Friday, November 30, 2012

Sami Zaatari vs. David Wood: Is Islam a Threat to Society?

Kudos to Sami Zaatari for taking on one of the most difficult Muslim topics imaginable.

148 comments:

Don Dan said...

1:10:57 Sam completely contradicts himself, let me get this straight... So if a current day muslim decides to marry a nine year old girl copying the actions of Mohammed, he actually isn't following Mohammed/Islam because today we have determined that 9 year old girls are unfit for marriage? Are you DARING to say that the Mohammed was wrong in his "divine" assumption? You can't have it both ways buddy!

Zack_Tiang said...

Indeed. Good for him.

taomeano said...

This was the worst performance by Sami. He was not being truthful with the verses in the quran that David quoted eg Sura 9:29. That verse is so clear I dont know why Sami kept saying David is having a subjective interpretation of that verse.

Just like the previous debate with Sami, he runs away from the clear meaning of the subject matter. He was not that impressive at all in the two debates. To use the Christian bible to make your points when it favors you and to say it is corrupted when it goes against you is the height of inconsistency and that was what Sami did in the other debate, yet he does not see anything wrong with that.

David Wood, please do not waste your time and energy debating people who are not faithful to the topic at hand. By the way the other guy Zakir Hussain was a joke, he should learn how to debate before embarking on any serious debate with christians. He was woefully lacking in intellectual vigour and completely clueless about what our bible teaches. Good job David.

Peakvistas said...

Great debate - good Job David. Zaatari, in his initial response is not actually addressing the topic at hand. The issue is -- whether ISLAM is a threat to society.. not 'are the motivations of terrorist cells (esp. 9/11 crowd) strictly religious in nature'. It is true that Islamic terrorist extremists have non-religious justifications for their acts of terror -- but this fact does not exonerate Islam. The comparison between Malala (teen Taliban victim) and child victims of drone attacks is enlightening. Drone attacks have been condemned by many and are understood to be attempts by the US government (either legitimate or not) to kill known terrorists. The cowardly acts of the Taliban towards teenage girls in Pakistan, on the other hand, are a consequence of gender bias stemming directly from the teachings of Islam.

Nobody but everybody said...

Nice one David. Be safe though, don't trust the Moslems in Britain.

akairey said...

Sami-once again, the words "kill" & "fight" are can not be interpretted any other way. IT comes from you book to do so. SO you either have your Quran erase those words or refute the Quran.
Here's a quote from an Ambassador who clearly states the motive of the islamists:
It was founded on the laws of their Prophet [Mohammed] – that it was written in their Koran that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners; that is was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners; and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise. Source:
Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd, editor (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1954), Vol. 9, p. 358, Report of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams to John Jay, March 28, 1786.

akairey said...

@Sami-another point is that those people who stating that "Islam" is not the cause HAVE NOT read the Quran.
Even though other races commit crimes, they do NOT have a source that give them an "OK" to beat their wives, kill non-believers, etc, to continue what they're doing.

akairey said...

Sami-u tend to take versus out of context from the OLD TESTAMENT!
Regarding Sharia, so you're okay if CHRISTIANS/JEWS/BUDDIST impose their own laws in ARAB countries and ignore the ARAB laws? is that okay with you? Simple answers please.

akairey said...

@Sami-do you know about the case against the HOLYLAND TRIAL in the U.S. Or watched something called the "PROJECT"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGzohLgqXyY

akairey said...

@Sami-your "interpretation" of 9:29 is completely false. It's a broad generalization and does NOT specify which pagans, which unbelievers because the QURAN "clearly" specifiy it as the QURAN says it is clear. YOU have not authority to change it the words.

akairey said...

@ David-GREAT JOB!!

Radical Moderate said...

David Wood

I understand that Paul Willims made a complete fool of himself at speakers corner.

David Wood said...

No question. Paul tries to portray himself as someone who is scholarly minded, but when you see him at Speakers' Corner, you realize he is a complete buffoon.

Radical Moderate said...

@David Wood

I must strongly disagree with you. When I listen to Paul Williams or read his essays I realize he is a complete buffoon. :)

Samatar Mohamed said...

@David wood

To be fair you didn't answer their question on 1 samuel 15 whatsoever. Care to explain now in this blog and I'll direct Paul Williams to your response.

gabriella oak said...


Poor Paul. He hasn't quite learned the knack, so beloved his Muslim brothers, of arguing black is white with a straight face.
He still has just enough infidel self-awareness to know that non-Muslims are laughing at his argumentations.
I think in his more introspective moments, this realisation is like a dagger in his heart.

It would require a heart of stone not to laugh.

Tom said...

quote attributed to bin laden
"We--with God's help--call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson." Feb. 1998 - Bin Laden edict

If the koran is as peaceful as it claims, then the number of terrorist attacks would be inconsequential and not as overwhelming, random & destructive as it is!

The level of violence, is mindboogling & unprecedented!

David Wood said...

Samatar said: "To be fair you didn't answer their question on 1 samuel 15 whatsoever. Care to explain now in this blog and I'll direct Paul Williams to your response."

"To be fair"? Are you serious, or are you really this obnoxious? If a speaker at Speakers' Corner steps up on a ladder to address a topic, and a dozen hecklers start shouting other topics in order to avoid the subject, you're telling me that the speaker is supposed to change the subject and start addressing all the other topics so that the hecklers can avoid the subject at hand? Seriously?

Let's see if you're consistent. Suppose Paul Williams steps up on a ladder and says, "Today, I would like to address some difficulties with the doctrine of the Trinity." If Christians started screaming, "Paul Williams! Why did your prophet rape a little girl!" "Why did your disgusting pervert prophet rape that little girl!" "Come on, Paul! Tell us why your pathetic excuse for a pedophile prophet raped a little girl."

Are you telling me, Samatar, that Paul would be somehow obligated to deal with their question, instead of addressing the topic he came to discuss?

Okay, now it's time for consistency, Samatar. Whenever you make a comment on this blog, I'm going to change the subject, attack your prophet, and demand and answer. Let's try it out. Leave a comment.

Sam said...

This is to Samatar. I sent your coward friend, Paul Williams, messages on his blog where I sent him the following links which not only refute his perversion and distortion of 1 Samuel 15, but also turn the tables on Muhammad and his god, proving that Allah is a genocidal tyrant:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/q_amalekites.htm

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/zaatri_amalikites.htm

http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/inconsistent1.html

http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/inconsistent2.html

http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/asma_afak1.htm

http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/asma_afak2.htm

Now go back to Williams and ask that coward why he refused to post my messages which contained the links that thoroughly answer to his rant.

David Wood said...

Samatar, answer the question. Why did Muhammad rape a little girl? (I wouldn't normally ask the question this way, but this is the method that you and Paul have approved of, so I'll stick with it.)

Sancho Panza said...

David let Samatar off the hook too easily with regard to honor killings. When Sami pretended that it was a cultural thing David cold have quoted from the Reliance of the Traveler:
A manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).

In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. No wonder 91% of honor killings worldwide are committed by Muslims.

Sami must have been a relieved man by David's omission. But this information would have been a dash of cold water for the dhimmis and the Friday Muslims present.

Angelo said...

hi, I am from India, an atheist converted to Christianity. Just like brother David wood.But the difference between me and brother David is we converted in different years on different issues. I converted in 2007. Bro David converted by seeing historical issues of Jesus and I converted by debating about the existence of God, after life, creation of universe and all. I have been watching debates since 2009. Before that I had no interest in religions and I didn't know that Brother Sam was debating since around 1981. Two years before my birth. Some times it came in my mind that we are polytheists but thanks to Brother David Sam Robert Nabeel and all. Now a days I remember many Biblical and Quranic important verses and nobody can make me fool. Now again I stopped watching debates because I am convinced enough that we Christians are right. But I watched this debate to see what brother( only in humanity )Sami says. He said when Christians killed some people in Europe, they used Biblical verses.But he didn't quote the verses. And he can't because there is no such verse in Bible which says - kill / rape / cut the hands and feet of non-Christians if they don't believe in Jesus or Trinity. But Quran says these.
Jesus is not idiot. Jesus will never say that because He knows you can drag a horse to river by force but you can't make the horse drink the water.
Now if he talks about the violent passages of OT then he should know the reasons and how LONG God waited for people to repent before God punished them. But brother David quoted verses after verses and showed the match with the actions of Muslims. So of course Islam is threat to society.

Neverrepayevilwithevil said...

Which statistic is sami quoting from? absolutely ridiculous! What about all the bombings in Nigeria, church, government building and so on.Is boko haram fighting a defensive jihad What about the promise of virgins for suicide bombers in heaven? are all these not from the koran.
The koran is a book from the pit of hell

John Bob said...

Great job Brother David

Koala Bear said...

Can someone please tell me who this paul williams is? Another convert to the death cult?

minoria said...

Hello,
Guys,I dont think it is Christian to call Paul Williams a complete clown.We should just concentrate on his arguments,the words to say are his arguments are bad,clownish,a buffonerie.

But as for 1 Samuel 15:1-3 and the order to kill all the Amalekites.

Samatar,the situation is this:

1.The Amalekites had about I think 200 years to repent.They did not.

2.It is true that even children were to be killed but they would have gone to heaven.

The time God decided to kill the entire Jewish people

With the exception of Moses.It was when they made a GOLDEN CALF.
But MOSES interceded and it was not so.

My point is if the CANAANITES had done the same God would have forgiven them as easily as he paid attention to Moses(also in the case of king Manassah,Jewish,who commited child sacrifiec).It is all explained in my French article here:

You can translate using GOOGLE TRANSLATE and the article has a LINK to an article about the CANAANITE CASE:

Google Translate is this one:

http://translate.google.com/

"L’Incident Etonnant dans l’Ancien Testament lorsque Dieu decide l’Extermination Totale des Juifs"

http://www.avraidire.com/2012/11/lincident-etonnant-dans-lancien-testament-lorsque-dieu-decide-lextermination-totale-des-juifs/

Jamal Hassan said...

Sam intentionally killing women and children is haram, forbidden. That is clear. Your articles do not prove anything. Their length and all the bold emphasis are not impressive. Bring up your points a couple at a time here please, and we'll see if they carry any weight.

Prophet Muhammad praising the Torah does not mean he fully accepted it.

"So for their breaking of the covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good."(Quran 5:13)

Jamal Hassan said...

@Minoria

I believe it was 400 years to repent. Did the inhabitants live for 400 years?

wheatington said...

Islam is a threat to society. In fact, it is THE threat to civilization. We can solve other problems with technology or compromise but we MUST eradicate Islam. Totally.

Tom said...

Not sure what the issue was raised about 1 Samuel 15:1-3, I know one of their favourites is God mandated the killing of infant & children etc.

I will response, by asking them in the koran does it not record 2 events where children were not spared, namely, "The Flood", and the complete destruction of sodom & gamorrah, were there not children? And what caused God to initiate that?

DazzleDaz said...

GBU brother David. Another great debate. I have some info that might be of use to regarding taking non believers as friends.

Being friends with non-Muslims
Shaykh Saleh Munajid, Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 11793

With regard to non-Muslims, the Muslim should disavow himself of them, and he should not feel any love in his heart towards them. Allaah says in Qur'an 60:1:

O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists, etc.) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth (i.e. Islamic Monotheism, this Quran, and Muhammad SAW), and have driven out the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) and yourselves (from your homeland) because you believe in Allah your Lord! If you have come forth to strive in My Cause and to seek My Good Pleasure, (then take not these disbelievers and polytheists, etc., as your friends). You show friendship to them in secret, while I am All-Aware of what you conceal and what you reveal. And whosoever of you (Muslims) does that, then indeed he has gone (far) astray, (away) from the Straight Path .

Something else that will help you to stop mixing with non-Muslims is to remember that these kaafirs – even though they may have good manners and some good qualities – also do a number of seriously wrong things, any one of which is sufficient to nullify any good deeds that they may do. Among these evil things is the belief of the Christians – for example – that God is one of three (trinity), as Allaah says in Qur'an 5:73:

Surely, disbelievers are those who said: "Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)." But there is no ilah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilah (God -Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall the disbelievers among them.

Even if they give you some of your rights by treating you nicely, they do not give Allaah His rights and they do not give the Qur’aan its rights and they do not give our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) his rights. The rights of Allaah and His Book and His Prophet are more important than our personal rights. Remember this, for this is one of the things that will help you to hate them and regard them as enemies until they believe in Allaah alone, as mentioned in the aayah quoted above (interpretation of the meaning):...[quotes Qur'an 60:4below]

DazzleDaz said...

In the following hadith (classed by Al-Albani as "hassan", meaning "good") Ibn Abbas reports that Muhammad said:

"The strongest bond of faith is loyalty for the sake of Allah and opposition for His sake, love for the sake of Allah and enmity for His sake. (At-Tabarani, al-Kabir., as-Suyuti, al-Jami' as-Saghir, 1/69)


Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali, Jami' al-Ulum wal Hikam, p.30:

Ibn Abbas is also reported to have said, "Whoever loves for the sake of Allah, and hates for the sake of Allah, and whoever seals a friendship for His sake, or declares an enmity for His sake, will receive, because of this, the protection of Allah. No one may taste true faith except by this, even if his prayers and fasts are many. People have come to build their relationships around the concerns of the world, but it will not benefit them in any way."

Qur’an 60: 4 Indeed there has been an excellent example for you (muslims) in Ibrahim and those with him, when they said to their people: "Verily we are free from you.. and whatever you worship besides Allah: we rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred forever until you believe in Allah alone.

Ibn Kathir explains:

Allah the Exalted says to His faithful servants, whom He commanded to disown the disbelievers, to be enemies with them, and to distant themselves and separate from them:

(Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibrahim and those with him,) meaning, his followers who believed in him,

(when they said to their people: "Verily we are free from you...'') meaning, `we disown you,'

(and whatever you worship besides Allah: we rejected you,) meaning, `we disbelieve in your religion and way,'

(and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred forever) meaning, `Animosity and enmity have appeared between us and you from now and as long as you remain on your disbelief; we will always disown you and hate you,'

(until you believe in Allah alone,) meaning, `unless, and until, you worship Allah alone without partners and disbelieve in the idols and rivals that you worship besides Him…'

DazzleDaz said...

Imam Ahmad, Musnad, 4/357-8:

Imam Ahmad reports from Jarir ibn Abdullah that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, made him swear an oath to 'offer counsel to every Muslim and to steer clear of every disbeliever.'

In chapter three of the Qur’an it states: 28 Let not the believers take the disbelievers as friends instead of the believers, and whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way, unless you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allah warns you against Himself, and to Allah is the final return.)

Allah said next, (unless you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly.

For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' Al-Bukhari said that Al-Hasan said, "The Tuqyah is allowed until the Day of Resurrection.'' Allah said,

(And Allah warns you against Himself.) meaning, He warns you against His anger and the severe torment He prepared for those who give their support to His enemies, and those who have enmity with His friends,

DazzleDaz said...

In chapter five of the Qur’an it states: 51 O you who believe! Do not take friends from the Jews and the Christians, as they are but friends of each other. And if any among you befriends them, then surely, he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are the wrongdoers.

Allah forbids His believing servants from having Jews and Christians as friends, because they are the enemies of Islam and its people, may Allah curse them. Allah then states that they are friends of each other and He gives a warning threat to those who do this,

(And if any among you befriends them, then surely he is one of them.) Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that `Umar ordered Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari to send him on one sheet of balance the count of what he took in and what he spent. Abu Musa then had a Christian scribe, and he was able to comply with `Umar's demand. `Umar liked what he saw and exclaimed, "This scribe is proficient. Would you read in the Masjid a letter that came to us from Ash-Sham'' Abu Musa said, `He cannot.'' `Umar said, "Is he not pure'' Abu Musa said, "No, but he is Christian.'' Abu Musa said, "So `Umar admonished me and poked my thigh (with his finger), saying, `Drive him out (from Al-Madinah).' He then recited,

(O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as friends...)'' Then he reported that `Abdullah bin `Utbah said, "Let one of you beware that he might be a Jew or a Christian, while unaware.'' The narrator of this statement said, "We thought that he was referring to the Ayah,

(O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as friends,)

"Invite to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom and fair preaching, and argue with them in a way that is better. Truly, your Lord knows best who has gone astray from His Path, and He is the Best Aware of those who are guided." [al-Qur'aan, an-Nisaa'(16):125]

"Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the book, they are the ones cursed by Allah and cursed by the cursers." [al-Qur'aan, al-Baqara(2):159]

From this it is important to that if a Muslim does not invite the infidels to Islam the Muslim is cursed, whereby showing it is an obligatory upon the muslims.

This is also supported by The scholar of islam, Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan. This affair is clear. The first faction who established the invitation to Allaah and called the kufaar to Islaam, they are the ones who are upon the correct path and upon the haqq. [The shaikh brought as proof the statement of Allaah:]

And who is better in statement than the one who calls to Allaah and performs righteous deeds and says, "I am from the Muslims." (Fussilat 41:33)

So mixing with these people in order to call them to Islam and taking them out of the darknesses and into the light is wajib (obligatory) upon the Muslims. Does Islaam mean that a person accepts Islam and then sits and does nothing? No! Islaam means that you perform deeds and you also give da'wah. You perform deeds for yourself and you give da'wah (call) to Islam.

DazzleDaz said...

Shaykh Muhammad al-Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about the ruling on mixing with the kuffaar and treating them kindly hoping that they will become Muslim. He replied:

Undoubtedly the Muslim is obliged to hate the enemies of Allaah and to disavow them, because this is the way of the Messengers and their followers. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

Qur’an 60:4 There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: “We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever, - unless you believe in Allah and Him alone.
(http://islamqa.com/en/ref/59879)

Sam said...

Jamal Hassan, you must have not read my articles since I prove from your own sources that your god DOES KILL WOMEN AND CHILDREN. Do I need to copy and paste all the quotations to prove it? So you need to actually go back and read my articles since I have refuted your lie in them.

Sam said...

And contrary to your other lie, by praising the copy of the Torah which the Jews handed to him, testifying that he trusted it and in the One who revealed, without word of it being corrupted, PROVES THAT HE DID BELIEVED IN ALL OF IT!


Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar:

A group of Jews came and invited the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) to Quff. So he visited them in their school.

They said: AbulQasim, one of our men has committed fornication with a woman; so pronounce judgment upon them. They placed a cushion for the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) who sat on it and said: Bring the Torah. It was then brought. He then withdrew the cushion from beneath him and placed the Torah on it saying: I BELIEVED IN THEE AND IN HIM WHO REVEALED THEE.

He then said: Bring me one who is learned among you. Then a young man was brought. The transmitter then mentioned the rest of the tradition of stoning similar to the one transmitted by Malik from Nafi' (No. 4431)." (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38 (Kitab al Hudud, ie. Prescribed Punishments), Number 4434: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=38&translator=3&start=0&number=4434)

So try spreading your lies somewhere else since it ain't working with us.

Sam said...

Here is another version of that same hadith:

"... Abu Dawud recorded that Ibn `Umar said, "Some Jews came to the Messenger of Allah and invited him to go to the Quff area. So he went to the house of Al-Midras and they said, ‘O Abu Al-Qasim! A man from us committed adultery with a woman, so decide on their matter.’ They arranged a pillow for the Messenger of Allah and he sat on it and said…

((Bring the Tawrah to me.)) He was brought the Tawrah and he removed the pillow from under him and placed the Tawrah on it, saying…

((I TRUST YOU and He Who revealed it to you.))... (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 5:41: http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=776&Itemid=60)

So Jamal, enjoy!

minoria said...

@Jamal

Good point about the 400 years.The order was not carried out when it was given.

The Amalekite people worshipped MOLOCH as one of their gods,in other words they still practiced CHILD SACRIFICE at the time of SAUL.Saul lived circa 1000 BC.

The fact that the Jewish king MANASSAH,king of JUDAH,with JERUSALEM as its capital,who lived some 200 years after Saul,actually praticed child sacrifice,killing his own son,shows it existed in Saul's time.

Samatar Mohamed said...

@David

I concur. Sorry about that I was under the presumption that the dialogue was sort of back and forth. Anyways regarding your question.

"Samatar, answer the question. Why did Muhammad rape a little girl?"

That's odd you should say that it was rape. In order for it two be rape one of these criteria had to be met:

1. One of the members would not consent to sexual intercourse.

2. The person's consent is consider invalid because either they are too young or mentally insane.

We are well aware that Aisha did hit puberty and was able to bear children, and that she consented to marrying the prophet (pbuh). If you are honestly going to put an age limit on when a female or male is able to have sex before it is not considered rape I would like to hear it. Is 12 too young? How about 13? See we know from history that women used to have sex at a younger age than nowadays. If you condemn the sexual relationship between Aisha and the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), then you condemn all the past generations.

Nothin'ButTheTruth said...

@ Samatar,

I quote you "We are well aware that Aisha did hit puberty and was able to bear children, and that she consented to marrying the prophet (pbuh). If you are honestly going to put an age limit on when a female or male is able to have sex before it is not considered rape I would like to hear it. Is 12 too young? How about 13? See we know from history that women used to have sex at a younger age than nowadays. If you condemn the sexual relationship between Aisha and the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), then you condemn all the past generations."

