Common questions Muslims can´t answer:

[elwill]

You are simply wrong here. The Catholic Church would never marry a child to a middle aged man.

they will do that based on the secular laws of the country , not based on the teaching of thier religion
the same happens in muslims countries , if the the age of marriage was limited in the laws of the country then the mosque will not marry a child to a middle aged man

You really think Catholics should be okay with sex with babies because Jesus never forbade it? You are wrong. There are limitations on marriage. Most states you have to be at least 16 without parental consent.

my point is the that this limitation isn’t religious , it wasn’t never religious issue , and wasn’t never decesion of the church

Jews and Christians, since NT, have never been okay with child marriages, multiple marriages, multple wives, etc. It may be that marriages were arranged. Give me an example of the custom of children marrying in NT Judaism or Christianity.

i will give you more than that , it was custom even within Byzantine emperors and nobility!

roman-emperors.org/aggiefran.htm

According to William of Tyre, Agnes was only eight on her arrival at Constantinople, while Alexius was thirteen; in fact Alexius was born on 14 September 1169. Child brides, whether Byzantines or foreign princesses, were the norm rather than the exception, especially from the late twelfth century. Irene Ducaena, wife of Alexius I Comnenus, was twelve at her marriage, and empress before she was fifteen; the Byzantine princess Theodora, Manuel’s niece, was in her thirteenth year when she married Baldwin III of Jerusalem; and Margaret-Maria of Hungary married Isaac II Angelus at the age of nine.

Agnes’s age, then, was not unusual, **especially as it was customary for young engaged couples in Constantinople to be brought up together in the house of the socially **superior partner.

We hear little of Agnes during Alexius’ reign (24 September 1180 to prior to 24 September 1183). It is highly unlikely that the match was consummated, as it was customary to import imperial brides from overseas at a young age to enable them to become acquainted with Greek and with their future ceremonial duties; **certainly it was unusual under normal circumstances for Byzantine girls to marry before the age of twelve. **However, shortly before Alexius completed three years as emperor, Manuel’s first cousin Andronicus made himself co-emperor and then usurped Alexius’s position altogether, putting him out of the way by having him throttled. Nicetas Choniates then, with morbid relish, claims that Andronicus (who was born c. 1118 and was thus about 65 years of age) sexually exploited the eleven-year old princess.Despite the fact that his marriage to Anna, some fifty years his junior, may well have been made for political reasons – and Andronicus had portraits of Mary of Antioch in the capital replaced with ones of himself either alone or accompanied by his child-bride
Choniates makes the most of the opportunity to ridicule Andronicus, his age and the incongruity of the alliance (‘the overripe suitor embracing the unripe maiden, the dotard the damsel with pointed breasts, the shriveled and languid old man the rosy-fingered girl dripping with the dew of love’).[15]] According to Eustathius of Thessalonica as well, the match was repugnant to her, as she regretted Alexius’ death and loathed Andronicus:[16]] She was the young daughter of the king of France, and as everybody knew hated the union because she was full of intelligence; and after having experienced a different kind of gentle loving, she loathed the roughness of Andronicus. Sometimes, they say, she would imagine in her dreams that she saw the young Alexius, and would cry out his name, and she alone knew what she suffered.

 

[qui_est_ce]

All these things have been mentioned on this forum before today. Its nothing new.

Let’s see, you brought them up, but you won’t back up your statements, because it’s been addressed on other threads. Link please.

 

[qui_est_ce]

roman-emperors.org/aggiefran.htm
{snip}
Agnes’s age, then, was not unusual, **especially as it was customary for young engaged **couples in Constantinople to be brought up together in the house of the socially superior partner.

We hear little of Agnes during Alexius’ reign (24 September 1180 to prior to 24 September 1183). It is highly unlikely that the match was consummated, as it was customary to import imperial brides from overseas at a young age to enable them to become acquainted with Greek and with their future ceremonial duties;**certainly it was unusual under normal circumstances for Byzantine girls to marry before the age of twelve. **However, shortly before Alexius completed three years as emperor, Manuel’s first cousin Andronicus made himself co-emperor and then usurped Alexius’s position altogether, putting him out of the way by having him throttled. Nicetas Choniates then, with morbid relish, claims that Andronicus (who was born c. 1118 and was thus about 65 years of age) sexually exploited the eleven-year old princess.Despite the fact that his marriage to Anna, some fifty years his junior, may well have been made for political reasons – and Andronicus had portraits of Mary of Antioch in the capital replaced with ones of himself either alone or accompanied by his child-bride .

Note the terms “morbid” and “exploited” The custom of the nobility, in that house, it was wrong then and it’s wrong now.

 

[jakasaki]

Originally Posted by elwill
roman-emperors.org/aggiefran.htm
{snip}
Agnes’s age, then, was not unusual, especially as it was customary for young engaged couples in Constantinople to be brought up together in the house of the socially superior partner.

