Aisha

[cestusdei]

Again, you’re not answering my claim.

In a stone aged desert where people die at age 30, is marrying a girl who turns 9 child rape?

In the backwoods of the Amazon today, where there is the equivalent of 7th century technology (or worse), are there tribes of child rapists because they marry women that young?

The key is the conditions in which people live. In harsh, undeveloped conditions, childhood is a luxury that people simply do not have. It’s very easy to forget that when you live your whole life in America, but as a Priest, surely you should be sensitive to the fact that most people in the world don’t live with medical technology and other material means of this sort.

pro, so if the key is the conditions in which people live then WHY do you still think it’s okay to marry 9 year olds today?

hamba, The question isn’t why we believe this hadith, it’s why do muslims believe it.

 

[hamba2han]

Answers paraphrased for brevity from Shaykh Gibril Haddad
sunnipath.com/Resources/Questions/QA00004861.aspx

It is most interesting that you are referring to the 'Sunni Path" website for reference and confirmation of the age of Aisha (ra) at the time of her marriage to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Well OK then, good for you.

Since you are relying on their judgment to settle religious matters concerning Islam, I like to ask whether you also accept their judgment on the following excerpt which I took from the webpage you quoted from:

The hadith Masters, Sira historians, and Qur’anic commentators agree that the splitting of the moon took place about five years before the Holy Prophet’s (upon him blessings and peace) Hijra to Madina.

And so then – Do you also accept their judgment that the splitting of the moon event did indeed take place that was one of the miracles the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) performed that proved that he was indeed a Messenger of God?

They certainly believe it really happened.

Do you agree with them?

If your answer is ‘NO’, then why do you believe them when they say that Aisha (ra) was 9 years old at the time her marriage was consumated?

They are after all relying only on the Qur’an and the Sunnah which of course includes the hadiths for all of their religious information.

 

[jack_hawkins]

It is clear, I think, that Islam does not advocate sex with children. Abraham was willing to kill both his children. We don’t seem to have any problem believing he was righteous. Everyone can find issues with their respective scriptures or actions taken on behalf of their religion.

I don’t think so - it’s pretty clear Islam does advocate sex with children, I have heard many Mohammedans defend Mohammed’s child abuse. Tu quoques don’t resolve the issue.
And when a girl has not had her first period she can be “thighed”.
Look at FFI for detailed discussion of Aisha and refutations of the denials about her age.

 

[Montalban]

Actually, they have indeed done so:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha’s_age_at_marriage

There’s really two interesting things about this you’ve obviously not considered.
a) Its to suggest that the Hadith which distinctly say she was nine is wrong - I’m always amazed when Moslems argue against the accuarcy of their own holy books
and
b) Wiki is simply re-printing an argument allegedly by a Terry O’Shanavas. I’ve met this apology a number of times, here’s what I stated then when I debated a pagan called Mizzmax
Mizmaxx:

The Ancient Myth Exposed by T.O. Shanavas

There are two (consistent) problems with the claims made herein by Mizmaxx’s western-orientated Muslim apologist. The first problem with most of these claims is that they are based on the ‘commentaries’ of Muslims on the Hadiths. Not the Hadiths themselves. The Hadiths are a source for the age of Aisha, and they agree about her age. Therefore, in weighing up who to believe, most Muslims will bow to the Hadith, over tradition. It seems T O Shanavas is unaware of this, and by extension, Mizmaxx has repeated his mistake.

The second problem deals with the actual concept of when a girl becomes a woman, wherein this apologist actually applies western values to dating a girls age. He uses the wrong measure.
Claim:
Mizmaxx:

The Prophet was an exemplary man. All his actions were most virtuous so that we, Muslims, can emulate them. However, most people in our Islamic Center of Toledo, including me, would not think of betrothing our seven years daughter to a fifty-two year-old man. If a parent agrees to such a wedding, most people, if not all, would look down upon the father and the old husband.
However, my long pursuit in search of the truth on this matter proved my intuition correct. My Prophet was a gentleman. And he did not marry an innocent seven or nine year old girl. The age of Ayesha has been erroneously reported in the hadith literature. Furthermore, I think that the narratives reporting this event are highly unreliable. Some of the hadith regarding Ayesha’s age at the time of her wedding with prophet are problematic. I present the following evidences against the acceptance of the fictitious story by Hisham ibn Urwah and to clear the name of my Prophet as an irresponsible old man preying on an innocent little girl.