All I can say is LOL...What a joke!
Aisha was 9 when he had sex with her.
She was seven times Muhammad's age for God's sake.

Cristo Te Ama said...

Samtar said: "We are well aware that Aisha did hit puberty and was able to bear children, and that she consented to marrying the prophet (pbuh)."

i read until here, i think it's not neccesary to keep reading, i mean, 9 yrs old puberty? even if she did because she was a little premature, can a kid of that age really give her consent and it can be valid? i mean SHE WAS STILL PLAYING WITH HER DOLLS according to the hadiths, so is that a person who can give a valid consent in such matter?
Samatar stop it, reapeating these lies 100 times won't make them true. Muhammad raped that poor little girl and who knows how many others (slaves) he did.

coptic crusader said...

@ Samatar

You have dodged this question from me several times now. If your so called prophet was alive today and asked for your 6 year old daughter hand in marriage, 1.) How would you react 2 your prophet and 2.) Do you really believe she is old enough 2 even understand what she is consenting 2 and if not is that not considered rape?
Now please don't bring up the virgin Mary cuz we've been down that road be4... In those times yes women were married at younger age, 1. because at that time they died at a much younger age than men, they didn't hold as high of a status as men did and they were objects of sexual desires as well as procreation. In the Bible we are never taught to follow the example of Joseph as an example to all mankind. in the Koran however you are explicitly call to follow the example of Muhammad as an example to all mankind not only while he was alive but through all times.
so please answer the question at hand this time... I will ask it again, if Mohamed were 2 ask for your daughter hand in marriage at his old age and according 2 sahih hadith she was only 6yrs old and was molested by him be4 she reached puberty (he fondled her with his penis but didn't penetrate her) how would feel about that. How on earth can a 6yr old even fathom what she was consenting to... It was rape by all sense of the word. I'm sorry 2 say Samatar, without meaning 2 be offensive in any way your "prophet" gives a whole new meaning 2 robing the cradle!

Hazakim1 said...

Samatar....I dont think David was actually calling it rape. He was making a point that at Speaker's Corner, while the speaker is speaking, a million and one other questions, usually phrased as invictive as the one he used, are hurled at you....his point is that it is silly to think he would be able to answer every inflamming and offensive question when it is not the topic at hand. Hope this helps.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Sanmatar

That is preposterous, to say the least. First of all there is no evidence that Aisha was of child bearing age. She never had children. Mohamed may have destroyed her reproductive organs by having sex with her before she is fully developed.

The onset of menstruation is not the completion of puberty. Menstruation is just a symptom of puberty.

And even if she were menstruating NOBODY in their right mind would say a child of six has the psychological, maturity or life experience to make the decision to marry at that age.

Now as for a child of none, Nobody in their right miond would say that a nine year old has the psychological capacity, let alone the physical development or mental and physical maturity to make a decision to have or consent to a sexual relationship with a 53 year old man.

Your rationalizing is so disturbing I am frightened for any children you are in any supervision over! i would say they are in danger.

Now as for other people who have committed these acts. I condemn them as well. But the difference is that they did not call themselves the final prophet and the perfect example to follow.

And that is why you see children suffering in Islamic lands! And yes 12 or 13 in those times makes much more sense than NINE! It takes up to three years for the completion of puberty. So if a child starts her period at nine, it should be completed at twelve or thirteen. Her hips will be more developed and her reproductive organs will be developed! Aisha NEVER had children! Was never reported to be pregnant! We can consider that her reproductive organs were destroyed for having sex at to young an age!


You can try and rationalize this immoral and scientifically destructive act all you want. Your just revealing how Islam has twisted your mind and your morals!

TA said...

Samatar said: "See we know from history that women used to have sex at a younger age than nowadays. If you condemn the sexual relationship between Aisha and the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), then you condemn all the past generations."

No, we do not condemn past generations for doing harm when they didn't know better.

However, an all-knowing God DOES know better. An all-knowing God would never say that someone who does severe harm is an example for all mankind.

And it WAS rape by your definition because a 9-year-old does not have the maturity to consent.

See, even today, you are blind to this simple fact because of the example of your so-called prophet. You cannot bring yourself to condemn an act of rape by a so-called prophet of God. This is why Islam is bad for society.

Samatar Mohamed said...

I will comment on this matter later tomorrow when I have more time but lets me just show you how far fetched your claim is. You are telling me that a man raped a little girl, was not condemned by society or rebuked for what he did either by his friends or enemies for it. That in fact the father and mother of the women strongly approved of this supposed "rape". That the "rape victim" said EXTREMELY positive things about him while showing no signs of being raped that normal rape victims suffer. Not only that, but she even became a scholar teaching and upholding the message of her supposed rapist. Are you even starting to fathom how far fetched you're claim is. By saying Muhammad (pbuh) raped Aisha, you are not only speaking negatively about him, you are denouncing all his followers, the parents of Aisha, and even the society as a whole. Now, one question for all of you before I continue. What age would you be ok with?

@searchfortruth

"And that is why you see children suffering in Islamic lands! And yes 12 or 13 in those times makes much more sense than NINE!"

However, Does 12 or 13 make SENSE in general. Sure, comparative to nine you could say it makes sense but what about in general. If a grown 50 year old man was having sex with a 12 year old female what would you think. Would you be okay with a 12 year old being married to a grown man in this day and age. I will be looking forward to your response search for truth and please do not avoid this question. My question has to do with the present time, I want to emphasize this point.

minoria said...

About the age Mary had when she married.

We just dont know,all we know is this:

1.It was usually at 12 or 13

2.The husband HAD TO GIVE A DOWRY.

3.Even then he had to WAIT FOR ONE YEAR,they were married but she lived with her parents.

4.In the case of JOSEPH he is called a TEKTON.
JAMES TABOR,a non-Christian,skeptical NT scholar,in his "The Jesus Dynasty"(2006) says a tekton was a day laborer,with NO LAND,free but as poor as a slave.Read it here,on page 90 of his book:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=3rCyCH1iMgIC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=tekton,joseph,day+laborer&source=bl&ots=mKuveD3tS_&sig=kbOJEMVJqs7r8H2LOxEWf6M4T7U&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ik6-UI-xA6qX0QHIk4GwBw&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=tekton%2Cjoseph%2Cday%20laborer&f=false

SO?

Joseph was very poor but free and to MARRY MARY he had to GIVE A DOWRY.

RICHARD CARRIER,atheist NT scholar,in an article of his says that in Joseph's case,he probably married Mary but she had to live with her parents for YEARS till he accumulated the necessary dowry.

So for all we know,Mary would have been 16,17,18 when she had Jesus.God in his wisdom would have chosen an age older than 13,too young to have a child.

Jamal Hassan said...

@Minoria
What’s your point when you mention the custom of child sacrifice? Also, if it was 400 years, the innocent children were killed for the mistakes of their forefathers?
Now, I would actually accept when somebody says it was in God’s wisdom that the children were killed and that the children go to Heaven. Fair enough. But how can you prove that the children automatically go to heaven and that it was in their own interest to be victims of slaughter? Are there any Bible verses or anything? On the contrary, the verses are quite ruthless. Still, I will not draw any conclusions yet. But my question again is how would we know the children automatically go to heaven, etc.
Also minoria, Islam also mandates that the husband give the wife a dowry. It is an obligation.

Jamal Hassan said...

@Search 4 truth
Are you insane? That is a serious question. I am not prone to hyperbole. What in the world is wrong with you brother?
“Aisha NEVER had children! Was never reported to be pregnant! We can consider that her reproductive organs were destroyed for having sex at to young an age!”
You should know better. Did all of Muhammad’s wives have children? Look it up and get back to me.
Do you people have any clue what pedophilia does to children? Aisha lived her life looking forward to her death so she could meet Prophet Muhammad again. She had nothing but loving words to describe her husband, as did all his wives. I would be happy to explain more and delve into more details about the marriage if you people do not understand. Do some historical research. Girls used to be married early. Heck, in England I remember reading hundreds of years ago a 7 year old boy was hanged for stealing or something. Everything has a historical background. People reached adulthood quite early. And for those who talk about the best example, there was no example being set in this. It was a valid custom prevalent amongst all world societies, and the women reached maturity early on, etc. It was a matter of custom, or Urf as it is called in Islamic law. Do some research on urf.
Prophet Muhammad married older women and younger women. So what example? There is no example. Aisha had nothing but love for Muhammad. A victim of pedophilia does not do that, they are scarred for life. You guys must know, living in the country where child pedoplihia and child pornography is rampant.

Jamal Hassan said...

@Sam
No you do not have to copy and paste. Concise points a couple at a time would suffice. Your articles really do not make sense, with all due respect. Killing women and children is forbidden. I will be happy to show you how.
Did you ignore the verse in the Quran about Jews changing their book? So if Prophet Muhammad says he believes in the Torah and Allah who revealed the Torah, does that mean everything in it is true? That does not make sense, especially in light of the verse I provided. We Muslims are mandated to believe in all the holy scriptures, does that mean we say everything in it is true? Yes, we believe in the Torah and He who revealed it. But the Quran is clear about the changing of the Torah. You would do well to understand that. It’s not a hard concept.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samater

1. If people are followers of a man who they believe is talking to God. It is not a giant leap for them to believe that the "Prophet" of God was told by God to marry a child. People do crazy things for all types of reasons. Including religion. Muslims have been willing to murder and die for Mohamed and Allah. What makes you think that marrying a child would deter them?

2. How do you know he wasnt criticized for it? Do you think that `Muslims were going to be critical of Mohameds actions? Thats preposterous. And Abu Bakre questioned it!

Sahih Bukhari 7.18
Narrated ‘Ursa:
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for ‘Aisha’s hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said “But I am your brother.” The Prophet said, “You are my brother in Allah’s religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.”

3. I have spoken to Muslims who said to me that if the Mohamed were alive today they would give their 6 year old child to him. And it would be a great honor! And thats knowing what we know today about the enormous damage sex with a child has on them and the childs child if she becomes pregnant ! Would you like that i list those?

4. So what if she became a scholar. Children that are raised in cannibalistic societies grow up believing that cannibalism is the norm and perfectly justified and rational. Thats all she ever knew! You really make NO sense at all. She was praised for her position, she was the child wife of the false Prophet! She had a standing in her tribe. She was indoctrinated at birth or not long after. Do you understand anything about sociology and the human development? I cant believe how you can be so selective in your reasoning. Oh wait. yes I can. Its Islam!

5. No i would not be comfortable with a grown man having sex with a twelve year old, in this day and age. But what I am saying is that a twelve or thirteen year old is within a more scientifically safe guideline. I do understand that the custom was different back then. But Mohamed set a horrible example for ALL future Muslims and condemned Muslim children to danger, oppression, harm, and damage. Both physically and psychologically.

6. And there is NO age restriction for marriage in Islam!

If you are in doubt concerning those of your wives who have ceased menstruating, know that their waiting period shall be three months. The same shall apply to those who have not menstruated. As for pregnant women, their term shall end with their confinement. God will ease the hardship of the man who fears him. 65:4,


{ وَٱللاَّئِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ ٱلْمَحِيضِ مِن نِّسَآئِكُمْ إِنِ ٱرْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلاَثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَٱللاَّئِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ وَأُوْلاَتُ ٱلأَحْمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ وَمَن يَتَّقِ ٱللَّهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِ يُسْراً }

And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months

Now begin your logical fallacies!~

Sam said...

Jamal, what doesn't make sense is your blatant inconsistency since you follow a book that is nothing more than incoherent babble. The real miracle is that people like you are so naive to think that this mumbo jumbo is God's word, an utter blasphemy to the majesty and wisdom of God. Do you ignore all the responses which exposes your blatant lie that your false prophet taught that the Jews corrupted the text of their Scriptures? I guess you do. So if your false prophet asks for a copy of the Torah and testifies that he believes in it WITHOUT QUALIFICATION, WITHOUT EVER SAYING A WORD ABOUT IT BEING TEXTUAL SUSPECT, you want us to therefore assume that this really means that he really didn't believe that ALL OF IT IS TRUE AND INSPIRED? Really? Is this what happens to the brains of Muslims that meditate on the Quran, namely, it turns into mush?

You are great example of what happens to someone's brains that is hooked on the Quran.

And the Quran is clear on one thing. It is clear that NO ONE CAN CHANGE OR CORRUPT THE WORDS OF God, which means that no one can corrupt the previous Scriptures since they are all his revealed words.

Spend some time reading the following articles and give your brain a break from reading all that mumbo jumbo that you call a revelation:

http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/word_incorruptible.html

http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/gods_words_unchangable.html

http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/gods_words_unchangable_r1.html

http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/gods_words_unchangable_r2.html


Samatar Mohamed said...

@Searchfortruth

"No i would not be comfortable with a grown man having sex with a twelve year old, in this day and age. But what I am saying is that a twelve or thirteen year old is within a more scientifically safe guideline. I do understand that the custom was different back then. But Mohamed set a horrible example for ALL future Muslims and condemned Muslim children to danger, oppression, harm, and damage. Both physically and psychologically. "

Thanks for responding to this point. I thank you for conceding that the custom was different centuries ago. But why was it different search for truth? Is it because our past generations were all a bunch of pedophiles who did not care about the persons development sexually. Obviously not. Just look at the age of consent in America from the late 1800s onward, here is a link:

http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/teaching-modules/230?section=primarysources&source=24

Do you see the states in America regarding the age of consent. They all ranged from 7 to 12 not even 200 years ago. So is it safe to say that the United states of America approved of rape not even two centuries ago. Surely, you will say no. But do you see your inconsistency, Because you hate the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), you will easily condemn him of rape or pedophilia, but I'm assuming you won't say that about America or the world for that matter. Surely we did not live 14 centuries ago where we could know ourselves if the 9 year olds at this day and age where developing the same physically and psychologically. Your only argument is that 9 is too young to be sexually active no matter when in history this occurred. Well I guess almost every state in the United states where allowing pedophilia and rape centuries ago. You claimed you understood the custom was different centuries ago but you didn't expound on it. If you are not comfortable with a 50 year old man having sex with a 12 year old know, but you are okay with it in the past because you understood the difference in customs, etc... you only prove my point. Times were different 14 centuries ago. Are we are just going to use our 21st century mind frame to condemn every culture or society that practiced something we disapprove of today. Without even considering the fact that their situation and customs were different.

Lastly, all the evidence sides with me regarding Aisha and the prophet (pbuh). When we try to determine whether someone was raped or not we take some things into consideration. I pointed out that no one condemned the prophet (pbuh) for what he did. Even his enemies never pointed this out. Surely if a man today married a 9 year old there would be an outcry. Is it because we are so much more advanced and knowledgeable compared to those before us, or is it that the situation is different and a 9 year old today would be no where near ready for marriage. To be honest the age only seems to be going higher. Even 16 or 17 year olds for the most parts are not fit to get married today. Who knows, maybe in the future 16 or 18 will be too young for consent, but I doubt we will be accused of pedophilia. Try to keep your hate of the prophet (pbuh) from examining things in a fair and unbiased manner.

You also said Abubakr questioned the prophet (pbuh) marrying Aisha. Are you even reading the hadith. Abu bakr said nothing about her being too young for marriage. I'd be interested in hearing what you think Abu bakr is questioning exactly.

minoria said...

Hello Jamal,
You ask good questions.This is the situation:

1.Nowhere in the OT is there mention of heaven,

2.There is mention,but centuries after the Torah,of a resurrection of the dead.

3.Nowhere in the OT is there mention of a HELL either.

4.We believe in gradual revelation,so Jesus came and told us about a hell and a heaven and I suspect,based on what will happen to GOG(Antichrist) of Ezekiel 38-39 that the punishment in hell will diminish with time to make it tolerable.

So tolerable that when Gog-Antichrist is released again after the 1000 year rule of Jesus,he will again revolt against God(Rev 20:8).That can only be if hell became less bad for him,the most evil man in history,worse than HITLER.

We know children go to heaven because Jesus said so,heaven is full of children:

It's in Marc 10:13-15 (repeated in Matthew 19:13-14/Luke 18:15-17)

And in Marc 9:35-37(repeated in Matthew 18:1-5/Luke 9:46-48)

Zack_Tiang said...

I have to say, Samatar, you're ignoring the fact that the Quran calls Muhammad the best examplar for all Muslims to follow.

If it was alright for Muhammad to marry a 6-year-old and have sex with her at 9... how can you say that just means all Muslim men are to marry those at the eligible age, rather than the simple implication that it means Muslim men can marry 6-year-olds and have sex with them at at least 9.

And I recall someone did point out that Aisha's father was reluctant to give his daughter in marriage to Muhammad... but for obvious reasons, Muhammad's 'prophethood' makes him 'infallible'. Clear sign of power abuse.

Jamal Hassan said...

Sam, dude, what are you saying? I’m sure you know the answers. But you just need a reason to ridicule Islam even more. Why so stubborn? As you probably know, you cannot fully understand the Quran without a clean heart:
56:79 Which none shall touch but those who are clean
56:80 A Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds
56:81 Is it such a Message that ye would hold in light esteem?
56:82 And have ye made it your livelihood that ye should declare it false?

At least try to understand. Obviously anybody can change a book. I can go now and scribble things on a Quran, it does not mean I’m changing God’s Words.
More importantly, the Quran does have subtle references the meaning of God’s Words. You just have to be willing to think a bit.
18:27 “And recite, [O Muhammad], what has been revealed to you of the Book of your Lord. There is no changer of His words, and never will you find in other than Him a refuge.”
If you look closer brother, the key arabic word used is “uhiya” which you probably know comes from “wahy” which is revelation. The ayah is telling Prophet Muhammad to recite what has been revealed to him, for there is no changer of His Words. Easy concept. Same with Moses and Jesus. The Quran is right, nobody can change what was revealed to Moses. Nobody can change what was revealed to Jesus, peace be upon them both. You can change the human book via lies, etc. But the actual revelation, nobody can change. I’m sure you understand this. Or maybe you refuse to, in which case:
“Indeed, those who disbelieve - it is all the same for them whether you warn them or do not warn them - they will not believe. Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and over their vision is a veil. And for them is a great punishment.” (2:6 – 2:7)
By the way, I can copy and paste and edit these ayas. I can do the same with Bible verses. Am I changing God’s Words by doing that? No way.

Jamal Hassan said...

@Minoria
I never knew that about the OT that they do not mention Heaven and Hell. Thank you for sharing that.
With regards to the verses you provided, such as Mark 15, it says: “Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.”
Does that mean there are little children who do not receive the kingdom of God?
The passages you refer me to raise many questions in my mind. The most important one regards Matthew 19:
If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”
18 “Which ones?” he inquired.
Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,’[c] and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’[d]”
20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
So do Christians have to keep the commandments to enter Heaven? That sounds very different than modern day Christianity.
Quran 2:85 “So do you believe in part of the Scripture and disbelieve in part? Then what is the recompense for those who do that among you except disgrace in worldly life; and on the Day of Resurrection they will be sent back to the severest of punishment. And Allah is not unaware of what you do.”
And we also believe in the coming of the Anti-Christ. We call him Dajjal. If you have time, for more info, here is an awesome talk on this subject by Shaykh Hamza Yusuf:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMUJ8xWw5JE
He does say some controversial things, but this is more than 10 years ago when he was much younger, energetic, and willing to say controversial things. He has taken back such things he said as he grew older and wiser. Nevertheless, it is a very interesting lecture. You’ll be awake the whole time, trust me.

21st Century said...

What a waste of time. Comparing today's practice of Islam, justifying it against what Christians did in the Holy Wars centuries ago is ludicrous. Also, Sami never defines who determines when a young girl is fit to be a wife in the 21st century. David could easily provide real life examples of honor killings, underage marriages, genital mutilations, people being stoned & beheaded, etc. All barbaric acts that should have remained in the past! Is that the best Sami can give us...past explanations and backward cultural practices to explain away today's worship of Islam & the Quran? What a cop out. Sami is practicing stage one of Jihad in the UK.

Samatar Mohamed said...

@Zack

Yes, Muhammad (pbuh) is the best moral example regarding religious practices but what does marrying someone of a certain age have to do with anything. We know the prophet (pbuh) disliked eating lizards even though it is permitted in Islam. Does that mean that muslims shouldn't eat lizards because the prophet (pbuh) disliked it? The prophet (pbuh) did say something about marriage however. The prophet (pbuh) told us to marry women who is best in their religion and character. That would be following the example of the prophet (pbuh). I think you have got the two confused. Lastly, I must put an emphasis that times are different. It was very common that females married at a young age centuries ago and there was no outcry of pedophilia or rape. If you want to say that the prophet was a pedophile or rapist fine, but just be consistent and condemn all of history for taking part in and allowing this in the past. You can't have your cake, and eat it too.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Jamal

Im not even sure what your getting at? What is your assertion? What does Mohamed not having children have to do with anything. Yes he did have children. Have you ever heard of Fatima?

