Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Was Muhammad a Pedophile?

For the Western mind, one of the most disturbing facts about Islam is that its founder had a sexual relationship with a nine-year-old girl. Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha has even led some critics to refer to him as a “pedophile.” This is, of course, extremely upsetting to Muslims, who view their prophet as the ideal servant of God and as the greatest example of what a man should strive to be (see Qur’an 33:21). Nevertheless, Muhammad’s relationship with a young girl presents a problem for Muslims, especially for those who want to share their faith with others.

Some Muslims are so embarrassed by their prophet’s marriage to a prepubescent girl that they are attempting to rewrite history, claiming that, contrary to all available sources, Aisha must have been much older than history demands. Other Muslims appeal to moral relativism, suggesting that, while sex with young girls may be wrong today, it wasn’t wrong in seventh-century Arabia. Still other Muslims try to offer morally sufficient reasons for their prophet to marry Aisha (i.e., some good state of affairs that could only be attained through Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha).

Since pedophilia is one of the most serious charges that can be leveled against a person, the term “pedophile” should not be used lightly. With that said, let us carefully examine Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha, recalling the Western principle that a man is innocent until proven guilty.

FIRST MUSLIM DEFENSE: Aisha was older than nine when Muhammad first had sex with her.

Faced with the arguments of Western critics, Muslim apologists sometimes creatively piece together information from various accounts in an attempt to deny that Aisha was as young as critics often claim. Maulana Muhammad Ali writes:

The popular misconception as to Aishah’s age may be removed here. . . . Isabah, speaking of the Holy Prophet’s daughter Fatimah, says that she was about five years older than Aishah. It is a well-established fact that Fatimah was born when the Ka’bah was being rebuilt, i.e., five years before the Call. Aishah was therefore born in the year of the Call or a little before it, and she could not have been less than ten years at the time of her marriage with the Holy Prophet in the tenth year of the Call. . . . And as the period between her marriage and its consummation was not less than five years, because the consummation took place in the second year of the Flight, it follows that she could not have been less than fifteen at that time. The popular account that she was six years at marriage and nine years at the time of consummation is decidedly not correct because it supposes the period between the marriage and its consummation to be only three years, and this is historically wrong. (Ali, pp. 183-184)

RESPONSE: The historical evidence for Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha when she was still a child is too strong to be ignored.

Notice that Ali hasn’t offered a single quotation from any Muslim source claiming that Aisha was a teenager when Muhammad first had sex with her. Why not? Because there are no such sources. The problem with Ali’s selective and carefully edited defense (other than the complete lack of references) is that it ignores the numerous accounts we possess which record Aisha’s age when her marriage was consummated. Many of these accounts are from Aisha herself. Indeed, the evidence for Muhammad’s marriage to the young Aisha is as strong as the evidence for just about any other fact in Islam. We have copious traditions from Islam’s most trusted historical sources reporting Muhammad’s marriage proposal when Aisha was six or seven years old, as well as his consummation of that marriage when she was nine:

Sahih al-Bukhari 3896—Narrated Hisham’s father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Al-Madina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he wrote the marriage (wedding) contract with Aishah when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.

Sahih al-Bukhari 5158—Narrated Urwa: 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 Muslim 3310—Aisha reported: Allah’s Apostle married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Sahih Muslim 3311—Aisha reported that Allah’s Apostle married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

Sunan Abu Dawud 2116—Aishah said: The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old. (The narrator Sulaiman said: Or six years.) He had intercourse with me when I was nine years old.

This is just a sample of the early Muslim traditions reporting Muhammad’s marriage to the young Aisha, but it is sufficient to show that she certainly wasn’t fifteen years old at the time of the consummation, as some Muslims claim.

(For a fuller treatment of the early evidence regarding Muhammad’s marriage to the young Aisha, click here.)

In addition to traditions concerning Aisha’s age, various ahadith also provide details about how the relationship began and progressed:

Sahih al-Bukhari 3895—Narrated Aishah that the Prophet said to her, “You have been shown to me twice in my dream. I saw you pictured on a piece of silk and someone said (to me), ‘This is your wife.’ When I uncovered the picture, I saw that it was yours. I said, ‘If this is from Allah it will be accomplished.’”

After having this dream about Aisha (who couldn’t have been more than six years old at the time), Muhammad proceeded to ask her father Abu Bakr for her hand in marriage. Abu Bakr understandably objected at first, but Muhammad was able to persuade him to consent.

Sahih al-Bukhari 5081—Narrated Urwa: The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for Aishah’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 (Aishah) is lawful for me to marry.”

The marriage contract was subsequently written. However, Aisha became extremely ill, so she wasn’t taken to his house for consummation until three years later:

Sahih al-Bukhari 3894—Narrated Aishah: My marriage (wedding) contract with the Prophet was written when I was a girl of six (years). We came to Al-Madina and we dismounted at the place of Bani Al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on, my hair grew (again) and my mother, Umm Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became normal, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Once Aisha was a part of Muhammad’s household, she became his favorite wife, even after he had married several other women. Indeed, Muhammad’s other wives had to plead with him for equal treatment (to no avail):

Sahih al-Bukhari 2581—Narrated Urwa that Aishah said: “The wives of Allah’s Messenger were in two groups.” Urwa added: One group consisted of Aishah, Hafsa, Safiyya and Sauda; and the other group consisted of Umm Salama and the other wives of Allah’s Messenger. The Muslims knew that Allah’s Messenger loved Aishah, so if any of them had a gift and wished to give to Allah’s Messenger, he would delay it till Allah’s Messenger had come to Aishah’s home and then he would send his gift to Allah’s Messenger in her home. The group of Umm Salama discussed the matter together and decided that Umm Salama should request Allah’s Messenger to tell the people to send their gifts to him in whatever wife’s house he was. Umm Salama told Allah’s Messenger of what they had said, but he did not reply. Then they (those wives) asked Umm Salama about it. She said, “He did not say anything to me.” They asked her to talk to him again. She talked to him again when she met him on her day, but he gave no reply. When they asked her, she replied that he had given no reply. They said to her, “Talk to him till he gives you a reply.” When it was her turn, she talked to him again. He then said to her, “Do not hurt me regarding Aishah, as the Divine Revelations do not come to me on any of the beds except that of Aishah.”

Thus, Aisha held a place of special favor among Muhammad’s wives, which caused a great deal of tension among the women. Since it may be taken as historically certain that Aisha was very young when her marriage to Muhammad was consummated, critics sometimes charge that Muhammad’s preference for Aisha reveals his preference for young girls. We find some amount of support for this view in Sahih al-Bukhari:

Sahih al-Bukhari 2967—Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah: . . . When I took the permission of Allah’s Messenger, he asked me whether I had married a virgin or a matron and I replied that I had married a matron. He said, “Why hadn’t you married a virgin who would have played with you, and you would have played with her?” I replied, “O Allah’s Messenger! My father died (or was martyred) and I have some young sisters, so I felt it not proper that I should marry a young girl like them who would neither teach them manners nor serve them.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 6130—Narrated Aishah: 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 Messenger 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 Aishah at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.)

Nevertheless, it must be noted that, if Muhammad had truly been obsessed with young girls, he could have taken many others as his wives. Muhammad eventually held complete power in Medina and later in Mecca, yet he didn’t build himself a harem of young girls. Since there isn’t enough evidence to support the charge that Muhammad had a perverted obsession with prepubescent girls, critics should be careful when making such a claim.

To sum up, the evidence makes it abundantly clear (1) that Muhammad had sexual intercourse with Aisha when she was very young, (2) that this relationship was pursued by Muhammad after he had dreamed about her, and (3) that she was his favorite wife. With so much historical data concerning the age of Aisha, it should be obvious that Muslims who deny her young age do so out of embarrassment.

SECOND MUSLIM DEFENSE: Morality is relative to one’s culture.

Another method of defending Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha is the Muslim appeal to moral relativism. According to this view, since different cultures have different standards of morality, it is wrong to criticize the standards of others based on one’s own ethical system. Consider the following responses by Maqsood Jafri and Abdur Rahman Squires:

The Arabs practiced polygamy. In the wake of custom the Prophet Muhammad married some ladies. Hazrat Khadijah was fifteen years older [than] him at the time of marriage. Most of them were his age sake. In his fifties he married Hazrat Aiysha, the daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr when she was just bloomed to youth. Hinting this marriage some of the orientalists charge Prophet Muhammad as a “pedophile”. It was not only the Prophet Muhammad who had married a young girl [but] even the father of Hazrat Aiysha, Hazrat Abu Bakr had also married a young girl in his sixties. It was . . . part of the prevalent Arab culture and custom. Hence not to be taken seriously. (Source)

The large majority of Islamic jurists say that the earliest time which a marriage can be consummated is at the onset of sexual maturity (bulugh), meaning puberty. Since this was the norm of all Semitic cultures and it still is the norm of many cultures today—it is certainly not something that Islam invented. (Source)

Thus, since the practice of marrying young girls was “part of the prevalent Arab culture and custom,” it is “not to be taken seriously” as a criticism of Islam.

RESPONSE: Islam is utterly inconsistent with moral relativism.

This defense is truly amazing, for, when defending Muhammad’s moral perfection, Muslims often maintain that Muhammad condemned the Arab culture for its immorality. Abul A’la Mawdudi describes Muhammad’s moral stance as follows:

After spending his life in such chaste, pure and civilized manner, there comes a revolution in [Muhammad’s] being. He wearies of the darkness and ignorance, corruption, immorality, idolatry, and disorder which surround him on all sides. . . . He wants to get hold of that power with which he might bring about the downfall of the corrupt and disorderly world and lay the foundations of a new and better one. . . . He wanted to change the whole structure of society which had been handed down to them from time immemorial. (Mawdudi, pp. 53, 56)

Muslims are quick to point out immorality around the world, especially in the West. It seems, then, that they are presenting a very inconsistent message. When confronted with an immoral practice in another culture, Muslims cry out in one accord, “We condemn these practices, for they are against the eternal, perfect, and unalterable Law of God!” Yet, whenever the moral character of Muhammad is being scrutinized, Muslims suddenly say, “Don’t judge Muhammad! You should remember that he was from a different culture! Marrying young girls was common in Arabia, and it still is, thanks to Muhammad’s precedent. Different people have different moral standards, so no one should worry about Muhammad’s sexual relationship with a nine-year-old girl.”

This convenient switch from moral absolutism to moral relativism is logically unacceptable. If it is wrong to judge the practices of another culture, then both Muhammad and the Qur’an were wrong for condemning immoral practices in Arabia. But if condemning immoral practices is acceptable, then Muslim apologists need a better response to criticisms of Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha.

We should also note that, because Muhammad is described as the ideal pattern of conduct in the Qur’an (33:21), Muhammad’s actions, according to Islam, can never be wrong. In other words, if Muhammad is the pattern of conduct that Muslims are supposed to follow, and Muhammad had sex with a nine-year-old girl, then marriage to young girls can’t even be wrong in our day, since Muhammad is still the pattern of conduct for Muslims. This is precisely why the practice of marrying child-brides continues in the Muslim world. Islamic clerics recognize that the practice can’t be condemned without thereby condemning Muhammad.

THIRD MUSLIM DEFENSE: Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was part of God’s plan.

Muslim apologists have developed another answer to Muhammad’s critics, namely, that Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was part of God’s divine plan (i.e., God had an important reason for it). Consider two such responses by Abdul Hamid Siddiqi and Abdur Rahman Squires:

It should be borne in mind that, like all acts of the Holy Prophet, even this marriage had a Divine purpose behind it. Hazrat Aisha was a precocious girl and was developing both in mind and body with rapidity peculiar to such rare personalities. She was admitted to the house of the Holy Prophet just at the threshold of her puberty, the most impressionable and formative period of her life. It was the Holy Prophet who nurtured her sensibilities and directed the growth of her faculties to the most fruitful channel and thus she was made to play an eminent role in the history of Islam. Moreover, she was the only virgin lady to enter the House of the Holy Prophet and was thus very competent to share the feelings of other ladies of younger age who had numerous questions to ask from the Holy Prophet with regard to sexual ethics and morality. These ladies felt shy of asking them through the elderly wives of the Holy Prophet out of modesty. They could speak out their minds comparatively more freely to Aisha who was more or less of their own age group. (Siddiqi, Note on Sahih Muslim 1860)

Puberty is a biological sign which shows that a woman is capable of bearing children. Can anyone logically deny this? Part of the wisdom behind the Prophet Muhammad’s marriage to Aishah just after she reached puberty is to firmly establish this as a point of Islamic Law, even though it was already a cultural norm in all Semitic societies (including the one Jesus grew up in). (Source)

Here Muslim apologists argue that Muhammad married Aisha for a divine purpose. Young girls who had questions about sex needed someone to talk to, and who better for this task than the young wife of the Prophet? Further, Muhammad wanted to establish puberty as an appropriate age for marriage, so he decided to demonstrate this rule by marrying Aisha.

RESPONSE: Muslims have failed to offer a sufficient reason for God to ordain the marriage.

There are numerous problems with this line of defense. First, such a response could be used to justify nearly any behavior. Consider a husband on trial for beating his wife. When he takes the stand, he explains, “Your Honor, many women are victims of spousal abuse, and they need someone to talk to. Out of the kindness of my heart, I decided to beat my wife, so that she would be able to comfort other women whose husbands beat them.” This explanation would never be accepted (except, perhaps, in countries under Islamic rule, where Qur’an 4:34 guarantees a husband’s right to beat his wife). Besides, if Muhammad had simply outlawed sex with children instead of becoming a willing participant, little girls wouldn’t have to worry about sex, and they wouldn’t need to question Aisha.