Problem:

The Hadith are so widely accepted by Moslems that they are deemed second in importance ONLY to the Koran (which they believe to be the word of their god).

Claim:
Mizmaxx:

EVIDENCE #1: Reliability of Source
Most of the narratives printed in the books of hadith are reported only by Hisham ibn Urwah, who was reporting on the authority of his father. First of all, more people than just one, two or three should logically have reported. It is strange that no one from Medina, where Hisham ibn Urwah lived the first 71 years of his life narrated the event, despite the fact that his Medinan pupils included the well- respected Malik ibn Anas. The origins of the report of the narratives of this event are people from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have shifted after living in Medina for most of his life.

Problem:

We’re not looking at the narratives of the Hadith, but the Hadith themselves. The Hadith were collections of sayings of Muhammad and his followers. They were compiled by Islamic scholars, who tested them for accuracy. They were formed into collections such as Hadith Bukhari. Some later Islamic scholars made commentary on them, and it is these that they base their objections upon.

There’s a whole notion in Islam called the ‘science of Hadith’ where-by certain Hadith are more accepted BECAUSE of the sources. Mizmaxx’s argument is that the problem is not with the Hadith itself, but with someone’s commentary on the Hadith! This lessens her proofs greatly, for all she is showing is that the commentators, Ibn Hajar et al, are unreliable. NOT the Hadith, which as shown, are widely accepted by Moslems.

Consult:

Outlines of the Development of the Science of Hadith

Dr. Mustafa Awliya’i

al-islam.org/al-tawhid/hadith-science/

OR

An Introduction to the Science of Hadith

Suhaib Hassan, Al-Quran Society, London

ymofmd.com/hadith/Intro_Science_Hadith/

also at

islamworld.net/hadith.html

It is an important part of Islam that their own holy books are authentic - naturally enough.

 

[Montalban]

Claim:
Mizmaxx:

EVIDENCE #2: The Betrothal
According to Tabari (also according to Hisham ibn `Urwah, Ibn Hunbal and Ibn Sad), Ayesha was betrothed at seven years of age and began to cohabit with the Prophet at the age of nine years. However, in another work, Al-Tabari says: “All four of his [Abu Bakr’s] children were born of his two wives during the pre-Islamic period” (Tarikhu’l-umam wa’l-mamlu’k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara’l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).
If Ayesha was betrothed in 620 CE (at the age of seven) and started to live with the Prophet in 624 CE (at the age of nine), that would indicate that she was born in 613 CE and was nine when she began living with the Prophet. Therefore, based on one account of Al- Tabari, the numbers show that Ayesha must have born in 613 CE, three years after the beginning of revelation (610 CE). Tabari also states that Ayesha was born in the pre-Islamic era (in Jahiliya). If she was born before 610 CE, she would have been at least 14 years old when she began living with the Prophet. Essentially, Tabari contradicts himself.
CONCLUSION: Al-Tabari is unreliable in the matter of determining Ayesha’s age.

Problem:

Accepting that Al-Tabari is unreliable is superfluous as the primary evidence (that of the Hadith), say she was nine when the marriage was consummated.

Claim:
Mizmaxx:

EVIDENCE # 3: The Age of Ayesha in Relation to the Age of Fatima According to Ibn Hajar, “Fatima was born at the time the Ka`bah was rebuilt, when the Prophet was 35 years old… she was five years older that Ayesha” (Al-isabah fi tamyizi’l-sahabah, Ibn Hajar al- Asqalani, Vol. 4, p. 377, Maktabatu’l-Riyadh al-haditha, al-Riyadh, 1978).
If Ibn Hajar’s statement is factual, Ayesha was born when the Prophet was 40 years old. If Ayesha was married to the Prophet when he was 52 years old, Ayesha’s age at marriage would be 12 years. CONCLUSION: Ibn Hajar, Tabari an Ibn Hisham and Ibn Humbal contradict each other. So, the marriage of Ayesha at seven years of age is a myth.