You should ask yourself. Am I insane?

What are you claiming. What is your point? My assertion is clear. Aisha NEVER had children.

And your question about pedophilia doesnt even make sense. This is the problem with Muslims! They are so inconsistent in their reasoning. I never said Mohamed was a pedophile. But he was a child molester. There is a difference. If a child is raised in a culture that says it is ok to be married at a young age then that child will not think anything is wrong of it. But we know that it was wrong. Thats why we dont do it today.

AND CHILDREN DID NOT MATURE EARLIER BACK THEN. THAT IS A LIE.

Yes child pedophilia happens all over the world. The difference is that Mohamed and Islam ordains it. In the West it is a crime. So of course their are statistics of criminal child molestation and pedophilia in the West!

BECAUSE IT IS A CRIME! In Islamic countries it is the NORM!

Yopu make absolutly no sense!

Provide the evidence that people matured earlier back then! That is FALSE!

Prophet Muhammad had five children from his first wife Khadijah. One son, Al qasim died when he was still a baby, and four daughters: Zaynab, Ruqayah, Fatimah, and Om Kolthoom. The last child, a boy Abrahim was born 628 A.D. He was the only child born to the Prophet after Prophet Muhammad knew that he was to be a Messenger of God. His mother was Maria, an Egyptian whom the king of Egypt sent to Prophet Muhammad as a handmaid servant and Prophet Muhammad married her in 627.

http://www.islamicweb.com/history/children.htm

In Europe, in 1830, the average age at menarche was 17. Similarly in the 1980s in rural China, the average age at menarche was 17.3 In the U.S. in 1900, the average was 14.2. By the 1920s, average age at menarche in the U.S. had fallen to 13.3 and by 2002, it had reached 12.34.[4] Similar trends are occurring in other Western nations.[5,6] For example, age at menarche in Ireland has declined from 13.52 in 1986 to 12.53 in 2006.[7] In Italy, a recent study showed that girls' age at menarche was on average 3 months earlier than their mothers.

Children are reaching puberty earlier now than they ever have in history! You are delusional. You have bought the lies of your Imaams and Mullahs. And dont even try and give me the baloney about Arab children. Because Islam is not just for Arabs! Mohamed the child molester is an example for all Muslims, including non Arab Muslims! So absurd!

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samatar

I am going to try and explain this to you as simply as possible. Because you are missing the point. First of all you didnt read it all.

Information on the ages used historically in western age of consent laws is not readily available. This table has been compiled from a combination of historical and contemporary sources. By 1880, the first date chosen, many western nations had established an age of consent for the first time, typically of 12 or 13 years.


For the first time 12 or 13.

Now nobody who was marrying a 7 year old child calling themselves the Prophet of God, and saying that they were speaking to God and that they were the perfect example for all mankind. Future and present. You are comparing man made laws to that of what your false prophet claimed was ordained by your Allah.

These people were wrong. I dont look to them and say, oh well they married a 7 year old so it must be good.

NO! We can look to science and say that this is wrong. YOU CANNOT! Because your Prophet was wrong. It was immoral. Just like the people who did it in the West was immoral.

It was also harmful to Aisha, just like it was harmful to the child in the WEST!

Now we have laws that say it is harmful to the child both physically and psychologically.

But YOU cannot say that. Because your false Prophet practiced it. So in other words we can use science and common sense to see that it is both harnful and wrong.

BUT YOU CANNOT AND WILL NOT BECAUSE YOUR PROPHET ORDAINED AND PRACTICED IT!


Do you comprehend that? What is so difficult for you to comprehend?

The Wests laws and scientists are better examples that your false Prophet! DUH!

And no you didnt prove that nobody criticized him for it. All you are doing is making an assumption. Just because there is no evidence for or against criticism does not mean that the assumption leans to your view. Thats ridiculous!

Yes I condemn the people that practiced that years ago. But also the Jews had a minimum age. And it was more scientifically and morally sound that that of Mohamed's actions!

The Baker Ency. of the Bible says about Jewish marriage customs in volume 2, page 1407, under "Marriage":

"Subsequently, minimum ages (for marriage) of 13 for boys and 12 for girls were set."

16 or 17 will NEVER be to young in Islamic countries! Because Mohamed set the standard. So all a Muslim will have to do is plead his case that Mohamed did it! And in the Quran it states it! I already showed you sura 65:4! Are you saying that Allah and Mohamed were incorrect?

Abu Bakre is saying that he is his brother. And Mohamed made the proclomation that Aisha is lawful to him. So Mohamed again set the standard! Mohamed pretty much made it up as he went along! Whatever he wanted he just said that Allah told him it was ok! And thats why he ended adoption because he lusted after Zainayb. And when he was having sex with his concubines Allah miraculously ordained it after he said he wouldnt anymore!

Bukhari (60:311) - "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."

Now read it carefully and try and think objectively!

Search 4 Truth said...

Ibn Kathir writes regarding 65:4

, "The `Iddah is made up of cleanliness and the menstrual period." So he divorces her while it is clear that she is pregnant, or he does not due to having sex, or since he does not know if she is pregnant or not. This is why the scholars said that there are two types of divorce, one that conforms to the Sunnah and another innovated. The divorce that conforms to the Sunnah is one where the husband pronounces one divorce to his wife when she is not having her menses and without having had sexual intercourse with her after the menses ended. One could divorce his wife when it is clear that she is pregnant. As for the innovated divorce, it occurs when one divorces his wife when she is having her menses, or after the menses ends, has sexual intercourse with her and then divorces her, even though he does not know if she became pregnant or not. There is a third type of divorce, which is neither a Sunnah nor an innovation where one divorces A YOUNG WIFE WHO HAS NOT BEGUN TO HAVE MENSES, the wife who is beyond the age of having menses, and divorcing one's wife before the marriage was consummated.

Al-Tabari said regarding 65:4

The interpretation of the verse "And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise". He said: The same applies to the 'idaah for girls who do not menstruate because they are too young, if their husbands divorce them after consummating the marriage with them.

Abu-Ala’ Maududi states:

"Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl at this age but it is permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur’an has held as permissible." (Maududi, volume 5, p. 620, note 13, emphasis added)

It is clear: Muslim men can engage in sex with prepubescent children!

Zack_Tiang said...

Eating lizards or not is neither morally right nor morally wrong, but a personal preference.

Marrying a little girl is definitely a moral issue and it has been determined as morally wrong now.
How is it that something done by the best moral examplar for all Muslims be deemed inappropriate by 'modern' Muslims?

(FYI, I neither said pedophile nor rapist.)

And as pointed out before, it is one thing to practice pedophilia or rape that is contrary to God's teaching, and completely another to be ordained by God for it.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 18:
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/062-sbt.php#007.062.018
Narrated 'Ursa:

The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Number 140
http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=87&translator=1&start=0&number=140
Narrated 'Aisha: Allah's Apostle said to me, "You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, 'Uncover (her),' and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.' Then you were shown to me, the angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said (to him), 'Uncover (her), and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.' "

With that said, the second hadith proves what I've said... Clear proof of power abuse.

Sam said...

Jamal Hassan,m are you trying to play games here? Do you think that you are going to get away with your blatant lies and distortions? Really? The context of Q. 18:27 and 6:115 shows that by words the Quran means the Book(s) that God reveals. As such, any and all books which God has revealed are his words and therefore incorruptibility.

Did you even bother to read the quotation I provided from one of your own scholars who stated that Muslim scholars concluded that the Torah could not have been corrupted on the basis of Q. 6:115 which says that none of Allah's words can be changed?

So you need to play your games somewhere else since we ain't buying what you have to sell.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samatar

Quote " Is it because we are so much more advanced and knowledgeable compared to those before us"

Samatar what are you takling about?

How can we be more advanced than God? If Mohamed had a direct line to God then why didnt he know that sex with a child is physically and psychologically harmful?

No man can have more knowledge then God. THINK!

Quote " Because you hate the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), you will easily condemn him of rape or pedophilia"

And i can use this in reverse. Because you love and idolize Mohamed you will NEVEr condemn him or be capable of objective reasoning concerning his actions and commands!

I approached Islam and Mohamed objectively over ten years ago. I had no reason to dislike or disbelieve him. And then i sought out the evidence. And i objectively reached the conclusion that he was a false Prophet and a hypocrite. Who says i hate him. I hate his many of his actions and much of his teachings.


Dont make claims about me or my feelings or my knowledge!

Try and keep your subjective apologist leanings from being unbiased. See what I mean? Probably not. Because you cannot separate the topic from your love of Mohamed and Islam. You cannot and will not open your mind.

minoria said...

Hello Jamal:

I didnt know you didnt know those details about the OT.It teaches me not to assume anything,that's why in the avraidire.com articles I repeat alot of things,never assuming all readers know what is old history to me.

I checked Mark 10:13-15.The way you put it was,as I understand you:

1.If one does not accept Jesus when one is a child

2.And dies as a child,then he does NOT go to heaven?


That would be the case,possibly were it not that Mark 10:13-15 also says:

"Suffer the children to come to me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God

He makes no distinction regarding the origin of children,the reason is:

1.Children have NOT yet reached the stage of knowing right from wrong,they are pure,so anybody who dies,whatever their society's religion,goes to heaven.

2.Till around 1800 MOST people born DIED as CHILDREN,so till then MOST automatically went to heaven.

I will check out the video you suggested about the Dajjal and give my feedback.

As for Jesus and the rich young man,Jesus specifically tells him he LACKED one more thing for salvation....to accept Jesus,follow him.

Ok,for us Jesus was God incarnate,to follow Jesus is following God.

zaith ansaf said...

i have read an book regarding this issue hope that brings a great answer for your question, so its better il copy the each page, so i humbly request u all to go through dat....

Is the Purpose Criticizing the Marriage of Young
Girls or Distorting the Picture of Prophet Muhammad?
Most of the Western people are astonished from the fact that the
Prophet Peace be upon him married Aisha who was just nine years
old while he was fifty. Some of them even called such marriage as rape and
some of them condemned it. Not only this, but some of them portrayed the
Prophet of Islam Peace be upon him as a man who is sexually suppressed
and considered that as the real picture of Islam!!
They have ignored the fact that such marriage in such age in such era was
a natural matter, therefore it is clear that they are not criticizing the early
marriage of a nine-year-old girl to a fifty-year-old man as much as they are
keen to criticize and distort the picture of the Prophet of Islam Peace be
upon him and instigate others against him.
Accordingly, this undermines their credibility and unveils their false human
feelings and malicious intentions under the pretext of defending the
rights of woman. If they were really seeking denouncing such marriage,
they should have spoken about such marriage as a general phenomenon
which appeared before Islam and continued after it and would not focus
their criticism on one person as if he was the one who invented such marriage
or the first one who applied it or the only one who did it.
Prophet Muhammad Peace be upon him was born in a society in which
early marriage was something ordinary and natural, therefore, he married
the way others did. Moreover, his enemies, who tried to kill him, did not
use such marriage as a pretext to distort his picture or instigate against him
because it was an ordinary matter in such era, and they were themselves
marrying girls in early ages.

zaith ansaf said...

If such Marriage was Strange, then why didn›t the
Disbelievers of Quraish use it as a Pretext against
Muhammad?
Those people competed in writing about such marriage and ignored the
similar cases in the era where Prophet Muhammad was living. Why
didn›t the people - who criticized the Prophet for marrying Aisha- criticize
the disbelievers who fought Muhammad and tried to kill him? They have
married girls in early ages and even preceded the Prophet Peace be upon
him in doing the same. So, if the intention of such criticizers is to criticize
the relation between an old man and a young girl, they should have then
spoken about the other similar cases which happened in the era of the
Prophet Peace be upon him.

zaith ansaf said...

Did they know the Marriage Age in Judaism?
They should also focus on the stipulations of the Jewish religion which
allowed marrying a girl of three years and one day old!!
The Old Testament narrated the story of the marriage of Ishaq Bin Ibrahim
Peace be upon them from Refka while she was just three years old. The
Genesis mentioned that Ishaq was born while Sara was ninety years old.
Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, «Will
a child be born to a man one hundred years old? And will Sarah, who is
ninety years old, bear a child?» (Genesis 17:17).
Refqa was born in the same year in which Sara died: «Bethuel became the
father of Rebekah. Milcah bore these eight sons to Abraham›s brother Nahor.
His concubine». In the next chapter thereof, the first paragraph, it is
mentioned that: «Sarah lived to be a hundred and twenty-seven years old»
i.e. Ishaq then was thirty seven years old, and Refka was just a baby.
When he attained forty years old and she attained three years, Ishaq has
married her. Refer to: «And Isaac was forty years old when he married Rebekah
daughter of Bethuel the Aramean from Paddan Aram and sister of
Laban the Aramean». (Genesis 25:20). Talmud itself allowed making such
marriage relation although the girl was just a child, as stipulated in the following
teachings:
The 55th Commandment of Sanhedrin stated: «A maiden aged three years
and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition».
The 54th Commandment of Talmud Sanhedrin stated: «Pederasty with a
child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above
that».
Why did Prophet Muhammad Marry Aisha; the Young Girl www.rasoulallah.net
7
The 11th Commandment of Talmud Khathoboth mentioned: «The sexual
intercourse between an adult man and a young girl is something ordinary».
Moreover, Saeed Rabi Joseph wrote: «The girl who attains three years and
one day can make sexual intercourse» (1).
Therefore, in Judaism, it is not a strange issue to make a sexual relationship
with a girl of three years, so why they criticized Prophet Muhammad Peace
be upon him for marrying a nine year old girl.

zaith ansaf said...

The marriage in early ages was prevailing in Europe itself, especially the
early marriage of kings and rulers in the twelfth century for the purpose
of creating alliances guaranteeing the continuity of peace. An example
for that is the child empress «Anias», in France, the wife of two Byzantine
Emperors: Emperor Alexios Kamanos II, and the Emperor Andronikos Kamanos
I, respectively.
According to (William of Tyre), Anias was just eight years old when she
reached Constantine while Alexios was thirteen years old (2). Moreover,
the wife of Alexios Kamanos I was twelve years old when she married and
became an empress before attaining fifteen years. As for the empress of
Byzantium «Theodora» the wife of Manwel, she was thirteen years old when
she married the Prince of Jerusalem «Baldwin III»; moreover, «Margret Maria
Hingaria» married «Izak Anglos II» when she was nine years.
The age of Ainas in such era was not something extraordinary. It was even a
traditional matter that the new bride and bridegroom meet in Constantine,
in the house of the spouse who has the higher social rank (3). However,
before Alexios completed the third year as an emperor, the cousin of his
father Andronikos has appointed himself as an associate emperor (Born in
1118, i.e. he was sixty five years old) and then overthrew Alexios by force
and married «Aainas» although there were about fifty years gap between
2 William of Tyre, History of the Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, 13.4; P. Wirth, ‹Wann wurde
Kaiser Alexios II. geboren?› Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 49 (1956), 65-7.
3 One example being Anna Comnena, who was put into the care of her future mother-inlaw,
the dowager empress Mary of Alania, before she was eight years old so she could
be brought up with her fiancé Constantine (Anna Comnena, Alexiad 3.1.4; cf. 2.5.1 for a
further example)
Why did Prophet Muhammad Marry Aisha; the Young Girl www.rasoulallah.net
10
them (4).
This clearly demonstrates that the marriage of young girls to men over sixty
years old was something usual in Europe among the governing class itself;
so, what about the public then? Of course such kind of marriage was prevailing
among the public in Europe itself after more than five centuries
from the marriage of Muhammad Peace be upon him and Aisha.

zaith ansaf said...

The Age of Consent in Most Countries Worldwide!
Apart from the European traditions in the medieval ages, if we look at
the current era i.e. after 14 centuries from the marriage of the Prophet
Peace be upon him from Aisha May Allah be pleased with her we
will find that the age of consent is still early in various places. AVERT, an
international Charity Organization interested in studying the HIV/ AIDS
diseases, having its headquarters in the United Kingdom, and works hard
for preventing this disease in all countries worldwide, mentioned a detailed
table in its website about the age of consent worldwide i.e. the legal age of
practicing the sexual intercourse worldwide or the age which is considered
by the countries and governments acceptable for making a sexual relation.
AVERT stated that the Japanese people can practice sex legally in the age
of thirteen year. In Argentine, it is allowed to practice sex in the age of thirteen.
In Canada, until 1890, the allowed age of consent was twelve years (5).
Similarly, the age of consent in Mexico is twelve years. In Panama and Philippine,
the age of consent is twelve years.
In Spain (6), Cyprus (7), South Korea, the age of consent is thirteen, while
in Bolivia, the sexual age of consent is the maturity age (8).
http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm
If this is the case in the 21st century, why they deny it?
All such cases took place after 14 centuries from the marriage of Prophet
5 Tories move to raise age of consent by Terry Weber, Globe and Mail, June 22, 2006.
6 specified by the Spanish Penal Code, Article 181(2)
7 Cyprus Penal Code, Article 154

zaith ansaf said...

Muhammad Peace be upon him and Aisha! You can also note that such
countries which have several cultural backgrounds allowed practicing sex
in e according to Article 308 of the Bolivian Penal Code arly age; so, why some persons
refuse respecting the traditions of a nation lived before 14 centuries? It is
not possible or logical to force other nations to follow the Western or the
American thinking concerning what is accepted or rejected! Especially before
14 centuries.
According to the said table in the website of AVERT Organization, the
legal consent age is different from state to another inside America itself,
for example, the sexual fitness age in Aiwa, Missouri and South Carolina
is fourteen while the age of consent in Arizona, California, North Dakota,
Oregon, Tennessee and Weskinson is not less than eighteen.
http://www.ageofconsent.com/comments/numberone.htm
This means that it is not logical or reasonable to criticize the other nations
on the ground of the difference between them and the West or America
concerning the age of consent. The states of the United States themselves
are different in determining this age; therefore, it is silly or illogical to criticize
an early marriage took place before 14 centuries. It is worth mentioning
here that several organizations in the West have objected to rais the age
of consent.
For example, in Canada, such organizations corresponded with the parliament
members via internet and requested to reject this proposal and demonstrated
the dangerous effects thereof (9). One of such letters mentioned:
«Dear Parliament Member,
I write to you in order to express my attitude concerning the age of consent
which was increased from fourteen years to sixteen years the proposal of
9 see http://www.ageofconsent.ca/action.html

zaith ansaf said...

increasing the age of consent is a backward dangerous movement and will
make the young males and females practice sex illegally».
If we return back to the legal age which qualifies the girl to accept or reject
the sexual relation or marriage in America and the West, we will find that
the age of ten to thirteen was the ideal acceptable age of consent in the mid
of the nineteenth century (10).
Moreover, the Americans should know that the legal age of practicing sex
was just ten years in UK and America in 1885, i.e. just one year older than
the age of Aisha when she married Prophet Muhammad Peace be upon
him before 13 centuries. Stephen Robertson wrote in this regard: «In 1885,
after the scandal which took place upon issuing the book of The Maiden
Tribute of Modern Babylon, the English writer «Sted» unveiled trading in
the young girls in London, and these campaigns became part of the war
launched against prostitution in the United States. This scandal urged the
British parliament to raise the age of consent from ten to sixteen and this
attracted the attention of the American reformers to the law of their Country
» (11).
The Western and American people should know the campaign of the Christian
Woman Association for Preventing Alcohol (WCTU 1885-1990) and
increasing the age of consent, as it was in most of the American states,
and after issuing the general law, the age of consent was determined as ten
years, while it was before seven years only in the state of Delaware (12).
http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html
10 [Waites, Matthew (2005). The Age of Consent: Young People, Sexuality and Citizenship.
Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 1-4039-2173-3, page 7.
11 Stephen Robertson, Journal of Social History, summer 2002
12 Linda R. Hirshman and Jane E. Larson, HARD BARGAINS: THE POLITICS OF SEX, Oxford
University Press, 1998, pp124-133, ISBN: 0-19-509664-9.

zaith ansaf said...

The age of consent in one of the American States was just seven years, just
120 years ago! But the Western people did not know that and just criticized
Islam and Muslims for the marriage of the Prophet Peace be upon him and
Aisha May Allah be pleased with her while she was nine years more than
1400 years ago.
Anyway, our modern age, at the beginning of the 21st century, witnessed
several early marriage cases in Europe itself, for example, the legal marriage
age in Romania is 16 years. The child Ana Maria, The Roma Gypsy
Princess, twelve years old, married the child Birita Mihai, fifteen years old.
Roma King Florin Cioaba, the father of the bride, told the journalists:
«In fact, this is a happy day in the royal house; the best days of my life it is
better for the children to marry in an early age». Fasil Eunisko, from Roma
Public Policies Center, stated: «The marriage of the princess did not happen
by force, she was the sweetheart of the king and he cannot act against her
wishes. We should preserve our traditions in order to preserve our identity
and being. Therefore, it is immoral to prohibit the traditions and norms,
and no one can prohibit it» (13).

zaith ansaf said...