Second, it isn’t necessary for a lawgiver to institute laws by performing actions that create a precedent. In other words, Muhammad didn’t need to marry a young girl in order establish a law about marrying girls who had reached puberty. Muhammad, as Islam’s lawgiver, could have simply issued a decree. For instance, Muhammad allowed husbands to beat their wives. Was it necessary for Muhammad to beat his wives in order to establish this as a law? Certainly not (even though he did beat Aisha in Sahih Muslim 2127). Similarly, when an American lawmaker says that killing someone in self-defense is acceptable, no one argues that the lawmaker must go out and kill someone in self-defense for his law to stand. Hence, the argument that Muhammad needed to marry a young girl to establish puberty as the appropriate age for marriage completely fails.

Third, the Muslim claim that Aisha was a “precocious child” strains the evidence. As we have seen, Aisha herself reports that, when she was taken to Muhammad’s house, she was playing on a swing with her friends. She was also still playing with dolls. Based on the evidence, Aisha sounds like a normal little girl, not like a young adult. Moreover, Muhammad didn’t marry her because she was precocious; he married her because he was dreaming about her.

Fourth, God couldn’t have been using Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha to establish puberty as the minimum age for marriage, since the Qur’an clearly allows marriage to prepubescent girls. According to Surah 2:228, if a Muslim man wants to divorce his wife, he should wait until she has gone through three monthly cycles (i.e., three periods) in order to make sure that she isn't pregnant. But the question later arose: What about wives who do not have monthly cycles? How long should their husbands wait to divorce them? The Qur'an answers this question in Surah 65:4, where it gives divorce rules for (1) women who do not have monthly cycles because they are too old, (2) girls who do not have monthly cycles because they are too young, and (3) women and girls who do not have monthly cycles because they are pregnant. The verse declares that, if Muslim men want to divorce girls who haven't yet reached puberty, they must wait three months (after having sex with them). The verse reads:

Qur'an 65:4 (Hilali-Khan)—And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubts (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, except in case of death]. And for those who are pregnant (whether they are divorced or their husbands are dead), their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is until they deliver (their burdens), and whosoever fears Allah and keeps his duty to Him, He will make his matter easy for him.

In case there is confusion about the meaning of this verse, here are three classic Muslim commentaries on 65:4:

Tafsir Ibn Kathir—Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah in (Surat) Al-Baqarah [see 2:228]. The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation. Their `Iddah is three months like those in menopause.

Tafsir al-Jalalayn—And [as for] those of your women who (read allà'ï or allà'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.

Tafsir Ibn Abbas—(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.

Hence, unless Muslims expect us to believe that God wanted Muhammad to marry Aisha in order to refute the Qur’an, they must abandon this response. (I could also point out that, according to Muslim sources, Aisha hadn’t reached puberty by the time Muhammad consummated his marriage with her. Click here for sources proving that Aisha was still prepubescent when she was taken to Muhammad’s house.)

Fifth, Muslims search for reasons that would justify Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha because they are convinced that everything Muhammad did had a divine purpose behind it. When critics point out Muhammad’s numerous murders and assassinations, Muslims claim that these violent acts were fair and just. When critics note the extent of Muhammad’s polygamy, or his participation in the slave-trade, or his countless robberies (click here for references), Muslims provide answers based on the view that Muhammad was an outstanding moral example. Similarly, when Muslims are confronted with the evidence for Muhammad’s sexual encounters with Aisha, they assume that there must have been a reason for it. They then invent reasons for Muhammad’s behavior (i.e., the other little girls needed someone to talk to about sex), and they offer these reasons as a defense of Muhammad’s morality. However, non-Muslims do not share this confidence in Muhammad’s moral perfection. When non-Muslims hear about Muhammad’s violence, his greed, his polygamy, and his support of spousal abuse, we aren’t as quick to exonerate Muhammad as Muslims are. Because of this, Muslim justifications for Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha sound hollow when presented as a defense of his actions.

Finally, Muslim explanations for Muhammad’s behavior fail to take into account the dangers that accompany sex at a young age. Many Muslims assume that, as soon as a young girl gets her first period, she is suddenly ready to bear children. This “old enough to bleed, old enough to breed” mentality, aside from being disgusting, is completely false. A nine-year-old girl isn’t ready for sex or childbirth, even if she reaches menses earlier than other little girls. Children that young are still growing. When they become pregnant, their bodies divert nutritional resources to the developing fetus, depriving the growing girls of much-needed vitamins and minerals. Further, complications often result from adolescent pregnancies, because the bodies of the young girls simply aren’t ready to give birth.

(For a discussion of child-brides, click here.)

Western nations, unfettered by blind allegiance to seventh-century Arab ethics, have long discerned the dangers posed by adolescent pregnancies. Muslim apologists often claim that marriage to young girls was common in biblical times. This may be correct, but it has nothing to do with God endorsing the practice. Whereas many Christian countries have recognized the potential harms brought on by pregnancies among adolescent girls and have raised the legal age for marriage, Muslim countries are often kept from such advancements specifically because of Muhammad. This is very interesting, for Muslims frequently claim that Muhammad was scientifically enlightened and that the Qur’an is a scientific masterpiece. In reality, Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha is causing health problems (and even death) for young girls across the Middle East and North Africa, and has been doing so for nearly fourteen centuries. The dangers have even been noted by the United Nations, which issued the following report in an attempt to curb Islamic child marriage:

Traditional cultural practices reflect values and beliefs held by members of a community for periods often spanning generations. Every social grouping in the world has specific traditional cultural practices and beliefs, some of which are beneficial to all members, while others are harmful to a specific group, such as women. These harmful traditional practices include female genital mutilation (FGM); forced feeding of women; early marriage; the various taboos or practices which prevent women from controlling their own fertility; nutritional taboos and traditional birth practices; son preference and its implications for the status of the girl child; female infanticide; early pregnancy; and dowry price. Despite their harmful nature and their violation of international human rights laws, such practices persist because they are not questioned and take on an aura of morality in the eyes of those practicing them.

Child marriage robs a girl of her childhood-time necessary to develop physically, emotionally and psychologically. In fact, early marriage inflicts great emotional stress as the young woman is removed from her parents’ home to that of her husband and in-laws. Her husband, who will invariably be many years her senior, will have little in common with a young teenager. It is with this strange man that she has to develop an intimate emotional and physical relationship. She is obliged to have intercourse, although physically she might not be fully developed.

Health complications that result from early marriage in the Middle East and North Africa, for example, include the risk of operative delivery, low weight and malnutrition resulting from frequent pregnancies and lactation in the period of life when the young mothers are themselves still growing.

Early pregnancy can have harmful consequences for both young mothers and their babies. According to UNICEF, no girl should become pregnant before the age of 18 because she is not yet physically ready to bear children. Babies of mothers younger than 18 tend to be born premature and have low body weight; such babies are more likely to die in the first year of life. The risk to the young mother’s own health is also greater. Poor health is common among indigent pregnant and lactating women.

In many parts of the developing world, especially in rural areas, girls marry shortly after puberty and are expected to start having children immediately. Although the situation has improved since the early 1980’s, in many areas the majority of girls under 20 years of age are already married and having children. Although many countries have raised the legal age for marriage, this has had little impact on traditional societies where marriage and child-bearing confer "status" on a woman.

An additional health risk to young mothers is obstructed labor, which occurs when the baby’s head is too big for the orifice of the mother. This provokes vesicovaginal fistulas, especially when an untrained traditional birth attendant forces the baby’s head out unduly. (Source)

Contrary to Muslim claims, a nine-year-old girl just isn’t ready for sexual intercourse or for its possible ramifications (i.e., pregnancy, giving birth, breast-feeding, and raising a child). It is unnecessarily dangerous, for a much safer relationship could be crafted if the marriage were to take place several years later, when the girl reaches her late teens. Muslims may respond here by arguing, “But Aisha never became pregnant, so none of this matters.” Yet it does matter. Every year, countless young girls, still playing with dolls, are taken to live with much older husbands. If these husbands were to be challenged, they wouldn’t respond by saying, “But it’s part of Arabic culture”; instead, they would reply, “It can’t be wrong, because Muhammad did it.” In other words, even if we grant the bizarre claim that Aisha was somehow ready for sex and marriage, most nine-year-old girls aren’t ready for sex and marriage. But the practice of marrying children continues to this day in many Muslim countries, largely because Muslims hold up Muhammad as their highest role model.

FOURTH MUSLIM DEFENSE: The average lifespan in Muhammad’s day was so low that people had to marry young.

Muslim debater Osama Abdallah argues that Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was justified, because people in Muhammad’s day needed to marry early:

Life 1400 years ago was very rough in the too hot desert. From my personal knowledge, the average life span back then was 50 years. People used to die from all kinds of diseases. Both parents of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for instance, died natural deaths before he even knew them. (Source)

On this view, since people could die at any time in the “hot desert,” they would get married at a very early age to make sure they had as many years together as possible.

RESPONSE: Muhammad was already more than fifty years old when he consummated his marriage to Aisha, so there was no need for him to marry such a young girl.

Abdallah’s claim might make sense if Muhammad had been nine or ten years old when he married Aisha. But the Prophet of Islam was already well advanced in years. He was far closer to death than most available women, so why not marry an adult instead of a child? At the very least, why not marry a fully developed twenty-year-old instead of a little girl playing on a swing? By marrying Aisha when she was so young, Muhammad was, in effect, condemning her to a life of widowhood, for the Qur’an barred Muslims from marrying Muhammad’s widows (33:53). Beyond all this, Abdallah’s argument ignores the facts. Muhammad didn’t marry Aisha because the average life span was fifty years old; instead, he married her because (1) he had been dreaming about her, and (2) he had the power to persuade Abu Bakr to give him his daughter in marriage.

FIFTH MUSLIM DEFENSE: Other people have done it too—even Christians!

Abdallah also employs an “everybody’s doing it, so it’s okay” defense:

Not only was it a custom in the Arab society to Engage/Marry a young girl, it was also common in the Jewish society. The case of Mary the mother of Jesus comes to mind. In non biblical sources she was between 11-14 years old when she conceived Jesus. Mary had already been “BETROTHED” to Joseph before conceiving Jesus. Joseph was a much older man. Therefore Mary was younger than 11-14 years of age when she was “BETROTHED” to Joseph. We Muslims would never call Joseph a Child Molester, nor would we refer to the “Holy Ghost” of the Bible, that “Impregnated” Mary as a “Rapist” or “Adulterer.” (Source)

RESPONSE: Besides committing the “tu quoque” fallacy, this defense misses the point of the criticism against Muhammad.

Tu quoque is a type of fallacy that attempts to ignore a criticism because of some hypocrisy found in the critic. For instance, suppose I’m a thief. One day, I catch someone stealing my car, and I say, “Stop, Thief!” If the person stealing my car turns to me and says, “But you’re a thief too, so it’s not wrong for me to steal,” he will be committing the tu quoque fallacy. (It’s not okay to steal just because other people steal.)

Muslims rely heavily on the tu quoque. When people criticize Islam for terrorism, it’s common to hear Muslims say, “But Americans are killing Arabs!” as if this were a meaningful response to the charge. Likewise, when someone says, “Look at all the people Muhammad killed,” Muslims respond by saying, “But people were killed in the Bible too.”

To say that Joseph married a young girl in the Bible does nothing to address the problem of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. At best, such a defense would only show that Christians are being inconsistent. But in reality, the Muslim defense doesn’t even show this, since their comparison fails, for several reasons.

First, there is no real historical data reporting the age of Mary when she married Joseph. True, given the custom of the time, she was probably fairly young, perhaps as young as twelve or thirteen. But since we have no historical references to her age, we can’t rule out the possibility that Mary was twenty years old. The point here is this: people criticize Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha based on what we know (i.e., that Aisha was nine years old), whereas Muslims reply based on what we don’t know (i.e., the age of Mary).

Second, we must not forget that, biologically, thirteen-year-old girls are very different from nine-year-old girls. Nine-year-old girls typically haven’t reached menses. In a best-case scenario for Abdallah’s defense, a girl this young may have just entered the beginning stages of puberty (note: puberty is a process that lasts several years). A thirteen-year-old girl, on the other hand, may be coming to the end of puberty. Thus, even if we grant a young age for Mary, there would still be a world of difference between her and Aisha.

Third, Muslim apologists seem to miss the fact that Joseph is not the standard of morality in Christianity. When critics point to the age of Aisha, they are arguing something like this: “You’re trying to tell me that Muhammad was the greatest moral example of all time and that I should believe everything he says? I can’t believe that a person who would have sex with a little girl was the greatest man ever.” More simply, Muhammad is foundational to Islam. If there is a problem with Muhammad, there is a problem with Islam. If Muhammad was immoral, then it becomes difficult to take his teachings seriously. Thus, it makes no sense for a Muslim to say, “Well, Joseph married a young girl too.” Joseph isn’t foundational to Christianity. If an ancient text were found tomorrow, and this ancient text proved that Joseph was an axe-murderer, Christianity wouldn’t be affected at all, because Christians don’t consider him to be a prophet, or a bringer of revelation, or even an important figure in Christianity. Thus, if Muslims want to show that Christians are being inconsistent, they need to show that Jesus, or Peter, or Paul, or someone central to Christianity, did the things that Muhammad did. Fortunately, Jesus was sinless, and the apostles lived exemplary lives once they had committed themselves to Jesus.

