a better light its ties with Judaism and Christianity.

The book by "Christoph Luxenberg" came out in 2000 in Germany with the title "Die Syro-Aramäische Lesart des Koran" ("A Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran"), published in Berlin by Das Arabische Buch. It is out of print, and there are no translations in other languages. But a new, updated edition (again in German) is about to arrive in bookstores.

Here follows an interview with the author, published in Germany in the newspaper "Süddeutsche Zeitung" and in Italy in "L´espresso," no. 11, March 12-18, 2004:


From the Gospel to Islam

An interview with "Christoph Luxenberg" by Alfred Hackensberger


Q. - Professor, why did you think it useful to conduct this re-reading of the Koran?

A. - "Because, in the Koran, there are many obscure points that, from the beginning, even the Arab commentators were not able to explain. Of these passages it is said that only God can comprehend them. Western research on the Koran, which has been conducted in a systematic manner only since about the middle of the 19th century, has always taken as its base the commentaries of the Arab scholars. But these have never gone beyond the etymological explanation of some terms of foreign origin."

Q. - What makes your method different?

A. - "I began from the idea that the language of the Koran must be studied from an historical-linguistic point of view. When the Koran was composed, Arabic did not exist as a written language; thus it seemed evident to me that it was necessary to take into consideration, above all, Aramaic, which at the time, between the 4th and 7th centuries, was not only the language of written communication, but also the lingua franca of that area of Western Asia."

Q. - Tell us how you proceeded.

A. - "At first I conducted a ´synchronous´ reading. In other words, I kept in mind both Arabic and Aramaic. Thanks to this procedure, I was able to discover the extent of the previously unsuspected influence of Aramaic upon the language of the Koran: in point of fact, much of what now passes under the name of ´classical Arabic´ is of Aramaic derivation."

Q. - What do you say, then, about the idea, accepted until now, that the Koran was the first book written in Arabic?

A. - "According to Islamic tradition, the Koran dates back to the 7th century, while the first examples of Arabic literature in the full sense of the phrase are found only two centuries later, at the time of the ´Biography of the Prophet´; that is, of the life of Mohammed as written by Ibn Hisham, who died in 828. We may thus establish that post-Koranic Arabic literature developed by degrees, in the period following the work of al-Khalil bin Ahmad, who died in 786, the founder of Arabic lexicography (kitab al-ayn), and of Sibawwayh, who died in 796, to whom the grammar of classical Arabic is due. Now, if we assume that the composition of the Koran was brought to an end in the year of the Prophet Mohammed´s death, in 632, we find before us an interval of 150 years, during which there is no trace of Arabic literature worthy of note."

Q. - So at the time of Mohammed Arabic did not have precise rules, and was not used for written communication. Then how did the Koran come to be written?

A. - "At that time, there were no Arab schools - except, perhaps, for the Christian centers of al-Anbar and al-Hira, in southern Mesopotamia, or what is now Iraq. The Arabs of that region had been Christianized and instructed by Syrian Christians. Their liturgical language was Syro-Aramaic. And this was the vehicle of their culture, and more generally the language of written communication."

Q. - What is the relationship between this language of culture and the origin of the Koran?

A. - "Beginning in the third century, the Syrian Christians did not limit themselves to bringing their evangelical mission to nearby countries, like Armenia or Persia. They pressed on toward distant territories, all the way to the borders of China and the western coast of India, in addition to the entire Arabian peninsula all the way to Yemen and Ethiopia. It is thus rather probable that, in order to proclaim the Christian message to the Arabic peoples, they would have used (among others) the language of the Bedouins, or Arabic. In order to spread the Gospel, they necessarily made use of a mishmash of languages. But in an era in which Arabic was just an assembly of dialects and had no written form, the missionaries had no choice but to resort to their own literary language and their own culture; that is, to Syro-Aramaic. The result was that the language of the Koran was born as a written Arabic language, but one of Arab-Aramaic derivation."

Q. - Do you mean that anyone who does not keep the Syro-Aramaic language in mind cannot translate and interpret the Koran correctly?