Is it Logical to judge a Marriage Case that took
Place before 1400 Years under the Laws of the 1st
Century?
After demonstrating the age of consent for the American girl, which
was until the last part of the 19th century just ten years i.e. one year
older than Aisha when she married the Prophet Peace be upon him before
13 centuries; moreover, such age was just seven years in one of the
American States i.e. two years younger than Aisha May Allah be pleased
with her, and having demonstrated that the age of consent is still ranging
between twelve to thirteen years in most countries of the world, including
Western and Christian countries; accordingly, there is no ground to criticize
the marriage of the Prophet Peace be upon him and Aisha May Allah
be pleased with her which was portrayed by the instigators as an offence
against young girls.
Such instigators exploited the ignorance of the Western community about
the age of consent in the West and the non Muslim countries in order to
instigate against Islam and portray the Prophet of Islam Peace be upon
him as an offender. Such instigators are in fact hypocrite people because
they are accusing the Muslims with things practiced legally and normally
by non Muslims.
In brief, the early marriage still exist in the 21st century, and it is practiced
by European and Christian people in the 21st century; therefore, why is the
Prophet of Islam Peace be upon him blamed for such marriage which took
place before 1400 years? This clearly demonstrates the non credibility of
such instigators and their hidden aims under the pretext of defending the
rights of woman and the human rights in order to gain the sympathy of the
Western people toward Aisha the child who was «obliged» to marry a man
more than fifty years old, as they allege. However, apart from the instigaWhy
did Prophet Muhammad Marry Aisha; the Young Girl www.rasoulallah.net
18
tion of such criticizers who have concealed their actual aims, we would like
to demonstrate some points about the marriage of the Prophet of Islam
Peace be upon him and Aisha May Allah be pleased with her when she
was nine years old, in order to understand the reasons and circumstances
of such marriage.
Did they know the Arabian Peninsula before 14 Centuries?
It is worth mentioning that the Western principles and mentality in the
21st Century may not understand the Eastern & Arabian principles and
mentality in the 6th century fully and completely! There is a wide gap between
the two cultures, mentalities, and geographies. This is an important
point which should be recognized, because judging a norm practiced by an
Eastern community before fourteen centuries by a secular Western culture
in the 21st century won›t be just or accurate. Therefore, the Western people
in this era should study such norm and understand the reasons which justify
it. Anyway, such reasons are still convincing the Western and Christian
communities which do not oppose the early marriage until today.

zaith ansaf said...

Brides in Africa are Younger than Ten?
In order to make the picture clearer to the Western people in the 21st
century, let›s compare between a nine-year-old girl in America and a nineyear-
old girl in some countries in Africa nowadays.
The American girl used to live a modern easy life with all means of entertainment,
joy and luxury, while the African girl, in some of the black-skin
countries, use to shepherd sheep, bring water from wells several kilometers
far from her house, know cocking, clean the house, participate in the
agricultural works, and carry out other tasks just like the older people in
spite of her childhood. These responsibilities make the African girl in the
21st century an intellectually mature girl who is able to run her own affairs
when her family is not at home. However, the American or European girl
is living a modern easy life and do not bear such heavy responsibilities. She
has a baby sitter if her family is not at home. Moreover, the African girl in
the above mentioned example can take care of the western girl in spite of
their equal ages. So, how about the Arab girl before 14 centuries? The Arab
girl then was living in circumstances similar to the African girl in term of
tasks and responsibilities. The Arab girl at seven and eight years, since
14 centuries, was fully mature and responsible just like the African girl in
the above mentioned example. Therefore, she cannot be considered similar
to the Western girl who has no responsibilities. Accordingly, the Western
people should not compare the circumstances of the Western girl in the
21st century with the circumstances of the Arab girl before 14 centuries,
because any judgment like this will be inaccurate and not just in the best
cases. Moreover, the Western people should take into consideration that
the body of the girl in the hot regions reaches maturity before the girls in
the cold regions. The femininity of the girl in the hot regions appears before
the femininity of girls in the cold regions; therefore, she will be qualified for
marriage in early age.
Why did Prophet Muhammad Marry Aisha; the Young Girl www.rasoulallah.net
21
This is exactly the case in the Arabian Peninsula before 14 centuries.
The environment of the Arabian Peninsula makes the girls mature in early
age, contrary to the environment of Europe & America; therefore, there is
no way for the criticizers to compare.
This fact was realized by the English orientalist R.V.C. Bodley, grandson
of Sir Thomas Bodley, the founder of Bodley Library, author of «Wind in
the Sahara», «The Messenger», and other fourteen books, after visiting the
Arabian Peninsula. He said after such visit:
«Aisha, though was young, was mature and grew up quickly like the other
Arab women. Such early marriage still exists in Asia & East Europe, and
is a natural habit in Spain and Portugal until recently» (14). The English
author added: «Since she entered the house of Muhammad Peace be upon
him all people felt her presence, and if there was a girl knowing fully what
is marriage, Aisha will be such girl. She has built her character since the
first day of her life in the house of the Prophet Peace be upon him which
was attached to the Masjed.(15)

reference:14 R.V.C. Bodley, The Messenger, p 129 (Arabic version)
15 R.V.C. Bodley, The Messenger, p 130 (Arabic version)

zaith ansaf said...

It is not for Satisfying a Desire!
It is Following a Good Advice and wishing for Enhancing Relations with
a Dear Friend “The marriage of the Prophet Peace be upon him with
Aisha May Allah be pleased with her was not his own idea, it was an opinion
by a woman called Khawla Bint Hakim, for the purpose of enhancing
relations with the dearest friend of the Prophet Peace be upon him i.e. Abu
Bakr As Siddeek, father of Aisha May Allah be pleased with them by way
of affinity. Abu Bakr May Allah be pleased with him was one of the pillars
of Islam and was the closest friend to the Prophet Peace be upon him.
He was the first orthodox Caliph after the death of the Prophet Peace be
upon him. It is worth mentioning here that the marriage of Aisha was made
upon an advice by a woman i.e. such opinion means that such marriage was
conforming to the customs and traditions of society and that such woman
did not find such marriage a breach to the rights of Aisha or confiscating
her freedom as alleged by the hypocrite people. Anyway, the Prophet Peace
be upon him did not wish to reject marriage with Aisha, the daughter of
the dearest friend.
His loyalty to his friend, Abu Baker, made him pleasant to accept the offer
in order to enhance relations between them.
It is worth mentioning also that Aisha, before marrying the Prophet Peace
be upon him, was engaged to another man; Jubair Bin Mut›em Bin Adei.
I.e. marriage in an early age was a norm & a custom widely prevailing in
such era and no one denied or objected it. Moreover, after marriage, Aisha
gained a high rank in the Prophet›s life.
The Prophet Peace be upon him was asked: Who is the dearest person in
your life? He said: Aisha.
He was asked: Who is the dearest person from men? He answered: Her
Why did Prophet Muhammad Marry Aisha; the Young Girl www.rasoulallah.net
24
father (16).
Therefore, the marriage of the Prophet Peace be upon him with Aisha was
not for the purpose of satisfying desires as portrayed by some people; contrary,
it was done for several purposes. If the Prophet Peace be upon him
was seeking desires, he would not then, while being twenty five years old,
marry Khadija who was fifteen years older than him, and would not refrain
from marriage until her death.
Moreover, if he was seeking desires, he would not, after the death of Khadija,
marry an old woman eighty years old; Sawda Bint Zam›a Al Aameriah
who became a widow after her husband›s death. The Prophet wanted to
console her and to be an example for all Muslims in doing good deeds for
the widows. Anyway, the marriage of the Prophet Peace be upon him with
Aisha in such early age produced great benefits to Islam & Muslims.
Being young, Aisha was able to learn and keep the principles of Islam from
the Prophet Peace be upon him quickly; therefore, she gained wide knowledge
in religion and became a reference for the old and young companions
concerning the Holy Quran, jurisprudence, interpretation, and the prophetic
traditions. She was one of the greatest scholars in jurisprudence, and was
for the companions like a teacher. They were asking her about all things in
Islam, and she delivered one fourth of the Islamic teachings (17).
The Prophet Peace be upon him has qualified Aisha to be a good source
and reference for the Muslims after him. Aisha was a young, clever, and
bright woman with a strong memory; therefore, the Prophet Peace be upon
him was confident that she will keep the great Islamic heritage assigned to
her.
The revelation was coming down to the Prophet Peace be upon him every
16 «Sunan At Termithi»-Hadith No.3886
17 «Aisha and Politics»- by Al Afaghani-p.16
Why did Prophet Muhammad Marry Aisha; the Young Girl www.rasoulallah.net
25

zaith ansaf said...

time he is in the house of Aisha only. This was an indication to her for
focusing on understanding the great mission of her husband in order to
perform her role in guiding the Muslims. The Muslims in the reign of Abu
Baker, Omar, Othman, Ali and Mo›awiah May Allah be pleased with them
learnt a lot from her and the scholars were consulting her in the religious
issues. She remained a reference for the Muslims and a source for teaching
them their religion.
Mr. Saeed Al Afaghani said: I have spent several years studying Lady Aisha
May Allah be pleased with her. I found myself in front of a miracle, and did
not find the right description for her. She has vast knowledge, diversity of
specializations and several fields of experience; jurisprudence, prophetic
traditions, interpretation, juristic science, morals, poetry, medicine, history
She has mastered all such fields before being eighteen (18).

Jamal Hassan said...

@Search 4 truth
“Im not even sure what your getting at? What is your assertion? What does Mohamed not having children have to do with anything. Yes he did have children. Have you ever heard of Fatima?”
My assertion is clear. You said that because Aisha never had children, her organs were destroyed. A palpably stupid comment by the way. Because other wives of Muhammad also never had children. Just because a wife does not have children does not mean her organs are destroyed. Oh and Aisha never got married after the death of Muhammad. She awaited death so she could meet him again. Does this sound anything like a victim of pedophilia? You can never answer this except with stupid and immature assumptions.
Oh so it was ok back then and now it’s wrong? Typical. You make absolutely no effort to understand the Muslim point of view. You take opinions that suit your objective. The Quran mentions an age of marriage:
“And test the orphans [in their abilities] until they reach marriageable age. Then if you perceive in them sound judgement, release their property to them.” (4:6)
It differs with the culture. Child molestation is forbidden. Harming is forbidden. And you run to point at muslim countries, as if we’re the fools whose priests come off as child molestors. I wonder why. Yes I cannot judge everybody by the actions of a few. Fine. So then you should stop with your bickering. There is an age for marriage, as the Quran says. Instead of quoting minority opinions that suit you, do some research on the majority and scholarly consensus of the 4 schools of thought and their ruling on having relations with girls who are not ready/pre-pubescent. Why did the Prophet wait 3 years after the marriage? If the girl is not ready for relations, the scholarly consensus says she cannot even leave her father’s house, much less have relations that would harm her. As for 65:4, it does not only refer to young girls without menses yet, it also refers to those who have irregular periods. But yes, younger girls without menses are included. Menses are not always the sign of puberty. This is how wise the Quran is.
“Menarche [onset of first period] may occur at an unusually early age, preceding thelarche [breast development] and other signs of puberty. This is termed isolated premature menarche. (Wikipedia, Menarche - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)”
The Quran was meant for 1400+ years. Stop harping on matters that addressed culture 1400 years ago. That is how marriage was done. Once the woman can handle relations, she moved into the husband’s house. Good thing the Quran did not leave menstruation as the green light for relations, or else you would have gone on a tirade about girls who have menses but are still not ready for relations. It’s the by-product of a diseased heart, as the Quran says.
Have you looked up the concept of Urf in Islam? Customs? There was no objection, no religious objection, no secular objection, to Muhammad’s marriage to Ayesha until modern times, until the 20th century. You cannot project your view 1400 years back. It’s wrong. All semitic cultures, ALL married their girls off young.
Did I say puberty genius? Yes girls matured earlier. By the time they reached puberty, they were Women. Doing work. Milking cows and what not. They matured much earlier than todays’ women and were ready for marriage early on.
You’re going to come 14 centuries later and deem an action wrong that was not deemed wrong by anybody before modern times? Yes, you are insane.

Jamal Hassan said...

@Zack_Tiang
“And as pointed out before, it is one thing to practice pedophilia or rape that is contrary to God's teaching, and completely another to be ordained by God for it.”
Oh yes, and completely another to be impregnated by god as an early teen. Not that I’m ridiculing or anything, there is nothing wrong with girls being married at that age during that time, but open your eyes.
“The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."
Ok, I’m surprised nobody understands English. Abu Bakr said he was his brother. Do you understand brother? You cannot marry your brother’s daughter. That’s how close Abu Bakr and Prophet Muhammad were. But the Prophet said no, you are my brother in religion, meaning not his blood brother, and therefore Aisha is lawful for him to marry. Simple concept.
“Narrated 'Aisha: Allah's Apostle said to me, "You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, 'Uncover (her),' and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.' Then you were shown to me, the angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said (to him), 'Uncover (her), and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.' "
Power abuse you say? Aisha was not even considered until Khawlah suggested it to the Prophet. There is no power abuse. What are you talking about…another soul wandering in blindness, with a void in his heart that he seeks to fill by twisting Islam. Get a life.

Jamal Hassan said...

@Sam
18:27 does not have a context as you present it. It clearly says “what has been revealed.” Ok, obviously nobody can change what has been revealed. The wahy is guarded. But the Quran is clear that the Jews changed their book. And you try to fool everyone by bringing up a tafsir? Which by the way, Al-Razi says “There is a difference of opinions regarding this matter among some of the respectable scholars.” Difference of opinion. You do understand that don’t you? Well I hope so. Quran is number one. There is nothing like it, nothing above it. Everybody knows that. No tafsir or opinion can go against the Quran. And the Quran says:

"So for their breaking of the covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good."(Quran 5:13)
Can it be any clearer? You know you do bring up good points for discussion, but your stubbornness on points that have no case weakens your credibility.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

All of these ridiculous assertions have been answered and refuted. These rambling apologies for immoral and harmful behavior prove nothing.

Did you read my responses to these logical fallacies and lies. Go back and read all of my postings. they answer this nonsense.

And the thing about African girls is just preposterous. American farm girls have many chores as well. That proves nothing. That doesnt mean she should be in a sexual relationship with a man. She has not had the lifetime experience nor the judgment to make a lifetime decision. A child of six cannot make those types of decision that will alter her life forever. And because of Mohameds horrible example millions and millions of Muslims children in the past, present and future will be victimized, oppressed, and physically and mentally harmed.


You can make all the excuses you want for Mohamed. It is still wrong. Now go back and read all of my responses that answer and refute this nonsense!

And would you give your six year old daughter to a 53 year old man? Answer the question.

Zack_Tiang said...

@Jamal,

"Oh yes, and completely another to be impregnated by god as an early teen."

1 - That's only according to some of the Jewish writing, which has been known to be antagonistic or misrepresentative of Jesus Christ, so far I understand. (forgot the name of that scripture)

2 - God is spirit and He needs not perform physical sex to impregnate Mary. So it is not the same as an older mortal man having sex with a child who's not even in her teens yet.


“The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

I quoted this to show Abu Bakr's reluctance... I wasn't trying to say that they were blood brothers. And you're surprised nobody understands English?


"Power abuse you say? Aisha was not even considered until Khawlah suggested it to the Prophet. There is no power abuse."

No power abuse he says. Here's a clear hadith Aisha says of the 'Prophet' Muhammad telling her a vision that only HE saw... and because HE was (supposedly) a prophet from their Allah and NO ONE else could say otherwise about this prophet, therefore it was concluded that if it was Allah's will, then let it happen.
No power abuse? O rly?

That's why in the Torah, God placed the condition for a true testimony to be confirmed by the testimony of at least TWO witnesses.
Pretty much all of 'Prophet' Muhammad's revelation were revealed by ONE man... Oh yeah! Prophet Muhammad himself.
His power abuse goes beyond just his marrying Aisha.

Tom said...

@Jamal
"Oh yes, and completely another to be impregnated by god as an early teen."

ONE of DUMBEST statement thus far!!

How come this muslim "god" allowed this particular marriage to take place,did it not know that it will be a contentious issue in the future?
This man muhammad being the last prophet did he not have to set some clear moral standards, for all times? Or is it again that same all tired muslim retort, the prophets are for that time only!

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 1

Here we go again with more of Jamal's lies and distortions of his own book. Here is the refutation to his lie that Q. 5:13 teaches that the previous Scriptures are corrupted, taken from one of my replies to another dceeptive taqiyyist:

However, Zaatari does quote the following verses to “prove” that the Quran acknowledges that the Scriptures in our possession are not the original revelations: 2:79; 3:78; 4:46, 157; 5:13.

The problem with Zaatari’s list is that none of these verses suggest that the Judeo-Christian Scriptures have been corrupted. The most that these passages prove is that a specific group of Jews living in a certain area during a specific time had tampered with their Scriptures.

However, the same Quran testifies that there were other Jews, as well as Christians, who did not and would not allow their Scriptures to be falsified:

Yet they are not all alike; some of the People of the Book are a nation upstanding, that recite God's verses/signs in the watches of the night, bowing themselves, believing in God and in the Last Day, bidding to honour and forbidding dishonour, vying one with the other in good works; those are of the righteous. S. 3:113-114

And some there are of the People of the Book who believe in God, and what has been sent down unto you, and what has been sent down unto them, men humble to God, not selling the verses/signs of God for a small price; those -- their wage is with their Lord; God is swift at the reckoning. S. 3:199

Moreover, one of the references accuses a party (not all) of believers of distorting the Book WITH THEIR TONGUES:

And verily, among them is a party who distort the Book WITH THEIR TONGUES (as they read), so that you may think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book, and they say: “This is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie against Allah while they know it. S. 3:78 Hilali-Khan

It is clear that this is referring to the misinterpretation of specific passages as opposed to the corruption of the text itself. This is similar to the hadiths that Zaatari cited to prove that Muhammad didn’t trust the Scriptures of the Jews:

The Apostle of Allah said: Whatever the people of the Book [Jews and Christians] tell you, do not verify them, nor falsify them, but say: We believe in Allah and His Apostle. If it is false, do not confirm it, and if it is right, do not falsify it. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud, Knowledge (Kitab Al-Ilm), Book 25, Number 3637)

Narrated Abu Huraira:
The people of the Book used to read the Torah IN HEBREW AND THEN EXPLAIN IT IN ARABIC to the Muslims. Allah's Apostle said (to the Muslims). "Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’" (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 460)

It is evident from the context that Muhammad wasn’t rejecting the Torah or questioning its authority. Muhammad was merely cautioning his followers from accepting the explanation or interpretation of the Jews since what they said in Arabic may not have accurately reflected what was actually written in the Hebrew text of the Torah.

Continued in the next part.

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 2

Continuing from where I left off:

More importantly, here is what Ibn Kathir wrote concerning Q. 3:78:

Mujahid, Ash-Sha'bi, Al-Hassan, Qatadah and Ar-Rabi' bin Anas said that …

(who distort the Book with their tongues.)

means, “They alter (Allah's Words).”

Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn 'Abbas said that the Ayah means they alter and add although none among Allah's creation CAN REMOVE THE WORDS OF ALLAH FROM HIS BOOKS, THEY ALTER AND DISTORT THEIR APPARENT MEANINGS. Wahb bin Munabbih said, “The Tawrah and Injil REMAIN AS ALLAH REVEALED THEM, AND NO LETTER IN THEM WAS REMOVED. However, the people misguide others by addition and false interpretation, relying on books that they wrote themselves.” Then …

(they say: "This is from Allah," but it is not from Allah;)

As for Allah's books, THEY ARE STILL PRESERVED AND CANNOT BE CHANGED.” … Ibn Abi Hatim recorded this statement ... (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 3:78; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Hence, both Ibn Abbas and Wahb bin Munabbih believed that none of the Books of God could be corrupted and that the Torah and the Gospel remain as God revealed them. What makes this rather ironic is that Zaatari quotes a hadith where Ibn Abbas supposedly calls into question the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians! (We say supposedly since a careful analysis of the narrative in light of some of the other reported statements of Ibn Abbas proves otherwise. For the details please read the following article.)

Continued in the next par.

coptic crusader said...

All of this aside no 1 has yet to answer the question posed. search for truth askEd it again. would any of you Muslims on this blog Be oK marrying your 6 year old daughter to your 53 year old so called prophet? I am NOT arguing the custom and practices of that time but want to reiterate that Muhammad according to the Koran is the prime moral and religious example for all of mankind. so what you muslims are saying is no matter what the norms and customs were for any people at any time worldwid doesn't make it wrong? we today understand that no way no how does a 6 year old can understand what it means to consent to marriage especially to a 53 year old man because supposedly he saw her in a dream. I mean according to sahih bukhari he followed her and rub his member (penis) around her vagina but never penetrated and people are amazed at his will power. I mean are you kidding me yes in this day in age it is called perverted (child molestation). as a civilized people now we can look back at this and know this is wrong. and for all knowing Almighty God 2 sanction this, and make Muhammad a prime moral example to mankind ludicrous! this is why today Muslim countries people use example of your prophet to get away with this. we'll try this 1 more time, would any Muslim on this blog offer his 6 year old daughter to marry your so called prophet?