The Internet is filled with examples of Muslim responses of this sort. Muslim websites constantly note that young girls are married in various countries and that these young girls sometimes give birth. No one doubts this. The problem is that this has nothing to do with whether or not marriage to a nine-year-old girl is morally acceptable for a mighty prophet. The fact that Muslims are forced to resort to an “everyone’s doing it” defense shows that they have run out of responses.

ASSESSMENT: Two Interpretations of “Pedophile.”

Muhammad unquestionably had sex with Aisha when she was nine years old. Does this make him a pedophile? Our answer to this question will depend on our definition of “pedophile.” In common usage, as well as in some dictionaries and even certain medical dictionaries, a “pedophile” is defined as anyone who is attracted to a young girl or boy. Stedman's Medical Dictionary, for instance, defines “pedophilia” as “the act or fantasy on the part of an adult of engaging in sexual activity with a child or children” (Source). Since Muhammad had sex with a child, he been called a “pedophile” in this sense in numerous writings, sermons, and conversations.

The term “pedophile” has a more specific clinical use, however, where a “pedophile” is someone who has an exclusive or primary sexual interest in children. For example, The Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders defines “pedophilia” as “a psychosexual disorder in which the fantasy or actual act of engaging in sexual activity with prepubertal children is the preferred or exclusive means of achieving sexual excitement and gratification” (Source). Because Muhammad was sexually attracted to women and girls of various ages (including Khadijah, who was 15 years his senior), he would not be a pedophile in this more specific sense.

Hence, given the ambiguity of the term, care should be used when applying it. Indeed, since the term is commonly understood in the narrower sense, critics of Islam may be better off not using it at all. (Needless to say, people who are interested in maintaining an ongoing discussion with Muslims should avoid emotionally charged terms whenever possible.)

Nevertheless, Muslims are too hasty in dismissing objections to Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha. When Muslims tell us to convert to Islam, we can’t simply ignore their prophet’s marriage to a nine-year-old girl. Muslims view Muhammad as the highest example of a moral life, but his marriage to Aisha conflicts with that view. If they want to put Muhammad forward as the pattern of conduct for all humanity, Muslims need to come to terms with the many questionable things he did, as well as the catastrophic impact of his actions.

There is, of course, a simple (but highly explicit) way to evaluate the importance of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. We must begin by trying to get a mental picture of a morally perfect man. For Muslims, this will include all the things they have been taught about Muhammad. According to their picture, he is kind, generous, patient, humble, and trustworthy. He protects orphans and widows, endures persecution, helps the needy, and promotes justice. He prays faithfully, fasts regularly, and obeys God in everything. He is loyal to his friends and patient with his enemies. He never gives in when tempted with evil. Now we must picture this same man in a room with an innocent little girl. He takes away her doll, climbs on top of her, and forces his penis inside her. She doesn’t know what is happening because she is too young to know much about sex. Frightened and confused, she cries because of the pain and bleeds on her bed, but she tries to remain quiet out of respect for her new husband, who, in return, endangers her life.

If a person is able to keep the same vision of moral perfection throughout this description, he may have the faith necessary to be a Muslim. But if his vision of the perfect man is at odds with what Muhammad did on numerous occasions, he will need to look elsewhere for an ideal human being.


Ali, Maulana Muhammad. Muhammad the Prophet (St. Lambert: Payette and Sims, 1993).
Mawdudi, Abul A’la. Towards Understanding Islam (Islamic Circle of North America, 1986).
Sahih al-Bukhari, Muhammad Muhsin Khan, tr. (Riyadh: Darussalam Publishers, 1997).
Sahih Muslim, Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, tr. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 2000).
Sunan Abu Dawud, Ahmad Hasan, tr. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 2000).


GreekAsianPanda said...

There is one tradition that may indicate an older age for Aisha: Sahih al-Bukhari 1.8.465, which begins: “Narrated ‘Aisha: (the wife of the Prophet) I had seen my parents following Islam since I attained the age of puberty." It implies that her parents converted when she had hit puberty, and since Muhammad married Aisha sometime after their conversion, she must have been of a more appropriate age.

Of course, there are many, many, much more explicit traditions that outright state she was nine when the marriage was consummated, as you point out. You should just be aware of this hadith's existence in case Muslims ever use it.

Anyway, this is a great, thorough take-down, especially the Mary argument. It's amusing that the apologist used second- and third-century texts (the "non biblical sources") to claim Mary's young age while probably believing that the first-century gospels are absolutely corrupt and untrustworthy.

Unknown said...

David we Honor and Love Jesus, why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies, why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments.

you always criticize family issues of prophet Muhammad instead of talking about Basic principles such as the Nature of God, the Koran or the Bible, the Nature of Human, The hell fire, the Paradise and the other important issues of every religion.
criticize Muhammad or not, all Muslims and true Christians love him more than their selves.

Unknown said...

What a blast! Excellent presentation once again. I have a daughter who is Ten years old, I can not for the life of me imagine a man of mohammed;s age climbing on top of her, whether he was moved to do so by an allah or not. It is simply an abomination. I will defend my child to the last.
Another thing is that mohammed may still qualify as a pedophile since he prefers Aisha over the other women. He only covered his true nature up by forcing her hand in marriage and legalising it through an obviously harassed father. This practice is still very prevalent in Islamic dominated regions of the world. What a "prophet" to follow!

william t said...

Excellent article. I would argue that the internal language of the New Testament definitely discounts Mary from being 12 years old or less when betrothed to Joseph.
Mark 5:39 When He came in, He said to them, “Why make this commotion and weep? The CHILD is not dead, but sleeping.”40 And they ridiculed Him. But when He had put them all outside, He took the father and the mother of the CHILD, and those who were with Him, and entered where the CHILD was lying. 41 Then He took the CHILD by the hand, and said to her, “Talitha, cumi,” which is translated, “Little girl, I say to you, arise.” 42 Immediately the GIRL arose and walked, for she was TWELVE YEARS OF AGE. And they were overcome with great amazement.
However when Elizabeth speaks of Mary she exclaims (present tense) in luke 1.42 “Blessed are you AMONG WOMEN, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!
At no point is Mary spoken of in the New Testament language category of a child (i.e 12 years old or younger) but as a woman.

rowland said...

Great Presentation Brother David. This was masterful.
I usually ask muslims this question,
Why didn't other prophets the ones that came before Mohammed, From Abraham to Jesus (assuming we say Jesus is a prophet), Marry 6-9yr olds?
Why did God give permission to his "Last and Greatest" prophet to marry a toddler. Why didn't he
With this piece of yours I have more ammo in my arsenal to confront muslims with.

I personally like the part where one of Mohammed companion told the False Prophet that he couldn't marry a child because he had little sisters and daughters of his own, and needed someone mature to take care of them. Lols.
It goes to show that some muslims actually had more moral sense than their prophet.

TAREK said...

To Mr. Mohamoud Hassan MohamedWhat is the meaning of Critic? Can you please tell us what did he say that isn't true? He wants people like you the know the person you call prophet and that you are following. You spoke of true Christians love muhammad; I'm sure that you are dreaming or you are looking for a way to comfort yourself after being confronted with the truth. No human being who loves truth with dare thinking of following muhammad. The truth you have in front of you is just s drop in the sea. The verse I will leave you with from the quran is Surat 3 Aya 55. Think well and come to CHRIST.
Well done Dr. David

Unknown said...

David your article speaks volume. Everytime I think of what mohammed did to that little girl called ayeaha or Aisha my hearts hurts deeply. He stole her innocence in the guise of being a "prophet". For crying out loud, this girl was still playing with her dolls!
Where is the humanity in Muhammed Hassan Muhammed? is he not ashamed of his "prophet? has his blind loyalty to his master so clouded his sense of morality and decency.
I believe you were name after your "prophet" I would suggest a name change is overdue. I am ashamed on your behalf if you are not.

Unknown said...

very nice article..thanks david wood,we salute you sir!Mohamoud hassan you are same question with my co worker muslim friend,you know i tell you the truth,i try to love your prophet but the love of our LORD JESUS CHRIST it could not be change because HE is our SAVIOUR in this world,my co worker muslim friend he convince me to know about your allah and your prophet i read some verses of quaran through online,im so amazed when i read some verses of quran about your allah that your allah and your prophet deny the SON OF GOD,OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST said in Holy Bible those who not believe the SON OF GOD not believe also the father and cannot enter in my kingdom!!!just think it that brother,PEACE BE WITH YOU & GOD BLESS US ALL!

Deleting said...

Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed said, "David we Honor and Love Jesus, why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies, why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments."

One of three things is going to happen.
1. Mo will ignore me.
2. Mo will try to rip into me.
3. Mo will mimic everything I say in his rebuttal as if that will end the argument.

But here goes.

@Mo, You don't love Jesus and truly you don't even love the real Mohammad.
Isa Ibn Miriam is a concoction of Mohammad's fantasy based off of arabic fairy tales and stories told by Christians and Jews that were never thought to be authoritative in any way. We know this from what existed during this time (arabic infancy gospel, the gospel of thomas, the story of the seven sleepers).

We can trace the real Jesus who real christians love back to the eye witness accounts (gospels) and the law and prophets.

The gospels are like the hadith but longer and given by the people who either were there, were a disciple or a historian and totally in line with history.

The Koran is not.

But I made two statements. Here's the second: You don't love Mohammad.

You really don't. You love the figment specially built for you by your imams and religious programs using selected (and often abridged) hadiths and sometimes koran passages.
Adding to this is your own imagination.

It's not hard to swallow. Romans one says that while you know of the attributes of god through creation and conscious you have rejected him and built an idol (mohammad) in your own image.

But if I told you about a man who raped children, exterminated allies and even friends and had a whole tribe of jews striving to be neutral and not take his or anyone elses sides in a fight beheaded in one day, and then told you he was the greatest example of mankind, how could you possibly believe me?

In what sick universe could you abandon reason and morality and embrace this satanic person.

You couldn't, and that's the real issue here. You love a version of Mohammad like you love your version of Allah and you have your form of religion that seems right to you.

But you don't love Allah, and you don't love Islam or the Koran and most of all, you DO NOT love mohammad.

If you dare, go back and read your hadiths Imam Muslim and Bukhari collected and verified. Mohammad wasn't a good person. He was a bad person. If he were alive today very few muslims would follow him.

...including you.


Thanks David once again for proving that Muhammad was not real prophet, and Islam is not religion “it’s a cult”.
Muhammad Hassan Muhammad, why Christian has to love a paedophile Muhammad? Tell me any one good reason???
When Muhammad persuaded Abu Bakr to give Aisha as his bride. As the sources tell that initially Abu Bakr was reluctant, but Muhammad bribe him with caliphate .Remember that after Muhammad death Abu Bakr was the first caliphate. See from day one how culprit Muhammad and his close companion’s were.

Anonymous said...

Also one fact many people don't realize is that Muhammad was a RAPIST.

Not making that accusation up.

Many of Muhammad's "wives" where indeed war captives. They were captured after Muhammad had attacked their villages, killed their fathers, brothers and even THEIR HUSBANDS.

Kidnapping them and forcing himself upon them.

So Muhammad was indeed a rapist also.

Anonymous said...

Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed.

You forgot to add (PBUH) after Muhammad's name.

Muhammad corrupted Christian beliefs, so why should Christians love Muhammad?

Muhammad says to not have Jewish and Christian friends, so Muhammad did not teach love, he taught HATE.

Anonymous said...

Also a 12-13 girl is different than a 9 year old girl in growth and maturity, both mentality and psychologically.

I believe this is why Aisha could not have any children because she was probably damaged from this incident.

Anonymous said...

More proof that Asiah was not the age of 18 or 20 when she married Muhammad.

She was 14 or 15 when she had her first period and was already married to Muhammad for years. It also shows that it was over 8 years after Muhammad married Aisha would again proves her age to be 6 when he married her.



Anonymous said...

@G.A.P. one hadith that does not mention her age is not the same has SEVERAL, some from Aisha herself, stating her REAL age.

Truth Defenders said...

Muhammad was in fact a filthy pedophile. How many children does a degenerate molester need to violate before he is a "pedophile"? But if it requires more than one, besides molesting little Aisha, Muhammad molested young boys, he was also a pederast, he would suck on the tongues of young boys. He also lusted after another child, while the infant was in her mothers arms, Mo said "If I am alive when she gets older I will marry her, what kind of a filthy dog speaks of marrying an infant while in her mothers arms. Not to mention Mo's desires for young boys in his paradise. etc etc. I can provide the references to all of the above if required, I'm simply being brief here. The fact remains, Mohammad was and many muslims are filthy pedophiles and no amount of reasoning and "cultural" justification/rationalization will acquit them.

simple_truth said...

Well done, David!

This paragraph you wrote below is very critical to discussing Mohammad sexual perversion:

Hence, given the ambiguity of the term, care should be used when applying it. Indeed, since the term is commonly understood in the narrower sense, critics of Islam may be better off not using it at all. (Needless to say, people who are interested in maintaining an ongoing discussion with Muslims should avoid emotionally charged terms whenever possible.)

I completely agree. I have always defended Mohammad against the charge of pedophilia since there aren't any Islamic sources that I am aware of that show any consistent perverted love towards young girls in general; thus, the charge of pedophilia is unfairly levied against Mohammad. People who try to witness to Muslims aren't going to get anywhere by levying the charge. It is simply the easiest way to turn off the Muslim from listening.

kiwimac said...