A. - "Yes. Anyone who wants to make a thorough study of the Koran must have a background in the Syro-Aramaic grammar and literature of that period, the 7th century. Only thus can he identify the original meaning of Arabic expressions whose semantic interpretation can be established definitively only by retranslating them into Syro-Aramaic."

Q. - Let´s come to the misunderstandings. One of the most glaring errors you cite is that of the virgins promised, in the Islamic paradise, to the suicide bombers.

A. - "We begin from the term ´huri,´ for which the Arabic commentators could not find any meaning other than those heavenly virgins. But if one keeps in mind the derivations from Syro-Aramaic, that expression indicated ´white grapes,´ which is one of the symbolic elements of the Christian paradise, recalled in the Last Supper of Jesus. There´s another Koranic expression, falsely interpreted as ´the children´ or ´the youths´ of paradise: in Aramaic: it designates the fruit of the vine, which in the Koran is compared to pearls. As for the symbols of paradise, these interpretive errors are probably connected to the male monopoly in Koranic commentary and interpretation."

Q. - By the way, what do you think about the Islamic veil?

A. - "There is a passage in Sura 24, verse 31, which in Arabic reads, ´That they should beat their khumurs against their bags.´ It is an incomprehensible phrase, for which the following interpretation has been sought: ´That they should extend their kerchiefs from their heads to their breasts.´ But if this passage is read in the light of Syro-Aramaic, it simply means: ´They should fasten their belts around their waists.´"

Q. - Does this mean the veil is really a chastity belt?

A. - "Not exactly. It is true that, in the Christian tradition, the belt is associated with chastity: Mary is depicted with a belt fastened around her waist. But in the gospel account of the Last Supper, Christ also ties an apron around his waist before washing the Apostles´ feet. There are clearly many parallels with the Christian faith."

Q. - You have discovered that Sura 97 of the Koran mentions the Nativity. And in your translation of the famous Sura of Mary, her "birthgiving" is "made legitimate by the Lord." Moreover, the text contains the invitation to come to the sacred liturgy, to the Mass. Would the Koran, then, be nothing other than an Arabic version of the Christian Bible?

A. - "In its origin, the Koran is a Syro-Aramaic liturgical book, with hymns and extracts from Scriptures which might have been used in sacred Christian services. In the second place, one may see in the Koran the beginning of a preaching directed toward transmitting the belief in the Sacred Scriptures to the pagans of Mecca, in the Arabic language. Its socio-political sections, which are not especially related to the original Koran, were added later in Medina. At its beginning, the Koran was not conceived as the foundation of a new religion. It presupposes belief in the Scriptures, and thus functioned merely as an inroad into Arabic society."

Q. - To many Muslim believers, for whom the Koran is the holy book and the only truth, your conclusions could seem blasphemous. What reactions have you noticed up until now?

A. - "In Pakistan, the sale of the edition of ´Newsweek´ that contained an article on my book was banned. Otherwise, I must say that, in my encounters with Muslims, I have not noticed any hostile attitudes. On the contrary, they have appreciated the commitment of a non-Muslim to studies aimed at an objective comprehension of their sacred text. My work could be judged as blasphemous only by those who decide to cling to errors in the interpretation of the word of God. But in the Koran it is written, ´No one can bring to the right way those whom God induces to error.´"

Q. - Aren´t you afraid of a fatwa, a death sentence like the one pronounced against Salman Rushdie?

A. - "I am not a Muslim, so I don´t run that risk. Besides, I haven´t offended against the Koran"

Q. - But you still preferred to use a pseudonym.

A. - "I did that on the advice of Muslim friends who were afraid that some enthusiastic fundamentalist would act of his own initiative, without waiting for a fatwa."

__________


Divine Verses


Koran, in Arabic Qur´an, means recitation or reading. It is an essential element of the Islamic faith that it was always with God and "descended" in its fullness to Mohammed at the moment of his call as a prophet, called the "night of destiny." It is in Arabic, and it may be ritually recited only in this language. It is divided into 114 Suras, or chapters, and each Sura is divided into verses. The first Sura, called "the unstopping," is a brief prayer that plays an important role in worship and everyday life. The following Suras are ordered according to length, from longest to shortest. According to the tradition, Mohammed gradually communicated to his faithful the parts of the Koran revealed to him. The oldest Suras are called those "of Mecca"; that later ones, "of Medina." The most ancient Suras are of a markedly theological character, while the Suras of Medina are more juridical, dictating the ordering of the community. For Sunni Islam,.the Koran may not be put to criticism, given its divine nature: in any case, the "door of interpretation" of the Koran has been closed since the 11th century.

