Common questions Muslims can´t answer:

[elwill]

Not sure what you mean by this question. What I see him as is a morally reprehensible man who used the name of God for his own (and/or) Satan’s purposes. (i.e. being able to have sex with slaves (adultery), being able to marry his step-sons wife, etc.)

why should he use the name of God to commit all of these accusations . it was custom and normal to do these things pre_islam , he didn’t need to bring new religion to do that if you understand what i mean

just as hint for the story of his step son
Before Islam, the Arabs did not allow divorcees to remarry. Zayd was adopted by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and called his son as was the custom among the Arabs before Islam. But Islam abrogated this custom and disapproved of its practice. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was the first man to express this disapproval in a practical way. So he married the divorcee of his “adopted” son to show that adoption does not really make the adopted child a real son of the adopting father and also to show that marriage is lawful for divorcees.

this very Zaynab was Muhammad’s cousin, and had been offered to him in marriage before she married Zayd. He refused her then, but after she was divorced he accepted her for the two legislative purposes: the lawful marriage of divorcees and the real status of adopted children
but offcourse you be misinformed , i think we have to spot some details about this issue later if you still have doubts about morality behaviours of our prophet (pbuh)

My question with regard to consummating the marriage to Aiesha was more to do with the fact that if what I read is true - that there were marriages that Muhammad did NOT consummate - then why did he have to consummate the marriage with the child. Why couldn’t he have said “I will marry you as I did these other women, but allow you remain pure and unviolated.”? I just don’t understand what kind of man actually gets turned on by a 6 year old child. (I believe that was the age she was when he was “thighing” her.)

i don’t know if that was true actually , my be it happened with some of his wifes whom were very old , but i actaully have no knowlge about it . sorry

My other issue with Muhammad is the poor woman whose family was slaughtered by Muhammad and then had to sleep with him. Someone else posted the hadith where someone stood outside the tent and guarded it because they feared for Muhammad’s life. And then it goes on to say that Muhammad just laughs and says “It went well.”. That right there just makes my blood boil. I just want to say “You smarmy *******! Sure it went well for you - what about the poor woman you just violated who at that moment was probably curled up in a ball, grieving for her family and the violation that just occurred.” How anyone can read that and respect a man such as that is beyond me.

i don’t know this event can you search for me it please to read it before responding

 

[Jay53]

i don’t know if you need to know my openion about the same questions with reference of my knowledge about the history of th man , but i will try to make my responds very objective and not biased atall

I appreciate your opinion and your respectful dialogue.

but i have one more question for you
do you think on account of his marriages that it can simply interpreted in terms of masculine love and desire for women. ? Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) had never touched a woman until he was 25 years of age when he married for the first time.

I’m not sure what you mean by this question. I will take your word for it that he never touched a woman prior to Khadijah. The reason why? I have no idea. He could have been a moral person, or he could have just been an undesirable man that women were not interested in until Khadijah. I wonder why he was faithful to her for so many years and then after she died he had multiple wives, sex slaves etc. His morality seemed to decline - coincidentally around the time of his “revelations”.

This is off topic, but how did Khadijah die - just old age? (I’ll see if I can look that up.)

do you suggest that he married her for her money ?

but anyway it’s correct that She was a very rich and business woman of Mecca.Muhammad (PBUH) used to do the trading for her. As Muhammad (PBUH) was an honest person and got confidence of Khadeeja in no time, she got impressed with the honesty of Muhammad (PBUH) and she found the best person as life partner in the shape of Muhammad (PBUH).

I don’t think her money was the sole reason. From all accounts it seems that he genuinely loved her. The money/influence may have just been a “bonus”.

so he (pbuh) was lover for widows and elders, not the childs

I don’t understand what you mean. I don’t know that he loved all of his subsequent wives. He seemed to collect them and also had the sex slaves which he made sure everyone knew Allah deemed permissable for him. And no, I don’t understand romantic love of an older man for a child. To me, that is perverted. Had he been a teenager or even early twenties I don’t think it would seem as wrong. Like I said before, I don’t know how a 50-something year old man even is turned on by a child.

do you suggest that he didn’t out of love and respect and grateful to her or did you mean that he didn’t out of fear from her

Could have been a little of both. From all accounts, as I said, he seems to have loved her. But my impression has also been that she was a strong woman (personality wise) and that she would not have tolerated adultery.

so if you that man who thrives on power and just doing all you could , will you choose to marry elder women and widow women and divorced women ( under considertion that you have 50 yo )

My opinion is that he was thrilled with his new power as being “Allah’s apostle” and was collecting “notches in his bedpost” so to speak. I don’t know that he particularly cared about their status.