Muhammad would also appear to fit the DSM Criteria for Pedophilia-especially when he see's her as a Baby and dreams of Marrying her..Here are the three Criteria for a diagnosis of a Pedophile-
1. A period of 6+ months during which a person experiences recurrent, intense, sexual arousing fantasies, urges or behaviors involving children (generally 13 years or younger).
2. They have acted on these fantasies with a child or they have not acted upon them BUT the fantasies cause significant distress and interpersonal impairment.
3. The patient is at least 16yo and is at least 5 years older than the child they are fantasizing about.

simple_truth said...

Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed said...

Obviously I am not David, but I feel the need to respond.

"David we Honor and Love Jesus,"

For a Christian, honor and love are not the same as respect and admiration, which is what I feel Muslims are thinking of. It is easy to respect and admire someone without having intimacy with that person through a relationship, whether personal or impersonal (via literature or other media). It is almost impossible to love and honor somebody whom you have no record with which to form an intimate relationship with. The Qu'ran doesn't contain any of Jesus' messages, morals, deeds, and teachings that compel you to love and/or honor Him as God. Contrastingly, the Bible has all sorts of accounts, teachings, messages, morals, etc. that acquaints the reader with Jesus and can give that person a genuine sense of intimacy with Him. The best the Qu'ran can do is to offer a polemic against the version of Jesus given in the Bible. Muslims wouldn't really know much about Jesus, other than His name and that he was a prophet, if they didn't turn to the Bible and other Jewish/Christian literature. Obviously, Islamic literature is void of knowledge and accurate information of Jesus.

I also find it both funny and arrogant for Muslims to claim to love and honor Jesus from an Islamic view. You can't truly love Jesus if you don't know what his message is and you can't know that from Islam other than some general statement or claim. You have to read the Bible. But, you don't believe in the Bible; so, you are being superficial in your claim.


"why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies, why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments."

Are you confessing that Mohammad is an enemy of Jesus' followers?

I would also suggest that you understand what the statement means. Loving your enemies does not mean that you capitulate to them.

Jesus' commandments is outlined within the Bible--not the Qu'ran. Do you love your enemies? Of course not since Allah tells you to kill them if they don't accept Mohammad's message and agree to join Islam. Do you love your neighbors as yourself? Of course not since Allah does not love disbelievers and commands Muslims to follow his lead.


"you always criticize family issues of prophet Muhammad instead of talking about Basic principles such as the Nature of God, the Koran or the Bible, the Nature of Human, The hell fire, the Paradise and the other important issues of every religion."

It's funny you say this when Muslims are always criticizing other religions, especially Judaism and Christianity. By your statement, you would have to criticize Mohammad for his criticisms of other religions in the Qu'ran. Fair criticism is always fruitful and necessary for the adherent of that religion to think upon and not just accept what they are told to believe.


"criticize Muhammad or not, all Muslims and true Christians love him more than their selves."

You definitely can't speak for Christians or other non Muslims because you really don't have any literature that gives you a reason to make that claim. Islamic reverence for Jesus is based upon superficial understandings of the person of Jesus.

True Christians are not Islamic in nature since they believe that Jesus died for the remission of our sins and that he is God incarnate and the only mediator between us and God.

To love a mere mortal more than ourselves is a form of idolatry. So, from a Christian perspective, to love Mohammad more than yourself is idolizing him, and in essence, making him equal to Allah in significance. We love Jesus because of who He is and what He did for our souls if we accept His works of salvation that frees us from eternal condemnation before a Holy and Just God.


Hence, given the ambiguity of the term, care should be used when applying it. Indeed, since the term is commonly understood in the narrower sense, critics of Islam may be better off not using it at all. (Needless to say, people who are interested in maintaining an ongoing discussion with Muslims should avoid emotionally charged terms whenever possible.)

I completely agree.

Tom said...

@Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed
"David we Honor and Love Jesus, why you don't love Muhhamad...."

Jesus of the Bible IS the "Son of God & He came to Die for Our sins".
The Bible has WARNED us to beware of FALSE prophets and muhammad declared that "Jesus is NOT the Son of God AND He DID NOT die on the Cross".
Now tell me how can Christians "love" muhammad when the very foundation of Christianity is what he has taken AWAY!! Actually this is what satan the deceiver wants to take away from man, our Salvation which "JESUS CAME TO GIVE FREELY"!
Hope you can just reflex on this & think about what you are telling us!

Osama Abdallah said...

Lewis ("Truth Defender"),

It's funny how you continue to spew your load of garbage here, while you dropped dead silent and couldn't provide a single reference during our debate, which I have shut your loud mouth in clearly. The reader can clearly see this at:


When I challenged you during the debate for references, you provided none. *****The dumpster that you get your garbage from, i.e., Zakaria Botros, had been exposed to be a big fat liar, who fabricates quotes left and right as WE HAVE EXPOSED HIM THOROUGHLY ON, and who is now rotting in his grave and heading to his Doom in Hell. This is why you can't produce quotes to back up your garbage.

You are a perfect missionary; a notorious liar and a blasphemous fool.

Osama Abdallah

Unknown said...

Its so typical of Osama bin laden, I mean Osama to raise something unrelated and try to divert the discussion.
See here he has no explanation or defence for his so called prophet. All he knows to do is abuse people.
Sometimes I wonder about Osama's intellectual acumen. He must be licking his wounds somewhere in his cave. Osama, the game is up. You and your "prophet" have been exposed!

Truth Defenders said...

Osama (“meatball” “solomon”) Abdalla, why rant, when you can simply provide references in attempt to defend your pedophile, demoniac false prophet.
Like I said in the pervious post, “I can provide the references to all of the above if required” so here they are, just for you sweetheart.
Because of space constraints citations will be shortened but references will be provided for integrities sake.

Muhammad struggled with demon possession:

Qur’an 68:051
YUSUF ... they say: "Surely he is possessed!"

Ibn Ishaq’s "Sirat Rasul Allah," The Life of Muhammad, by A. Guillaume, p. 106
(Muhammad Speaking) "... I thought, Woe is me poet or possessed — Never shall the Quraysh say this of me! I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest."

Bukhari vol.8 book 73 ch.56 no.89 p.57 See also: Bukhari vol.8 book 75 (Book of Invocations) ch.59 no.400 p.266
Mohammed was bewitched.

Pig Mo sucked on children's tongues, yuk!:

Al-Adab al-Mufrad Al-Bukhari by Imam Bukhari
Translated by: Ustadha Aisha Bewley
XDVI. Sitting and lying down

1183. It is related that Abu Hurayra said, "... . Then he (Muhammad) said, 'Where is the little one? Call the little one to me.' Hasan came running and jumped into his lap. ... Then the Prophet opened his mouth and put his tongue in his mouth. Then he said, O Allah, I love him, so love him and the one who loves him!'"

Just like a spiting viper, the snake Muham would spit his filthy mouthwash in kids faces:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 3, Number 77:
Narrated Mahmud bin Rabi'a:
When I was a boy of five, I remember, the Prophet took water from a bucket with his mouth and threw it on my face.

The sicko also had others drink his filthy mouthwash:

Volume 1, Book 4, Number 187:
... then threw a mouthful of water in the tumbler and said to both of us (Abu Musa and Bilal), "Drink from the tumbler ... ."

Things that should make you vomit:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 249:
Narrated Aisha:
The first child who was born in the Islamic Land (i.e. Medina) amongst the Emigrants, was 'Abdullah. They brought him to the Prophet.
The Prophet took a date, and after chewing it, put its juice in his mouth. So the first thing that went into the child's stomach, was the saliva of the Prophet.

This pig pedophile Muhammad lusted after other infants:

(Suhayli, ii. 79: In the riwaya of Yunus I. I. recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu'lFadl) when she was a baby crawling before him and said, 'If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.' But he died before she grew up… (Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, translated by A. Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi], p. 311)

Muhammad saw Um Habiba the daughter of Abbas while she was fatim (age of nursing) and he said, "If she grows up while I am still alive, I will marry her."
(Musnad Ahmad, Number 25636)

Just a few of the many disturbing accounts by Muslim scholars, unlike Osama the meatball, concerning Osam’s Muhammad. Yes, Moo-ham-head was a pedophile/pederast and lunatic demoniac. He had a sickness of the mind and so does Osama.

In order not to flood this post with bantering, I will not deal with his demonic shrieking if he replies. This was simply a reply to the request for references.
PS even with the “crafty” editing of the debates, Osama is shown to be unable to defend his demonic accusations nor can he defend against the stated facts. Please do watch the debates and enjoy.
Have a nice day :)

Osama Abdallah said...

I invite everyone again to watch my debate with "Truth Defenders". His garbage comes from one of three:

1- Notorious liars who fabricate quotes and lie on Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. The doomed-to-Hell Zakaria Botros fabricated a lie on the Prophet sleeping with a dead woman. When we checked the references we found out that the Prophet, who grew up as an orphan, laid down near the woman that raised him, gave her a kiss good bye before her burial, and told her:

"Farewell O Mother. You were my mother after my mother (i.e., after his biological mother died when he was 5. His father was already dead also). You would go hungry and feed me, and you would clothe me. You wanted from that to please Allah Almighty and the Home of the Hereafter."

*******Zakaria Botros the coward and liar said that the Prophet had sex with the woman! I added this to my debate with Lewis. See the link above for the debate.

2- Out of context and/or partial quotes that give a false picture of the whole context. We clearly see this from this liar, "Truth Defenders", first example.

3- Bogus books that contain weak and unreliable narrations, which were written 100s of years after the Prophet, peace be upon him. In other words, they were gossips that written either by the enemies of Islam, or by transmitted by lazy ignorants who didn't double check the narrations that they narrated. We find tons of this in what you reject from what you call GNOSTIC and APOCRYPHA books.

This guy here copied his garbage from wikislam site. Much of this site's references had been refuted already and proven to be lies. I will destroy his lies soon insha'Allah. On my blog actually we are working on a project to 100% refute the currently-growing wikislam site. They are no more than hateful liars who feed garbage and blasphemies to fools and ignorants like Lewis.

Osama Abdallah

Anonymous said...

Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed said...

"David we Honor and Love Jesus, why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies,"

You clearly weren't thinking straight when you wrote that. Look carefully at what you asked:

"why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies"

You're implying Muhammad is an enemy of David, a Christian. But Muhammad is the central figure of islam, an example all muslims should emulate. Religion of peace? Nope.

"why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments."

There's this one regarding false prophets. Muhammad fits the bill.

"you always criticize family issues of prophet Muhammad"

Muhammad is the example of perfect man all muslims should aspire to become in all aspects of life, including family life, with the child marriages and wife beating and rape. Why should he be above any criticism? And looking at it from another angle, why is it that muslims are always eager to criticize other religions but never make any critics on their own religion? Christianity has been under scrutiny for centuries, both from christians and non-christians. Same for judaism. Why should islam get a free pass? Is it because muslims know that islam doesn't hold up to scrutiny?

"instead of talking about Basic principles such as the Nature of God, the Koran or the Bible, the Nature of Human, The hell fire, the Paradise and the other important issues of every religion."

Here's the thing: christianity has a history of christian clerics studying and advancing science. They believed the Bible to be the truth and that God is subjected to the same natural laws as humans, even though he created said laws. Because of that they believed that exploring sciences would bring them closer to God. Compare that with islamic sources, according to which allah is omnipotent and the laws of nature mean nothing to him. The nature of God in christianity and islam are polar opposites.

"criticize Muhammad or not, all Muslims and true Christians love him more than their selves."

No true christian would love muhammad more than himself. Unless you're going for the "jesus preached the same thing as muhammad before christians corrupted his message, therefore muslims are indeed the true christians" approach, in which case you're saying that all muslims and muslims love him more than they love themselves. We all know how much muslims over their self-proclaimed prophet. We can say what we want about allah, but we better think twice before saying anything other than praise about muhammad, lest we want our necks to be struck at.

Anonymous said...

Just a small P.S.:

Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed said...

"you always criticize family issues of prophet Muhammad instead of talking about Basic principles such as the Nature of God, the Koran or the Bible, the Nature of Human, The hell fire, the Paradise and the other important issues of every religion."

Talking about the nature of God, humans, hellfire or holy texts would be proselytizing (dawah). I know you're surprised because David just criticised muhammad and the people who apologize for (one of) his unholy actions without trying to use his criticism as a mean of attracting followers to his faith, but he's not using the islamic play book.

Anonymous said...

Osama Abdallah said...

"On my blog actually we are working on a project to 100% refute the currently-growing wikislam site."

Osama, you'd be serving islam better if you spend your time refuting people like Anjem Choudary. His views on islam and the need to wage war and subjugate non-muslims and impose sharia law in the world are pretty much the same than in wikislam. You would be preventing more deaths at the hands of people who learned of islam through Choudary, like Michael Adebolajo, one of the killers of Lee Rigby, who justified his crime saying he was comanded to do so by sura 9 of the quran and many other verses through the quran.

ignatius said...

Great article, David. I just have two questions:

1. The UN report on the consequences of young girls having sex focuses on the dangers of emotional damage and pregnancy. Is it possible, however, that Aisha's childlessness was also a result of early sexual activity, i.e. penetration at such a young age damages the internal organs and renders the girl infertile? This isn't my idea, but I'd like it to be pursued more. Is a possible consequence of Mo's sickening behavior permanent sterility in the child?