Problem:

Ibn Hajar died in the year 852. This puts him two hundred years or so after the event. Secondly, Islamic tradition maintains that people are fallible, and their proclamations should be tested - against the Koran, first, then against the Hadith. Any discrepancies are subsumed by these works.

 

[Montalban]

…and so on and so on. You get the picture. If you’re really interested in reading more, go to where I debated her
4forums.com/political/showthread.php?p=59787&highlight=shanavas#post59787

But if you don’t want to read this, I’ve had this debate by Moslem apologists so many times, here’s more on the issue…
kiwimac:

Ok let’s take it from the top,

Montalban:

As noted, you simply could have cited where you stated this ‘information’ before. Further, had you read through this thread, I’ve already retorted much of what you cite here, because it too, was part of a cut and paste apology by MuslimConvert.

Most of your claims are ones he made. (see Appendix)

But, rather than just use your “I’ve posted this somewhere else…” defence, let’s look at the information you provide and I’ll point out all the mistakes.

Firstly, the quote at the beginning is telling… I’ll highlight the bit that stands out…

"What was Ayesha’s (ra) age at the time of her marriage?

It is normally believed that she was nine years old at the time of her marriage with Mohammad was consummated. I do think it was according to the traditions of the Arab culture, as otherwise people would have objected to this marriage. But unfortunately, the modern day man is not satisfied with an answer as simple as that."

I should leave the argument there, because I agree in total. It is normally believed that she was nine. That’s what I stated. That what your citation says too.

Thanks.

But unwilling to quit while I’m ahead, I’ll go into a bit of depth with regards to this unknown author’s personal opinions.

Firstly, they are allegedly based on the research of

Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi (urdu) as presented in his booklet, “Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka’inat”, Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan

understanding-islam.com/ri/mi-004.htm#1

Your ‘revision’ is novel to Islam, done by a Pakistani man…
MAULANA MUHAMMAD ALI, the author cited by The_true_path lived in the late 1800s. He was a modernist; educated in Britain.
"His editorials played a critical role in molding the political outlook of modern India. "
cyberistan.org/islamic/mmali.htm

As such he was an apologist for Islam; wishing to make it more palatable to his western educated audience. This was his raison d’etre, as is yours, to provide a false idea of Islam, based on recent conjecture.

 

[Montalban]

Last but not least…

Montalban:

“It appears that Maulana Muhammad Ali was the first Islamic scholar directly to challenge the notion that Aisha was aged six and nine, respectively, at the time of her nikah and consummation of marriage”
muslim.org/islam/aisha-age.htm

Thus the confession at the top of your site; because historically, Aisha has been accepted as being nine when the marriage was consummated.

He continues this novel approach with statements such as…

“In my opinion, the age of Ayesha (ra) has been grossly mis-reported in the ahadith. Not only that, I think that the narratives reporting this event are not only highly unreliable but also that on the basis of other historical data, the event reported, is quite an unlikely happening. Let us look at the issue from an objective stand point.”

(Ibid).

Most Muslims will take the writing of an Hadith over history…

"Of the four ahâdîth in Sahîh al-Bukhari, two were narrated from cAishah (7:64 and 7:65), one from Abû Hishâm (5:236) and one via 'Ursa (7:88). All three of the ahâdîth in Sahîh Muslim have cAishah as a narrator. Additionally, all of the ahâdîth in both books agree that the marriage betrothal contract took place when cAishah was “six years old”, but was not consummated until she was “nine years old”. Additionally, a hadîth with the same text (matn) is reported in Sunan Abû Dâwûd. Needless to say, this evidence is - Islamically speaking - overwhelmingly strong and Muslims who deny it do so only by sacrificing their intellectual honesty, pure faith or both.