 

[Jay53]

why should he use the name of God to commit all of these accusations . it was custom and normal to do these things pre_islam , he didn’t need to bring new religion to do that if you understand what i mean

But if he says “Allah says this is OK” then he is not held accountable for any wrong-doings - Jesus had a different message, in this instance particularly regarding adultery. Basically Muhammad says adultery is OK under the guise of polygamy and slave women.
In the same way some Muslims sanction “living together” (which they condemn “Western” nations for) under the guise of “temporary marriage”. (And no, I don’t think either is acceptable. )

just as hint for the story of his step son
Before Islam, the Arabs did not allow divorcees to remarry. Zayd was adopted by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and called his son as was the custom among the Arabs before Islam. But Islam abrogated this custom and disapproved of its practice. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was the first man to express this disapproval in a practical way. So he married the divorcee of his “adopted” son to show that adoption does not really make the adopted child a real son of the adopting father and also to show that marriage is lawful for divorcees.

this very Zaynab was Muhammad’s cousin, and had been offered to him in marriage before she married Zayd. He refused her then, but after she was divorced he accepted her for the two legislative purposes: the lawful marriage of divorcees and the real status of adopted children
but offcourse you be misinformed , i think we have to spot some details about this issue later if you still have doubts about morality behaviours of our prophet (pbuh)

There is a whole other thread discussing this marriage. It was a while back so I would have to search for it. If I remember, most of the criticism of Muhammad was because his step-son saw that Muhammad was attracted to his wife and wanted her so he divorced her so that Muhammad could marry her. Or something of that nature.

i don’t know this event can you search for me it please to read it before responding

I’ll look for it. Or someone else may have the info. handy. We also discussed this event in another thread.

I had questioned Sister Amy who didn’t seem to have any empathy for this woman, but who admitted that if she were in a similar position of being a captive woman of someone of a different faith who believed he could have sex with her, she would (to paraphrase), fight and generally make the man’s life miserable. I then asked her why she would do that if the man was only doing what Allah has made permissable (having sex with captive women). I don’t believe I ever received a response, although that was also a while ago so it may have been lost in the shuffle.

 

[elwill]

I appreciate your opinion and your respectful dialogue.

I’m not sure what you mean by this question. I will take your word for it that he never touched a woman prior to Khadijah. The reason why? I have no idea. He could have been a moral person, or he could have just been an undesirable man that women were not interested in until Khadijah. I wonder why he was faithful to her for so many years and then after she died he had multiple wives, sex slaves etc. His morality seemed to decline - coincidentally around the time of his “revelations”.

This is off topic, but how did Khadijah die - just old age? (I’ll see if I can look that up.)

I don’t think her money was the sole reason. From all accounts it seems that he genuinely loved her. The money/influence may have just been a “bonus”.

I don’t understand what you mean. I don’t know that he loved all of his subsequent wives. He seemed to collect them and also had the sex slaves which he made sure everyone knew Allah deemed permissable for him. And no, I don’t understand romantic love of an older man for a child. To me, that is perverted. Had he been a teenager or even early twenties I don’t think it would seem as wrong. Like I said before, I don’t know how a 50-something year old man even is turned on by a child.

Could have been a little of both. From all accounts, as I said, he seems to have loved her. But my impression has also been that she was a strong woman (personality wise) and that she would not have tolerated adultery.

My opinion is that he was thrilled with his new power as being “Allah’s apostle” and was collecting “notches in his bedpost” so to speak. I don’t know that he particularly cared about their status.

sorry if my questions not presented very well , i made such question under the account of most anti_ isamic views about mohammed (pbuh) that he was molester for young girls , and that he (pbuh) had these kinds of physical and intercourse desires for women

anyway , thank you for your respectfull dialog
i seek more question from you if you have any , and i really hope if you tried to make some studies about mohammed’s life and his character
and be sure that you can know the negatives from anti_islamic sites
and you can know the positives from muslims sites
then you can conclude your personal of view if you take both sides seriously to find out the truth about this man

good luck

 

[elwill]

But if he says “Allah says this is OK” then he is not held accountable for any wrong-doings - Jesus had a different message, in this instance particularly regarding adultery. Basically Muhammad says adultery is OK under the guise of polygamy and slave women.
In the same way some Muslims sanction “living together” (which they condemn “Western” nations for) under the guise of “temporary marriage”. (And no, I don’t think either is acceptable. )

do you think that adultery is okey in islam ?
or do you think that polygamy is adultery ?
what is your thought about slave women or to be specific which wife of his wives are you talking about ?

by the way , temporary marraige not acceptable in islam , shi3ah sect allowing it but with sunni muslims it’s not acceptable ( it considered to be adultery)

 

[Jay53]

do you think that adultery is okey in islam ?
or do you think that polygamy is adultery ?

Yes, polygamy is adultery. I think Islam forbids adultery in theory, but sanctions it by permitting polygamy and captive women.

I believe marriage is one man and one woman in a sacramental union, til death do they part. Sex with any subsequent wives or captive women etc. is adultery.
(Not to mention - there shouldn’t be any “captive” women in the first place. )

what is your thought about slave women or to be specific which wife of his wives are you talking about ?