2. Despite its length, your article concentrates on Aisha. For the question of whether Mo was a pedophile, however, additional evidence can be cited. Mo's abuse of other youngsters supports the claim that he was a pedophile even in the clinical sense, i.e. his overstepping limits with his daughter Fatima, his grandsons and others. These incidences were mainly revealed by Father Zakaria Botros, whose assertions were made available to English speakers by articles of Raymond Ibrahim. In any case, the clinical definition of a pedophile seems very narrow. Claiming that a man engaging in pedophiliac activity is not necessarily a pedophile seems dubious to me, even if the claim comes from an expert.

Anonymous said...

Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed, you say,

“David we Honor and Love Jesus”

You only honour and love Islam’s version of Jesus, the idolatrous invention/distortion that we find in the Quran, and who, at best, does not exist except in the person of the devil himself.

There are almost as many versions of Jesus as there are political doctrines. Different groups tend to re-make Jesus in their image. To Marxists He becomes a Marxist; to pacifists He becomes the ultimate pacifist etc. The political takes/versions on Jesus’ life both now and throughout history are nearly endless, and Islam’s version is just another one of many.

You say,

“why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies, why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments.”

What has loving your enemies got to do with telling the truth about Islam and its founder, since we are commanded to love all people as well as our enemies? So by your logic, for the sake of loving Muhammad, who is not even alive anymore, do we have to withhold the truth and not warn those who are living?

Rather, we are to do the right thing, as Jesus did when He harshly put the Pharisees on the spot in Matthew Ch. 23, and give warning to one and all. We are to follow Jesus’ example by,

Casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ. 2Corinthians 10:5

goethechosemercy said...

David we Honor and Love Jesus, why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies, why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments.

You do not.
You persecute the followers of Jesus, the Son of God, the Christ.
Mohammed is a false prophet, a warlord, a terrorist, and a rapist.
Salvation comes from the Jews.
Not from the Arab.

Unknown said...

9 years my foot! lol
Look at the fatwa of the "The permanent committee for scientific research and religious sanctions:Bakr ben Abdullah Abu Zeid, Member Saleh ben Fozan Al Fozan, Member Abdel Aziz ben Abdullah ben Mohammed Aal Sheikh, Chairman":
link here:

Pay attention to:
"As for the thighing of the messenger of God to his fiancée Ayesha, she was six years old and he could not engage in sexual intercourse with her because of her young age, therefore he used to place his penis between her thighs and rub it lightly. In addition, the messenger of God had full control of his penis in contrary to the believers"

He had sex with her when she was 6! and that the only way he could! Nothing could stop Mohammed. Back then also, she was only his fiancee!
And as one commentator below the mentioned article stated:
"theighing or fingering , I don't think muslims care.They are hoplessly devoted to this freaking pedophile"....
Not to mention he slept with Safiya the night after he killed her father, husband, her whole family. He was a monster. Who has ears let him hear!
All you muslims read about Mohammed!

Aletheya said...

Mohamoud Hassan Mohamed said...
"David we Honor and Love Jesus, why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies, why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments."

1- We Honor and Love Jesus

No, you don't.
Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God and died on the cross? If you know your Qur'an, as a muslim you don't believe in this. So how exactly do you honour and love Jesus?

2- Why you don't love Muhhamad while the Bible commanding you to love your enemies, why you don't apply and follow the bible's commandments.

So, you admit that Muhammad is the enemy of Christianity?
You are right, we are commanded to love our enemies, BUT FORBIDDEN to accept false prophets and their teachings:

2John 1:9-10,
9 Whoever transgresses and doesn’t remain in the teaching of Christ, doesn’t have God. He who remains in the teaching, the same has both the Father and the Son.
10 If anyone comes to you, and doesn’t bring this teaching, DON'T RECEIVE HIM INTO YOUR HOUSE, and DON'T WELCOME HIM

So based on this and many other verses similar to this, we have no respect for Muhammad because he brought a new teaching about Jesus, namely, he denied the Sonship [i.e. Deity], Crucifixion of Jesus. He is an anti-Christ according to 1John 2:22.

Can you please answer me this:

How are we supposed to love our DEAD enemy?

Showing Muslims the falsehood of Islam is proof of our love for Muslims. Jesus died for your sins, so receive Him in your heart and life today.

Unknown said...

Hey Family in Christ
I finally uploaded my youtube vid on this article. Enjoy.


Unknown said...

No man gets married to a female at that age and waits some years later to have sex with her ...Let's face it , Mohammed was a very horny self -determined pedophile who will not wait .

Unknown said...

No man in Mohammed's position waits for anybody ... He was clearly a pedophile fornicator who was unrepentant in his sexual escapades of sexual slaves .

shabeer said...

Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 86 :: Hadith 101

Narrated 'Aisha:

Allah's Apostle said, "It is essential to have the consent of a virgin (for the marriage). I said, "A virgin feels shy." The Prophet; said, "Her silence means her consent." Some people said, "If a man falls in love with an orphan slave girl or a virgin and she refuses (him) and then he makes a trick by bringing two false witnesses to testify that he has married her, and then she attains the age of puberty and agrees to marry him and the judge accepts the false witness and the husband knows that the witnesses were false ones, he may consummate his marriage."

Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2091
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

A virgin came to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and mentioned that her father had married her against her will, so the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) allowed her to exercise her choice.
Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2095
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: A guardian has no concern with a woman previously married and has no husband, and an orphan girl (i.e. virgin) must be consulted, her silence being her acceptance.

Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2080
Narrated AbuMusa:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: There is no marriage without the permission of a guardian.

Malik :: Book 28 : Hadith 28.2.4

Malik related to me from Abdullah ibn al-Fadl from Nafi ibn Jubayr ibn Mutim from Abdullah ibn Abbas that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "A woman who has been previously married is more entitled to her person than her guardian, and a virgin must be asked for her consent for herself, and her consent is her silence "

Dawud :: Book 29 : Hadith 3952
Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The child of adultery is worst of the three.

Dawud :: Book 17 : Hadith 2867
Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib:

I memorised (a tradition) from the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him): There is no orphanhood after puberty

Unknown said...

HAHAHAHAH You people are a literal joke! If you are followers of Jesus you would not slander anyone or anything as EVERYTHING IS OF GODS CREATION!

Also the Arabs of that time didn’t count the age of the women from the birth but from the moment of puberty -so aisha r.a was a girl of 18 -20 years old.

David Wood said...

LOL! Lying for Allah, eh? Islam only allows prepubescent girls to play with dolls. They are forbidden for girls who have reached puberty. But the Hadith says that Aisha was still playing with dolls when she was taken to Muhammad's house for consummation. So you're saying that Aisha was 18-20 years old and still hadn't reached puberty?

Any other lies you'd like to tell for your prophet?

Unknown said...

The age of consent in one of the American States was just 7 years, just 120 years ago! But the Western people did not know that and just criticized Islam and Muslims for the marriage of the Mohammed and Aisha more than 1400 years ago.

David Wood said...

LOL! Nice try, Fatma. The reason laws change is that people recognize them as wrong and immoral. Slavery was once legal in America. Does that mean that slavery is right or that it's wrong to condemn slavery? No.

But it sounds like you approve of young girls getting married to much older men. Sad to see what Islam has done to you.

And that's the point. The world is capable of making moral progress, but Islam keeps people in the seventh century.

Unknown said...

LOL! Nice try, Fatma. The reason laws change is that people recognize them as wrong and immoral. Slavery was once legal in America. Does that mean that slavery is right or that it's wrong to condemn slavery? No.

But it sounds like you approve of young girls getting married to much older men. Sad to see what Islam has done to you.

And that's the point. The world is capable of making moral progress, but Islam keeps people in the seventh century.

Excuse me, did you read that I approve of little girls getting married at this age. No There was no conclusinon done by me. I simoly state the facts.I was pointing out that westerners need to think befoer they speak because as the syaing goes, the pot can not talk about the kettle especually if the pot so black that he will never be any other color.Secondly this english word pedophile or the concept was not even an issue. you can not apply these word to atime in the pastwhen things were totatlly differnt.The thing that i am trying to say again is that no one can critisize our Prophet without critising themselves. As if your crap smell like roses. Far from smelling good.And lastly some Muslims who have not apply their faith to the, adapted to the year may do this.I do not approve of it, it is not in our belief.

Unknown said...

Wait a minute....What about Lot having sex with his daughters? What about Noah getting drunk? What about David having a man killed so he could screw the guy's wife? What about Mary and Jospeh? Joseph was an old man and Mary gave birth to Jesus when she was about 13 years old. You are taking things from Hadiths, some of which are not reliable. Nothing in the Quaran says it's ok to have sex with children. The problem is that there are extremists in every religion..but take the Jews for example. Read the Sanhedrin...you'll find that it is perfectly fine to have sex with young girls for Jews. Mormons wear magical underwear..and God commanded in Numbers that the Israelits kill all male enemies but keep the women who have not had sex yet...take a look in the mirror at your own religion first.

David Wood said...

Wow, Jon. If you were trying to show everyone how ignorant and desperate you are, you nailed it!

You complain about issues in the Bible (e.g., Lot's sin, David's sin, etc.), but you deliberately omit the fact that THE BIBLE CONDEMNS THESE ACTIONS. People, sin, and the Bible condemns it. This is very different from what we find in Islam, where Allah constantly rushes to justify Muhammad's perversion.

And yet you're using the Bible as a response to Muhammad having sex with a prepubescent girl? Does Islam condemn this? Not at all! Rather, the Qur'an affirms Muhammad as the pattern of conduct that you're supposed to imitate (Qur'an 33:21). Would you marry a nine-year-old girl like your prophet did?

You say that some hadith are reliable. That's true, but the one's that I quoted are all SAHIH. There the most reliable hadith. If you're going to reject these, you have to reject Islam as well, because these are as good as hadith get, and you don't have Islam without the hadith.

You say that the Qur'an doesn't allow sex with prepubescent girls. Apparently, you didn't even read the article. The Qur'an promotes sex with prepubescent girls in 65:4 (read it, along with the commentaries I provided).

So you're contradicting both your god and your prophet, which makes you an apostate. Why do you follow a religion that you don't really believe in?

And why do you lie about Christianity? How can you be following the truth when you have to lie so much? Sad to see what your religion does to you.

Unknown said...

The only thing I will say is, before you make any more opinions, if I were you, I would seek a sheikh and/or scholar who is Muslim and another , maybe non Muslim , discuss your opinions with them.

Anonymous said...

The discourse and debate around these issues will continue perhaps ad infinitum (although I pray this will not be so), however what cannot be denied (though I'm sure someone will) is that the Qur'an and the Hadith (the ones on which we have consensus) contain verses, legal injunctions and examples that provides a validation and justification for good, and for evil. The Islamic extremists brandishing a sword has as much justification from the Islamic texts to behave that way, as does the moderate Muslim expounding words of acceptance and peace. So too does the husband who uses physical punishment on his wife or marries an underage bride. Conservative Muslims may argue that the legal imperatives disallow these things, while the fundamentalists Muslim just as convincingly argues that the legal imperatives makes it their right.

Both conservatives and extremists claim equally to be serving the higher objectives (Maqasid) of Islamic law, both have dedicated and highly qualified scholars, both can quote the Qu'ran and Sunnah and both claim to be the true servants of Allah who want to bring about a better world. All this using the same council of texts!

While man is pretty clever at misrepresenting texts to mean whatever suits his agenda, the unique thing about Islam is that you don't have to misrepresent the texts to find justification for killing, abuse and domination. You can find justification from proof texts in the Jewish and Christian texts for sure, but you have to misrepresent the texts to do it. Why would Allah provide a revelation that just as easily validates wrong doing?

Also,if Islam was Allah's revelation to put believers on the right path, addressing the errors of earlier faiths, then shouldn't it follow that Islam, of all the faiths, would be the most clearly delineated and sign posted(this being its expressed purpose)? How is it then that disagreements led to killing each other in the first generation of Muslim leaders? If even Aisha, mother of Muslims, took up a sword against fellow believers, how rightly guided could they have been?

Finally, as logic, knowledge and reason are highly revered within Islam shouldn't it be the most logical and accessible of the three faiths also? Today, Islam is so convoluted and complex that the average Muslims, without Imams, fatwas and scholarly re-re-re-re-interpreations, has no hope of finding the 'right path'. How then does Islam claim to be a 'straight path' if one must jump through a hundred hoops, chose specific schools of thought, lean entirely on human authority and wait unendingly for consensus to be reached before putting one foot in front of the other? God's ways are higher than ours, but these convoluted paths seems to lead Muslim in any direction, except 'straight'.

These are not rhetorical questions, not are they meant to entrap anyone. I would sincerely appreciate thoughts from Muslim readers.

Realist said...

LOL the proof that the garbage ass so called prophet was a pedophile are SO CLEAR.. The fact that ISLAM is a garbage death cult which instructs its followers to treat non-muslims like second class citizens and to murder them is also CLEAR. It's pointless arguing with a brainwashed muslim like some of the few who posted in response to this blog because they have been brainwashed since birth by a death cult and facing the fact their religion is garbage would destroy a very big part of their miserable lives. Everything they believe and think is based on a death book, which is why this religion is so dangerous.

Anonymous said...

Dear Realist,
Interesting pseudonym considering your fairly unsubstantiated and emotional comment? I'm not sure if you're meaning to just represent yourself or whether you're trying to represent a side in this very important debate. Perhaps you've just had a very, very, bad day in which I hope there's someone who can pray with you. Whatever the reason, your comment reveals that you neither understand Islam nor Christianity, nor the reason this article was written.

The human beings that you deride, condemn and cast aside with terrifying indifference are in fact the same people as you and I. God created them, Jesus died for them and the gospel was written for them. By your argument, all that God did was pointless if indeed there is no way to reach Muslims.