This evidence having been established, there doesn’t seem much room for debate about cAishah’s age amongst believing Muslims. Until someone proves that in the Arabic language “nine years old” means something other than “nine years old”, then we should all be firm in our belief that she was “nine years old” (as if there’s a reason or need to believe otherwise!?!). In spite of these facts, there are still some Muslim authors that have somehow (?) managed to push cAishah’s age out to as far as “fourteen or fifteen years old” at the time of her marriage to the Prophet(P). It should come as no surprise, however, that none of them ever offer any proof, evidence or references for their opinions. This can be said with the utmost confidence, since certainly none of them can produce sources more authentic than the hadîth collections of Imâms al-Bukhârî and Muslim! Based on the research that I’ve done, I feel that there is a common source for those who claim that cAishah’s age was “fourteen or fifteen years old” at the time of the marriage. This source is The Biographies of Prominent Muslims which is published in book form, on CD-ROM and is posted in several places on the Internet. Just another example of why going to the sources is important . . ."

islamic-awareness.org/Polemics/aishah.html

(We concur with the general contents of the article.

and Allah Ta’ala Knows Best Mufti Ebrahim Desai islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=6618)

Summary: he acknowledges what most people believe to be true. He comes up with a re-wording of a novel argument (one that’s not even properly credited). There’s several assumptions made in this, and worst, as far as Moslems are concerned, it turns the order of authority on its head. Most Muslims believe Koran, hadith, commentary, in that order.

Thus the idea about her not being nine is only fairly recent and is not widespread, except amongst those pretending that this apology *is *Islamic

And so, again I ask this question:

I’ve already answered this. You believe it to be so.

You’ve either got to accept she was nine, as most Moslems do, or believe that she wasn’t despite explicitly worded Hadith saying she was, and thus denying the accuracy of ‘strong’ Hadith.

 

[Montalban]

The age of Aisha at marriage is an unsettled issue, and the subject of increasing attention in recent years. Several hadiths said to have been narrated by Aisha herself, such as Sahih Bukhari 5:58:234 and Sahih Muslim 8:3311, state she was six or seven years old when betrothed to Muhammad and nine years old when married or when the marriage was consummated.[2] Other traditional material (hadith, sira, etc.) suggests that Aisha may have been anywhere from twelve to nineteen years old when she married.

Also from wikipedia. So as a Muslim, you either have to believe Aisha wrote these and that they are true. Or you have to believe that she didn’t write them or that she lied.

The only ‘discrepancy’ in these things lies in whether you count her as being ‘married’ when she was betrothed (at six), or three years later (at nine) when she actually was married.

For some people could engagement as almost as binding as marriage.

However your selected sources say…
Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um 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 Allright, 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 a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle 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.

There’s no confusion here as she differentiates between six (engagement) and marriage (nine)

Your second selected source does offer a single year discrepancy, or when she was engaged.
Book 008, Number 3311:

'A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he 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.
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/008.smt.html#008.3311

Most Hadith say she was nine when the marriage was consummated.

You thus offer a singular example of a single year difference

For Moslems the strength of transmission leads them to believe this, despite your own wishes to the contrary; that they might be confused about the matter.

 

[pro_universal]

pro, so if the key is the conditions in which people live then WHY do you still think it’s okay to marry 9 year olds today?

hamba, The question isn’t why we believe this hadith, it’s why do muslims believe it.

cestusdei,

There are still people living in those conditions (or worse) today. I don’t get what you’re not understanding.

No technology, limited food, harsh environment, no medical care=get married young and fast.

This is a fact anywhere you go in the world, today or yesterday.

 

[Montalban]

The hadiths were compiled in it’s present form hundreds of years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) from written reports of the narrations and after undergoing a very stringent verification and filtering process known as the ‘science of hadith’.

The Qur’an, on the other hand, was completed during the life of the Prophet (pbuh) and he himself instructed and supervised everything that is written within it and not a single word or syllable has been added to or subtracted from it ever since it’s completion.

It’s amazing how Moslem apologists are so quick to diss their own holy books!

 

[Montalban]

cestusdei,

There are still people living in those conditions (or worse) today. I don’t get what you’re not understanding.