I’m talking about the verse in the Quran that says having sex with captive women is acceptable.

(1) O Prophet (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم)! Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), and those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses - whom Allah has given to you, and the daughters of your 'Amm (paternal uncles) and the daughters of your 'Ammat (paternal aunts) and the daughters of your Khal (maternal uncles) and the daughters of your Khalat (maternal aunts) who migrated (from Makkah) with you, and a believing woman if she offers herself to the Prophet, and the Prophet wishes to marry her - a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers. Indeed We know what We have enjoined upon them about their wives and those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, in order that there should be no difficulty on you. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
( سورة الأحزاب , Al-Ahzab, Chapter #33, Verse #50)

by the way , temporary marraige not acceptable in islam , shi3ah sect allowing it but with sunni muslims it’s not acceptable ( it considered to be adultery)

That’s why I said “some” Muslims because I realize that there are only certain sect(s) that approve of this. I believe that topic also created a heated debate on the forums.

 

[elwill]

Yes, polygamy is adultery. I think Islam forbids adultery in theory, but sanctions it by permitting polygamy and captive women.

we have to agree that adultery refere to sexual intercourse out of marriage , but polygamy is still considered to be sexual intercourse through the contract of mrriage
so even if you dont accept polygamy , you can’t just equal it with adultery it will be still marriage in it’s general theory

I believe marriage is one man and one woman in a sacramental union, til death do they part. Sex with any subsequent wives or captive women etc. is adultery.
(Not to mention - there shouldn’t be any “captive” women in the first place. )

but Jesus peace be upon him did honor the laws of the Old Testament, and did order his followers to follow the laws of the Old Testament:

I’m talking about the verse in the Quran that says having sex with captive women is acceptable.

(1) O Prophet (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم)! Verily, We have made lawful to you your
wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), and those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses - whom Allah has given to you, and the daughters of your 'Amm (paternal uncles) and the daughters of your 'Ammat (paternal aunts) and the daughters of your Khal (maternal uncles) and the daughters of your Khalat (maternal aunts) who migrated (from Makkah) with you, and a believing woman if she offers herself to the Prophet, and the Prophet wishes to marry her - a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers. Indeed We know what We have enjoined upon them about their wives and those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, in order that there should be no difficulty on you. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
( سورة الأحزاب , Al-Ahzab, Chapter #33, Verse #50)

here is a fatwa i quoted from scholar of islam

When Islam was reveled to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), slavery was a worldwide common social phenomenon; it was much older than Islam. Slavery was deeply rooted in every society to the extent that it was impossible to imagine a civilized society without slaves.

In spite of this social fact, Islam was the first religion to recognize slavery as a social illness that needed to be addressed. Since slavery was deeply rooted in the society, Islam did not abolish it at once. Rather, Islam treated slavery in the same manner it treated other social illnesses. Islam followed the same methodology of gradual elimination in dealing with this social disease as it did with other social illnesses, for example: the prohibition of alcohol in three steps.

Concerning having slave women, i would like to let you know that it happens to be a practice necessitated by the condition in which early Muslims found themselves vis-à-vis non-Muslims, as both parties engaged in wars. Slave women or milk al-yameen are referred to in the Qur’an as “Those whom your right hand possess” or “ma malakat aymanukum”; they are those taken as captives during conquests and subsequently became slaves, or those who were descendants of slaves.

Thus, it was a war custom in the past to take men and women as captives and then turn them into slaves. Islam did not initiate it, rather, it was something in practice long ago before the advent of Islam. And when Islam came, it tried to eradicate this practice, bit by bit. So it first restricted it to the reciprocal practice of war, in the sense that Muslims took war captives just as the enemies did with Muslims.

But as it aimed at putting an end to such issue, Islam laid down rules which would eventually lead to eradicating the practice. So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free if she got pregnant. What’s more, her child would also become free.

Not only that, Islam also ordered a Muslim to treat the slave woman in every respect as if she were his wife. She should be well fed, clothed and given due protection. In the family environment, she had the opportunity to learn about Islam and was free to accept it or reject it. She also had the opportunity to earn her freedom for she could be ransomed.

In the light of the above-mentioned facts, and the nature of the question posed by people, it’s clear that some people misunderstand the wisdom behind the permissibility of having female slaves and think that it is meant to unleash men’s desires and give them more enjoyment. Never! That is not the point! It is, rather, means of freeing slaves; and this is clarified above in the fact that if a master got a female slave pregnant, then he could neither sell her nor give her away as a present. And if he died, she would not be considered part of his property. She’d receive her freedom and her baby would also be free.