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 3

Nor was Ibn Kathir the only scholar who quoted this report from al-Bukhari. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, in his Ighathat Al Lahfan, Volume 2, p. 351, refers to this same tradition along with the narrative from Abu Dawud where Muhammad praised the Torah which the Jews possessed at that time:

On the other side, another party of hadith and fiqh scholars said: these changes took place during its interpretation and not during the process of its revelation. This is the view of Abi Abdullah Muhammad bin Ishmael Al-Bukhari who said in his hadith collection:

“No one can corrupt the text by removing any of Allah’s words from his Books, but they corrupted it by misinterpreting it.”

Al-Razi also agrees with this opinion. In his commentary he said:

There is a difference of opinions regarding this matter among some of the respectable scholars. Some of these scholars said: the manuscript copies of the Torah were distributed everywhere and no one knows the exact number of these copies except Allah. It is impossible to have a conspiracy to change or alter the word of God in all of these copies without missing any copy. Such a conspiracy will not be logical or possible. And when Allah told his messenger (Muhammad) to ask the Jews to bring their Torah and read it concerning the stoning command they were not able to change this command from their copies, that is why they covered up the stoning verse while they were reading it to the prophet. It was then when Abdullah Ibn Salam requested that they remove their hand so that the verse became clear. If they have changed or altered the Torah then this verse would have been one of the important verses to be altered by the Jews.

Also, whenever the prophet would ask them (the Jews) concerning the prophecies about him in the Torah they were not able to remove them either, and they would respond by stating that they are not about him and they are still waiting for the prophet in their Torah.

Abu Dawood narrated in his collection that Ibn Umar said:

A group of Jewish people invited the messenger of Allah to a house. When he came, they asked him: O Abu Qassim, one of our men committed adultery with a woman, what is your judgment against him? So they placed a pillow and asked the messenger of Allah to set on it. Then the messenger of Allah proceeded to say: bring me the Torah. When they brought it, he removed the pillow from underneath him and placed the Torah on it and said: I BELIEVE IN YOU AND IN THE ONE WHO REVEALED YOU, then said: bring me one of you who have the most knowledge. So they brought him a young man who told him the story of the stoning.

The scholars said: if the Torah was corrupted he would not have placed it on the pillow and he would not have said: I believe in you and in the one who revealed you. This group of scholars also said: Allah said:

"And the word of your Lord has been accomplished truly and justly; there is none who can change His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing."

And the Torah is Allah’s word. (Bold and capital emphasis ours)

Continued in the next part.

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 4

Continuing from where we left off:

It is interesting that Muslim scholars cited Q. 6:115 to prove that the Torah could not be corrupted since this verse equally applies to all of the inspired Scriptures. Notice what it says:

And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.

Here is how another renowned Muslim expositor interpreted this text:

The word of God meant in this verse is the Quran. This word is complete in truth and justice. Nothing can change Allah’s word which he revealed in his BOOKS. The liars cannot add or delete from Allah’s BOOKS. This is referring without a doubt to the Jews and Christians because they are the people of the books which were revealed to their prophets. Allah is revealing that the words they (the people of the book) are corrupting were not revealed by Allah, but Allah’s word cannot be changed or substituted. (Tafsir al-Tabari, Q. 6:115; bold and capital emphasis ours)

This isn’t the only place where the Quran says this:

Recite what has been revealed to thee of the Book of thy Lord; no man can change His words. Apart from Him, thou wilt find no refuge. S. 18:27

Thus, the logic of the Quran goes something like this:

A. None can change the words of Allah.
B.The Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel are the words of Allah.
C.Therefore, no one is able to change the Torah, the Psalms or the Gospel.

How much more clearer must the Quran be that Muhammad did not think that the previous Scriptures were corrupted but that they had been preserved by God and were in the possession of the Jews and Christians of his time?

More to come.

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 5

Finally, in his haste to prove that the Muslim scripture accuses the Jews and Christians of corrupting their Books Zaatari cited Q. 4:46 without realizing how this text actually backfires against him.

According to the immediate context this passage refers to a party of the Jews distorting the words of Muhammad!

Seest thou not those unto whom a portion of the Scripture hath been given, how they purchase error, and seek to make you (Muslims) err from the right way? Allah knoweth best (who are) your enemies. Allah is sufficient as a Guardian, and Allah is sufficient as a Supporter. Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say: ‘We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not’ and ‘Listen to us!’ distorting with their tongues and slandering religion. If they had said: ‘We hear and we obey: hear thou, and look at us’ it had been better for them, and more upright. But Allah hath cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, save a few. S. 4:44-46

The late Abdullah Yusuf Ali helps us understand the historical context of this particular citation:

“… A trick of the Jews was to twist words and expressions, so as to ridicule the most solemn teachings of the Faith. Where they should have said, 'We hear and we obey,' they said aloud, ‘We hear,’ and whispered, ‘We disobey.’ Where they should have said respectfully, 'We hear,' they added in a whisper, ‘What is not heard,’ by way of ridicule. Where they claimed the attention of the Teacher, they used an ambiguous word apparently harmless, but their intention disrespectful.” (Ali, The Holy Qur'an, p. 194, fn. 565; bold emphasis ours)

And,

“… ‘Ra'ina' if used respectfully in the Arabic way, would have meant ‘Please attend to us.’ With the twist of their tongue, they suggested an insulting meaning, such as ‘O thou that takest us to pasture!', or in Hebrew, 'Our bad one!'” (Ibid, fn. 566; bold emphasis ours)

In light of this Zaatari must apply his own method of exegesis consistently and conclude that the Jews corrupted the text of the Quran according to Q. 4:46 since they changed Muhammad’s words around. After all, it was Zaatari who quoted Q. 4:46 to prove that the Jews and Christians corrupted their inspired Books. He must therefore remain consistent and accept the fact that this verse actually establishes that the Jews corrupted the Muslim scripture as well!

Zaatari will obvious reject such an explanation and rightly conclude that this passage refers to the Jews distorting the words of Muhammad by their tongues, not that they actually changed the text of his scripture. By the same token why doesn’t Zaatari see that the Quran doesn’t accuse the Jews (or even the Christians for that matter) of changing the text of their Scriptures but of misinterpreting or concealing what their inspired writings teach? The answer is obvious.

What makes this all the more ironic is that the verse immediately right after Q. 4:46 actually testifies that Muhammad came to confirm the very Scriptures that the Jews possessed!

O ye unto whom the Scripture hath been given! Believe in what We have revealed confirming that WHICH YE POSSESS, before We destroy countenances so as to confound them, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers (of old time). The commandment of Allah is always executed. S. 4:47

Note that this verse does not say “confirming that which ye once possessed” in the past tense as if it is now lost, but “confirming that which ye possess” in the present tense.

Did Zaatari not bother reading this text which serves to refute his gross distortion of what his own scripture says regarding the authenticity and authority of the previously revealed Books? Apparently not!

Not finished just yet.

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 5

To make matters worse Zaatari proceeds to quote Q. 5:48 and erroneously concludes that,

So the Quran allows us to establish what is false and true in the Bible, that which is in line with Islam we take as truth, and that which contradicts Islam is the corrupted part.

Once again Zaatari has to misread the text by ignoring the very context in which it is found. Here is the immediate context in order to help the reader see the point Muhammad was making:

Yet how will they make thee their judge seeing they have the Torah, wherein is God's judgment, then thereafter turn their backs? They are not believers. Surely We sent down the Torah, wherein IS GUIDANCE AND LIGHT; thereby the Prophets who had surrendered themselves gave judgment for those of Jewry, as did the masters and the rabbis, following such portion of God's Book as they were given to keep and were witnesses to. So fear not men, but fear you Me; and sell not My signs for a little price. Whoso judges not according to what God has sent down - they are the unbelievers. And therein We prescribed for them: 'A life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds retaliation'; but whosoever forgoes it as a freewill offering, that shall be for him an expiation. Whoso judges not according to what God has sent down -- they are the evildoers. And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus son of Mary, confirming the Torah that is between his hands (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi mina al-tawrati) and We gave to him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, and confirming the Torah that is between his hands (wa-musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi mina al-tawrati), as a guidance and an admonition unto the godfearing. So let the People of the Gospel judge according to what God has sent down THEREIN. Whosoever judges not according to what God has sent down -- they are the ungodly. And we have revealed unto you the Book confirming the Book that is between his hands, and assuring it (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi mina al-kitabi wa-muhayminan alayhi). So judge between them according to what God has sent down, and do not follow their caprices, to forsake the truth that has come to thee. To every one of you We have prescribed a law and a clear way. If God had willed, He would have made you one nation; but that He may try you in what has come to you. So be you forward in good works; unto God shall you return, all together; and He will tell you of that whereon you were at variance. S. 5:43-48

Compare this with how the following Muslim translates Q. 5:48:

To you We revealed the Book with the Truth, confirming previous Scripture AND WITNESSING TO THEIR VERACITY. So judge between them as God revealed and do not follow their whims, to turn you away from the truth revealed to you. For every community We decreed a law and a way of life. Had God willed, He could have made you a single community – but in order to test you in what He revealed to you. So vie with one another in virtue. To God is your homecoming, all of you, and He will then acquaint you with that over which you differed. S. 5:48 (The Qur’an – A New Translation, by Tarif Khalidi [Viking Adult Publishers, October 16, 2008], p. 89; bold, capital and italic emphasis ours)

In context Muhammad had just finished explaining to the Jews and Christians that they must judge in accord with their Scriptures since they are fully reliable and authoritative, and further asserted that his very own book was “sent down” to testify to their veracity.

The end is far from over.

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 6

In light of this Muhammad’s point wasn’t that the previous Scriptures are corrupt, but that he was commanded to judge according to the dictates of the Quran. And in the Quran Muhammad was ordered to inform the Jews and Christians that they were expected, in fact required, to judge by the Torah and Gospel respectively.

In other words, the Quran told Muhammad not to judge the Jews and Christians according to his law or sharia but in respect to the commandments found in their own Scriptures. Muslims, on the other hand, were to be judged according to the dictates of the Quran. That is all that the passage is saying.

Now why in the world would Allah command Jews and Christian to judge by Scriptures that had been changed and were therefore unreliable? Why not order them to abandon their corrupted Books and follow Muhammad’s laws? The answer is obvious to any honest seeker of truth. Muhammad did not think that the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians were unreliable. He actually believed that they were the true revelations that God had given them through his prophets and messengers.

This means that my first proposition has been fully established and my argument against Muhammad’s prophethood therefore remains uncontested. Muhammad confirmed that the Holy Bible which the Jews and Christians of his time possessed was the uncorrupt revelation which God sent down through his prophets and messengers. Muhammad believed that his scripture was in perfect agreement with those inspired Books. However, he was grossly mistaken since his teachings contradict(ed) the essential doctrines that were/are taught within the Holy Bible. As such Muhammad is one of those false prophets and antichrists that the Holy Bible warned against (cf. Deuteronomy 13:1-5; Matthew 7:15-20; 24:23-25; 2 Corinthians 11:2-4, 13-15; 1 John 2:18, 22-23).

One more post left.

Sam said...

Exposing Hassan's Lies Pt. 7

Now notice folks how many references and citations I provided proving that Muhammad thought that the Scriptures which the Jews and Christians of his day possessed were the uncorrupt revelations which God had given them. He even asked for a copy of the Torah, praised it, and testified that he believed in it, without a word of it being corrupt. And yet Hassan seriously wants us to believe that Muhammad didn't mean what he said, and pretty much deceived the Jews into making them think that he actually affirmed their Scriptures, even though according to Hassan this is not what happened.

Thus, according to Hassan, Muhammad was a liar and a deceiver, something we already knew and didn't need him to tell us.

Hassan, like I said before, time to play games somewhere else.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Jamal

I dont even know what to say. Are you serious or joking? Because your statement may be one of the most illogical, most ridiculous, most preposterous irrational response anyone has made to me on this blog.

How do you make the correlation between Mohamed not having children with some wives and having some with others, to Aisha and Mohamed not having children?

That is absurd!

Do you know anything about the most basic of human anatomy or reproduction?

What does Mohamed having sex with others have to do with Mohamed having sex with an under developed Child named Aisha?

Are you serious?

I am not stating it as a fact either. I am saying that it is a possible cause for her never having the ability to bare children

Just because Mohamed didnt have children with other women does not mean that he did not destroy her undeveloped reproductive organs by having sex with her to early?

this is fascinating how your mid works, or shall i say, doesnt work.

And are you reading my responses to Samatar?

Because I already answered this. Do you know anything about sociology and human behavior?

If a child is raised in an environment where say,. cannibalism is the norm. That child will believe that it is normal and moral. Just like if a child is raised in an environment that allows child or infant brides. They will grow up believing that child and infant brides is the norm and moral.

I cannot believe I have to explain this to you.

And I already showed you in the Quran sura 65:4 that there is NO minimum age! And here are the commentaries! Continued:

Search 4 Truth said...

Ibn Kathir writes regarding 65:4

, "The `Iddah is made up of cleanliness and the menstrual period." So he divorces her while it is clear that she is pregnant, or he does not due to having sex, or since he does not know if she is pregnant or not. This is why the scholars said that there are two types of divorce, one that conforms to the Sunnah and another innovated. The divorce that conforms to the Sunnah is one where the husband pronounces one divorce to his wife when she is not having her menses and without having had sexual intercourse with her after the menses ended. One could divorce his wife when it is clear that she is pregnant. As for the innovated divorce, it occurs when one divorces his wife when she is having her menses, or after the menses ends, has sexual intercourse with her and then divorces her, even though he does not know if she became pregnant or not. There is a third type of divorce, which is neither a Sunnah nor an innovation where one divorces A YOUNG WIFE WHO HAS NOT BEGUN TO HAVE MENSES, the wife who is beyond the age of having menses, and divorcing one's wife before the marriage was consummated.

Al-Tabari said regarding 65:4

The interpretation of the verse "And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise". He said: The same applies to the 'idaah for girls who do not menstruate because they are too young, if their husbands divorce them after consummating the marriage with them.

Abu-Ala’ Maududi states:

"Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl at this age but it is permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur’an has held as permissible." (Maududi, volume 5, p. 620, note 13, emphasis added)

It is clear: Muslim men can engage in sex with prepubescent children!

Thanx Sam

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Jamal

If a Priest Molests a child he is committing a sin and a crime. If a Muslims man of 53 marries a child and has sex with her. he is a Prophet@!

A Preist is a man, and he sins. We believe even Prophets were not sinless. You on the other hand believe that Mohamed was sinless and his marriage to a child was not only moral, but a virtue.

And your comparing Mohamed to criminal priests who we all deem as sinners?

LOL! Do you realize how preposterous and damning you did to Mohamed? You are hilarious.

Menses are not always the sign of puberty? LOL! Well what is? How does that make the Quran wise?

You just make it up as you go along? What are the signs? I showed you the scholars that said you can have sex with a child who has nopt had menses!

Now tell me with the evidence from your schools of thought or scholars what are the other signs of puberty?

And as I said before, the onset of menstruation is not the completion of puberty. it is just a symptom.

So your Allah and false prophet should have known to wait for the completion of puberty, not during the process of puberty!

This is the funniest things i have heard in a while! Everything you say is so contradictory to logic,. reason and science I cant believe it!

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Jamal

You said there was an age in the Quran! Where is that age stated? There is not one single sura that gives a specific age. That is a lie!

Quote "The Quran was meant for 1400+ years. Stop harping on matters that addressed culture 1400 years ago."

So Why are you a Muslim then? If the Quran was meant for seventh century backward beduins then why are you practicing Islam today? I thought the Quran was for all time? And that Mohamed was the perfect example to folloow for all time.

Now all of a sudden it was for 1400 years ago and Mohameds actions are not to be emulated?

033.021
YUSUFALI: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.
PICKTHAL: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.
SHAKIR: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.


So your pointing to a condition such as premature menarche to justify having sex with younger and younger children?

That argument actually goes against you.

Because premature menarche is a condition. So now if a little girl of three s=has the condition known as premature menarche a Muslim could be justified in having sexual relations with a three year old.


Do you comprehend how you are destroying Islam and Mohamed with your ridiculous apologetics? I mean this is pathetic.

Samatar Mohamed said...

@Zack

"Marrying a little girl is definitely a moral issue and it has been determined as morally wrong now.
How is it that something done by the best moral examplar for all Muslims be deemed inappropriate by 'modern' Muslims?"

I've pointed out numerous times that this practice is immoral right now, but that does not mean it was always immoral. A good example is slavery. Both in Islam and The Bible, slavery was allowed undoubtedly but with restrictions. Nowadays, slavery is abolished completely. It would be a radical stance to say that God wasn't being just because he allowed slavery centuries ago. This is one example of a practice that was moral as long as the guidelines were met, but is immoral today. Regarding the age of Aisha, The United states had the age of consent anywhere from 7 to 10 not even 2 centuries ago. My point is, I am pretty sure if a 9 or 10 year old in the 21st century was the exact same in development physically and psychologically, there would be restrictions in this practice. Didn't Mary get married at the age of 12 if I recall correctly. The reason I am not disgusted is because I'm sure Mary wasn't anything like the 12 year old we see today who haven't even hit puberty for the most part, and rely on their parents on pretty much everything. We know that Aisha hit puberty at the age of 9, indicating she was an early bloomer. Hence, why the prophet (pbuh) waited until she hit puberty before the marriage was consummated. Zack, just like searchfortruth, I recommend if you want to hold that God ordained us to practice rape/pedophilia, then please be consistent and condemn all of society, including Joseph the carpenter for this. It's amazing to me how christians will literally take an argument anywhere just to win them. It doesn't matter if they end up condemning their own.

Samatar Mohamed said...

@searchfortruth

You are very inconsistent it is unbelievable sometimes.

I asked you if you were okay with a 12 your old having sex with a 50 year old man today.

Your response: No i would not be comfortable with a grown man having sex with a twelve year old, in this day and age.

We both know very well that a 12 year old in the 21st century is nowhere near ready for marriage or sex. That is why we would consider the sex pedophilia/rape. But what about Mary, didn't she get married at the age of 12 to a man twice as old as the prophet (pbuh). I don't see you condemn Joseph the carpenter for having sex with Mary, or society for accepting this supposed "pedophilia" years ago. So using your standards, because 12 is way too young to be in any sexual relationship right now, it must have been wrong for all times. If you want to maintain this position so be it. But next time you want to call the prophet (pbuh) a rapist, don't forget to mention to everyone else that Joseph the carpenter was a rapist as well and the mother of Jesus (pbuh) was raped at a young age because 12 is way too young for Mary to consent to any sexual relations.

HELLO, searchfortruth, are you an ATHEIST in disguise as a christian. That is the only reasonable conclusion I can come up with.

zaith ansaf said...

@ searching for truth

u r saying that those african girls are preposterous, how silly your, how u can say like, thats because u think, u live in modern matured world which alow GAY and Lesbian SEX.. BUll shit,
i might accept to marry my daughter 50 years old man, if i lived during those period, because that was a culture those days,(and when my sisy marry ma brother in law she was 14 and he was 29 and ma parents accept that) but your heart does not accept this because you r not neutral, u wanna show this issue bad to this world, that is your only aim, but we muslim never talk anything wrong about Jesus (PBUH)......

still in srilanka parents arrange thier daughters wedding its totally different than your culture, if you r gonna reuse this to prove your comment come here and check this, in here marry a gal at here age of 13 or 14 is not an big issue.....

at the beginning u guys said prophet marry Aisha @ her age of 9 now you guys are saying he married her @ 6...
rubbish...............

minoria said...

Hello Jamal:

I saw the video about the Dajjal by the famous Hamza Yusuf.

He talked about the Dajjal only having one eye.And even made a reference to the one eye in the pyramid in the American dollar.I am practically sure he said he believed the Dajjal would be a man.

I disagree with him a bit.

What Hamza did not say or failed to appreciate much

1.Some hadiths says the Dajjal will have one eye,but other say he will have 2 eyes,and be blind of one eye.

2.He forgot to say in the hadiths it is specifically Muhammad who calls him "ad-Masih al-dajjal/the False Messiah.

3.There are some hadiths where it says "the Lord is not one-eyed and others say Allah is not one-eyed.

AND SO?

Using deduction most Muslim scholars have concluded:

1.The reason for saying "Allah is NOT one-eyed" is BECAUSE the FALSE MESSIAH will say HE IS ALLAH.

2.The False Messiah will say:"I am the MESSIAH and ALLAH".

3.Thus the False Messiah will also say,because of his title:"I am JESUS".

Yes,2 Jesus at the same time

All this would have only intellectual interest to Christians were it not that:

1.Revelation specifically talks of TWO BAD MEN TO COME:the Antichrist and the False Prophet.

2.Islam talks of a descendant of Muhammad to come called the Guided One/Mahdi who will have Jesus as his helper.They will conquer the world for Islam.