No technology, limited food, harsh environment, no medical care=get married young and fast.

This is a fact anywhere you go in the world, today or yesterday.

I note you’ve gone back to ignoring my posts. You only reply to point score. I am still waiting for evidence from you to show that a nine year old is capable of having children; that she is mentally an adult the moment she BEGINS to be an adult physically

 

[cestusdei]

cestusdei,

There are still people living in those conditions (or worse) today. I don’t get what you’re not understanding.

No technology, limited food, harsh environment, no medical care=get married young and fast.

This is a fact anywhere you go in the world, today or yesterday.

pro, so you do admit that you have no problem with having sex with children in todays world. The english term for that is pedophilia. It is simply wrong. Justifying child abuse is appalling.

hamba, the quran wasn’t written till long after Muhammed died. There were various versions until Uthman destroyed them, a few variants still exist. So we don’t really know if all the surah’s are there or not. Some were destroyed or lost. There is no proof of the qurans completeness.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

hanba2han,
None of us believe in the Quran since we’re not Muslims. Only Muslims believe in the Quran.

However, Shaykh Gibril Haddad showed your ‘Aisha was not nine’ polemics to be false. So it is sufficient for us, Muslims and non-Muslims, to acknowledge that you cannot use false information as evidence. Thus, you have no evidence since your evidence has been proven to be false.

In short, the originator of your wikipedia polemics - i.e. T.O.Shanavas, had distorted the Islamic literature to convey a point of view.

In the end of the day, it is sufficient for us to take what Muslims believe to be authentic sources of their own history as the basis of discussion. Almost all historical records of that period and long after that were recollections of historians. They generally lacked ‘mechanical recording instruments’ that we have today and had to rely on some historian noting down events as he or she remembered it. This is the same for all cultures at the time.

It is therefore the nature of the study of ancient history to rely on the recollections of historians. Authenticity is checked by cross-referencing other historical accounts/records and physical evidence. But the historical narration is still the basis of our understanding of ancient history.

This is not to say that we should believe spurious or false information. Once we know the information is false (e.g. by someone like Shaykh Gibril Haddad proving to us the info is false) we should disregard it. So far, nobody has shown the sahih hadiths that relate Aisha’s age of 9 to be false.

Chau,
Rodrigo

 

[Montalban]

In short, the originator of your wikipedia polemics - i.e. T.O.Shanavas, had distorted the Islamic literature to convey a point of view.

Shanavas is the person relied upon by Moslem apologists. He himself simply took most of his ideas from a Pakastani apologist. His concept of re-working the Hadith is novel to Islam and is thus widely rejected.

But the weird thing (maybe not weird because Moslems rely on every argument at once) is that those Moslems using this argument are denying the accuracy of their own holy books.

Moslems argue like this because they are of a different mind-set, as Satan is the master of confusion.

 

[hamba2han]

This is not to say that we should believe spurious or false information. Once we know the information is false (e.g. by someone like Shaykh Gibril Haddad proving to us the info is false) we should disregard it. So far, nobody has shown the sahih hadiths that relate Aisha’s age of 9 to be false.

Have a look at the following excerpt from the ‘Sunni Path’ website that you quoted from:

According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah was five years older than Ayesha. Fatimah is reported to have been born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.

And Shaykh Gibril Haddad’s answer to this is:

Rather, Ibn Hajar mentions two versions: (1) al-Waqidi’s narration that Fatima was born when the Prophet was 35; and (2) Ibn Abd al-Barr's narration that she was born when he was 41, approximately one year more or less before Prophethood, and about five years before A’isha was born. The latter version matches the established dates.

The thing that we should remember here is that if Shaykh Gibril Haddad is correct and that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was indeed 41 years old at the time his daughter Fatimah (ra) was born, then this would make her mother Khadijah (ra) to be about 56 years old of age at the time she gave birth to Fatimah.

Although it is indeed possible for a 56-year old woman to give birth, based on our present day medical and scientific knowledge, would this be more plausible than a 50-year old woman giving birth?