 

[Jay53]

we have to agree that adultery refere to sexual intercourse out of marriage , but polygamy is still considered to be sexual intercourse through the contract of mrriage
so even if you dont accept polygamy , you can’t just equal it with adultery it will be still marriage in it’s general theory

Exactly. That’s why I said Islam permits adultery under the guise of polygamy. IMO, only the 1st marriage is valid so all subsequent “marriages” are in fact adultery. And that doesn’t address the issue of the “captive women” who are NOT wives, but somehow sex with them is OK too.

here is a fatwa i quoted from scholar of islam

When Islam was reveled to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), slavery was a worldwide common social phenomenon; it was much older than Islam. Slavery was deeply rooted in every society to the extent that it was impossible to imagine a civilized society without slaves.

In spite of this social fact, Islam was the first religion to recognize slavery as a social illness that needed to be addressed. Since slavery was deeply rooted in the society, Islam did not abolish it at once. Rather, Islam treated slavery in the same manner it treated other social illnesses. Islam followed the same methodology of gradual elimination in dealing with this social disease as it did with other social illnesses, for example: the prohibition of alcohol in three steps.

Concerning having slave women, i would like to let you know that it happens to be a practice necessitated by the condition in which early Muslims found themselves vis-à-vis non-Muslims, as both parties engaged in wars. Slave women or milk al-yameen are referred to in the Qur’an as “Those whom your right hand possess” or “ma malakat aymanukum”; they are those taken as captives during conquests and subsequently became slaves, or those who were descendants of slaves.

Thus, it was a war custom in the past to take men and women as captives and then turn them into slaves. Islam did not initiate it, rather, it was something in practice long ago before the advent of Islam. And when Islam came, it tried to eradicate this practice, bit by bit. So it first restricted it to the reciprocal practice of war, in the sense that Muslims took war captives just as the enemies did with Muslims.

But as it aimed at putting an end to such issue, Islam laid down rules which would eventually lead to eradicating the practice. So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free if she got pregnant. What’s more, her child would also become free.

Not only that, Islam also ordered a Muslim to treat the slave woman in every respect as if she were his wife. She should be well fed, clothed and given due protection. In the family environment, she had the opportunity to learn about Islam and was free to accept it or reject it. She also had the opportunity to earn her freedom for she could be ransomed.

In the light of the above-mentioned facts, and the nature of the question posed by people, it’s clear that some people misunderstand the wisdom behind the permissibility of having female slaves and think that it is meant to unleash men’s desires and give them more enjoyment. Never! That is not the point! It is, rather, means of freeing slaves; and this is clarified above in the fact that if a master got a female slave pregnant, then he could neither sell her nor give her away as a present. And if he died, she would not be considered part of his property. She’d receive her freedom and her baby would also be free.

No offense, but this is a load of hogwash!! Having sex with a woman is a “means of freeing slaves” !?! That would be as opposed to just giving them their freedom at an appropriate time without physically violating them. And if she gets pregnant, gee what a bonus - she can have her freedom and then have a baby by the man who violated her! You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t find these teachings as generous as you do. Especially since they are in a book that is supposed to be for all people at all time.

What is the purpose of being able to have sex with the captive woman - to try to get her pregnant so she can have her freedom. And as stated above, this is still adultery - having sex with someone who is not your wife - no matter how “scholars” try to dress it up.

 

[Jimzz12]

You can’t actually because then there would be no islam. the whole religion is based on mohammad’s dillusion or lies, if he is not there then all his fake revelations also get thrown out.

To me this language ‘dillusion or lies’ seems a little strong, but it is what we work with. It is true either he was dilluded or purposely mislead others for his own material behalf. I am not going to judge the man, and therefore we resolve to say that he was misguided by the angel, who perhaps, lying of his identity, was not Gabriel The evidence bearing in the two breeds of spiritual messengers: Good and Evil, and that, an evil angelic messenger would have no qualm as to misrepresentation. The book “Rules for Radicals” was mandatory reading in college. The goal of the radical is to increase base-power at any cost by erosion of the base-power. Evil angels (demons) run their chariots in the same hippodrome as the radical. “Use deceit with the unbeliever” said Mohammed; clearly a radical.

Let us assume for the sake of discussion that there is no Judeo-Christian belief or ethical system, and Mohammed was decieved. Also assuming, without Mohammed there is no Islam, which means Peace. But we do know that Peace is defined as Faith in God, for God freely out of His Own Will, supra-abundantly grants us Faith in order to attain Everasting Peace. The greatest of these gifts is His Word, Christ Jesus, the Crucified One. Outside of Christ’s Body, and The Scripture, the definition of Peace is known experiently through God’s creation. This is Tradition. There is evidence all around us. Blesséd Angela di Foligno tells us “there is God’s Imprint, God’s Mercy even in the sin.” C.S. Lewis defines this essence ‘even in the sin’, as evidenced by say the reward of bodily pleasure in fornication reminding us that God is still there, over your shoulder, being beaten down with every thrust.