We hear little of Agnes during Alexius’ reign (24 September 1180 to prior to 24 September 1183). It is highly unlikely that the match was consummated, as it was customary to import imperial brides from overseas at a young age to enable them to become acquainted with Greek and with their future ceremonial duties;certainly it was unusual under normal circumstances for Byzantine girls to marry before the age of twelve. However, shortly before Alexius completed three years as emperor, Manuel’s first cousin Andronicus made himself co-emperor and then usurped Alexius’s position altogether, putting him out of the way by having him throttled. Nicetas Choniates then, with morbid relish, claims that Andronicus (who was born c. 1118 and was thus about 65 years of age) sexually exploited the eleven-year old princess.Despite the fact that his marriage to Anna, some fifty years his junior, may well have been made for political reasons – and Andronicus had portraits of Mary of Antioch in the capital replaced with ones of himself either alone or accompanied by his child-bride .

elwill - the above post from you, are any of these characters described here Prophets of God???

We have adimited over and over and 1000x’s that we know this was happening. ** But did any Prophets of God **marry any 6 or 9 year old little girls.

 

[Jimzz12]

But concubinage isn’t marriage, even to people who think it is permissible. It’s a separate institution altogether.

That is correct. I would argue that concubinage has become an institution (in the Europe, Canada, United States, aka. the secular/non-Christian/non-Hebraic Western legal tradition) but itself is not instituted say as such as a sacrament. Perhaps, it is more accurate to say that concubinage is a domestic partnership between unmarried men and women. Even this has changed as of late with the arguing of homosexual concubinage/partnerships.

In the US, albeit rarely employed, the legal term for a live-in-girlfriend is ‘concubine’. She has full citizenship and/or human rights just as anyone else living under the jurisdiction of the US Constitution, but none pertaining to her partner; complicated by the duality of states’ rights and their respective general laws and constitutions. Traditionally material/property rights – inheritance and benefits have been the subsidiary of the domestic in the state recognized marriage. This line has been blurred as of late with all of the legal battles arguing that marriage and domestic partnerships are of similar status. Here the state grants the right to marry with the approval of all three parties: Partner A, Partner B, and the State.

The West expects concubinage to be monogamous despite the lack of legislation and full rights not to keep it so by all parties involved, as laws regulating adultery are only in force with a contractual marriage, and except in the armed services, notably rarely enforced. In the minds of the Faithful, and indeed even in the non-Faithful, concubinage in the West is universally considered a sinful state precipitating the death of the soul. Even those practicing internally know it carries some grave burden. The Faithful have hold no judgement on those outside of the influence of the West.

African and Middle Eastern concubinage is a vastly different approach than that of Europe and the West. African and Eastern concubinage do not carry the sinful burden for several religio-cultural reasons but most of all because marriage, although sometimes legally recognized, is not *instituted *except. Only in Judeo-Christian Tradition is it instituted by God. Marriage in the Great Monotheistic Tradition has less to do with property than that of a state of the soul. In the henotheistic tradition of Mohammed and the Persians (Zorastrianism), even in the early undeveloped primordial Hebraic thought awaiting more complete utterance of The Word Jesus, property rights are the focus. The individual is virtually uninhibited as to divorce and re-marriage.

Generally speaking, Anglo-American and European laws, although based Church Law, diverge where the Church discusses both the material rights and the state of the soul whereas, the state discusses only the material aspect. Mohammedist thought of the Sura is in line with the secular West in this regard, as it considers primarily the financial/material aspect.

Internally, in the seed of the soul that God breathed into each human being upon conception is aware of The Truth concerning things like marriage. The natural inclination is a monogamous way of life. Any other way of life (i.e. polygamy, serial monogamy, et al) is an indication that something is amiss, because it is non-uniative expression; bearing in mind God brings about unity where without Him there can be none. Although we can say nothing of the individual follower of Mohammedist thought, it really is apples and oranges. Christians and Jews see marriage as form of uniative prayer giving praise to God. Now, a follower of Mohammed should know internally that marriage is a form of uniative prayer because it is written on the hearts of every man and woman. Unfortunately, polygamy and serial monogamy, et al. violate this prayer and undo the good works. Prayer is work and so is marriage, therefore, these two should both lead to the Beatific Vision.