I would think that purely from a scientific point of view, it is certainly more probable that her mother was only 50 year old at the time Fatimah (ra) was born and this of course would mean that Aisha (ra) coud not have been less than 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage in 622 C.E.

And so, again I ask – Why do you choose to believe that Aisha (ra) was only 9 years old at the time of the consumation of her marriage?

It seems to me that you much prefer to believe a disputed hadith made over a thousand years ago over what modern-day medical science is instead telling you today.

Why is that?

 

[cestusdei]

The hadith were not disputed until recent times when Muhammeds taste for young girls became embarassing. But it is interesting that Muslims will deny the accuracy of their own holy books. Let’s apply that idea to the quran.

 

[Montalban]

Have a look at the following excerpt from the ‘Sunni Path’ website that you quoted fromAccording to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah was five years older than Ayesha. Fatimah is reported to have been born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.

And Shaykh Gibril Haddad’s answer to this is:

Rather, Ibn Hajar mentions two versions: (1) al-Waqidi’s narration that Fatima was born when the Prophet was 35; and (2) Ibn Abd al-Barr's narration that she was born when he was 41, approximately one year more or less before Prophethood, and about five years before A’isha was born. The latter version matches the established dates.

The thing that we should remember here is that if Shaykh Gibril Haddad is correct and that the Prophet Muhammad was indeed 41 years old at the time his daughter Fatimah was born, then this would make her mother Khadijah to be about 56 years old of age at the time she gave birth to Fatimah.

Although it is indeed possible for a 56-year old woman to give birth, based on our present day medical and scientific knowledge, would this be more plausible than a 50-year old woman giving birth?

I would think that purely from a scientific point of view, it is certainly more probable that her mother was only 50 year old at the time Fatimah was born and this of course would mean that Aisha could not have been less than 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage in 622 C.E.

There are many problems with your stance however it will suffice to deal with one…you’re using a commentator on a commentator of the Hadith. The hierarchy of ‘authenticity’ in Islam is Koran, then Hadith, then commentators. The Koran is taken over the Hadith. The Hadith over the commentators. The Hadith says she was nine.

And so, again I ask – Why do you choose to believe that Aisha was only 9 years old at the time of the consummation of her marriage?

Why is it you continue to ask a question that’s been answered?
Why is it you continue to feel the need, in order to support Islam, to attack Hadith? I know Islam is a faith of confusion but attempting all arguments at once is amazing.

It seems to me that you much prefer to believe a disputed hadith made over a thousand years ago over what modern-day medical science is instead telling you today.
Why is that?

It seems to me that you’d much prefer to pretend that a well established Hadith is one that is disputed. Moslems today still regard these Hadith as ‘strong’ Hadith.

I note also you’ve not taken into account several rebuttals of the T O Shanavas apology you presented, I for one offered such. You simply ignore it, and continue to ask the same question over and over again.

Why is that?

 

[Montalban]

The hadith were not disputed until recent times when Muhammeds taste for young girls became embarassing. But it is interesting that Muslims will deny the accuracy of their own holy books. Let’s apply that idea to the quran.

Exactly. And Moslems still regard marrying a young girl permissable.

hamba2han’s continual asking of the same question is also truly strange.

So far we’ve had Valke2 jump in to apologise for this horrendous behaviour, and pro_universal give his highly selective question/answer routine, that is, he asks the questions and does not answer them.

 

[cestusdei]

Muslim apologists don’t seem to vary their tactics very much. The more I see them in action the more I realize that Islam is a very weak faith. It cannot defend itself when confronted intellectually. Another reason they deny reason and don’t use their intellect.

 

[Montalban]

Muslim apologists don’t seem to vary their tactics very much. The more I see them in action the more I realize that Islam is a very weak faith. It cannot defend itself when confronted intellectually. Another reason they deny reason and don’t use their intellect.

Islam does mean submission. One has to suspend one’s intellect to become Moslem.

They have you believe in Hadith, but then if you examine any under light they’re not entirely sure which argument to take, except THE BIBLE IS FAULTY!