The Mohammedist has been trained, albeit falsely, to parrot what they have been trained since childhood. It is in this that their culpability to these ends are diminished. We as the Christian cannot let them not know as it is our holy duty to instruct and admonish; never judging a soul, the bad or the good; even our own. The Mohammedist stakes these claims that without Mohammed, and the model he represents, there is no way to reach Heaven. It is true that Heaven is Everlasting Peace. Without Mohammed can we say that there is no access to the afterlife whatsoever? Here is what I need to know. Does the psuedo-Theology define Mohammed as a false-messiah, and not just as an anti-prophet? The role of a messiah is to usher in the prospect of afterlife.

Noting that phrasings such as ‘Let There be Peace on Earth’ are completely fallacious, even the prospect of considering Christ. There will never be peace on earth. What then was Mohammed’s role? Indeed, Man did not need Mohammed. If there had been no need of a Christ then God could arguably work through all of us. What is Mohammed’s special claim? What did he do that made him any better than anybody? Given the facts, within the non-God fearing world, as Islam is not a religion of the book, although this is routinely and falsely claimed that they are. A thousand lies do not make a truth. If a man ran a billion-dollar charity, since we know experiential that care for the poor is Godly, than he holds a greater validity in a claim of self to prophethood than Mohammed. This is the verdict: Bill Gates, the Rockerfellers, even Oprah Winfrey has a greater claim to prophethood than Mohammed.

We can have Islam seperate from Mohammedism. But, I fear the reprisal. To remove Mohammed from Islam begets a more Hebraic Middle East. Indeed, Judaism and Islam are twin brothers. Those are not the words the many want to read.

 

[Hadi]

We can have Islam seperate from Mohammedism. But, I fear the reprisal. To remove Mohammed from Islam begets a more Hebraic Middle East. Indeed, Judaism and Islam are twin brothers. Those are not the words the many want to read.

I don’t understand your last paragraph , would you explain it a bit more…especially the bold part

 

[elwill]

Exactly. That’s why I said Islam permits adultery under the guise of polygamy. IMO, only the 1st marriage is valid so all subsequent “marriages” are in fact adultery. And that doesn’t address the issue of the “captive women” who are NOT wives, but somehow sex with them is OK too.

No offense, but this is a load of hogwash!! Having sex with a woman is a “means of freeing slaves” !?! That would be as opposed to just giving them their freedom at an appropriate time without physically violating them. And if she gets pregnant, gee what a bonus - she can have her freedom and then have a baby by the man who violated her! You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t find these teachings as generous as you do. Especially since they are in a book that is supposed to be for all people at all time.

What is the purpose of being able to have sex with the captive woman - to try to get her pregnant so she can have her freedom. And as stated above, this is still adultery - having sex with someone who is not your wife - no matter how “scholars” try to dress it up.

no , offensees at all
you don’t need to be convinced and you don’t need to accept it , we just exchange our view’s , it’s simple as that
i just trying to make you live and feel and comprehend the situation in the time which quran was revealed , i agree with you that quran is revealed for all generations but we need explore the initial purpose and the time of revelation and the purpose of each verse to conclude the most correct interpretation

so yes . in sometime it was allowed to marry captive slaves and i presented the situation of slaves in such era where the religion of jesus through 600 years pre_islam did nothing about it ( slavery)
(no offensees at all)

but what is the situation of this verse when there is no slaves ? think about it
and think about the laws which mohammed (pbuh) bring to abolish slavery gradually .

there’s no slavery in cuntries in this era which make this verse useless for your criticism

 

[Jay53]

but what is the situation of this verse when there is no slaves ? think about it and think about the laws which mohammed (pbuh) bring to abolish slavery gradually .

there’s no slavery in cuntries in this era which make this verse useless for your criticism

Is there a verse in the Quran that completely abolishes slavery and abolishes the practice of taking women and children captive in a war?

I’m not convinced that there is no slavery today, although I have not researched that. My concern is that since the Quran is supposedly for all people at all time and it permits sex with captive women, what happens if an Islamic country is in what they consider a just war and somehow are victorious (God forbid! ) and then decide that God has prescribed for them to collect booty and women and then permits sex with them? What happens then?

 

[Jimzz12]

would you explain it a bit more…

The socio-cultural and faith aspectual differences of Semetic Islam and Semetic Judiasm are so slight they are almost imperceptable. The differences between Mohammedism and Judiasm are goliath.

When referencing what we know of Christianity, knowing that Judiasm has evolved into Christian thought, without breaking the still active and living Covenants; Covenants, God has freely made to the race inwhich He freely chose out of His Love, whereby manifesting Himself, sharing and expressing His Gift of everlasting dedication to all of Creation, and extending to all Mankind, we see that what Mohammed brought was nothing new.

