Islam: Sex slave?

[inJESUS]

i can copy from wherever i want provided there is a reference…and since you found the same passage, it means what i quoted is true no matter where i quoted from.

the rest of your post is again an attempt to digress the topic since what you highlighted does not refute that right hand possessions are not wives but you shoot yourself in the leg.

Got a source that says right hand possessions are legal wives and hence Muslims can have unlimited wives? yes or no? because so far you proved nothing but logical fallacies.

 

[Angelos]

inJESUS;4068469:

happyday;4068442:

LOL
You just copied and pasted from an anti-islam website whose job is to deceive people like you.

The funny thing is even in the quoted commentry of Maududi, that website deliberately omitted a great part of it. The whole footnote# 94 is as follows:

inJEUS, you just blindly quoted a half-quote from an anti-Islam website who decieved you and then you tried to deceived others. Is this what Jesus (or faith in Jesus) or Catholic church taught you?

Now you are the one slandering us and trying to deceive non-Muslims through digression.

The part you additionally quoted prefers blaming Muslims for the supposed abuses of the rules. Yet those abuses are the direct result of the loopholes provided by the Islamic Law.

 

[inJESUS]

seems only Happyday did not understand what he quoted…Sadday i made you a favour NOT quoting the part you quoted.

Then, as it was not possible to determine the number of the prisoners of war, legally also** it could nor be determined how many slave girls a person could keep at a time**. The sale of the slaves and slave-girls was also allowed for the reason that if a slave or a slave-girl could not pull on well with a master, he or she could be transferred to another person so that the same person’s permanent ownership did not become a cause of unending torture for both the master and the captive. The Shari`ah made aII these laws keeping in view human conditions and requirements for the convenience of men. If these have been made a means of sexual enjoyment and luxury by the rich, it is they who are to blame for this and not the Shari’ah .

He must have been kidding… a sharia that allows a man to have unlimited sex slaves, a sharia that allows a man to trade his sex slave with another man, a sharia that allows an unmarried man to have sex with unlimited sex slaves is NOT responsible for a man’s immorality?subhanallah…

 

[happyday]

i can copy from wherever i want provided there is a reference…and since you found the same passage, it means what i quoted is true no matter where i quoted from.

Ofcourse you can copy paste from any source, likewise I too can copy paste from anti-Christianity sources…right?

But the question here is you apparently did not quote the whole and omitted the things which gives an answer to your own question.

Likewise the Shari’ah has allowed that the women who are captured in war and whose people do not exchange them for Muslim prisoners of war nor ransom them

, may be kept as slave-girls, and gave the persons to whom they are assigned by the government the right to have conjugal relations with them so that they do not become a moral hazard for the society.

Keeping those CAPTIVE women during a war ( fi-sabilillah - a war which is waged for justice to be prevailed and not any other war ) is a last resort and not an first option. They are not to be kept in a brothel for prostitution.

 

[happyday]

inJESUS,
I asked you this earlier:

In your Catholicism too, marriage is allowed for all God-fearing Catholics but if the very His/Her Holiness Pope doesn’t want to marry a free or war salve girl/man; or a sister of His/Her Holiness Pope wants to become a nun, then what happens? Are they to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church?
Ansd who will excommunicate them? The magisterium? or His/her Pope him/herself?

Now tell me what is the Mosaic Law on War Slaves (male/female) and also what is NT’s position on them? Is there any hint (in the NT) what to do or what is allowed and what is better with the War Female Salves if their masters like to do something with their slaves under “critical situation”?

 

[Angelos]

inJESUS,
I asked you this earlier:

In your Catholicism too, marriage is allowed for all God-fearing Catholics but if the very His/Her Holiness Pope doesn’t want to marry a free or war salve girl/man; or a sister of His/Her Holiness Pope wants to become a nun, then what happens? Are they to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church?
Ansd who will excommunicate them? The magisterium? or His/her Pope him/herself?

Now tell me what is the Mosaic Law on War Slaves (male/female) and also what is NT’s position on them? Is there any hint (in the NT) what to do or what is allowed and what is better with the War Female Salves if their masters like to do something with their slaves under “critical situation”?

You are like a naive person that looks for equations and arithmetics in a history book. You should know that the New Testament is no sharia book.

Your questions will remain unanswered as long as you keep ignoring that they have actually been answered many times so far.

