Shame

[Montalban]

We do not know that. Like I said, it’s disputed – many Muslims believe she was much older, up to nineteen, which is a perfectly acceptable age for marriage in modern society.

That’s not true. See this earlier post that shows that the ‘older Aisha’ theory is relatively recent.

Post #92

Montalban:

The first person to do a major re-work on this issue was a western-educated Moslem apologist.

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.

“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 such objections only emerged 1200 years after Muhammad - so over the history of Islam, these beliefs are ‘novel’

You don’t believe me? Here’s what some Moslems say about their own holy books, naturally enough they believe them to be accuarate.

“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)

Do you think having sex with a twelve-year-old is a good thing (the Catholic Encyclopedia places Mary between twelve and fourteen)? Yes or no.

That’s not true either. Evidentally you’ve not read the rebuttals of earlier, and thus make the same misatkes as others. The Catholic Encylopedia says that an unreliable source says she was younger. EVEN IF this were true, 14 is not 9.

 

[Montalban]

We don’t know how old Mary was, so the point is moot. But we do know for a fact that Aisha was nine. Like many muslims you refuse to condemn that because you do believe it. Otherwise you would have no problem condemning it. Nice try dodging the question, but I have yet to see even ONE muslim say marrying nine year olds is wrong.

Cestusdei, I agree.

It’s amazing how many people have the same unproven argument about Mary. Nowhere do we have real evidence for how old she was.

Worse still, this fact-less argument is an apology for Muhammed’s attack on a child.

 

[Carol_Coombe]

Carol, as I remember we Christians didn’t do anything to them, but they came out of the desert and invaded us. More recently they flew an airplane into the wtc. Do you remember that? I do. This is a forum on non-catholic religions. If you don’t like my objections to islamic atrocities then you don’t have to read them. Place your head carefully in the sand and pretend all is well.

If you look at the bibliography I have posted on another Forum (Apologetics: Is there one supreme church?) you will perhaps find some helpful reading.

I live in the world, internationally. I have seen distress in person: have you?

And if you think that we did ‘nothing’ to them, then you have another think coming. Inform yourself before your tongue flaps before your brain gets there.

I have re-read the Forum rules before I came here to find this off-topic posting. There are rules about flagrantly abusing other faiths, which you have persisted in doing despite efforts to calm you down. This thread is about being civil and as Christian as we possibly can be to one another. Please take that on board. Please.

 

[Carol_Coombe]

I think it is also important to point out that there is no shame in defending the faith a spirited and respectful manner.

If one expects their views to be respectfully treated they should extend that same courtesy to others on the forum. Some on this forum want only the first part. Iowa Mike

Very true, and I am sure that you will remember your excellent advice when next you post. It is especially important not to let ‘spirited defence of the faith’ overlap with or overwhelm your sense of respect for The Other.

People are at liberty to post opinions which reflect a curiosity about the Catholic Church; you are at liberty to reply in a spirited but respectful way, which I am sure you can define for youself if you really try hard.

 

[jack_hawkins]

Very true, and I am sure that you will remember your excellent advice when next you post. It is especially important not to let ‘spirited defence of the faith’ overlap with or overwhelm your sense of respect for The Other.

People are at liberty to post opinions which reflect a curiosity about the Catholic Church; you are at liberty to reply in a spirited but respectful way, which I am sure you can define for youself if you really try hard.

well said Carol!

 

[Carol_Coombe]

We do not know that. Like I said, it’s disputed – many Muslims believe she was much older, up to nineteen, which is a perfectly acceptable age for marriage in modern society.

Do you think having sex with a twelve-year-old is a good thing (the Catholic Encyclopedia places Mary between twelve and fourteen)? Yes or no.

In 2007, we might not think this was acceptable, particularly in terms of international and national conventions on the rights of the child. It does nevertheless happen all over the world, not without a great deal of concern.

However, looking at the historical evidence, at least from the Roman Empire of the time, we see that life expectancy was less than 30 years (as opposed to 75 or thereabouts now, at least in the US). That means that women were introduced to marriage and child-bearing much earlier than is the case now. I assume that, as in Africa, any woman would have become marriagable on achievement of puberty, on first menarche (menstration). That would be at about 12-14, or earlier given the life expectancy at the time, for which the body clock would have made adjustment.

 

[Carol_Coombe]

Hate the sin, love the sinner.

Hatred of anyone or anything, except for Prime Evil, is not a Christian principle. There are other more sophisticated attitudes to take which allow individuals, communities and civilisations to move on.

Apart from being unacceptable to God, hatred is mixed inevitably with fury which makes peace impossible.