Now we have greatly digressed from the original matter. The debatably universal acceptability of the moral example set by Mohammed. If one did not know that he had been granted a dispensation by God via the attributed angel, could we follow his example. The answer is a resounding “No.” Mohammed behaviour was mortally compromised. It is clear to one who exercises prudence and judgement of spirits that the messages passed to Mohammed through the angel were not from God in the least. Perhaps, some messages were from God, as God is always talking to us. We only have to screen out the noise, listening for certifiable message. Much of what is written in the Koran is patently and demonstrably wrong. We cannot blame the individual Mohammedist for following the code. Their wills and perceptability may have been neglected and wounded from the time that they were children. Nor can we blame their parents, grandparents, or any of their ancestors. Raising of children is a holy act. But, their basic way of life has a definitive purpose. Islam is prepatory to the development of peoples who will eventually become followers of Christ. Mohammedism, on the otherhand, is a corruption of the peace of Islam. Mohammed has no place in Islam. Can there be Islam without Mohammed? Certainly and it is the duty of the follower of Islam to make it so. Mohammedists will do their worst to keep the inevitable from happening.

I know the answer to my original question of how many women and girls did Mohammed have relations. He entered into the ‘field’ of no less than 60 women and girls with his ‘plowshare’; thanks be to Bukhari. As for the number of boys and men, I will leave that up to all of you to figure out.

 

[qui_est_ce]

**
Internally, in the seed of the soat God breathed into each human being upon conception is aware of The Truth concerning things like marriage. The natural inclination is a monogamous way of life. Any other way of life (i.e. polygamy, serial monogamy, et al) is an indication that something is amiss, because it is non-uniative expul thression; bearing in mind God brings about unity where without Him there can be none.** Although we can say nothing of the individual follower of Mohammedist thought, it really is apples and oranges. Christians and Jews see marriage as form of uniative prayer giving praise to God. Now, a follower of Mohammed should know internally that marriage is a form of **uniative prayer because it is written on the hearts of every man and woman. **Unfortunately, polygamy and serial monogamy, et al. violate this prayer and undo the good works. Prayer is work and so is marriage, therefore, these two should both lead to the Beatific Vision.

What a beautiful way to express marriage and the love of God.

The debatably universal acceptability of the moral example set by Mohammed.** If one did not know that he had been granted a dispensation by God via the attributed angel, could we follow his example. The answer is a resounding “No.” **Mohammed behaviour was mortally compromised. It is clear to one who exercises prudence and judgement of spirits that the messages passed to Mohammed through the angel were not from God in the least. Perhaps, some messages were from God, as God is always talking to us. We only have to screen out the noise, listening for certifiable message. Much of what is written in the Koran is patently and demonstrably wrong. We cannot blame the individual Mohammedist for following the code.

Yes. Christians are not to hate followers of Islam. We are called to seek Truth. It is written on our souls.

I know the answer to my original question of how many women and girls did Mohammed have relations. He entered into the ‘field’ of no less than 60 women and girls with his ‘plowshare’; thanks be to Bukhari. As for the number of boys and men, I will leave that up to all of you to figure out.

So sad Natural Law perverted for the sake of one man’s evil.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Please back your answers with verifiable historical references. Thank you.

Do you have “verifiable historical references” that Moses split the Red Sea or that Elisha raised the dead, etc?

 

[tomarin]

I know the answer to my original question of how many women and girls did Mohammed have relations. He entered into the ‘field’ of no less than 60 women and girls with his ‘plowshare’; thanks be to Bukhari. As for the number of boys and men, I will leave that up to all of you to figure out.

Care to elaborate (re men and boys)? That seems like a pretty serious allegation.

 

[seraphime2008]

they will do that based on the secular laws of the country , not based on the teaching of thier religion
the same happens in muslims countries , if the the age of marriage was limited in the laws of the country then the mosque will not marry a child to a middle aged man

Hey then your secular government is against God’s law. And you’re supposed to follow God than man-made law? This happened in Indonesia, most muslim scholar will defend the marriage of a recently news making cleric of late 40 to a young girl aged 9, while the law prohibit that. Most average people here, whether Muslim or not condemn that practice. It only brought confusion to people and Muslim are questioning themselves whether to abide the Koran rule or the man made rule.

Not to mention the habit of polygamy maintain by the muslim. In Indonesia, even though most of the citizens were Muslim, they will find that polygamy is not the answer to the real purpose of marriage. Indonesian muslim scholars who prefer polygamy will lose his popularity. Deep inside many of my muslim friends they know that they will never agree to polygamy that the Koran is so permissible. But if one holds one view and other hold other view, would that make Muslim society split by themselves?

 

[elwill]

elwill - the above post from you, are any of these characters described here Prophets of God???

We have adimited over and over and 1000x’s that we know this was happening. ** But did any Prophets of God **marry any 6 or 9 year old little girls.

if you admitting that it was happening , then why all prophets of God in OT involving jesus (pbuh) in (NT) said nothing about it to be immoral or evil or unhealthy or barbaric ?
they say nothing because they didn’t consider it immoral

if you wanna to teach me how should the character of prophets should be , so check the pprophets in your bible first

God have no problems with early marraige , not God in islam nor in christianity nor in judaism . if you have a problem with early marriage so you have to admit that it’s your personal view , not God’s view

 

[Jimzz12]

Do you have “verifiable historical references” that Moses split the Red Sea or that Elisha raised the dead, etc?