Further if the evidence is CLEAR (capitols yours), as you ferociously assert then produce it so we can once and for all put this debate to rest. The reality is that we do not have the evidence to either prove it or deny it, hence the debate.

Hateful speech masquerading as a comment, does nothing but promote further hate. I suspect this was not your aim, but it was the outcome.

The slogan "All I need to know about Islam, I learnt at 9/11" has justified a commitment to ignorance of epidemic proportion and provided a greater obstacle for the gospel, than any physical attack ever could.

Finally, loving Muslims does not equate to condoning Islam. It is, however, worth asking yourself, what hating all Muslims condones.

Bart said...

Paige. You mention" Both conservatives and extremists claim equally to be serving the higher objectives (Maqasid) of Islamic law, both have dedicated and highly qualified scholars, both can quote the Qu'ran and Sunnah and both claim to be the true servants of Allah who want to bring about a better world. All this using the same council of texts!"

You make the case of different interpretation. But the original question remains. Evidence from Hadith and from the Koran has been presented regarding Mohammad's sexual practices with children. What sect conservative, fundamentalist, secular or mainstream Muslim has presented any interpretation showing this is totally incorrect. Yes the suggestion has been made for example that Aisha was 19 when she has sex and not nine but WHAT EVIDENCE was provided from Islamic Sacred texts to support this contention?
Also two wrongs do not make a right but off topic arguments have been made about Judaism or Christianity also condoning sex with children. Counter evidence has been presented showing this not to be true.

As regards whether Christianity historically condoned child sex:
Reid, Charles J., "The Rights of Children in Medieval Canon Law" (2007). U
of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07-34
Kuefler, Mathew
Love, Marriage, and Family in the Middle Ages: A Reader, and: Love, Sex and
Marriage in the Middle Ages: A Sourcebook (review)
The Catholic Historical Review - Volume 90, Number 4, October 2004, pp.
The Canon Law On the Formation of Marriage and Social Practice in the Later
Donahue Journal of Family History.1983; 8: 144-158
Child sexual abuse: historical cases in the Byzantine Empire (324-1453 A.D.)
John Lascaratos and Effie Poulakou-Rebelakou
a Department of the History of Medicine, Medical School, National Athens
University and International Hippocratic Foundation of Kos., Athens, Greece
b International Hippocratic Foundation of Kos., Athens, Greece
Received 13 October 1999; revised 13 October 1999; accepted 4 December 1999.
Available online 7 July 2000.
Conclusion: The research of original Byzantine literature disclosed many
instances of child sexual abuse in all social classes even in the mediaeval
Byzantine society which was characterized by strict legal and religious

Finally some of points about christianity and Islam. Most Christians are NOT Biblically fundamentalis i.e. the Bible is not tahen to be literal truth nor was it dictateds by god. Muslims however believe the Koran WAS dictated to Mohammad and not only that but when he finished it was looked at and any possible errors corrected so it is literally the words of god as God wanted it.
Most christians are not "Bible only" In fact a tiny minority are. Most Christians believe also in a parallel Christian tradition following on from the Apostles .It is called apostolic succession and the Magesterium and is a but like the Caliphate. But while the caliphate ended the Magesterium didn't. So to christians it is more about living like christ than following words in a book but the book does give them a good idea as to how to live like Christ. finally the Magesterium discussed core concepts of Christianity in the first few centuries and they came up with the core beliefs and these have not changed and are still held by most Christians. By most I mean Roman ( 1.2 billion) Orthodox ( 400 million) and Anglican and Lutheran protestants ( about 150 million). These number about 80-95 per cent of Christians. NONE of them believed any prophet had sex with a six year old and they also believe if any one ever did it was wrong.
This is entirely different to an interpretation of Islam condoning child sex and I have yet to see the interpretation saying the acts with Aisha never happened.

Bart said...

I shouls clarify Byzentine Culture and the Orthodox christian church can be regarded as the same thing. See:
Child Abuse & Neglect, Volume 24, Issue 8, August 2000, Pages 1085-1090
stated in reference to:

Byzantine society which was characterized by strict
legal and religious


Accesses Oct 3 2014
Byzantine culture and Orthodoxy are one and the same.
You can also check Early christian scholars and there is no discussion on Mary being 14 when she had Jesus. In fact the doctrine is she was a virgin and did not have sex to have Jesus.
A further doctrine which is mainly roman catholic says Mary herself was conceived without a sexual act. It is called the "immaculate conception"
You can find Early Church fathers here:
There are Ante and Post Nicaean fathers
Just to fill you in the Roman and Orthodox church were united until the Seventh Ecumenical council which was after the last of these writings.
At the same site you will also find Islamic Arabic Sufi etc. texts http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/index.htm

Bart said...

I am quite surprised at the number of Islamic sites that dont actually refer to the age of marriage or of consummation of marriage. For example
skirts around the central issue which is the age of marriqage and consummation of marriage. It presents a long story about a lot of other things it even asks "What is the true historical evidence about the person life of prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him)?" but does not mention even ONE of the 24 or so references in the Hadiths which attest to the ages of 6 and 9. In addition quite early on it asks [highlighted in BOLD]
"What is the truth behind of the age of prophet's wife, Ayesha?" and it says NOTHING AT ALL about the actual age.
Again in http://islamnewsroom.com/news-we-need/23-how-old-was-ayesha-at-marriage-really
the question is asked "Why did Mohamed marry little Ayesha when she was only an immature girl of 6 years?" Rather than answer this the question is changed to "
Did Muhammad, peace be upon him, marry a girl too young for marriage?"and the answer given as "No". But in spite of claiming Aisha herself was the source of the Hadiths on this the actual ages ( SIX for marriage and NINE for consummation) are NOT mentioned. In fact the marriage at age six is denied without even mentioning the age by saying it didnt happen and it happened years later. But the actual Hadiths from aisha saying six and nine are not mentioned. Also the question WHY this marriage happened is not mentioned. What is mentioned without referring to the actual Hadith is "This is a misunderstanding of stories (ahadeeth) of Muhammad, peace be upon him, in Saheeh Al Bukhari." It then goes into asking "OK! So - What Was Ayesha's Age At Marriage to Prophet Muhammad? Eventually it says "Cleary she was offered to him in marriage, but obviously it was not accepted until some years later, when she again narrates a similar incident and at that time she was married to the prophet, peace be upon him.

She tells us they had consumated the marriage when she was old enough and ready (and she tells us she was very pleased about the whole entire thing). So, if she is having no problem with any of this, then who is complaining? "

But it does not give references to the Hadiths which clearly say six for marriage. and ther are over 20 references to this. Also it NEVER mentions the age of nine h=hust "some years later" when NINE is clearly mentioned along with six. One must ask if the people who refer to Hadith without actually stating what the actual Hadiths say are being totally forthright here?

Spacedocker said...


> In the United States, as late as the 1880s most States set the minimum age at 10–12, (in Delaware it was 7 in 1895).


Unknown said...

Well, you can check the debates on youtube between Muslim scholars and those called pastors or priests and see who is more comfortable in giving the answers, and who is following one version book and who is following more than 60 versions book. Anyway we do not care about what you are thinking about our prophet because you guys worshiping a human (peace be upon his soul),who drinks and eats and goes to bathroom and nothing is worse than worshiping other than the only One. The whole article means nothing, if you think you are on the right side ask your scholars if they can find any error in the Holy Quran.

Unknown said...

This is to all readers. Their are multiple types of muslims much like in Christianity where their are multiple types of Christians. This site is based on Salifi muslims which really aren't muslims at all. David Woods video on how rape is allowed in Islam (Which was also fabricated and made by Zionists) In the video he quotes that if he was to become muslim, he would become Salifi. Salifi are corrupt (much like this website) and encourage rape and killing of innocent muslims and non-muslims. I hope you can all do good amount of research just like you have done to prove Muhammad (pbuh) was a pedophile. If you people can actually have a Q/A with an a Shiite Scholar, not to be confused with an Ismaili, Wahabi, or Salifi "scholar".

Wish You the Best

Unknown said...

if the given articles and references against prophet MO are totally wrong then why don't you islamic peoples come forward and explain it

1. how many wives did MO have ? (however islam allows only 4 marriage )

2. what was the age of Aisha when she got married to MO and when she had first sex with him.

3. whether MO had sex with his Aunt's dead body or not.

4. how would you conceal that MO had occasionally sex with concubines.

Unknown said...

You can be sure he had fewer wives than Solomon.

Rollins 7 said...

Jon McLeod if your mission in life is to ridicule yourself in the most ways possible, you are almost there. Keep it up.

Anonymous said...

Dear George,

I beg to differ. There are not "multiple types of Christians" at all. There are multiple ways in which Christians express their faith, but their faith does not differ. All Christians are members of one family all believing that we are saved by the grace of God through faith in Jesus and His atoning work on the cross. Like a large family, diversity is something we all cherish and encourage. In what matters however, Christians are wholly united. One Christian leader from the 18th century expressed this as 'in the essentials unity, in the non-essentials liberty, but in all things love'.

As a Christian I am able to walk into any Christian church in any country in the world and be among family. How they express their faith is purely external, what unites us is our internal relationship with the same Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Indeed, Christians represent the largest family on the face of the earth, united by our love of the same God and differing only in the non-essentials.

Different denominations are a testimony that the truth of the gospel is transcendent and not changed by cultural or external forces. I have brothers and sisters who are Greek orthodox, Anglican, Protestant, Pentecostal, etc. etc. and have worshiped and prayed with them in perfect unity.

Muslims have killed more Muslims than anyone else in the world. The deadly divisions in your faith have been a part of Islam since its inceptions. Early Muslims were almost immediately divided, despite holding power in the land, despite all being from the same geographical location. Early Christians were united despite being tortured, killed, persecuted and despite the fact they came harking from different lands with different languages and cultures.

The divisions in Islam are so numerous that barely has one finished an Islamic study course and a new one has been created. Each willing to kill or discredit the others using the same textual evidence.

Islam may once have been a religion for the every day man, but as a highly respected and very learned Imam and professor told me recently, "Islam cannot be understood by the ordinary person now. Only the best scholars can be trusted now to explain the Qur'an.".

My children can open the Word of God and find meaning and direction for their lives. My nephew and nieces do not need to learn a different language or go consult scholars to read the Bible and discover that God loves them with a love that is unequaled on this earth.

The scholars you speak of are not even united, nor can Muslims have any assurance that what they are being told is correct as the Qu'ran is now out of their reach, beyond their understanding, abrogated time and time over, until no-one really knows what's what's in and what out.

Islam is now divided into two sectors. The one is the largest mass, they are ruled by scholars and academics whose fatwas and counsels are clung for fear of getting something wrong. The lesser, but just as legitimate side of Islam is ruled by those wielding weapons and threats whose fatwas and decisions are clung to for fear of death.

Now is the time to really ask yourself, is this a god that is looking after his followers?

Bart said...

Spacedocker on Dec 25 said...
as late as the 1880s most States set the minimum age at 10–12, (in Delaware it was 7 in 1895).
So what? At that time and for 1900 years the church had said sex between adults and children was WRONG no matter what state passed laws saying it was acceptable.
saif subhy ".. who is following one version book and who is following more than 60 versions book."

there are thousands of surviving greek and hebrew manuscripts both of the bible and about the bible from the first century of christianity on. The Old testament was around then ( at the time of Jesus) unchanged for centuries. almost all of the new testament can be found in writings outside of the new testament. Some from people who were alive when Jesus was alive e.g. The earliest Church Fathers, (within two generations of the Twelve Apostles of Christ) are usually called the Apostolic Fathers since tradition describes them as having been taught by the twelve. They include Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp of Smyrna. In addition, the Didache and Shepherd of Hermas are usually placed among the writings of the Apostolic Fathers although their authors are unknown; like the works of Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp, they were first written in Koine Greek.. Greek was the common language of the Roman Empire. In addition they are parallel syriac manuscripts, the dead sea scrolls , etc.
One can identify fabricated and interpolated verses by comparing to earlier Greek and Syriac verses e.g. first to third century

These sources are much closer in time to Jesus than Islamic writers to Mohammad and more in number than Hadith writers are to Mohammad or Koran writers are to the Koran.
Also Islamic history records different Korans and missing verses.
your "60 versions" argument does not apply
He also said: "Anyway we do not care about what you are thinking about our prophet because you guys worshiping a human"
This is a double fallacy
1. It is not only christians who argue so the "you guys" aslo included those who do not worship Jesus.
2. Whether or not christians worship Jesus had nothing logically to do with whether the Koran and Hadith are correct according to themselves.
Even if Jesus is not God and the Bible all made up lies that would not prove and has nothing to do with Islams claims about Islam.
In addition Islamic history mentions other Korans which had more verses but which were ordered to be burned. If they were incorrect then that means that there were incorrect Korans at some time in history.

Bart said...

George Berkovic on said... shiites have differnt traditions .
True Shia Islam does not regard Aisha in a good light.
But Shia also has child marriage

عن علي بن يقطين قال: سألت أبا الحسن عليه السلام أتزوج الجارية وهي بنت ثلاث سنين؟ أو يزوج الغلام وهو ابن ثلاث سنين؟ وما أدنى حد ذلك الذي يزوجان فيه؟ فإذا بلغت الجارية فلم ترض فما حالها؟ قال: لا بأس بذلك إذا رضي أبوها أو وليها

[ From Ali bin Yaqteen: I asked Abu Al-Hasan (as) if I can marry a little girl that is three years old, or if a young boy that is three can get married, and the minimum age for marriage? What if she grows into puberty and doesn’t want to, then what? He said: It is fine if her father or caretaker doesn’t mind. ]

Reference : Tahdheeb ul Ahkam, by al-Tusi Vol. 7, p. 382
"Let us see what Shia scholars have said regarding the marriage of Lady Fatima"
and he says NINE!

on McLeod said...