Islam existed before Mohammed. Islam, as we have defined it, and as it defines itself, being Peace. We know that Peace is the freely and supra-abundantly given Gift of Faith. Christians know this Gift of Faith, this Gift From God, as His Manifestation as the Messiah Born in a Lowly Manger. Mark my words. Indeed, mark The Word of God. God is so incredibly beyond comprehension of any man except the Man, in whose image all men have been made. The Man is The Word. God spoke One, Single, Ineffible Word at the beginning of Creation. He spoke Jesus. To the Holy Prophets the heard it as ‘I am…’ Only God can finish The Ineffible Word. When God was done speaking upon His Manifestation, He said in the Entirety, in which everything is contained, “I am He Who Saves.”

God saves us from the decrepetation; sin. This is His dedication to us. And, continue to mark my words. I choose to believe with all my heart and soul and mind, even though I am unworthy due to my sins, that God will take me back. He is dedicated to me; so dedicated that God will allow me to chose my master. I can choose sin and be enslaved. Or, I can choose freedom from sin and the Hope of the Beatific Vision, entering into Everlasting Joy. Please note, the word joy, in English, is a cognate derivative of the Celtic word ‘to be noble’. Knowledge of God is Joy. Knowledge of God is noble. What makes this knowledge noble and free is God and His Love for His Manifestation. Christians have utilized words handed down from Tradition. The Father Loves the Son. The Father creates, the Son since He is God, has always existed, and so has the Love Between Them, that is commonly called the Holy Spirit.

I cannot fathom as to why God would not express Divine Love for Mankind as well as Himself. Is it not a commandment to love thyself as well as your neighbor? You and I and our neighbors are engendered of the same substance, the same naturalness. This vicinity to one another makes us one. Catholics use the term ‘one body’. God and His Neighbor, are engendered of the same substance, the same naturalness. With Jesus (aka God) this ‘body’ becomes ‘One Body’, God and Mankind together closely bound. God wants Man to be close to Him. He draws us closer when we listen to Him. We know this because God has said it over and over again, in every instant. We only have to listen. Please take notice of the word ‘Naturalness’, as nothing is more natural than God. When we say Nature when falsely personifying Creation we mean to say ‘that which is evidence of God’s naturalness’.

What does all this have to do with a man from the desert who took on a peddler’s wife from the city? Nearly every thing penned in the Koran, coming from Mohammed, is in direct contradiction with Creation. It speaks with a pride in a way that I have only heard when attacked by Satan Himself, or something nearly as evil as he; such as, when adhering to my fast, or struggling to pray, or trying not to hold back in my alms. All these things I do and fail to do with purity because I have not yet chosen, as mercenary with no master but earthy riches, to be free from sin. Surely there a elements of beauty in the Koran. These elements reflect the Naturalness of God, as men are created by God, they contain within themselves that imperceptable latent seed, which always seeks to return to God. Even if one were not a Christian they can see the Love that Jesus had for the Father. If the seed was not in Christ’s heart then who’s heart could it be in. He was a pure man. Was he not? This purity is a lesson. When a man named Mohammed, or better said, an angelic being, contradicts the story of a truly good and pure man of Gospels and Scripture, we know, utilizing the tools God gave us out of love for men, that Mohammed’s way is not an ideal way to the afterlife.

Cleave Mohammed from Islam and we are left with a pure love for God. Forget all of the rules Mohammed laid down, even the promulgations toward love of fellow men. Set down for prayer, tell God with your mouth, “God, my Creator, make me your son, if it is Thy Will. I want to shout Thy Praise. Teach me how. And, Father do not let me be led astray.” After some quiet, then do what is truly in your heart, and not in your head. Satan speaks to our heads. He, and no other angel can read the hearts of men. This is why they barrage us so with horrible thoughts and images and ideas. This is why they shout our sins at us in our sleep. Demon angles shouts the sins Mohammed carried with his conscience, inside of him was a little bit of Jesus telling him to do what is right. That is the source of all the good in the Koran. Everything else contradicting the Gospel and the Scriptures is of the Devil.

Give it a try and you will see that Islam stripped of Mohammed becomes Hebraic thought. Hebraic thought is all of the hints God gave us while speaking the Word of Jesus. Since Islam is outside of The Body, it is not Christian in thought, but rather on the edge. In many ways Islam is like the lost tribe that has been found.

Go back and look over the prayer and remember that nowhere in Christianity is a command to “use deceit with the unbeliever”. This is what Satan has done… and this is his ploy – to use deceit. I under the punishment of Hellfire will not lie to you.

 

[elwill]

Is there a verse in the Quran that completely abolishes slavery and abolishes the practice of taking women and children captive in a war?

When Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him received the Divine Revelations of Islam, slavery among the Pagan Arabs, Jews and Christians was quite common. When he came with Allah Almighty’s True Religion of Islam, he gradually eliminated slavery. He couldn’t enforce it all at once, because it would’ve caused Islam to be an unsuccessful religion toward freeing slaves, and would certainly have broken Islam’s system for ending slavery.