There are no historical references saying that these actions were not performed. The references we have are either oral, Scriptural, and contemporary (hieroglyphs, clay tablet writings, and myths). I will stop short accusing anyone who does use employ these historiographical resources of being hard-headed, but I will say that the raising of a question like this points to a demonstrable lack of virtue. Perhaps we should pray on it. Saying…

“Dearest Father in Heaven, were the seas parted? If it was so, then it was by Your Hands and Thy Will, And, are the seas parted still?
Father, did Elisha work your miracles and feed the many? If these were so, then they are your miracles, even still, as time is but a grain of sand.
Why do I doubt Thee my God? You are my Beloved. And, I only seek to know Thy Most Holy Face.
If it is Thy Will Show it to me. Show me how I am to learn about Thee from Thy miracles and your holy prophets.
Please LORD, do not let me be mislead by a false angelin this regard nor any.”

 

[qui_est_ce]

Do you have “verifiable historical references” that Moses split the Red Sea or that Elisha raised the dead, etc?

{sigh} Again non answer. You do not.

Catholics have non biblical historical evidence for everything since birth of Christ. Read Roman Historians, Early Church Fathers, Jewish Historians. Ancient Jewish texts document Biblical events. (see my post #139 for a partial list of the documents and where they are housed).

Mohammed came along hundreds of years later and declared them to be corrupted. There is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE for this claim aside from Mohammed alone. He made it up.

 

[qui_est_ce]

if you admitting that it was happening , then why all prophets of God in OT involving jesus (pbuh) in (NT) said nothing about it to be immoral or evil or unhealthy or barbaric ?
they say nothing because they didn’t consider it immoral

Some things are so atrocious, it goes without saying. Sex with babies is WRONG.

 

[qui_est_ce]

“Dearest Father in Heaven, were the seas parted? If it was so, then it was by Your Hands and Thy Will, And, are the seas parted still?
Father, did Elisha work your miracles? If these were so, then they are your miracles, even still, as time is but a grain of sand.
Why do I doubt Thee my God? You are my Beloved. And, I only seek to know Thy Most Holy Face.
If it is Thy Will Show it to me. Show me how I am to learn about Thee from Thy miracles and your holy prophets.
Please LORD, do not let me be mislead by a false angelin this regard nor any.”

Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners.

 

[Jimzz12]

Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners.

Rightly so.

And, suddenly I am reminded of tragic statement I came upon in another thread. And, I hope that it was misrepresentative of the followers of Mohammed… or even more so of Islam, which has be hijacked by Mohammedism for so long. I suspect this is a Mohammedist expression of thought and not of Islam as Peace at its core really seeks the Holy Face of God, He Who is Jesus.

I must paraphrase: “There is nothing inherently special about motherhood.” I wonder if the original poster would say this to his own mothers face, or even to the face of his father, who clearly loved his mother despite the teaching that says women are only half-human.

Is this another fundamental difference between the monotheist and the henotheist. Or does it belie experiential humanity and deny our most intimate physical bond?

I know I share the flesh of my mother until either she or I pass away.

 

[jakasaki]

Originally Posted by Sister Amy
Do you have “verifiable historical references” that Moses split the Red Sea or that Elisha raised the dead, etc?

It’s amazing that you are looking for proof of things which happened over 3000 years ago, and yet mohamad was only around 1400 years ago and when the koran and mohamads actions are disputed, there are no answers.

 

[qui_est_ce]

And, suddenly I am reminded of tragic statement I came upon in another thread. And, I hope that it was misrepresentative of the followers of Mohammed… or even more so of Islam, which has be hijacked by Mohammedism for so long. I suspect this is a Mohammedist expression of thought and not of Islam as Peace at its core really seeks the Holy Face of God, He Who is Jesus.

Was not Mohammed the founder of Islam? How do you separate Mohmammed from Islam?

 

[jakasaki]

Was not Mohammed the founder of Islam? How do you separate Mohmammed from Islam?

Question #1 = yes
Question #2 = you don’t

 

[Wildkit]

Do you have “verifiable historical references” that Moses split the Red Sea or that Elisha raised the dead, etc?

How long will it be until there is no answer to the question(s),……but another change in topic by way of another question?

Some things never change, regardless who the respondant is,…sigh…

This is exactly the answer to the OP’s question. While this is not a debating forum, indeed some things never change.

 

[elwill]

Some things are so atrocious, it goes without saying. Sex with babies is WRONG.

and who talking about babies ?
i actually talking about those girls whom reached puberty , are you calling them babies ?

Puberty refers to the process of physical changes by which a child’s body becomes an adult body capable of reproduction.

on average, girls begin the process of puberty about 1–2 years earlier than boys (with average ages of 9 to 14 for girls and 10 to 17 for boys),