3.The NT talks of Jesus fighting the Antichrist and the False Prophet.

Ok,for a Christian,it could be that we will have:

Antichrist=Mahdi
False Prophet=false Jesus

and Jesus(who for the Muslims will be "ad-Masih al-dajjal/the False Messiah".

Here in this article are links to the hadiths(in English) that talks about "ad-Masih al-dajjal","Allah is not one-eyed",etc.

You can translate the French part using GOOGLE TRANSLATE

http://translate.google.com/

"Deux Jesus en Meme Temps?Oui,selon l’Islam et selon Joel Richardson"

http://www.avraidire.com/2011/12/deux-jesus-en-meme-tempsouiselon-lislam-et-selon-joel-richardson/

minoria said...

Hello Jamal

In the video Hamza said scholars said the Gospels were not history or biographies.He is wrong.

A Christian writer had written a book saying the Gospels were biographies according to the standards of the historians of Antiquity.The was a scholar who was an expert on the classics of Antiquity,called Richard Burridge.

He disagreed and began to write a book and investigate,to PROVE it was NOT TRUE.He compared all the biographies of Antiquity from BEFORE the GOSPELS and AFTER the GOSPELS.

But he came to the conclusion that YES,the Gospels are real biographies of Jesus,its authors were writing a biography,it is in his book “What are the Gospels?”.

HERE IS AN ARTICLE ABOUT IT

http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/williams/licona_answer.html

Foolster41 said...

@Samatar:
It seems Muslims just can't stop using the "Mary is 12" strawman. They just accept as fact that Mary was 12 (because it helps their own arguments) that she was. Could you show me the historical or biblical proof that Mary was 12? Which scholars accepted this, and which mainstream denominations do they belong to?

Jamal tried to pull this one in an earlier thread, and when I asked he stop repeating this unless he showed evidence (besides the unconvincing encylopedia of catholisism which he never sourced, and I beleive the quote he quoted says "might have been") he backed down.

In fact, this idea that Mary was 12 has already been challenged above in this topic, but you just ignore it.

it's already been pointed out in this thread that God did NOT NEED to have sexual intercourse for Mary to be divinely pregnant, but you keep repeating this too, ignoring any arguments to the contrary!

Foolster41 said...

An illustration of this conversation: (Quotes in order) (Refrences to Joseph skipped because, unless there is proof that Mary was 12, are irrelevant)

Samatar said: "If you condemn the sexual relationship between Aisha and the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), then you condemn all the past generations."

Search 4 Truth: "Now as for other people who have committed these acts. I condemn them as well"

Samatar: " Are we are just going to use our 21st century mind frame to condemn every culture or society that practiced something we disapprove of today. Without even considering the fact that their situation and customs were different. "

Search 4 Truth: "Yes I condemn the people that practiced that years ago. But also the Jews had a minimum age. And it was more scientifically and morally sound that that of Mohamed's actions!"

Samatar: "I recommend if you want to hold that God ordained us to practice rape/pedophilia, then please be consistent and condemn all of society... It's amazing to me how christians will literally take an argument anywhere just to win them. It doesn't matter if they end up condemning their own."

So one person is repeating over and over a demand, and the other is answering that demand, but it is being ignored by the first person who insists on repeating the demand. It seems one person is really not interested in thoughtfully reading and responding to posts, but instead wants to make demands. This sounds an awfully lot like the definition of a TROLL to me.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samatar


No I am very consistent. You are just incapable of grasping or accepting my arguments because they destroy your lack of logic and inconsistency.

Show me the evidence from the Bible that Mary was twelve when she married. Dont show me some Catholics opinion. I am not Catholic. And Mary was a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus. LOL!

Yes the people who practiced that were misguided. I do not revere them as Prophets or believe that their actions are to be emulated.

Your arguments are ridiculous. no I am not an atheist. And yes I refuted all of your lies and logical fallacies.


Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

No I did not say the African girls are preposterous. I said the argument using African girls is a Preposterous argument.

So what do you propose we do to gay people? I speak to them and show them the love of Christ and try and persuade them that they are committing sin.

What is your solution? Please answer.

So that was the culture those days? So Mohameds sunna is not to be followed today?

then how can he be the perfect example for all man kind if his actions are not consist ant with todays morals and scientific knowledge that sex with children is harmful?

033.021
YUSUFALI: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.
PICKTHAL: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.
SHAKIR: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.


You just undermined Mohameds sunna! Thank you.

He did marry her at six. But it says he consummated the marriage with her at nine. After molesting her without penetration.

And we arent saying this. YOUR greatest scholars and historians are!

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65
Narrated ‘Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that ‘Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).” what you know of the Quran (by heart)’

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated ‘Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).


Would you like that we continue your education of Mohameds sunna?


Keep cursing. It really helps your argument!

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaif, Samatar, and Jamal


From "Adolescence", by L. Steinberg, pub. by McGraw Hill, 1993.
pages 36-37: "(Although menarche does not signal the onset of puberty....) .....the average age at menarche generally is lower in those countries where individuals are less likely to be malnourished or suffer from chronic disease. For example, in western Europe and in the United States, the median menarcheal age ranges from about 12.5 years to 13.5 years. In Africa, however, the median menarcheal age ranges from 14 years to 17 years."

You better contact that apologist you used for your ridiculous argument. He is as delusional as Samatar, Jamal, and yourself.


From "ADOLESCENCE - TRANSITION FROM CHILDHOOD TO MATURITY", by Lambert, Rothschild, Altland, & Green, pub. by Brooks / Cole, 1978:

page 106: "The process of physical development that results in the end of childhood and the beginning of adolescence involves three overlapping stages: Prepuberty, pubescence, and puberty. Although this sequence is the same for all individuals, the times of onset and the lengths of these periods differ from one person to another (Thornburg, 1975).

page 108: "... the gradual decrease in the average age at which menarche has been occurring among Western European girls and apparently among girls of the United States and Canada as well (Botstein & McArthus, 1976).... The fact that research has indicated that this trend is just as evident among girls in temperate climates as among girls in warm climates would also tend to destroy the myth that girls mature earlier in warm climates than in more moderate ones."

page 111: "Abnormal growth and delayed or precocious puberty are usually associated with disorders in hypothalamic hormonal changes (Schonberg, 1075; Sizonenko, 1975)."

Well there you have it. Now the question is, when will it sink in?

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaif

Apparently my response did not post. So here it is again.

NO I did not say those African girls are preposterous! I said your example of the African girls is preposterous!

And i am not the one who says that Mohamed married the child Aisha at 6. It is YOUR greatest scholars and historians, not mine!

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated ‘Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).


Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65
Narrated ‘Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that ‘Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).” what you know of the Quran (by heart)’

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated ‘Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).


So now your trying to tell me that Mohameds example is not to be emulated and it was only for a specific time? Well you just contradicted your Allah.

033.021
YUSUFALI: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.
PICKTHAL: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.
SHAKIR: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.

do you understand the difference between fourteen and six? It's more than double! And very significant in the developmental years. The difference between nine and twelve is great. Of course your parents would accept it. Your Prophet married a six year old. They are following his example of giving their daughter to an older man for a price. It's backward just like Islam taught them.

It's a shame that its not a big issue. It should be! And thats one of the reasons the countries and cultures are so far behind the rest of the civilized world.

Now keep cursing, it does a lot for your argument and character!

SD17 said...

@Samatar:
The point on Mary being twelve years old is from a Catholic website (new advent.org) which explains Catholic teachings, but this in no way shape or form is a dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church, that's point #1, point #2, even if you read how it is explained on the site, it DOES NOT explicitly state that Mary was twelve years of age, what it's states is "Jewish maidens were considered marriageable at the age of twelve years and six months, though the actual age of the bride varied with circumstances".... And the reason why it was stated was to try an shed some light on Luke (1:27) "to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David: and the virgin's name was Mary", so please don't bring this point as a way to justify Mohammed marrying Aisha at the age of 6 when he was 53 years of age, what mohammed did was wrong period, you and other muslims are basically trying to rationalize an embarrassing event that cannot be disputed from an Islamic perspective by justifying that is was culturally expectable in arabia and that other non-arab cultures did it too, but the difference between other cultures and what Mohammed did is that the other cultures eventually recognized that it is wrong morally and fundamentally for a 53yr old man to marry a 6 yr old, but Muslims have contend with the fact that mohammed ways and teachings are for or all ages/times and CANNOT be changed as Allah also approves of it, so it.

zaith ansaf said...

@Search 4 Truth
Facts on American Teens' Sexual and Reproductive Health
SEXUAL ACTIVITY

•Although only 13% of teens have had sex by age 15, most initiate sex in their later teen years. By their 19th birthday, seven in 10 female and male teens have had intercourse.[1]
•On average, young people have sex for the first time at about age 17,[2,3] but they do not marry until their mid-20s.[4] This means that young adults may be at increased risk for unintended pregnancy and STIs for nearly a decade or longer.
•Teens are waiting longer to have sex than they did in the recent past. In 2006–2008, some 11% of never-married females aged 15–19 and 14% of never-married males that age had had sex before age 15, compared with 19% and 21%, respectively, in 1995.[1]
•However, after declining substantially between 1995 and 2002, the proportion of teens who had ever had sex did not change significantly from 2002 to 2006–2008.[1]
•In 2006–2010, the most common reason that sexually inexperienced teens gave for not having had sex was that it was “against religion or morals” (38% among females and 31% among males). The second and third most common reasons for females were “don’t want to get pregnant” and “haven’t found the right person yet.”[5]
•Among sexually experienced teens, 70% of females and 56% of males report that their first sexual experience was with a steady partner, while 16% of females and 28% of males report first having sex with someone they had just met or who was just a friend.[5]
•Seven percent of young women aged 18–24 who had had sex before age 20 report that their first sexual experience was nonvoluntary. Those whose first partner was three or more years their senior were more likely to report this than were other women in the same age-group.[1]
•Teens in the United States and Europe have similar levels of sexual activity. However, European teens are more likely than U.S. teens to use contraceptives generally and to use the most effective methods; they therefore have substantially lower pregnancy rates.[6]
•Three percent of males and 8% of females aged 18–19 in 2002 reported their sexual orientation as homosexual or bisexual; the proportions reporting same-sex behaviors were similar.[7]
•The use of contraceptives during first premarital sex has been increasing, rising from 56% among women whose first premarital sex occurred before 1985, to 76% among those who first had sex in 2000–2004, to 84% among those whose first sex occurred in 2005–2008.[8]
CONTRACEPTIVE USE

(read this link to get more details bro: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-ATSRH.html)

and check this link for an example
http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120103185736AAgeUnC
this case is just an example but there are many cases like this in this current world who is having sex @ that age secretly without knowing to their parents, but you said our countries and cultures are so far behind the rest of the civilized world like yours. i wonder how u guys happy with these sort of culture but m rally happy with our culture because our sons and daughter know their parents and their parent's name bro.....

and a girl can get her 1st sex right after her 1st Menstruation but it is risky to be pregnant according to medical reports and etc , when aisha (razhi)got sex she was ready get her sex becz she was menstruated, but she might not ready to be pregnant, there are no evidence that aisha (razhi) had children or she got pregnant,

but the thing is, was aisha really 6 years when she got married to prophet muhammed even though there are few hadhees narrated in bukhary....

u may know about some sort of quran verses or hadheeth which are controdict (ACCORDING TO UR KNWOLADGE AND PERSPECTIVE ONLY)....

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

Why are you showing me statistics from the U.S?

Sp what!

People sin. They are not my Prophet! They are not to be emulated. So your trying to compare the sexual activities of the youth who are sinning to your Prophet?

YU MAKE NO SENSE!

Nobody is holding them in high regard. They are not PROPHETS!

Are you really this stupid? How can you be this dumb?

Yes people are having sex at a youg age.
So whats your point?

Your false Prophet was 53 when he married a six year old. And its NOT just a few hadith from Bukhari!

Its also in Sahih Muslim and Abu Dawood and every other scholars.

And no it is not my opinion. This is YOUR scholars historical accounts! What is wrong with you?


NOBODY IS COMMANDED TO FOLLOW THE ACTIONS OF MISGUIDED YOUTHS WHO HAVE SEX!

But YOU are permitted to have sex with a child because the Quran ordains it and YOUR false Prophet committed the act!

You are a complete and total imbecile! I cant believe that I have to point these simple matters out to you!

Narrated Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.
Sahih Bukhari 5:58:236
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)'
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:65

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith


Narrated 'Ursa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:88
Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet was screening me with his Rida' (garment covering the upper part of the body) while I was looking at the Ethiopians who were playing in the courtyard of the mosque. (I continued watching) till I was satisfied. So you may deduce from this event how a little girl (who has not reached the age of puberty) who is eager to enjoy amusement should be treated in this respect.
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:163
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)
Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.
Sahih Muslim 8:3310

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: When we came to Medina, the women came to me when I was playing on the swing, and my hair was up to my ears. They brought me, prepared me, and decorated me. Then they brought me to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) and he took up cohabitation with me, when I was nine.
Abu Dawud 41:4917
The tradition mentioned above has also been transmitted by Hisham b. ‘Urwah through a different chain of narrators. This version adds: I was swinging and I had my friends. They brought me to a house ; there were some women of the Ansar (Helpers). They said : With good luck and blessing.
Abu Dawud 41:4918

And I already answered all; of this nonsense in the prior posts.

Are you reading them at all? I refuted all of this! Menstruation is NOt the completion of puberty. It is just a symptom. It takes up to three more years for the reproductive organs to fully mature. It is dangerous and harmful to have sex with a child immediately after menstruation.

Your Allah and your false Prophet got it WRONG!

And if you go back and read my responses I produced the evidence@!

Your so brainwashed and indoctrinated you cannot think objectively!

EVERY single thing you said is INCORRECT! Go back and read so I dont have to keep repeating myself@!

Annd I did not write the Quran, hadith, or tafsirs. I just copied them from YOUR scholars. They are not my knowledge or perspective! They are YOURS!

This is incredible how willfully ignorant you are!

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

I will try and make this as simple as possible so you can comprehend. Maybe!

Those people in those statistics you provided. Are not my moral example. I do not follow their teachings or their actions.

But Mohamed is YOUR moral example and you are told that he is YOUR moral example.

And he was 53 when he married a six year old child.

Do you get it? I cant put it any more simply then that. WOW!

zaith ansaf said...

you said our countries and cultures are so far behind yours, to remind your culture and to identify your people's behavior only i post those statistics and those link, even though you are not follower of them but those people also live around you into your culture, other than that i don't need to post those statistic.. OK

zaith ansaf said...

According to many narratives, Ayesha participated in the battles of Badr and Uhud. No one older than 15 was allowed to accompany the Prophet's army in the battle of Uhud. This applied across the board to all participants, men and women alike. The battle of Uhud took place around the 2nd Hijrah, a time line close to her marriage with the Prophet. Obviously, she was at least older than 15 at that time.

2. A narrative regarding Ayesha's participation in the battle of `Uhud is given in Bukhari, (Kitabu'l-jihad WA'l-siyar, Arabic, Bab Ghazwi'l-nisa' WA qitalihinna ma`a'lrijal; that all boys under 15 were sent back is given in Bukhari, Kitabu'l-maghazi, Bab ghazwati'l-khandaq WA hiya'l-ahza'b, Arabic).

3. Most historians have consensus on the age of one of the oldest female companions of the Prophet, namely, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha that was ten years older than Ayesha. It is also reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah WA'l-nihayah that Asma died in 73 Hijrah when she was 100 years old. Clearly, if Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of Hijrah, Ayesha was 17 at the time of Hijrah and 19 at the time of consummation of her marriage with Muhammad.

(For Asma being 10 years older than Ayesha, see A`la'ma'l-nubala', Al-Zahabi, Vol 2, Pg 289, Arabic, Mu'assasatu'l-risalah, Beirut, 1992. Ibn Kathir confirms this fact, [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by ten years" (Al-Bidayah WA'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 371, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). For Asma being 100 years old, see Al-Bidayah WA'l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol 8, Pg 372, Arabic, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933). Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also has the same information: "She [Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH." Taqribu'l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Pg 654, Arabic, Bab fi'l-nisa', al-harfu'l-alif, Lucknow).

4. Tabari informs in his treatise on Islamic history that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the pre Islamic period. The pre-Islamic period ended in 610 A.D, a fact that makes Ayesha to be at least 14 years of age at the time of her marriage around 613-624 A.D.

Tarikhu'l-umam WA'l-mamlu'k, Al-Tabari, Vol 4, Pg 50, Arabic, Dara'l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).

5. Ibn Hisham, the historian, reports that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `Umar ibn al-Khattab which only means that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam close to the time of first revelation (around 610 A.D). This means she must have been at least a young girl at that time. Assuming she was barely 6 or 7 at that time this information puts the age of Ayesha at 20 or more at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (623-624 A.D.), (Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Ibn Hisham, vol 1, Pg 227 - 234 and 295, Arabic, Maktabah al-Riyadh al-hadithah, Al-Riyadh).

6. Tabari reports that before migrating to Habashah, Abu Bakr planned to hand over his daughter, Ayesha to Mut'am's son to whom she was engaged. But fearing persecution by the Quraish, Mut'am refused and his son divorced Ayesha. The migration to Habashah happened 8 years before Hijra. Obviously, at the time she was ready to take on responsibilities as a wife (possibly 9 or 10 years of age). If she married Muhammad in the 2nd Hijrah (623-624 A.D), she could not be less than 19 years of age (a secondary reference for this argument is: Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat, Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi, Urdu, Pg 38, Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan).

zaith ansaf said...

7. A famous Sunni imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, reports in His Musnad, that after the death of Khadijah, Khaulah came to the Prophet (pbuh) and advised him to marry again. She had two propositions for the Prophet: Either Muhammad could marry a virgin (bikr), or he could go for woman who had already been married (thayyib)". Khaulah named Ayesha for a virgin (bikr). It is common knowledge that the term bikr in the Arabic language refers to a well formed lady and not to a 9 year old, playful, immature lass. If she were nine, the word used by Khaulah would have been jariyah and not bikr.

(Musnad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol 6, Pg 210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut).

8. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has reported that Fatimah, Muhammad's daughter, was five years older than Ayesha and that Fatimah was born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, Ayesha, according to Ibn Hajar, was born when Muhammad was 40 and consummated her marriage when he was 54 or 55. That makes Aysha at least 15-16 years of age.

(Al-isabah fi tamyizi'l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Vol 4, Pg 377, Arabic, Maktabatu'l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh,1978)

Finally, it must be pointed out that Ayesha's age at the time of her marriage has never been an issue. If it were, his enemies must have picked up on this issue as they did to him on some other issues. Also, the reader must note that none of these Hadith reports concerning Ayesha's controversial age of marriage with the Prophet goes back to the Prophet himself. In other words, it is not the Prophet himself who said Ayesha was 6 or 9. These reports came from a single individual and the Iraqis reported from him when he grew old and his memory started failing.

In conclusion, this article is an attempt to prove that the books written 200-300 years after the death of Muhammad, while providing a good deal of historical information about him are not free from faulty, less than perfect and self-contradictory materials. These should not be taken as the final word for a Muslim. There is a Final Word for a Muslim and that is the Book of God, the Holy Qur'an-the book that defines the marriageable age for a man or woman when he or she attains soundness of judgment (Al-Qur'an 4:6). If Muhammad is a model for mankind, if he followed the Qur'an all his life, if Allah stands witness to his rock-solid character, there is no way that he could have taken a 6-9 year old, immature young, playful girl as a responsible wife. And Allah knowns better )

zaith ansaf said...

and u may ask about the hadheeth in sevral books, as i said earlier u just copying those thing from related books but u dont knw about islamic hadeeth rules.. isnt it?
Several books of Hadith (Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim, Abu Dawood, among others) and Islamic history (Tabari, among others) report that Ayesha was married to the Prophet at 6 but her marriage was not consummated until she was 9. Although, this information is widely quoted and found in many Hadith and history books, it must be noted that most of this information has come from a single person, Hisham bin Urwah, who is the last narrator of this Hadith Isnaad (chain of narration) on the authority of his father. Thus, this Hadith is primarily a single Hadith. Some other narratives mention the same Hadith but their narration has been found weak and unacceptable. In general, a Hadith has more credibility if it is narrated by more people independently from diverse chains of narrators. In this case, there is basically only on
e source.
Despite the abundance of information available during the 71 years that Hisham bin Urwah lived and taught in Medina, it is rather odd that no one else—not even his famous pupil Malik ibn Anas—reported Ayesha’s age from Hisham in Medina. Furthermore, all the narrators of this Hadith were Iraqis. Hisham is reported to have moved to Iraq in his later years. An extensive list of biographical sketches of all narrators including these Iraqis is available in some books.
Yaqub ibn Shaibah is reported to have said, “narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq“. Malik ibn Anas (d. 795), a student of Hisham in fact discredited all narratives of Hisham that were reported through people of Iraq.