By gradually freeing slaves and making it be acceptable to the society of many different pagan cultures and traditions, the idea of eliminating slavery became powerful enough that after Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him died, the freed slaves remained free and non of them was ever enslaved again.

Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari: "The Prophet said, “Give food to the hungry, pay a visit to the sick and release (set free) the one in captivity (by paying his ransom).”

Islam is a religion that came to fight slavery and end it once and for all. During Judaism and Christianity, slavery was at its highest peak in the Middle East. People were enslaved and they and their children were inherited and passed down to generations for ever

so how quran helps the society to eliminate slavery ? ( i will just quote the quran to you )

2:177 “It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces Towards east or West; but it is righteousness to believe in God and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made; and to be firm and patient, in pain (or suffering) and adversity, and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the God-fearing.”

4:92 “Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due): If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the deceased’s family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a believer, **the freeing of a believing slave (Is enough). **If he belonged to a people with whom ye have treaty of Mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing slave be freed. For those who find this beyond their means, (is prescribed) a fast for two months running: by way of repentance to God: for God hath all knowledge and all wisdom.”

5:89 “God will not call you to account for what is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth God make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful.”

58:3 “But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered, (It is ordained that such a one) **should free a slave before they touch each other: **Thus are ye admonished to perform: and God is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do.”

in ahadeeth
“'Abdullah b. 'Umar reported that 'Umar b. Khattab asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as he was at ji’rana (a town near Mecca) on his way back from Ta’if: Messenger of Allah, I had taken a vow during the days of Ignorance that I would observe I’tikaf for one day in the Sacred Mosque. So what is your opinion? He said: Go and observe I’tikaf for a day. And Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) gave him a slave girl out of the one-fifth (of the spoils of war meant for the Holy Prophet). And when Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) set the war prisoners free. 'Umar b. Khattab heard their voice as they were saying: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) has set us free. He (Hadrat 'Umar) said: What is this? They said: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) has set free the prisoners of war (which had fallen to the lot of people). Thereupon he (Hadrat 'Umar) said: Abdullah, go to that slave-girl and set her free. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4074)”

“Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him: I have caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him, then expiation for it is that he should set him free. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4079)”

be continued

 

[elwill]

I’m not convinced that there is no slavery today, although I have not researched that. My concern is that since the Quran is supposedly for all people at all time and it permits sex with captive women, what happens if an Islamic country is in what they consider a just war and somehow are victorious (God forbid! ) and then decide that God has prescribed for them to collect booty and women and then permits sex with them? What happens then?

i have to admit that it’s good question
it is important to know that thousands of years ago life was different than today. Today, people wouldn’t accept slavery for any reason. The reason for this is because people are a lot more independent both financially, education wise, mentally, etc… But people back then were different. When a tribe or a group of people lose a major battle and their money is mostly, if not all, is taken as war booty by the other side, then people could and would accept being slaves for the following reasons:

1- Both financial and social security. When their country or tribe lost the war, they also lost most or all of their money as war booty. Being out of money and food, it becomes necessary for an individual to find the means for basic survival in life. Living as a slave would provide this.
2- Protection from hostile individuals. Even under the Islamic rule, you can still find hostile individuals who violate the Law and take matters into their own hands. An enemy family can be sometime in danger if they don’t have a “protector”.
3- Widows, Orphans, and the extremely poor of the enemy side need the financial and social protection from a Master.
** Back then, there were no governments with good social system that protects everyone. Slavery back then was that social system in special cases**

 

[Jimzz12]

As to slavery. Here’s my personal experience…

A Poem.

Those poor women,

slavery exists still.

I have personally seen sex slaves before my own eyes,

The pity I feel,

Their eyes haunt the quiet moments and my dreams.

I have been to the Arabian Desert.

-St. Bakhita, you were not ‘lucky’ but blessed by God, when you escaped your slave master. Pray for all those enslaved under the weight of sin and injustice.

 

[Booklover]

Exactly. That’s why I said Islam permits adultery under the guise of polygamy. IMO, only the 1st marriage is valid so all subsequent “marriages” are in fact adultery. And that doesn’t address the issue of the “captive women” who are NOT wives, but somehow sex with them is OK too.

No offense, but this is a load of hogwash!! Having sex with a woman is a “means of freeing slaves” !?! That would be as opposed to just giving them their freedom at an appropriate time without physically violating them. And if she gets pregnant, gee what a bonus - she can have her freedom and then have a baby by the man who violated her! You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t find these teachings as generous as you do. Especially since they are in a book that is supposed to be for all people at all time.

What is the purpose of being able to have sex with the captive woman - to try to get her pregnant so she can have her freedom. And as stated above, this is still adultery - having sex with someone who is not your wife - no matter how “scholars” try to dress it up.

Great post, Jay! I was thinking the same thing. Sex with captive women would actually be rape, not adultery. I’m sure that those poor women would not willfully consent to having sex with their captors! The whole explanation he gave is disgusting. Isn’t it amazing how these so-called scholars twist things to make Muhammad’s actions appear good?