Iowa Mike

 

[Valke2]

Carol_Coombe:
I remember reading somewhere that for everything there is a season… a time to hate…

 

[Jayda]

I remember reading somewhere that for everything there is a season… a time to hate…

hola

it is from Ecclesiastes 3:8 but the byrds used it in a song…

que Dios te bendiga

 

[Mirdath]

In 2007, we might not think this was acceptable, particularly in terms of international and national conventions on the rights of the child. It does nevertheless happen all over the world, not without a great deal of concern.

However, looking at the historical evidence, at least from the Roman Empire of the time, we see that life expectancy was less than 30 years (as opposed to 75 or thereabouts now, at least in the US). That means that women were introduced to marriage and child-bearing much earlier than is the case now. I assume that, as in Africa, any woman would have become marriagable on achievement of puberty, on first menarche (menstration). That would be at about 12-14, or earlier given the life expectancy at the time, for which the body clock would have made adjustment.

Nine-year-olds are often capable of conception – in fact, there was a case quite recently in which a man named William Edward Ronca raped and impregnated a nine-year-old. He pleaded guilty in 2006.

So yes, this ‘Mohammed was a pedophile, but the Jewish custom of the bride being 12 and 6 months was a-okay’ stuff is ignorant at an absolute best case, hypocritical at worst.

Here is another Muslim perspective on it, making many interesting points – one notable theme among them is that history is hard to trust when it mixes with theology. Especially when that history is an oral tradition, as the hadith were for a good while after Mohammed’s death.

This, of course, works all ways, so I’ll propose an amicable compromise: I’ll shut up about Mary being underage if you all shut up about Aisha being underage. How’s that sound?

 

[jack_hawkins]

Nine-year-olds are often capable of conception – in fact, there was a case quite recently in which a man named William Edward Ronca raped and impregnated a nine-year-old. He pleaded guilty in 2006.

So yes, this ‘Mohammed was a pedophile, but the Jewish custom of the bride being 12 and 6 months was a-okay’ stuff is ignorant at an absolute best case, hypocritical at worst.

Here is another Muslim perspective on it, making many interesting points – one notable theme among them is that history is hard to trust when it mixes with theology. Especially when that history is an oral tradition, as the hadith were for a good while after Mohammed’s death.

This, of course, works all ways, so I’ll propose an amicable compromise: I’ll shut up about Mary being underage if you all shut up about Aisha being underage. How’s that sound?

Are you really so ignorant of human development that you can’t see the difference between an 8 year old and a 12.5 year old? We would need clarification as to whether gilrs of 12.5 were married and the marriage consummated or merely betrothed incidentally. You fail to see the real crux of the argument anyway, which is not about the various customs of the time at all but whether marrying a 6 year old and having sex with her at 8 is compatible with being the “Seal of the Prophets” and perfect example for all time?

 

[Booklover]

OK go read Edward Said, who taught in America for years, and was one of the last century’s great intellects. If you have doubts about Karen Armstrong that are based on actual evidence, then read her (her knowledge is vast) with an analytical mind, with scepticism if you must, but read. If you are educated by CNN, or NBC or ANOther American network, then I suspect (I am trying to be gentle here believe it or not) that you are not terribly well informed, and perhaps lack the selectiveness necessary to make an informed intellectual opinion or choice.

So because I don’t say complimentary things about Islam I’m misinformed about it?

Or go talk to a group of Muslims. Or find a Muslim friend, or a bunch of them, as we have done. Find out what their faith says, and what it does not say. They are not apologists for their religion: they are the faithful, who complete the hajj and mini-hajj several times in a lifetime, whose children are raised in the faith, who are peaceful and engaging. Our faith and theirs intermingles, and we try to observe Ramadan with them.

They’re not apologists? And they’re constantly trying to indoctrinate us as seen by the many Muslim posters on this site with their constant proseletyzing!

I know all about the hajj and how they circle the kaaba stone and kiss it and so on. Aren’t there usually casulties there as well?

Tell me, how can they be as peaceful and engaging as you claim, when the Quran explicitly teaches intolerance, hatred and bigotry towards non-Muslims?

Do you know what the hajj is, or what Ramadan is? Vinoba Bhave? Rabindranath Tagore? Mahatma Gandhi? Do you have knowledge based on fact about faiths outside your own?

Do you know what taqqiya is?

I understand your political fury at Islam at the moment, if you are American. You might understand our political fury at America at the moment (I am a Canadian in South Africa, and would-be convert to Catholicism). You might also think that Islam is far from monolithic: that it has denominations just as Christendom has, some of them engaged now in the terrible internecine civil war being waged in Iraq post invasion.

At the moment? As long as Muslims continue to kill and terrorize non-Muslims!

Vickie

 

[cestusdei]

If you look at the bibliography I have posted on another Forum (Apologetics: Is there one supreme church?) you will perhaps find some helpful reading.

I live in the world, internationally. I have seen distress in person: have you?