 

[inJESUS]

inJESUS;4068731:

irrelevant again .First, second or third option, these slaves are still not wives but possessions…Muhammad allowed you to have sex with unlimited number of women who are NOT your wife but called a possession whom you can “use” and give in trade to another man who in turn can do the same…(seems we have a different understanding of brothel for prostitution).

 

[Contrabass101]

inJESUS,
I asked you this earlier:

In your Catholicism too, marriage is allowed for all God-fearing Catholics but if the very His/Her Holiness Pope doesn’t want to marry a free or war salve girl/man; or a sister of His/Her Holiness Pope wants to become a nun, then what happens? Are they to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church?
Ansd who will excommunicate them? The magisterium? or His/her Pope him/herself?

Can’t speak for everyone, but I didn’t understand any of this…

• CB

 

[Chris_LaRock]

**
Please learn a little more from your old winesack (OT). What did David do to the man whom he got killed in battle and took his wife. Soloman was born out of their sex affair.**

I’m sorry, but you are wrong about that. The child conceived as a result of David’s affair with that man’s wife died.

2Sa 12:14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.2Sa 12:15 And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.
2Sa 12:16 David therefore besought God for the child; and David fasted, and went in, and lay all night upon the earth.
2Sa 12:17 And the elders of his house arose, and went to him, to raise him up from the earth: but he would not, neither did he eat bread with them.
2Sa 12:18 And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died. And the servants of David feared to tell him that the child was dead: for they said, Behold, while the child was yet alive, we spake unto him, and he would not hearken unto our voice: how will he then vex himself, if we tell him that the child is dead?
2Sa 12:19 But when David saw that his servants whispered, David perceived that the child was dead: therefore David said unto his servants, Is the child dead? And they said, He is dead. 2Sa 12:20 Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the LORD, and worshipped: then he came to his own house; and when he required, they set bread before him, and he did eat.

 

[Chris_LaRock]

Also please do not forget that David needed a young hot beautiful girl to heat him up in the very old age. It was provided to him But it did not work. Do you read those passages of the bible?

1Ki 1:1 Now king David was old and stricken in years; and they covered him with clothes, but he gat no heat.
1Ki 1:2 Wherefore his servants said unto him, Let there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin: and let her stand before the king, and let her cherish him, and let her lie in thy bosom, that my lord the king may get heat.
1Ki 1:3 So they sought for a fair damsel throughout all the coasts of Israel, and found Abishag a Shunammite, and brought her to the king.
1Ki 1:4 And the damsel was very fair, and cherished the king, and ministered to him: but the king knew her not.

In other words, the girl slept in the same bed with David to warm him and he DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH HER.

 

[happyday]

Where in the New Testament, a clear or understandable condemnation or negation of polygamy?

If a Muslim wants to become a Catholic (who has multiple wives) must divorce his all wives and keep just one?
If not, then how is polygamy exactly forbidden in the NT or when it is compromised and allowed for him?

.

 

[Chris_LaRock]

Where in the New Testament, a clear or understandable condemnation or negation of polygamy?

If a Muslim wants to become a Catholic (who has multiple wives) must divorce his all wives and keep just one?
If not, then how is polygamy exactly forbidden in the NT or when it is compromised and allowed for him?

.

1Co 7:2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

 

[planten]

1Co 7:2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

These are not real words of any bible (gospel). They seem to be additional stuff which was written (added) long after Jesus had departed. Also see the words “Let every man have his own wife…” A man who has two wives, each one is his wife. So can he have them one byone. He will be with his wife.he willbe having his wife and none else.
IT IS NOT WRITTEN "LET EVERY MAN HAVE HIS ONLY ONE ****WIFE"

The real matter being discussed in the above verses is chastity not monotheism. It is a lesson against fornication.That is all.

 

[planten]

Chris, your posts #182, #183 are correct. You are right. Thanks for the correction and help.

 

[Contrabass101]

These are not real words of any bible (gospel). They seem to be additional stuff which was written (added) long after Jesus had departed. Also see the words “Let every man have his own wife…” A man who has two wives, each one is his wife. So can he have them one byone. He will be with his wife.he willbe having his wife and none else.
IT IS NOT WRITTEN "LET EVERY MAN HAVE HIS ONLY ONE ****WIFE"

The real matter being discussed in the above verses is chastity not monotheism. It is a lesson against fornication.That is all.