Vickie

 

[qui_est_ce]

When a tribe or a group of people lose a major battle and their money is mostly, if not all, is taken as war booty by the other side, then people could and would accept being slaves for the following reasons:

1- Both financial and social security. When their country or tribe lost the war, they also lost most or all of their money as war booty. Being out of money and food, it becomes necessary for an individual to find the means for basic survival in life. Living as a slave would provide this.
2- Protection from hostile individuals. Even under the Islamic rule, you can still find hostile individuals who violate the Law and take matters into their own hands. An enemy family can be sometime in danger if they don’t have a “protector”.
3- Widows, Orphans, and the extremely poor of the enemy side need the financial and social protection from a Master.
** Back then, there were no governments with good social system that protects everyone. Slavery back then was that social system in special cases**

When “Christian” Crusaders ransacked the Holy Land and raped women, it was wrong. Slavery was wrong then too.

3- Widows, Orphans, and the extremely poor of the enemy side need the financial and social protection from a Master.

Then why are the widows in Afghanistan sitting in the streets begging? Why are Afghan men ridiculing them?
cnn.com/video/#/video/living/2007/09/12/don.siu.under.veil.beggars.cnn

 

[Jimzz12]

Great post, Jay! I was thinking the same thing. Sex with captive women would actually be rape, not adultery. I’m sure that those poor women would not willfully consent to having sex with their captors! The whole explanation he gave is disgusting. Isn’t it amazing how these so-called scholars twist things to make Muhammad’s actions appear good?

The Sharia teaches us that the whole aspect of women has been skewed by the words given by the “angel” to Mohammed. They say that women are only half-human. And, this is why it takes 4 men to act as a witness in a rape trial. This is in the stead of the usual two. Under these rules it is virtually impossible to convict a man of rape.

A selection from *Light of Islam *by Sayyid Mujtaba Busavi Lari:

“Fortunately the woman was at home and I married her for a while. When I had quietened my desire and enjoyed the pleasure of the flesh from my lawful income, I gave the woman the money.”

You see in Mohammedism “temporary marriage” is lawful as long as there is an exchange of money. A temporary marriage can be as short as one hour. Then can then divorce after exchanging money. They can then remarry and divorce. This can cycle three times, and at which point the woman can no longer marry that man until she has married and divorced another. In the west we call this prostitution. It is a shameful thing that many non-believers reside in the West where there is government sanctioned serial monogamy. Remember that Christian thought and Christian practice have never nor ever will espouse such behavoir.

And indeed, the temporary marriage and serial monogamy are bad enough but when we read Sura 4:23-24 we clearly see that any male follower of Mohammed is free to have intercourse with any slave girl, even if she is married to another.

Sahih Bukhari goes furthur to tell us that Mohammed commanded, “Go and take any slave girl”; that is, any captive after a battle. If a slave girl who was a member of nobility or royalty was found among the captives, she became Mohammed’s mistress, as she befit none but Mohammed.

It is therefore taught Mohammed was a king. Or at least, worthy or more worthy of kingship. But, what makes one worthy to be a king but virtue. There is no virtue in fornication and therefore Mohammed was no king, nor worthy of kingship. Rather he let himself become as a slavemaster by his example. To the many he testified his emulation of the Slavemaster of Hell, enslaving the race with sin.

There were men who tried to speak out against this behavoir but Mohammed recieved a message from the “angel”:

“May he perish… He shall be burnt in a flaming fire, and his wife, laden with faggots, shall have a rope of fibre around her neck.” - Sura 111:1-5)

The Devil is not interested in justice. It is evident that Mohammed tried to fight these messages from the “angel” and yet, ultimately, he had succumbed to their false messages proclaiming him falsely to be a prophet.

 

[Jay53]

What I would also like to know is how adultery, under the guise of permissable sex with captive women, is pleasing to God and gives glory to Him?

I guess I just don’t understand how having sexual intercourse with a woman who is not your wife would be something that God would specifically and expressly permit, when God specifically said in the Ten Commandments “Thou shall not commit adultery”. Was there a diffferent definition of adultery?

Islamic scholars also seem to claim that the Quran was making lives better for the slaves and gradually freeing the slaves, however I fail to see how permitting sex with these captives accomplishes that (other than the fact that if they happen to get pregnant they “earn” their freedom). All it seems to accomplish is satisfying the lust of the “master” or “owner”. What benefit is it to the captive woman? Perhaps it is supposed to be “compensation” for all of the support/food/clothing/shelter that the “master” is providing for her? And again, how can this be argued to be something from God?

I also missed the answer to if there is a specific verse in the Quran that completely and permanently abolishes slavery and the taking of captive women even in the case of war? If that was the goal of all of these practices, shouldn’t there have been a final “revelation” completing this process? If someone already posted such a verse, I apologize - please just point me in the right direction. Thank you.