A link to the full text of the Koran, in an English translation:

> The Sacred Koran

__________


An elaborated guide to the new historical-linguistic readings of the Koran, on a page of the blog parapundit.com:

> "Newsweek" Article About Christoph Luxenberg On Koran Banned In Pakistan

And an investigation by Alexander Stille in the "New York Times," March 4, 2002:

> Scholars Scrutinize the Koran's Origin

__________


The commentary of professor Gian Maria Vian on the interview with "Christoph Luxenberg," printed on Sunday, March 14 in the newspaper of the Italian bishops´ conference, "Avvenire":

> I filologi e il Corano

Gian Maria Vian, a professor of patristic philology at Rome´s "La Sapienza" university, is the author of an important essay on twenty centuries of Christian texts, beginning with Sacred Scripture:

> Quella scrittura che comincia in Galilea (29.8.2001)

__________


In the Muslim world, the view of the Koran peculiar to the Ismailis, open to multiple interpretations and to a positive relationship with the Jewish and Christian faiths:

> The Other Islam. The Peaceful Revolution of the Ismaili Shiites

[RightWhale]

The problem with the timing of the composition of the Koran is vital, but it might amount to nothing after all since most of those who would be concerned are illiterate and those here who might ‘get it’ don’t seem to. 1.3 billion should be having a crisis of basic belief, but it doesn’t seem to be happening, and possibly because most are already beyond that just as most Christians are beyond that ‘literal’ thing.

[Gamecock]

religions have always looked upon the sex act as being of the Devil, as vile, unholy, unclean, as a necessary evil to be engaged in for the sake of procreation only.

Not exactly. Reformed Christianity sees the marital bed as an expression/reflection of Christ's love towards the elect.

I am sure some of your eyebrows are up, but consider the following quote by John Piper.

God created human beings in his image—male and female he created them, with capacities for intense sexual pleasure, and with a calling to commitment in marriage and continence in singleness. And his goal in creating human beings with personhood and passion was to make sure that there would be sexual language and sexual images that would point to the promises and the pleasures of God’s relationship to his people and our relationship to him. In other words, the ultimate reason (not the only one) why we are sexual is to make God more deeply knowable. The language and imagery of sexuality is the most graphic and most powerful that the Bible uses to describe the relationship between God and his people—both positively (when we are faithful) and negatively (when we are not).

[RightWhale]

Wall Street Journal article
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120008793352784631.html

---

. . .
During the 19th century, Germans pioneered modern scholarship of ancient texts. Their work revolutionized understanding of Christian and Jewish scripture. It also infuriated some of the devout, who resented secular scrutiny of texts believed to contain sacred truths.
. . .

---

Seen plenty of this infuriation here on FR and can imagine the rage of the islamics, but it isn’t happening.

[LucyT]

Thank you, NYer.

[Gamecock]

Since you are interested in this topic consider yourself pinged to 36.

[irishtenor]

Can you say AMEN! AMEN.

[irishtenor]

The virins are actually camels, hence the excitement.

[NYer]

Reformed Christianity sees the marital bed as an expression/reflection of Christ's love towards the elect.

The same is true for the Catholic Church.