You can be sure he had fewer wives than Solomon.

so what? If solomon had loads of wives christians dont think that is something to copy. christians and Jews regard Solomon as very wise but not as Holy all the time. You should read what their books say about him. The Hebrew Bible credits Solomon as a Prophet and the builder of the First Temple in Jerusalem and portrays him as great in wisdom, wealth, and power, but ultimately as a king whose sins, including idolatry and turning away from Yahweh, led to the kingdom's being torn in two during the reign of his son.
We reap what we so and the sins of the father are visited on the son. and so on.

Anonymous said...

Dear Saif,

You wrote "The whole article means nothing, if you think you are on the right side ask your scholars if they can find any error in the Holy Quran."

You are mistaken sir in thinking that Christians need to consult scholars every time they need to understand something.

I wrote about this earlier, but you raise a very important distinctive of Islam, that is, your dependency on "scholars" to interpret your holy verses for you, and to you.

I appreciate that within Islam you have had a long tradition of depending on the 'learned' to tell you what the Qur'an actually means, but doesn't it trouble you that you are so completely dependent on men to know what Allah wants for your life?

If Mohammad was illiterate and relatively unlearned, then shouldn't Islam represent a religion that can be understood by those of similar ilk?

From the time of the rightly guided Caliphs until now, the supposedly divine and immutable Qur'anic verses have been re-interpreted thousands of times over, verses have been abrogated, then re-added, then abrogated again and in all this, you must wait for the latest counsel of scholars to give you consensus before you know what you believe.

Certainly Christianity and Judaism have a long tradition of encouraging scholarly pursuits, but our faith in not based on these scholars, nor do we look to them to tell us what to believe.

My own children can open the Bible and find profound and deeply personal messages which the Holy Spirit, not men, interprets for them.

Certainly, they learn aspects of their faith from our example, but many times I simply say "Ask the Lord in prayer and He will show you the answer Himself." That is our confidence, that we have access to the mind of our Heavenly Father through Jesus and can seek consensus with Him directly.

Doesn't it make you feel somewhat insecure to know that fallible humans are telling you what to believe?

One Islamic scholar told me that this was because Allah loved reason and wanted his followers to be scholarly, but, of course, he was only speaking for the small minority of Muslims, like himself, that are able to devote their lives to scholarly pursuits. "What of the others? Those who are called to work in other ways?" I asked him. "They have us to think for them" he replied.

Anonymous said...

For clarification Saif, when I assert verses have been "re-added", it is in the context of abrogation, and therefore is meant in the figurative, not literal sense.

I would sincerely be delighted to hear your thoughts on this topic. Essentially, do Muslims rely too heavily upon scholars for their understanding of the Qur'anic verses?

Unknown said...

Dear Paige, thank you for your comment about mine. First, I want to apologize for all those who read my comment and found it offensive that was because I was shocked by reading many of the comments in this blog that I did not expect. Regarding your question, we don't rely totally on the scholars to explain for us the Qura'an you know why the answer is simple and it's because it written in my own language so I can read and easily get the point of what is mentioned. We need scholars, which at this time many are not trustworthy, to educate the people about for example how to pray or fast or how to apply the teachings of the religion we have to do because these things are found in the teachings of the Prophet (peace be upon his soul) and they can help people with such things . We don't need them to talk to us about what are the principles of Islam or to tell us about other prophets or to prove to us that the Qura'an is authentic you know why because we know these things because it's written in my own language and I know what is the point of all of these things and the most important one is knowing the answer to "why we are created and what for" and believe me all Muslims, Arabs and non-Arabs , they know the answer. When I talked about the scholars and the preachers, I mentioned that because it's their job to prove to the other who is right and who is wrong because they are the one who supposed to know about the historical things that is specific for each religion.
Finally, and to give you my honest opinion, I believe that everyone is free in what he believes in because it's his own life and as long as he is happy with what he believes in then why try to interfere with that. I hope all of us are guided to the right path that the God wanted to us which is the essence of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

Anonymous said...

Dear Saif,

Thank you for your thoughtful and intelligent reply. I really appreciate that you took the time to respond.

Thank you for clarifying your thoughts regarding how scholars are viewed within Islam. That was very interesting.

Horrifying Muslims is not the purpose of this blog or the Acts 17 Ministry as far as I can see, and most of us wouldn't be here if it was. It seems to me that this site opens the lid on subjects that Muslims are themselves divided on, and for which the Qur'an and Hadiths do not provide adequate explanation.

As I wrote in an earlier post on this page, there is evidence that needs to be heard from both sides so using emphatic and absolute phrases such as "Mohammad was a #!?#" are counter-productive, purile and not worthy of this forum.

As a Christian, I often hear the name of my Lord and Saviour bandied about as if it were a dirty dish rag covered in filth. My God's glorious name is associated with all manner of evil on a regular basis, publicly and privately. This offends me deeply and profoundly so I do appreciate how you feel. I have an example in Jesus of how I am to behave towards those misusing it. Jesus, not only forgave such people, but He went a step further, He willingly laid his mortal life down so that they would have the opportunity to know Him.

I know that sounds foolish to you, and guess what? It does to me as well. I have family and friends that I would die for without question, but if you asked me to die for a member of ISIS or the KKK to give them the opportunity of turning from evil towards God, then I'm going to suggest the idea is foolishness.

The charge of 'foolishness', however, has been brought against Christians for 2 thousands years. Paul the Apostle was considered 'mad' for believing what he did (Acts 26:24). Scriptures tell us that the wisdom of God appears as foolishness to a world where love is earned not given freely (1 Corinthians 1:18).

That is not to say, it IS foolishness, but that without the aid of God's Spirit, the idea of God coming to earth to die for people who don't care about Him doesn't make sense.

I am proud to be a fool for Christ.
I do not always completely understand how God can love me as He does, but I see the change that it has brought about in my life, and I see how it has empowered me to love the unlovely.

Another commenter wrote on this page (to a Muslim) "Why should we love Mohammad?". The answer is plain -because Christ loved him, and not only loved him but died so that Mohammad could find the right path to God. I hope with all my heart that Mohammad made that right choice. None of us know for sure what happened in the final moments of Mohammad's life.
It's not a closed case for anyone, except the devil.

It would be lovely (in a sort of Disney way) if it only mattered that everyone was happy and that beliefs weren't important. But you and I Saif, know that's not true. You and I are monotheists who believe that there is a right way, and a wrong way. The right way leads to God and the wrong way leads away from Him. I cannot be content while seemingly happy people meander their way to a place without God. That is not happiness, that's not even blissful ignorance, it is a slow spiritual death.

Of course, I can't change anyone, or force anyone to believe anything, but I can say "Hey, I noticed that you were just about to jump off that cliff, there's a bridge just ahead if you're interested."

In the end though one of us is right, and one of us is wrong, but we cannot both be right. And being close doesn't actually help either. Being one degree off north is enough to ensure that a person is thousands of kilometers from their destination.

I have very much enjoyed our brief discussion and I hope that we can continue exchanging views in the future. Shalom.

Unknown said...

Dear Paige,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me and I am very happy that you and I proved ,to the person responsible for creating this blog as well as the people above, that there is always a way to communicate with each other when there is a mutual respect and when a discussion is made for the sake of reaching the truth instead of hurting each other.
I just want to clarify about your comment regarding Qura'an and the abrogation you meant. Qura'an was revealed in a step-wise manner over 23 years through the Prophet (peace be upon him), for example at first alcohol was not forbidden but later in time it is forbidden. I can understand that, the reason is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) is sent to people who were pagans and all they cared about is women,slavery, alcohol, and fighting with each other beside other things they liked including their language and poems and stuff like that. So the step-wise manner in revealing the Qura'an helped them a lot in leaving all the bad habits in their culture at that time. This is all I have about your comment about the Qura'an, I hope I was able to answer your question because I am not a scholar.
Over a period of time alcohol was completely forbidden, slavery started to diminish, along with other things like interest..etc.
Islam freed Muslims, at that time, from everything except following the guidance of the God. Unfortunately, nowadays, I see that many Muslims gave up their religion by being enslaved to their politicians, money, the scholars who praise their politicians even more than the God himself, moreover, I hear about who call themselves "Muslims" who are involved in killing innocent people, what a shame.

Now while I am writing it came to my mind what you said about Muslims relying heavily on their scholars. Oh My God, now I get it, I guess, in the right way. When I answered you, my answer is based on the norms of Islam. And as I always say, there is no bad religion but, unfortunately, there are always bad applicants of the religion.

I don't want to make it long, but I hope both of us, including all people of all kinds who have the will and sincerity to follow the true guidance and want to be on the right path, to find our way easily without any doubts.


Bart said...

i note you site seems to have many of the man Hadith references about marriage age but I didnt notice this one in any places on the net even though it is not from the main six

Sunan Ibn Majah

Abdullah said: “The Prophet married Aishah when she was seven years old, and consummated the marriage with her when she was nine, and he passed away when she was eighteen.”
: Sahih (Darussalam)
English reference : Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1877
Arabic reference : Book 9, Hadith 1951

iamme said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
iamme said...

Lets ask muslims because it is fair to hear from both sides, right?
do we all want truth instead of hatred against any thing?



Unknown said...

Thank you David wood.

Very thorough and respectful article. Just a couple of things, since this article was written, the general scholarly consensus by Muslims has since shifted, to now admit Muhammad did in fact marry Aisha at the age of six and consummate at age nine. I can only assume the pressure and challenges from the outside, to shed light on the truth has finally prevailed.

When it come to sex with little girls, Muhammad as a supposed prophet, with allegedly divine command, stands alone.

There is not the tiniest hint, or shred of evidence that would suggest any Biblical prophet or character in biblical times was ever charged with pedophilia, for the simple fact, it was never endorsed by the God of the Bible.

Anyone interested in checking out more on this topic, can see this blog


o brothers said...

In Islam there is no fixed age of marriage, whenever a person reaches the age of puberty he or she is fit for marriage. Nikah, the marital contract, may be made earlier but consummation of marriage can take place only after puberty is attained.
The wisdom behind Islam not fixing an age is evident, different people reach the age of puberty at different times. And the general trend also varies over the time and across the regions with variant climate conditions. For instance, people living in regions of low altitudes attain puberty earlier then those in high altitudes regions. Similarly people in warm climates attain puberty earlier then those in cold climates. Now keeping all this in mind consider that when Holy Prophet (PBUH) married Sayyidah Aisha while she was nine it was some 1400 years back and it happened in Arabia, a region with relatively lower altitude and hot climate as one of its most salient features.
It is rather erroneous to say that Sayyidah Aisha (RA) was a child bride. She was a grown up girl.
Sayyidah Aisha herself narrates; ‘Holy Prophet (PBUH) married her when she was six years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine years old…’ (Bukhari, Hadith 4738)

Having known this, let me draw your attention to another saying of Sayyidah Aisha which Al-Tirmidhi has narrated under a Hadith in his collection’s Book of Marriage, Chapter 18. It goes as:

Sayyidah Aisha said: ‘When a girl is nine years old, she is a woman (meaning, she has attained puberty)

Leaving all the history aside, even now puberty at nine is no wonderful a phenomenon. Experts now suggest that age 7 (even 6 for some races) and not 8 should be considered precocious (i.e. early) for puberty among girls. Below is a reference that a nine year old Thai girl even became a mother.
Next comes the issue of her consent. Her nikah, the marital contract, was made when she was six but the marriage was consummated when she was nine. Now had she showed her displeasure about this marriage when she was nine, and thus a woman according to her own testimony, then marriage would haven been null and void, but it never turned up like that. She did not show any such notion and similarly never in her later life did she ever give any such impression. She rather always showed her love for the Holy Prophet (PBUH).
We know that Sayyidah Aisha (RA) was considered the most learned among the all the Companions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). The following testifies to this.

Abu Musa al-Ashari says: "Never had we (the companions) any difficulty for the solution of which we approached Aisha and did not get some useful information from her". (Tirmidhi, Hadith 3883. Albani classified it as Sahih)

She narrated some 2210 Ahadith from the Prophet (PBUH) and this was possible only because she lived with him for nine years and that too at a young age when people have a sharp memory and great sense of observation. Then she lived for about 46 years after the death of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and continued to teach the people matters of religion especially those related to household affairs and marital life. No other wife of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) did the similar job that may be compared with her blessed endeavors. This shows the Divine Wisdom for it was not the Prophet himself but Allah that ordained this marriage. She herself reports;

Allah's Messenger (PBUH) 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.’ (Bukhari, Hadith 6495)

Thus do Allah’s plans work in a marvelous way!

o brothers said...

In Islam there is no fixed age of marriage, whenever a person reaches the age of puberty he or she is fit for marriage. Nikah, the marital contract, may be made earlier but consummation of marriage can take place only after puberty is attained.
Next comes the issue of her consent. Her nikah, the marital contract, was made when she was six but the marriage was consummated when she was nine. Now had she showed her displeasure about this marriage when she was nine, and thus a woman according to her own testimony, then marriage would haven been null and void, but it never turned up like that. She did not show any such notion and similarly never in her later life did she ever give any such impression. She rather always showed her love for the Holy Prophet (PBUH).
She narrated some 2210 Ahadith from the Prophet (PBUH) and this was possible only because she lived with him for nine years and that too at a young age when people have a sharp memory and great sense of observation. Then she lived for about 46 years after the death of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and continued to teach the people matters of religion especially those related to household affairs and marital life. No other wife of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) did the similar job that may be compared with her blessed endeavors. This shows the Divine Wisdom for it was not the Prophet himself but Allah that ordained this marriage. She herself reports;

Unknown said...