(Tehzibu’l-tehzib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (PbuH), vol 11, pg 48 – 51)

It is reported that Hisham bin Urwah’s memory suffered in his later years to the extent that some of the traditions reported from Hisham bin Urwah could not be trusted for authenticity.

(Mizanu’l-ai`tidal, by Al-Zahbi , Arabic, a book on the life sketches of the narrators of the Hadith, Al-Maktabatu’l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol 4, pg 301).

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

Legitimizing child marriage is backward. Islam legitimizes child marriage. Mohamed legitimized child marriage. Mohamed legitimized child molestation.

In the West it is illegal.

Zaith there are people who do things of their own volition all around the world. Whether they are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Buddhist etc...


That does not mean they are a reflection of the religion they claim to belong to. Do you think that people dont have premarital sex in Islamic countries? Do you think there are no gays in Islamic countries?

Of course their are. And of course they do.

Now what do you propose we do with them?

You wont answer.



Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

And i can bring statistics as well.

* Child Protection Bill was drafted in 2008, but has not been approved by parliament to date

* Child molestation cases silenced for lack of evidence and fear of social stigma

By Hina Akhtar

LAHORE: Cases of paedophilia have seen a dramatic increase in the country in a span of a few years, Daily Times has learnt.

Child molestation is no longer a secret or something that can only happen to “other people”. These sort of sex offenders may be people we meet every day. There are high chances of the victim knowing the offender. Paedophilia is not the problem of a certain area or income group. It is not likely poverty or illiteracy, which are problems of a certain class. Research from all over the world has shown that child molestation can occur in all socio-economic classes, even in educated families.

A Child Protection Bill was drafted in October 2008. Federal Minister for Information Qamar Zaman Kaira said, on July 5, 2009, that the government was determined to make the bill a vital part of legislation and it would soon be approved by parliament. He said this while speaking at the launch of the Post Card Campaign organised in connection with the Campaign for Child Protection, held at the National Press Club (NPC). “I promise that I, not as a minister, but as your advocate and representative, will leave no stone unturned to defend and pass the bill from parliament,” the minister said.

It has been two years since the National Child Protection Bill was tabled before parliament. The proposed piece of legislation could have been a breakthrough for innocent girls and boys being molested and murdered across the country, but the lack of interest on part of the parliamentarians clearly shows that there is no chance of the bill getting approved. Likewise, the Punjab government has also continuously failed to implement pledges of stern action against criminals of child molestation, trying them under the Anti-Terrorism Act.

According to the recent statistics given by SAHIL, a non-government organisation, Punjab is on the top of the list for child molestation with 62 percent of such cases, 154 in Lahore and the rest in other cities of Punjab.

Search 4 Truth said...

In total, 68 percent girls and 32 percent boys have been the victims of paedophilia. The number increased by 9.4 percent as compared to 2008. Statistics show that around 81 percent of the cases were registered with the police. The study shows that 2,012 children were reportedly abused in 2009 and most of them were abused by acquaintances.

The report says that children from the 11 to 15 age-group are amongst the most vulnerable, followed by the age-group 6 to 10. Out of a total 2,012 victims, 6 percent of the children were murdered after being sexually assaulted. However, 0.5 percent cases were of those children who were murdered during an “attempt” of sexual assault.

According to the study, “it is difficult to collect actual data regarding child molestation as the abusers threaten children not to share such experiences, even with parents”.

Cases: Even in cases where the molesters are revealed, people are unable to bring them to the book without solid evidence. Due to lack of evidence and social stigma, parents of molested children often choose to stay silent, hence these incidents go ignored.

One of the worst cases of child molestation is the rape and murder of a four-year-old girl in the village of Kharrianwala near Faisalabad. The incident was appreciably highlighted by the media, and there were huge protests leading to a massive blockade of the Faisalabad-Sheikhupura road. The coverage by the media, eventually compelled Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif to take notice of the case.

Examples of other child molestation cases in the year 2009 include the abduction, rape and murder of eight-year-old Mudassara in the New Anarkali police jurisdiction, the rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl who was found dumped in a drain near the Gujjarpura police jurisdiction and the murder of 10-year-old Muzammil who was found near the Mayo Hospital on December 2, 2009. Up till now, in 2010, a 10-year-old boy, Jamshed was killed after being gang-raped on January 10. Other notorious and heinous incidents include the rape and murder of a 3-year-old girl named Sana by two policemen in Karachi. The child’s body was recovered from a manhole and the culprits were sentenced to death by an anti-terrorism court.

The legal officer of the Child Protection Bureau, Rana Mumtaz was not available to give any statement regarding this issue despite repeated attempts to contact him.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010%5C07%5C30%5Cstory_30-7-2010_pg13_2

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Zath,

The problems with our culture are the result of people not following the teachings and example of Jesus.

The Problems with your culture are the result of people following the teachings and example of Mohamed.

Christ is The answer to the problems of both our cultures.

This is a website about Islam so we are discussing the problems of Islam here and now.

If this were a website about the the problems of western society your statistics would be relevant and would find Christians doing their best to show that Jesus is the solution to those problems as well.

as it is your post looks like a desperate attempt to change the subject.

Are you ashamed of the example of your Prophet?

peace

zaith ansaf said...

yeah ts obvious, there are people around the world who do such in, but i said im SRI LANKA, an i talked about our culture that means our SRI LANKAN MUSLIM culture not about those arabian culture,

You all have said that in previous comments that, having sex with a 6 to 10 years old girl will expose her for STDD.

I have mentioned in previous comment, I have clearly mentioned that Aysha (Razhi) was 17 to 19 years old when married.

Hathees, mentioning the age of Aysha (Razhi) as 6 is not a trusted one. One narrator in that line of narrators (x) cannot be trusted for the reason mentioned already in my comment. According to a rule of Islamic art of Hathees, when such a narrator involved in the order of narration, that hathees cannot be considered as a credible one.

Are you going to accept the thinks mentioned above or going to create new rules for your convenience?

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

LOL! All of that is conjecture and lies. Look, I am going to show you sahih hadith that states her age.

There is no looking for loopholes in other hadith!

THESE CLEARLY STATE HER AGE AT MARRIAGE AND CONSUMMATION!

There is no looking for some way out of it. Bukhari says the age!

Sahih Bukhari 5:58:236
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)'

Now that you are embarrassed by Mohameds actions you go to great lengths to try and deny and rationalize his behavior!

All of your twisting and jumping threw hoops will not help you.

Your most reliable sources STATED her age as clear as a bell. They didnt have to make ridiculous assumptions to reach the conclusion. They stated it!


I understand reality is difficult for you. But you have to accept it. You cant go on living in your bubble.

Muslims always throw out the old. You dont know the science of the hadith.

Well provide the evidence that the Sahih hadith in all of your greatest historians and collections are in agreement that she was six or seven.


Prove that the hadith is unreliable!

First you bring some guys opinion that it was ok that she was six using African girls as an example of early maturation.

Now that that was refuted as illogical. Your next attempt is to undermine your greatest scholars.

It never ends with you.


Search 4 Truth said...

Ibn Kathir
Yunus b. Bukayr stated, from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father who said, "The Messenger of God (SAAS) married ‘A’isha three years after (the death of) Khadija. At that time (of the contract) ‘A’isha had been a girl of six. When he married her she was nine. The Messenger of God (SAAS) died when ‘A’isha was a girl of eighteen. "[4]
Al-Bukhari had related, from ‘Ubayd b. Isma‘il, from Abu Usama, from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father, who said, "Khadija died three years before the emigration of the Prophet (SAAS). He allowed a couple of years or so to pass after that, and then he contracted marriage with ‘A’isha when she was six, thereafter consummating marriage with her when she was nine years old."[4]
"Al-Hajjaj related to us, that Hammad related to him, from Hisham b. ‘Urwa, from his father, from ‘A’isha, who said, ‘The Messenger of God (SAAS), contracted marriage with me (after) Khadija’s death and before his emigration from Mecca, when I was six years old. After we arrived in Medina some women came to me while I was playing on a swing; my hair was like that of a boy. They dressed me up and put make-up on me, then took me to the Messenger of God (SAAS), and he consummated our marriage. I was a girl of nine.’"[4]

Ibn Ishaq
He married ‘A’isha in Mecca when she was a child of seven and lived with her in Medina when she was nine or ten. She was the only virgin that he married. Her father, Abu Bakr, married her to him and the apostle gave her four hundred dirhams.[3]
Yahya b. Abbad b. Abdullah b. al-Zubayr from his father told me that he heard Aisha say: "The apostle died in my bosom during my turn: I had wronged none in regard to him. It was due to my ignorance and extreme youth that the apostle died in my arms.

‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) is reported to have said: Allah’s Messenger (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) contracted marriage with me while I was (yet) a six years [sic] old girl. Then we arrived at Medina and stayed with Banu Harith b. Khazraj. I fell victim to fever; then my hair (of the head fell off (and became scattered). Then they became plenty and hanged down upto [sic] the earlobes. My mother ‘Umm Ruman came to me while I was (playing) in a swing alongwith [sic] my play-mates. She (the mother) called me loudly. I went to her and I did not know what he [sic] wanted. She seized my hand and stopped me at the door of the house and I was hearing [sic] violently until the agitation of my heart was over. Then she took some water and wiped it over my face and head. Then she admitted me to the house when some woman [sic] of Ansar were present in the house. They said, "You have entered with blessings and good fortune." Then she (the mother) entrusted me to them. So they embellished me and nothing frightened me but Allah’s Messenger (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) (when he came there) in the morning and they (the women) entrusted me to him. On that day, I was a nine years [sic] old girl."
Ibn-i-Majah vol.3:1876
Abdullah (Allah be pleased with him) is reported to have said, "The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) married ‘A’isha while she was a seven years [sic] old girl and took him [sic] to his house as a bride when she was nine years old and he parted with her (after his demise) when she was eighteen years old."
Ibn-i-Majah vol.3:1877

Search 4 Truth said...

When Hadrat ‘A’isha passed nine years of married life, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) fell in mortal sickness. On the 9th or the 12th of Rabi-ul-Awwal 11 A.H., he left this mortal world…Hadrat ‘A’isha was eighteen years of age at the time when the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) passed away and she remained a widow for forty-eight years till she died at the age of sixty-seven."[1]
Sunan Nasa’i 1 #18

‘A’ishah, daughter of Abu Bakr.
Her mother was Umm Ruman bt. ‘Umayr b. ‘Amr, of the Banu Duhman b. al-Harith b. Ghanm b. Malik b. Kinanah.
The Prophet married ‘A’ishah in Shawwal in the tenth year after the [beginning of his] prophethood, three years before Emigration. He consummated the marriage in Shawwal, eight months after Emigration. On the day he consummated the marriage with her she was nine years old.
According to Ibn ‘Umayr [al-Waqidi]- Musa b. Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Rahman- Raytah- ‘Amrah [bt. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Sa’d]: ‘A’ishah was asked when the Prophet consummated his marriage with her, and she said:
The Prophet left us and his daughters behind when he emigrated to Medina. Having arrived at Medina, he sent Zayd b. Harithah and his client Abu Rafi’ for us. He gave them two camels and 500 dirhams he had taken from Abu Bakr to buy [other] beasts they needed. Abu Bakr sent with them ‘Abdallah b. Urayqit al-Dili, with two or three camels. He wrote to [his son] ‘Abdallah b. Abi Bakr to take his wife Umm Ruman, together with me and my sister Asma’, al-Zubayr’s wife, [and leave for Medina]. They all left [Medina] together, and when they arrived at Qudayd Zayd b. Harithah bought three camels with those 500 dirhams. All of them then entered Mecca, where they met Talhah b. ‘Ubaydallah on his way to leave town, together with Abu Bakr’s family. So we all left: Zayd b. Harithah, Abu Rafi’, Fatimah, Umm Kulthum, and Sawdah bt. Zam‘ah. Ayd mounted Umm Ayman and [his son] Usamah b. Zayd on a riding beast; ‘Abdallah b. Abi Bakr took Umm Ruman and his two sisters, and Talhah b. ‘Ubaydallah came [too]. We all went together, and when we reached Bayd in Tamanni my camel broke loose. I was sitting in the litter together with my mother, and she started exclaiming "Alas, my daughter, alas [you] bride"; then they caught up with our camel, after it had safely descended the Lift. We then arrived at Medina, and I stayed with Abu Bakr’s children, and [Abu Bakr] went to the Prophet. The latter was then busy building the mosque and our homes around it, where he [later] housed his wives. We stayed in Abu Bakr’s house for a few days; then Abu Bakr asked [the Prophet] "O Messenger of God, what prevents you from consummating the marriage with your wife?" The Prophet said "The bridal gift (sadaq)." Abu Bakr gave him the bridal gift, twelve and a half ounces [of gold], and the Prophet sent for us. He consummated our marriage in my house, the one where I live now and where he passed away.
Al-Tabari, Vol. 39, pp. 171-173, See also: Sahih Bukhari 5:58:234

Your in denial of reality and now you will say anything to defend the immoral and harmful actions of your false Prophet! You will go to any length to not accept reality!

Search 4 Truth said...

Umm Ruman said that al-Mut‘im b. ‘Adi had asked ‘A’ishah’s hand for his son, but Abu Bakr had not promised anything. Abu Bakr left and went to Mut‘im while his wife, mother of the son for whom he had asked ‘A’ishah’s hand, was with him. She said, "O son of Abu Quhafah, perhaps we could marry our son to your daughter if you could make him leave his religion and bring him in to the religion which you practice." He turned to her husband al-Mut‘im and said, "What is she saying?" He replied, "She says [what you have heard]." Abu Bakr left, [realizing that] God had [just] removed the problem he had in his mind. He said to Khawlah, "Call the Messenger of God." She called him and he came. Abu Bakr married [‘A’ishah] to him when she was [only] six years old.
Al-Tabari, Vol. 9, pp. 129-130
‘A’ishah states: We came to Medina and Abu Bakr took up quarters in al-Sunh among the Banu al-Harith b. al-Khazraj. The Messenger of God came to our house and men and women of the Ansar gathered around him. My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. Jumaymah, my nurse, took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door, she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was then brought [in] while the Messenger of God was sitting on a bed in our house. [My mother] made me sit on his lap and said, "These are your relatives. May God bless you with them and bless them with you!" Then the men and women got up and left. The Messenger of God consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old. Neither a camel nor a sheep was slaughtered on behalf of me. Only Sa‘d b. ‘Ubaidah sent a bowl of food which he used to send to the Messenger of God.
Al-Tabari, Vol. 9, pp. 130-131

Bring any source that states her age other than six or seven! Anything. We will all be waiting!

Search 4 Truth said...

This is a classic Straw man. There is no requirement in Islam for multiple narrations. Even a single sahih hadith is sufficient to establish Islamic laws and practices.
Shaykh Gibril Haddad also debunks the claim that most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn Urwah.
Try more than eleven authorities among the Tabi`in that reported it directly from `A'isha, not counting the other major Companions that reported the same, nor other major Successors that reported it from other than `A'isha.
Gibril Haddad

Another Straw man. There is no requirement for a hadith to be narrated in Medina for it to be considered sahih. Also, many events in the Prophet’s life were narrated by single narratives as well. Does that make them invalid? No. To demand multiple, independent narrations from Medinans is just setting up a standard that does not exist – i.e. a straw man.
Shaykh Haddad also refutes this argument by listing the people from Medina who reported this event.
Al-Zuhri also reports it from `Urwa, from `A'isha; so does `Abd Allah ibn Dhakwan, both major Madanis. So is the Tabi`i Yahya al-Lakhmi who reports it from her in the Musnad and in Ibn Sa`d's Tabaqat. So is Abu Ishaq Sa`d ibn Ibrahim who reports it from Imam al-Qasim ibn Muhammad, one of the Seven Imams of Madina, from `A'isha. All the narratives of this event have been reported. In addition to the above four Madinese Tabi`in narrators, Sufyan ibn `Uyayna from Khurasan and `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya from Tabarayya in Palestine both report it.
Gibril Haddad

Ya`qub said: "Trustworthy, thoroughly reliable (thiqa thabt), above reproach except after he went to Iraq, at which time he narrated overly from his father and was criticized for it." Notice that Ya`qub does not exactly endorse that criticism.
As for Malik, he reports over 100 hadiths from Hisham as is evident in the two Sahihs and Sunan! to the point that al-Dhahabi questions the authenticity of his alleged criticism of Hisham.
Indeed, none among the hadith Masters endorsed these reservations since they were based solely on the fact that Hisham in his last period (he was 71 at the time of his last trip to Iraq), for the sake of brevity, would say, "My father, from `A'isha? (abi `an `A'isha)" and no longer pronounced, "narrated to me (haddathani)".
Al-Mizzi in Tahdhib al-Kamal (30:238) explained that it became a foregone conclusion for the Iraqis that Hisham did not narrate anything from his father except what he had heard directly from him.
Ibn Hajar also dismisses the objections against Hisham ibn `Urwa as negligible in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (11:45), saying: "It was clear enough to the Iraqis that he did not narrate from his father other than what he had heard directly from him".
In fact, to say that "narratives reported by Hisham ibn `Urwa are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq" is major nonsense as that would eliminate all narrations of Ayyub al-Sakhtyani from him since Ayyub was a Basran Iraqi, and those of Abu `Umar al-Nakha`i who was from Kufa, and those of Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman from Kufa (the Shaykh of Abu Hanifa), and those of Hammad ibn Salama and Hammad ibn Zayd both from Basra, and those of Sufyan al-Thawri from Basra, and those of Shu`ba in Basra, all of whom narrated from Hisham!
Gibril Haddad

Foolster41 said...

Oops, it looks like Zath is forced once again to jetison a Hadith that doesn't fit in with his westernized Muslim view, so it it goes! Now the Hadiths that say Aisha was 9 when she consumed her marriage were wrong, she was 15! Here I had thought Muslim and Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim were reliable, but out they go if they don't coform to westernized Islam!

Of course, I've never heard before these hadiths being rejecred, and I wonder what classical and modern scholars (and which mainstream sect they belong to) that would agree with this view? It seems to me accepted text by Muslims keep shrinking!

Foolster41 said...

Search4Truth: You bring up another good point, if multiple narrations are required, even from who are considered respected, the number of hadiths that are reliable topple even more! Zaith has committed a MASSIVE innovation! It seems westernized Muslims in defending Islam can't help but accidently step over the precipice of Kuffir!

Samatar Mohamed said...

"No I am very consistent. You are just incapable of grasping or accepting my arguments because they destroy your lack of logic and inconsistency.”

Haha, nice one. I’m the one lacking knowledge and consistency. My simple argument is that women marrying at a young age was a common practice all over the world and that I’m not going to condemn every society in history for this practice simply because it is very possible that women might have developed physically and emotionally at a much faster pace than today. There are reasons people married long time ago like the life expectancy was much shorter back then compared to now. If my argument that we shouldn’t condemn all of history because we aren’t fully in their situation and that we do not fully understand their circumstances than sure, say I am illogical. But you are the one condemning all of our past generations of rape/pedophilia because of something that is not beneficial, tolerable, and acceptable in society today.

“Show me the evidence from the Bible that Mary was twelve when she married. Dont show me some Catholics opinion. I am not Catholic. And Mary was a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus. LOL!”

LOL, I know Mary was a virgin before she became pregnant with Jesus (pbuh), where did I say otherwise. I think you must have misread something I wrote. Regarding the catholic source on mary, I know you do not follow the catholic faith but they have no reason for lying about the age of Mary, hence why I brought it up. They might be wrong but they are the best source regarding the age of Marry.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samatar

First of all your assertion that children matured much earlier is NOT a fact. It is a claim with no evidence to support your assertion. You have not provided one iota of evidence. While i on the other hand have.

We know today through science, both social ad physical that sex with a child of nine years of age is premature and harmful both physically and mentally.

people in the past did many things that in todays society we would deem inappropriate, unwise and harmful. That doesnt mean that they did it with the intention to harm.

But today we know it was harmful.

So Mohamed and your Allah should have known better. Mohamed should NOT have followed the customs of the day. He should have corrected the inappropriate customs. After all he is suppose to be the perfect example. But instead of changing this harmful practiced he married a child of six in which the Jews had established the minimum age of twelve.


I am going to explain this as simply as possible. Because you clearly are incapable of objective reasoning and critical thinking.

Your argument is that Mohamed was a man of his time and followed the customs.

But you also argue that Mohamed is the example for all mankind for all time.

So which is it?

He cannot be both.

The Quran clearly says he is the perfect example.

Now if he is the perfect example than marrying a six year old and having sex with a nine year old is good for all time.

Unless your going to admit he is NOT the perfect example for all time.

The Quran says there is NO age restriction at all. NONE! ZERO!

Yes the people in past generations who married children were misguided!

But NOt ALL people did it! You act as if everyone was going around marrying children! And the Jews had established the age of twelve and a half. Which is more appropriate and scientifically justifiable. its DOUBLE the age of SIX!

Samater what in the world is wrong with you? ISLAM! Thats whats wrong with you!

No they are NOT the best source. What makes them the best source? Because you say they are the best source? And they did not say it is a fact. They say possibly!