Planten, discussing with you is hopeless. You want Catholics to argue from “Scripture alone”, yet the Catholic faith has no dogma, that all truth must be found in Scripture. That is a Fundamentalist approach and quite unfitting here - you better first convince us that all Christian truth must be based solely on the Bible.

And now, when the Catholics play along and point you to the places in Scripture where monogamy is at least implied, you argue that Titus is not on par with the Gospels, although Christendom has held it to be from the very beginning.

But in the end, it is merely an attempt to change the topic from the embarassing teachings of Islam.

Polygamy has never been divinely sanctioned in the Judeo-Christian faith. It was occasionally practiced before the time of Christ, and always with disastrous results, but monogamy has been implied right from the first pages of Genesis.

Islam explicitly sanctions polygamy and even allows for “right hand possesions”. Do you deny this?

• CB

 

[dzheremi]

These are not real words of any bible (gospel). They seem to be additional stuff which was written long after Jesus had departed.

You do not understand the words you are using. The Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) were all written after Jesus’ time on the Earth (from what I was told in RCIA, about 60-100 AD). They are testimonies of Jesus’ life, crucifixion, and ressurection, so logically they could not have been completed until after these events had happened, e.g. after Jesus’ time on Earth.

And don’t even start with the idea that this somehow makes them invalid, because if they are invalid by being written in the time-period in which they were, then the Qur’an is CERTAINLY invalid by virtue of its having been written hundreds of years after Jesus’ time on Earth, and I know you don’t believe that!

 

[Contrabass101]

By the way, the New Testament can’t be expected to explicitly take a stance on monogamy/polygamy, since polygamy was forbidden by Roman Law.

This is what led Martin Luther - unguided by the teachings of the Magisterium - to say that “I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter.”

• CB

 

[Angelos]

These are not real words of any bible (gospel). They seem to be additional stuff which was written (added) long after Jesus had departed. Also see the words “Let every man have his own wife…” A man who has two wives, each one is his wife. So can he have them one byone. He will be with his wife.he willbe having his wife and none else.
IT IS NOT WRITTEN "LET EVERY MAN HAVE HIS ONLY ONE ****WIFE"

The real matter being discussed in the above verses is chastity not monotheism. It is a lesson against fornication.That is all.

According to dear planten, whatever goes against his teachings and debunks his theories in the NT is additional stuff.

He also cannot see that the word wife in the sentence “Let every man have his own wife” is deliberately used in singular form. LOL

 

[Chris_LaRock]

These are not real words of any bible (gospel). They seem to be additional stuff which was written (added) long after Jesus had departed. Also see the words “Let every man have his own wife…” A man who has two wives, each one is his wife. So can he have them one byone. He will be with his wife.he willbe having his wife and none else.
IT IS NOT WRITTEN "LET EVERY MAN HAVE HIS ONLY ONE ****WIFE"

The real matter being discussed in the above verses is chastity not monotheism. It is a lesson against fornication.That is all.

Those verses don’t mention monotheism. They condemn fornication and being married to more than one spouse.

Obviously, if a Bishop is only allowed ONE wife, those who are being instructed by the Bishop would also.

 

[planten]

Planten, discussing with you is hopeless. You want Catholics to argue from “Scripture alone”, yet the Catholic faith has no dogma, that all truth must be found in Scripture. That is a Fundamentalist approach and quite unfitting here - you better first convince us that all Christian truth must be based solely on the Bible.

And now, when the Catholics play along and point you to the places in Scripture where monogamy is at least implied, you argue that Titus is not on par with the Gospels, although Christendom has held it to be from the very beginning.

But in the end, it is merely an attempt to change the topic from the embarassing teachings of Islam.

Polygamy has never been divinely sanctioned in the Judeo-Christian faith. It was occasionally practiced before the time of Christ, and always with disastrous results, but monogamy has been implied right from the first pages of Genesis.

Islam explicitly sanctions polygamy and even allows for “right hand possesions”. Do you deny this?

• CB

Yes, I was sure that you cannot ignore your book and try to be smarter, inventing your own religion. That is not allowed. It is not right that your real book be quiet on a subject and you try to be an advocate for it. For the purpose of discussion, you have to remain within the scope of your best authentic books. That you people do not do.