I know this is an anti-Muslim site. But please get your facts straight, and stop spreading lies.
The Prophet did not marry Aisha when she was six. She was at the very least 17 years old, and at most 24.

Unknown said...

To the poster above:

This website isn't an anti-ANYTHING website. It's a website dedicated to TRUTH and EXPOSURE OF MANS DECEPTION. You're an absolute fool to worship anything BUT Jesus Christ, THE prophet of God and of course, God Himself.

Instead of READING THE ARTICLE, you instead post blatant fallacies that WERE NOT STATED ABOVE. The poster never claimed she was 6 years old upon marriage; She was 9 years old. This is a historical fact based on COUNTLESS research done by top Universities.

Get off your high horse and kneel to your ONLY GOD, because right now, you're advocating pedophilia by promoting the RAPE of a sick, deranged PROVEN pedophile named Muhammad who create Islam IN CLOSURE AND BEHIND DOORS, just as ALL Man's Sin is created.

Farewell and Find Christ, otherwise face his wrath upon your inevitable DEATH, HEATHEN.

Unknown said...

>I know this is an anti-Muslim site. But please get your facts straight, and stop spreading lies.
The Prophet did not marry Aisha when she was six. She was at the very least 17 years old, and at most 24.

You're advocating pedophilia. Not where in this article stated she was 6 when she married; Factually she was 9. This is a historically accepted fact.

Get off your high horse and kneel to your one, true God. Islam is a false belief system, created by Man to deceive other men away from Christ.

Find Him before He finds you, Heathen.

Amin said...

Does Islam support pedophilia or child marriages? Did Prophet Muhammad marry a 6 year old?

List of western pedophile and pederast advocacy organizations

Top 10 Countries With Highest Rape Crime

VPI said...

david wood has been brainwashing people not to call a pedophile a pedophile for half a decade " Because Muhammad was sexually attracted to women and girls of various ages (including Khadijah, who was 15 years his senior), he would not be a pedophile in this more specific sense". to which his adoring worshippers say : "simple_truth said...
Well done, David!

This paragraph you wrote below is very critical to discussing Mohammad sexual perversion:

Hence, given the ambiguity of the term, care should be used when applying it. Indeed, since the term is commonly understood in the narrower sense, critics of Islam may be better off not using it at all. (Needless to say, people who are interested in maintaining an ongoing discussion with Muslims should avoid emotionally charged terms whenever possible.)

I completely agree. I have always defended Mohammad against the charge of pedophilia since there aren't any Islamic sources that I am aware of that show any consistent perverted love towards young girls in general; thus, the charge of pedophilia is unfairly levied against Mohammad. People who try to witness to Muslims aren't going to get anywhere by levying the charge. It is simply the easiest way to turn off the Muslim from listening.
October 31, 2013 at 2:33 AM"

Vicky Ram said...

Thanks for sharing this informative blog. I have read your blog and I gathered some valuable information from this blog. Keep posting.

Guest posting sites

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

In response to William T, yes Mary probably was about 12.5 years old when she had Jesus. It would have been very unusual for someone older to not have been married after that age. In regards to Mark 5:41, where Jesus heals the "little girl", yes she was probably a child - even by Jesus' standards. However, this is because the Bible does not put an exact age to adulthood. You can be an adult at 12 or 13; or you still may be a child at 12 or 13. The reason why Jesus called her a child is because she most likely had not gone through puberty enough and she was not sexually mature. Remember, women began menstruation around 12.5 years old back then, and would be considered a woman upon the arrival of sexual maturity; again - at 12.5 years old. This 12 year old "little girl" was not sexually mature (hadn't reached 12.5 years) - so she was still a little girl; a little girl on the verge of becoming a young woman. Another thing is that the Bible says in 1 Corinthians that if a virgin has passed the flower of her age that she can get married. "Flower of her age" is an euphemism to a woman's period/child bearing abilities. God does not allow children to get married, thus someone who has not reached menstruation is still a child and someone who has reached menstruation is an adult. We also know that the "little girl" was pre-pubescent/not menstruating based on the fact that she was still living with her parents. In Jewish culture, once a girl became a woman, she would be immediately married off. Since she was still living with her parents and not married off, this meant she had not reached child bearing years yet, and thus not a woman. Another important point is that we must take the life of Jesus as an example of the child/adult stages of life. Luke 2:42 states "When He was twelve years old, they went up to the festival, according to the custom." This is an incredibly important verse. The festival is referring to the Feast of Passover. This is an incredible verse as it shows that Jesus was in fact a man at 12; because the Feast of Passover was required for ALL adult males. If you still believe in the adolescent myth you must read the following books: Teen 2.0 and The Myth of Adolescence. Here is a sermon preached by the writer of The Myth of Adolescence: https://vimeo.com/100675953 ; https://vimeo.com/100678818.
*PS: something to think about: Many sources I've read online seem to suggest that Jesus is calling the "little girl" lamb or pet lamb, which is a term of endearment.

coconut girl said...

So we omit the most important ..
But yeah, if you write about it, all of your dissertation is useless.
You have knowingly avoided a reality: there is NO consensus about the age of Aïcha. Islamic sources diverge about her age.

Terentius Antonio said...

MohamMoohead would be on a pedo register come 2021

Terentius Antonio said...

Ever know a kebab star that did not have 100 teenagers hungry?

Terentius Antonio said...

Mo is the prophet for the Devil

Terentius Antonio said...

Islam is an adoptive cult and pick bits of religions to suit its pedophile,murder and wife beating agenda. It is a parasite cult

brkylmz said...

New scholarship suggests the story of Islam's prophet marrying a minor is baseless propaganda fabricated for political and sectarian motives

Abdulmannon said...

Dear David,
[part 1] The elephant in the room here is the divinity of Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him, will say this once for each prophet), which your faith advocates. That is actually the only main and central difference between Christianity and Islam – not how early or late people are getting married. In fact, Jesus lived at a time that was even earlier than Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and he was Middle Eastern and of similar culture (not a white/Caucasian man as erroneously portrayed by some sources). Therefore, it would have been normal in the time of Jesus for people who reached puberty to be called young men and young women and for them to get married. And all you are doing in your lengthy article is applying presentism and that is why you are writing on this blog while proper Christian and Jewish and other religious studies scholars (who are not populist) don't consider this a central issue. For proper scholars the central issue is whether or not Islam accepts the divinity of Jesus or not and whether or not one rejects the faith based on that and whether or not the sources of Islam or Christianity (especially those that claim Jesus is God and son of God) are credible.
You are overcomplicating the simple and oversimplifying the complex. In Islam, the core moral beliefs are not relative, and at what age you get married is not a core belief. You are comparing apples to oranges when you accuse Muslims of explaining away some things with moral relativity. For us, morality at its core, is not relative – killing a human being unjustly – is and was a sin and is equal to killing all of humanity; same with many other crimes and sins. If I am correct, it is similar in Christianity – homosexuality is a sin – whether or not society allows it or condemns it. If tomorrow all the world's governments decide to legalise it, most Christians will still believe that it is wrong. And for some Christians that might not even be an issue in terms of core beliefs. So the question is – do I believe that Prophet Muhammad 1400 years ago did something wrong by consummating a marriage with somebody who had reached puberty – no, taking into account the circumstances of those times. Would I do that today – no, but not because you and some other guys decided it was morally wrong – but because this is no longer the norm based on different factors including scientific ones and because Islam doesn't require one to do so. Would I advocate that today – no – because Islam gives us the tools to apply the cultural, scientific and other norms of today. Would Muhammad do the same today – probably not – because he would be a product of the environment of his times in that sense. Would he still advocate belief in one God and say that murder is wrong – yes. Also the individual factors are present here too – Aisha may have reached puberty at 10 but another woman would have reached it at 15 – would he have waited if it was another woman who reached puberty later – yes. The Koran implying that there is a waiting period for pre-puberty women also doesn't mean that Islam is instructing Muslims to marry pre-puberty women – it could simply be commenting on what had happened before Islam or about people, according to the customs of their time, who married young girl but not yet consummated the marriage.

Abdulmannon said...

[part 2] Your article makes it seem like early marriage is a central part of Islamic belief. It is not. Central to Islam are the five pillars of practice (testament to God's oneness, prayer, charity, fasting, pilgrimage to Mecca) and six pillars of faith (belief in God, in his prophets, in his books, angels, predestination, and day of judgment). In fact, the Islamic law leaves some matters to culture and circumstances just like Western law. If it was okay 150 years ago for 9-13 year-olds to get married in Western secular law, it was okay for people to practice that in Islamic law 1400 years ago and Prophet Muhammad was a product of his environment at that time on that matter. And, if the life of Jesus was as documented as the life of Muhammad, you would have found a lot of such matters that would not have fit today's societal practices. That means, if Prophet Muhammad or Jesus lived today, they would have probably married somebody 18 and older in keeping to the norms of society today. You mentioned that the majority of Christians moved away from the practice of early marriage but so have the majority of Muslims. Most of the Muslim countries today have laws that keep the minimum marriage age at numbers that a comparable to Western countries and to relevant UN conventions.
And by the way, Christians cannot take credit for Western secular law either, it is something that evolved over many years and taken from different societies and cultures and different societies and cultures follow it today, including Muslim ones. So please don't paint the Muslims as outsiders and you guys as the inventors of all that is good. And please read about Islam's contributions to civilization, to culture, arts, architecture, science and so on. This website clearly has a narrow agenda to prevent Christians and Jews from exploring about Islam with cherry-picked arguments.
You should also consider the sample of the religion you are trying to discredit. Out of the 1.9bn Muslims, if anybody practices early marriage 'incorrectly' in TODAY'S context that would be very trivial to the practice of the vast majority of Muslims who live by the laws and circumstances AND still practice their faith and look up to Prophet Muhammad. And it wouldn't mean they were right or wrong or that they were following the example of Prophet Muhammad specifically since Islam leaves the specific age of the people getting married – both men and women – to minimum puberty and after that to whatever the society decides based on its needs. When you don't consider the large sample, it would be like trying to extrapolate and infer that the Christian religion is wrong because many Catholic priests with high authority were convicted of sex crimes against minors – since Catholic priests have a very central and almost God-like role and forgive people's sins, legislate what is right and wrong and carry some other functions that in Islam are reserved only for God. I, as a Muslim, do not for a second believe that all Christians are pedophiles based on the example of some priests engaging in such acts or that all Christians condone gay marriage because some Christian majority countries decided to be first to legalise gay marriage and then push other countries to follow suit.

Abdulmannon said...

[Part 3] Regarding dreams, if a prophet saw something in a dream, that would quality as revelation just as in the example of Prophet Joseph and Abraham (when he saw himself sacrificing his son – peace be upon them). Prophet Muhammad seeing Aisha in his dream, doesn't necessarily mean he was fantasizing about her as you incorrectly inferred. The point of that hadith was to show the divine command for the marriage. You should try to understand the contexts of the hadiths and their strengths before you cherry pick them for your arguments. You should also study the different Islamic sciences systematically, which would address the conceptual nuances which your arguments are missing and mixing up and which proper Western and Eastern scholars on Islam can pick up easily.
What you are really trying to do here is to keep Christians who are curious about Islam and who turn to Islamic sources from converting (we use the word reverting) to this faith. It is commendable that you are attempting to study Islamic sources directly even though some of your sources in previous articles come from distorted and questionable sources and you are not always applying the right lens or framework in your analysis. But every person reading your posts, shouldn't forget that they should themselves explore about Islam with an open mind from the Islamic sources before they are spoon-fed your conclusions because you clearly have an agenda of your own, which is to discredit Islam and its prophet.
Lastly, the fact that you are quoting different interpretations as 'defenses', actually is a good thing and shows that there is a lot of interpretation in Islam in different directions, just like there are lots of interpretations of the actions of Jesus in Christianity, and it is a normal religion and not a 'cult' like some commenters here claim.
We Muslims believe that your scriptures are from God but we also know from our sources that they have been tampered with. If they hadn't been tampered with, there would have been no need for another prophet to be sent by God. If you had as much information about the life of Jesus as Muslims had about the life of Muhammad, with minute details of his interactions with very specific people, there would be no other prophet and we right now would all be following Jesus and defending him against some people trying to discredit him (and believe me when you have that much detail about somebody's life – there will be some people who will attack that person). I sincerely hope that God will show you the right way and everybody else who is commenting here. I will keep you in my prayers. Peace out.
Also, look at history itself. There are 1.9 billion people, hundreds of thousands of mosques from which, the call to prayer proclaims that Muhammad is God's messenger. If he was morally questionable, 1.9bn people would not associate themselves with him and follow his faith. His name will be protected just as God said in the Koran – 94:4 "and [have We not] raised your reputation high" – well beyond the time when you and I and everybody else here turn to dust.
Lastly, I have a lot of Christian friends, some of whom have brought many people to Christianity with their sincerity, knowledge, wisdom and great character. Unfortunately, the hatred being spewed in the comments and the words like 'heathen' being used, would make me stay away from Christianity if they were trying to preach to me. I guess such behaviour is very unlike the character of Jesus, whom the people here should be emulating.