They are not my source and there is no evidence they are the best source. LOL! You say that because you think it helps your argument!

But it doesnt! Twelve is twice the age of Aisha! And three plus nine is twelve!

So if Aisha had her menses at nine she would have been twelve by the time here reproductive organs fully matured! GET IT?

Islam has destroyed your cognitive abilities!

Search 4 Truth said...

@ foolster

There desperation and hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me!

If one argument doesnt work. Throw something else out there and hope it sticks!


Straw man, red herrings, logical fallacies, Citing irrelevant facts or logic, Changing the subject, False premise, Unqualified expert opinion etc...

It never ends when you deal with Muslims! Im waiting for the death threats.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samatar

A century ago, children worked down mines, up chimneys and in factories. Child marriage is just another example of the type of Child abuse that has occurred in the past.

Another thing to bear in mind are the dangers of girls getting pregnant just after puberty before they are fully grown. Most girls are not physically mature until their mid teens when their pelvis reaches adult size. If it were somehow possible for a nine year old to get pregnant, just imagine how difficult and dangerous birth could be.

Just remember that in the past, we not only had very young brides but also very high rates of death among mothers in childbirth.

All of the civilized world can recognize this as a good thing that we k=no longer marry children.

The exception is Muslims! Because they have to cling to the lie that Mohamed was a great example. Even in light of the fact that Islam gives NO age restriction.


There is absolutely No evidence that children matured earlier, nor is there evidence that children mature earlier in hotter climates,. Which i am sure is the next ridiculous claim they will make.

Foolster41 said...

@Samatar: I'm not sure what you really want. It seems search4truth is being consistant since he IS condemning, as you constantly ask to condemn pediaphelia in the past! You keep repeating this as if search4truth is being inconsistant in condemning mohammad and not others, when he REPEATIDLY has, but you (as I pointed out) ignore these responses!


Again, you are bneing inconsistant! Catholics acount for a small fraction of Christians world wide, and the majority of Christians see mary's age as speculation (i.e. there is currently no solid proof that she was any specific age, and the scriptures do not say.).
and yet you say they are the best source of the age of Mary! Would you then accept sources from small minority sects in Islam? I think not! Are you seriously saying we should accept the catholic sources as being reliable when there is no solid basis? Get real!

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Zaith

nobody said that sex with a child will expose them to STD's. Where did you get that from?

What are you talking about? The only way to get STD's is by having sex with someone with STD's/

STD's do not discriminate by age.

What does the age of anyone have to do with contracting STD's?

LOL! This is amazing! ''It is absolutely fascinating speaking to Muslims! Scary, but fascinating to see what Islam does to the mind and soul!

SD17 said...

@flooster41: you are incorrect in stating that Catholics account for a fraction of Christains worldwide, infact it's just the opposite, they account for nearly half (over 1 billion) of the 2.2 billion Christians from all denominations.

@Samatar: you are consistent in so much so as proving a strawman argument to justify Mohammed marriage to Aisha at the age of 6 yrs.........as for your point to Search 4 Truth on not condemning every society because of their past reasons and views on why women married young, well I personally wouldn't call it condemning, rather I see it as cultural progression, as a culture they considered, not consider marriage to young girls as normal from both a religious and secular perspective, esentially the Man-made laws evolved with our morality, but from yours and every other muslims perspective Mohammed's act is acceptable as he is al-Insān al-Kāmil (the perfect human) and uswa hasana (an excellent model of conduct) according to the Shari'ah (consisting of the Qur'an and Sunnah) which are seen as Allah's unalterable holy law., and so to attempt to change it would be considered blasphemous, as it constitutes Bid'ah, something which was forbidden by Muhammad himself.

Regarding Mary's age as per Catholic sources. You are right there is no need for Catholics to lie about Mary's age because their is no offical teaching from the Catholic Church about it, its pure speculation, even the website that makes the claim (new advent) makes it clear this is not an official teaching of the church

Foolster41 said...

@SD17: Oh, you're right. I think I misread a number.

Jan said...

Search 4 truth, you made great comments in response to Muslims defending Islam!

I myself like to frequent Alisina.org, and you almost certainly heard of Ali Sina. On (t)his website there is a Muslim commentator, Aminriadh, who is a bit like you, but in reverse. He makes to me really shocking scathing derogatory remarks about Ali Sina and his book, articles and other anti-Islam-posters.

And he does it with the help of providing evidence and especially he relies on logic. He is not so much into defending Islamic doctrine as he is in DEBUNKING as false or meaningless or irrelevent EVERYTHING that "counterjihadists" say. He much appeals to ridicule, and the border between ridiculing comments and commenters is blurred in his responses.

I was very impressed by your reasoning skills, evidence and logic and also your passion. And I would love to see you take on the formidable Muslim opponent Aminriadh on Alisina.org some day!!! If you like challenges, he really is a great challenge for you.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Jan

Thanks. Post the link and I would welcome the opportunity. You can post it here and I will be there shortly. Looking forward to it! Thanks again

simple_truth said...

Samatar Mohamed said...
-------------------------------------------->>>>>> quote
"No I am very consistent. You are just incapable of grasping or accepting my arguments because they destroy your lack of logic and inconsistency.”

Samatar: Haha, nice one. I’m the one lacking knowledge and consistency. My simple argument is that women marrying at a young age was a common practice all over the world and that I’m not going to condemn every society in history for this practice simply because it is very possible that women might have developed physically and emotionally at a much faster pace than today. There are reasons people married long time ago like the life expectancy was much shorter back then compared to now. If my argument that we shouldn’t condemn all of history because we aren’t fully in their situation and that we do not fully understand their circumstances than sure, say I am illogical. But you are the one condemning all of our past generations of rape/pedophilia because of something that is not beneficial, tolerable, and acceptable in society today.

-------------------------------------------->>>>>> response

I don’t know of any Jewish sources where marriage of young females was below 12. Never was it any younger as far as I know. Anyways, marriage of young females was to other young males, whereby their ages were more in line with each other. Such marriages of those close in age was acceptable. None of these standards were deemed as moral examples for all times as with Islamic examples laid down by Mohammad and Allah.

As far your argument goes, it doesn’t really do anything to exonerate Mohammad’s actions since he was a prophet (unlike these examples you used) who is also set as the perfect example of morality and religion for all times. The Qu’ran continually tells Muslims to follow his deeds and actions as the norm of a Muslim’s conduct and life. The bottom line is that Mohammad married a 6-year old and consummated the marriage at 9; so, that is what most reliable Islamic sources say. I don’t see how you can get around that without destroying the authority of trustworthy Islamic documents.

In some ways I can understand your point about condemning past cultures, religions, etc. for their seeming immorality; but, you can’t just dismiss the problem by allowing justification for those actions that are truly problematic for modern times. Just imagine that lying, stealing, cheating, coveting, lust, murder, etc. were the norm in past societies; would you then conclude that these acts were OK and can’t be judged as immoral and sinful today? Morality isn’t relative. Some things are wrong regardless of time; otherwise, God would not be able to judge us in absolute terms. He would have to have some kind of relative scale. He would have to let off murders from earlier times because they could claim societal ignorance or even moral relativism since everyone else was doing it too. Just imagine that!

simple_truth said...

Samatar Mohamed said...

-------------------------------------------->>>>>> quote

“Show me the evidence from the Bible that Mary was twelve when she married. Dont show me some Catholics opinion. I am not Catholic. And Mary was a virgin when she became pregnant with Jesus. LOL!”

Samatar: LOL, I know Mary was a virgin before she became pregnant with Jesus (pbuh), where did I say otherwise. I think you must have misread something I wrote. Regarding the catholic source on mary, I know you do not follow the catholic faith but they have no reason for lying about the age of Mary, hence why I brought it up. They might be wrong but they are the best source regarding the age of Marry.
-------------------------------------------->>>>>> response

There is no authoritative Christian source for Mary’s age, which is unlike that of Islamic sources that fix Aisha’s age at 6 for marriage and 9 for consummation Using Mary as a counter example doesn’t help the Islamic case at all for at least two reasons: 1) Mary’s marriage did not involve a presumed prophet that legitimized his marriage and sexual relations with her as an example to be emulated. Reality is that there is no prohibition given either by Mohammad or the Qu’ran to not follow Mohammad’s example of marriages to six-year olds and intercourse with nine-year olds. 2) Mary’s conception didn’t involve human intervention; so, sexual intercourse or any stigma of Mary being young at conception is a flawed and irrelevant argument. Even the Qu’ran recognizes that Mary’s conception was miraculous, in that it didn’t involve any human intervention.

Can you please explain to me that Mary’s example and any example of any society participating in marriage to young girls less than 10 years old would have any significance in any moral objection to Mary’s pregnancy or Mohammad's actions? Remember that Mohammad’s examples are for Muslims to emulate for the rest of time. He is the perfect role model for morality and religion. You can't reject your prophet on the basis that it is wrong/immoral today and at the same time, you can't justify his actions as moral/right because he did this in the 7th century unless you want to argue moral relativism. At best, you have a very difficult dilemna to deal with. At worst, you have to accuse your prophet of sin/immorality if ther is no concept of absolute morality.

Samatar Mohamed said...

@searchfortruth

“First of all your assertion that children matured much earlier is NOT a fact. It is a claim with no evidence to support your assertion. You have not provided one iota of evidence. While i on the other hand have.

We know today through science, both social ad physical that sex with a child of nine years of age is premature and harmful both physically and mentally.

people in the past did many things that in todays society we would deem inappropriate, unwise and harmful. That doesnt mean that they did it with the intention to harm.”


Again you misread what I said. I did not assert that women developed differently back then. I said that it was a possibility that they developed differently. For your claim to have any validity, you would have to show that females developed the same sexually back than, as they do now. Or else the facts you are stating becomes null and void because an argument from ignorance is a useless argument. See, science proves today that marrying a 9 to 12 year old is harmful to her because they examine the development of females, and through this they formed their conclusion. But at least from what I have heard, their examination and evidence is only bound to this era because obviously they cannot test the development of women 14 centuries ago. I agree with you that people in the past have done things morally wrong such as murder, stealing, etc... But we don't need science to show that murder or stealing is wrong. We don't need scientists to examine murder and the affect it has on humans (death) and than come to the conclusion that it is a wrong act. However, the problem with comparing murder to sexual relations with a 9 year old is because one is clearly wrong no matter what, but the other hinges on the development of the female. If women did indeed develop faster back then compared to today, then surely you would agree with me that this would be an example of an act that was moral at one time, that became immoral now. I even brought the example of slavery which was an act that was moral with regulations, but is immoral today. See, that is why I'm saying we are not in the situation or times of those living centuries before us. For example, Lets say 15 centuries from now females start to hit puberty around 18 years of age, Than clearly, having sexual relations with a women even at the age of 15 or 16 becomes immoral because they haven't developed to the point where they are ready for sexual relations. Would that make us living in the 21st century condemned of allowing rape or pedophilia? Obviously not. I don't know why you are having such a difficult time grasping this very basic point, but hopefully I have made myself clearer this time.

“Your argument is that Mohamed was a man of his time and followed the customs.

But you also argue that Mohamed is the example for all mankind for all time.

So which is it?

He cannot be both.

The Quran clearly says he is the perfect example.”

I don’t know how many times I have to answer this question. The prophet (pbuh) was the perfect example regarding religious matters. Anytime muslims have a dispute in something religious (I,e. prayer), we go back to the prophet (pbuh) because he is the perfect example regarding this. But the prophet (pbuh) was also human, and he liked and disliked things just like us. I already explained earlier that the prophet (pbuh) disliked eating lizards, it is not a religious matter, and hence, why we do not need to follow the prophet (pbuh) regarding non religious duties. We also know the prophet (pbuh) married a woman 15 years older than him (Khadija). Clearly, who the prophet marries is not a religious matter, so the conclusion follows what I stated. There are things that were once moral, with restrictions such as slavery which has now become immoral. Oh, and regarding the catholic source on Mary, sure I’ll drop the argument since you hold no authority to the source. But I will say that I do not see why they would just lie about the age of mary.

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samatar

You are so incredibly stubborn and ridiculous it is difficult to tolerate.

First of all it is established that nine years of age is to young. NOW! TODAY! We know through science that a having sex with a child at nine is both physically and mentally damaging for a child!

We have no evidence to question that it was any different in any other time in history!

You are creating the straw man argument that it was possible that in the past it may have been. But there is no evidence to support your even making that assumption.

So your argument is null and void.

Mohamed is suppose to be the perfect example for all man for all time. So his marriage to a six year old should hold up for all time. Not just 1400 hundred years ago.

So Muslims for all eternity can reflect and point to mohameds marriage to a six year okld and intercourse with a nine year old as a choice!

BECAUSE MOHAMED DID IT!

Are your brain dead or what? I cant understand how your little mind works!

That is a false premise! There is absolutely NO evidence for your premise!

And if Mohamed were speaking to Allah then Allah should have made it clear so that future generations do not follow Mohamed example of marrying and having intercourse with a child,

Allah and Mohamed were very irresponsible for future generations!

MAN are you THICK!

Oh so Mohamed was the perfect example of only religious matters?

You sir are a LIAR!

Show me evidence to support your claim that his actions were not to be followed!

You are making it up as you go along!

And the eating lizrds as someone already pointed out was a personal preference. This is regarding marriage to Muslim girls/children! Read the responses!

This is regarding marriage! And according to the Quran there is NO age restriction!

YOU LIAR!

How many times do i have to prove it to you?

Search 4 Truth said...



* تفسير Tafsir al-Jalalayn
{ وَٱللاَّئِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ ٱلْمَحِيضِ مِن نِّسَآئِكُمْ إِنِ ٱرْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلاَثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَٱللاَّئِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ وَأُوْلاَتُ ٱلأَحْمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ وَمَن يَتَّقِ ٱللَّهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِ يُسْراً }

And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months


* تفسير Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs
{ وَٱللاَّئِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ ٱلْمَحِيضِ مِن نِّسَآئِكُمْ إِنِ ٱرْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلاَثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَٱللاَّئِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ وَأُوْلاَتُ ٱلأَحْمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ وَمَن يَتَّقِ ٱللَّهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِ يُسْراً }

(And for such of your women as despair of menstruation) because of old age, (if ye doubt) about their waiting period, (their period (of waiting) shall be three months) upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months.

Ibn Kathir writes regarding 65:4

, "The `Iddah is made up of cleanliness and the menstrual period." So he divorces her while it is clear that she is pregnant, or he does not due to having sex, or since he does not know if she is pregnant or not. This is why the scholars said that there are two types of divorce, one that conforms to the Sunnah and another innovated. The divorce that conforms to the Sunnah is one where the husband pronounces one divorce to his wife when she is not having her menses and without having had sexual intercourse with her after the menses ended. One could divorce his wife when it is clear that she is pregnant. As for the innovated divorce, it occurs when one divorces his wife when she is having her menses, or after the menses ends, has sexual intercourse with her and then divorces her, even though he does not know if she became pregnant or not. There is a third type of divorce, which is neither a Sunnah nor an innovation where one divorces A YOUNG WIFE WHO HAS NOT BEGUN TO HAVE MENSES, the wife who is beyond the age of having menses, and divorcing one's wife before the marriage was consummated. (Source; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Al-Tabari said regarding 65:4

The interpretation of the verse "And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise". He said: The same applies to the 'idaah for girls who do not menstruate because they are too young, if their husbands divorce them after consummating the marriage with them.

Tafseer al-Tabari, 14/142 (Source: Islam Q&A (www.islam-qa.com)
(Question #12708: Is it acceptable to marry a girl who has not yet started her menses?)

Regarding sex with prepubescent children, Abu-Ala’ Maududi states:

"Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl at this age but it is permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur’an has held as permissible." (Maududi, volume 5, p. 620, note 13, emphasis added)

EVERY SINGLE THING YOU SAY IS EITHER A LIE< FABRICATION< OR A LOGICAL FALLACY! We are having a difficult time understanding it because it is all nonsense!

Search 4 Truth said...

THE SUNNAH AND PROPHET MUHAMMAD'S STATUS AS ROLE MODEL
Islamic scholars state that the terms sabil, sirat al-mustaqim and uswa al-hasana, which are mentioned in the Holy Quran, in the hadiths of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and in the words of his Companions, are words and terms that represent the concept of the sunnah. All these terms indicate the path to be followed and the model to be taken as an example. The name of this road is the sunnah, and it is collectively followed by the Companions of Prophet Muhammad and the believers.

http://www.lastprophet.info/the-importance-of-prophet-muhammad-and-his-status-as-a-role-model

The Qur'aan is composed of the actual words of Allaah, whereas the Sunnah is expressed through the words, actions and approvals of the Prophet Muhammad. Another difference is that the Qur'aan is recited formally in the prayers whereas the Sunnah is not.

As a way of life, Islaam is perfect and complete. However, such are the times that we live in, that some of the liberal elite from the Muslims choose to deny aspects of Islaam to suit their own desires. It is even more sad, that many choose to deny the Sunnah in particular. However this is clearly wrong, as the saying of the Prophet indicates: “I have been given the Qur'aan and something similar to it besides it. Yet a time will come when a man leaning on his couch will say ‘follow the Qur'aan only; what you find in it permissible, take as permissible, and what you find as forbidden, take as forbidden’. But verily what the Messenger of Allaah has forbidden is like what Allaah has forbidden”[1]. The words of the Arabian Prophet ring truthfully in our ears again.

http://www.islaamnet.com/whatissunnah.html

Quote " The prophet (pbuh) was the perfect example regarding religious matters. Anytime muslims have a dispute in something religious (I,e. prayer), we go back to the prophet (pbuh) because he is the perfect example regarding this. But the prophet (pbuh) was also human, and he liked and disliked things just like us"

The behaviour of the Prophet (peace be upon him) provides a model for us to
emulate. He had a keen sense of his position and status, realising that his practice
was observed and reported so that Muslims would follow his example in all
situations. This is required in order to live an Islamic life that steers away from
everything that is unacceptable to God or offensive to other people.

http://www.teachislam.com/dmdocuments/87/Prophet%20Muhammad%20The%20Best%20Role%20Model.pdf

YOUR A LIAR AND DELUSIONAL SAMATAR!

Search 4 Truth said...

So Samatar Mohamed did something that Allah would not have approved of? Like having sex with a nine year old?

Yes or no? And if he just did it as a personal preference, then what does that say about him?

If his actions were not of Islam then how is he the perfect example?

Sunna!

The word Sunnah (سنة [ˈsunna], plural سنن sunan [ˈsunan], Arabic) is derived from the root (سن [sa-n-na] Arabic) meaning smooth and easy flow [of water] or direct flow path. The word literally means a clear and well trodden path. In the discussion of the sources of religion, Sunnah denotes the practice of Prophet Muhammad that he taught and practically instituted as a teacher of the sharī‘ah and the best exemplar.[1] According to Muslim belief, this practice is to be adhered to in fulfilling the divine injunctions, carrying out religious rites and moulding life in accord with the will of God. To institute these practices was, the Qur’ān states, a part of the Prophet’s responsibility as a Messenger of God[Quran 3:164][Quran 33:21]
The sunnah of Muhammad includes his specific words, habits, practices, and silent approvals:[2] it is significant because it addresses ways of life dealing with friends, family and government.[2] Recording sunnah was an Arabian tradition and, once people converted to Islam, they brought this custom to their religion.[3] The sunnah is consulted after referring to the Qur'an, if the issue is not addressed there. The term "Sunni" denotes those who claim to practice these usages, as part of the Ummah.


Any more lies Samatar?

Search 4 Truth said...

@ Samaatr

And finally. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS MAKING THE ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE!

LOL! I am making the argument from fact.

You are making the assertion that children may have matured earlier.

You are doing exactly whatnyou are claiming that I am doing.

It is fascinating what Islam does to the mind.

Quote " For your claim to have any validity, you would have to show that females developed the same sexually back than, as they do now. Or else the facts you are stating becomes null and void because an argument from ignorance is a useless argument."

No Samatar. YOU WOULD HAVE TO SHOW THAT CHILDREN MATURED EARLIER OR ELSE YOU ARE MAKING THE ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE.

YOU ARE UNBELIEVABLE! AND A HYPOCRITE!

Argument from ignorance (appeal to ignorance, argumentum ad ignorantiam) – assuming that a claim is true (or false) because it has not been proven false (true) or cannot be proven false (true)

i XCn prove that sex with a nine year old is harmful.

YOU ARE DOING WHAT YOU ASSERT I AM DOING!

I am going to keep repeating this because it wont sink in your muslim mind!

You are also committing these as well.

Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam) – signifies that it has been discussed extensively until nobody cares to discuss it anymore.

Begging the question (petitio principii) – where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises.[14]
(shifting the) Burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false.
Circular reasoning – when the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with.
Circular cause and consequence – where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause.
Suppressed correlative – where a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible.
False attribution – an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument.
Fallacy of quoting out of context (contextomy) – refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original context in a way that distorts the source's intended meaning.

I cannot believe this! I am in awe of how your mind works!