---

ARTICLE 7
THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."⁸⁴

I. MARRIAGE IN GOD'S PLAN

Sacred Scripture begins with the creation of man and woman in the image and likeness of God and concludes with a vision of "the wedding-feast of the Lamb."⁸⁵ Scripture speaks throughout of marriage and its "mystery," its institution and the meaning God has given it, its origin and its end, its various realizations throughout the history of salvation, the difficulties arising from sin and its renewal "in the Lord" in the New Covenant of Christ and the Church.⁸⁶

Marriage in the order of creation

"The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage."⁸⁷ The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity,⁸⁸ some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life."⁸⁹

God who created man out of love also calls him to love the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being. For man is created in the image and likeness of God who is himself love.⁹⁰ Since God created him man and woman, their mutual love becomes an image of the absolute and unfailing love with which God loves man. It is good, very good, in the Creator's eyes. And this love which God blesses is intended to be fruitful and to be realized in the common work of watching over creation: "And God blessed them, and God said to them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.'"⁹¹

Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone."⁹² The woman, "flesh of his flesh," his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "helpmate"; she thus represents God from whom comes our help.⁹³ "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."⁹⁴ The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning": "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."⁹⁵

Marriage under the regime of sin

1606 Every man experiences evil around him and within himself. This experience makes itself felt in the relationships between man and woman. Their union has always been threatened by discord, a spirit of domination, infidelity, jealousy, and conflicts that can escalate into hatred and separation. This disorder can manifest itself more or less acutely, and can be more or less overcome according to the circumstances of cultures, eras, and individuals, but it does seem to have a universal character.

According to faith the disorder we notice so painfully does not stem from the nature of man and woman, nor from the nature of their relations, but from sin. As a break with God, the first sin had for its first consequence the rupture of the original communion between man and woman. Their relations were distorted by mutual recriminations;⁹⁶ their mutual attraction, the Creator's own gift, changed into a relationship of domination and lust;⁹⁷ and the beautiful vocation of man and woman to be fruitful, multiply, and subdue the earth was burdened by the pain of childbirth and the toil of work.⁹⁸

Nevertheless, the order of creation persists, though seriously disturbed. To heal the wounds of sin, man and woman need the help of the grace that God in his infinite mercy never refuses them.⁹⁹ Without his help man and woman cannot achieve the union of their lives for which God created them "in the beginning."

---

read more

[BuffaloJack]

The promise of 72 virgins and 28 boys sounds more like something the Archangel Lucifer might offer as an enticement to a dim-witted fool than anything else. And certainly not something associated with God and Heaven.

[joebuck]

"The promise of 72 virgins and 28 boys sounds more like something the Archangel Lucifer might offer as an enticement to a dim-witted fool than anything else."

"The woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes." Satan uses our physical appetites (fleshy lusts) to tempt us.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***What do women get when they get to heaven?***

Women don’t. Mohammed said HELL is mostly populated with women.

[dangus]

>> Historically, religions have always looked upon the sex act as being of the Devil, as vile, unholy, unclean, as a necessary evil to be engaged in for the sake of procreation only. <<

Not exactly. Catholicism, for example, regards sexuality as a foretaste of true spiritual reunion: Lesser than spiritual ecstasy, but still revelatory of God. (People rarely shout out, “Oh, government!” when having sex.) Definitely not vile, unholy, or unclean, unless done sacreligiously. And Catholicism STILL gets the rep as the sexually repressed denomination of Christianity.

[dangus]

No, from reading the article, it sounds like it was 72 white grapes in the Christian antecedents of Islam, which were perverted into Islam’s promises of 72 virgins. The author acknowledges he is reading 72 white grapes from Syriac Christianity, and that Koranic scholars are unanimous in insisting that it is 72 virgins. Hence, the spiritual Christianity is corrupted into the carnal Islam, precisely as the original post’s author contends.

But I profoundly disagree that sexuality is considered base in all other religions. Kama Sutra?

[dangus]

72 houris?

Could this be a typo in the original? They get three days in paradise (just enough to know what they are missing?) Sort of the opposite of three days in Hades?

[Campion]

this only krept into the western Christian church

It's not the Christian attitude, either.

St. Augustine admittedly had some issues with sexuality. Keep in mind that he lived a lascivious life as a young man, including "shacking up" with a girl and begetting an illegitimate son with her. He rather understandably reacted too strongly in the opposite direction.

[Continental Soldier]

Virtually everything in your second paragraph is false. And all the rest of your remarks deal with the Christian or post Christian movements, Islam, etc. Doesn’t it strike you as odd or interesting that so many contemporary symbols (Christmas Tree, colored lights, Easter eggs, etc.)harken back to the pre-Christian, pagan times?