And if you think that we did ‘nothing’ to them, then you have another think coming. Inform yourself before your tongue flaps before your brain gets there.

I have re-read the Forum rules before I came here to find this off-topic posting. There are rules about flagrantly abusing other faiths, which you have persisted in doing despite efforts to calm you down. This thread is about being civil and as Christian as we possibly can be to one another. Please take that on board. Please.

Carol, marrying nine year olds isn’t civil. There are Christians in distress due to islamic persecution. I guess you close your eyes to that. I have been abroad and lived abroad, in non-Christian countries. I saw no evidence that we were doing anything to anyone. A muslim will blame us for anything, even if he stubs his toe. It’s always someone elses fault. They blame 911 on the Jews.

I didn’t realize that you were now the board censor. It appears more likely that you are a muslim who doesn’t like the truth to be exposed. If you don’t like my posts then don’t read them. Frankly it sickens me that you are more upset that I hurt their feelings then the fact that they chop the heads off of Christians. Get your priorities in order.

 

[cestusdei]

Nine-year-olds are often capable of conception – in fact, there was a case quite recently in which a man named William Edward Ronca raped and impregnated a nine-year-old. He pleaded guilty in 2006.

So yes, this ‘Mohammed was a pedophile, but the Jewish custom of the bride being 12 and 6 months was a-okay’ stuff is ignorant at an absolute best case, hypocritical at worst.

Here is another Muslim perspective on it, making many interesting points – one notable theme among them is that history is hard to trust when it mixes with theology. Especially when that history is an oral tradition, as the hadith were for a good while after Mohammed’s death.

This, of course, works all ways, so I’ll propose an amicable compromise: I’ll shut up about Mary being underage if you all shut up about Aisha being underage. How’s that sound?

Thanks for admitting that Aisha was in fact nine and that makes muhammed a pedophile.

 

[cpayne]

I think it is also important to point out that there is no shame in defending the faith a spirited and respectful manner.

Iowa Mike

I agree (to wrench the thread away from Islam for a moment). I’ve gotten in some fairly intense arguments here, but I’ve never felt like anyone “hated” me because of it. (If anyone does, please don’t let me know. )

Try teaching courses on the Bible, theology, and so on, in a secular college for several years. People on this site are downright pussycats compared to some of the class discussions I’ve had.

 

[Mirdath]

Thanks for admitting that Aisha was in fact nine and that makes muhammed a pedophile.

I admitted no such thing. I wasn’t there and have no idea how old she really was – and neither do you.

Were I to say Mohammed was a pedophile, in the same breath I’d accuse Joseph.

 

[cpayne]

I’m not trying to jump into the argument over whether or not Mohammed was a pedophile–I don’t care what kind of bicycle he owned. But Mirdath’s comments about the Blessed Virgin Mary (title selected purposefully) have made me curious about something else. I’ve always heard that Mary was “probably about 13 or 14” when she married Joseph, based on Jewish customs of the time. But does anyone actually know? I’m sure that’s not in the Bible–is it in a Church Father somewhere? Is it from an accepted tradition? Or is it just a widely accepted idea?

 

[exoflare]

I’m not trying to jump into the argument over whether or not Mohammed was a pedophile–I don’t care what kind of bicycle he owned. But Mirdath’s comments about the Blessed Virgin Mary (title selected purposefully) have made me curious about something else. I’ve always heard that Mary was “probably about 13 or 14” when she married Joseph, based on Jewish customs of the time. But does anyone actually know? I’m sure that’s not in the Bible–is it in a Church Father somewhere? Is it from an accepted tradition? Or is it just a widely accepted idea?

Nobody knows for sure, and so of course the Church doesn’t say either. But tradition maintains that she was probably about 14.

 

[cpayne]

Nobody knows for sure, and so of course the Church doesn’t say either. But tradition maintains that she was probably about 14.

Thanks–I also just read the newadvent article, and it agrees with you, based on some apocryphal writings. Thanks again!

All right–back to Mohammed’s dating habits!

 

[Publisher]

This whole barage or “hate mail” about Muhammud is distressing to say the least…and from some priests no less.

Aisha may have been 9 years old…she may have been well into puberty by then…now it may shock some of you but in this country…my family in particular in previous decades, young women who began their period were married…quite young…I have a great aunt who was married at 12 years old, had her first child at 13 and had 10 children by the time she was 30. Does that make my great uncle a pedophile? He was in his late 30’s when they married…he was a widower…but it was the times they lived in…girls in large families were married off very quickly…lest in more unsavory circumstances became pregnant from the father or one of her brothers…then she was damaged goods and another mouth on it’s way to feed…

We live in different cultural times…there were no “teen years” of childhood…it was childhood right into adulthood.

What Muhammud did has no bearing on how Muslims behave today…many of the more radical sects ARE given to violence and terrorism…I fault them for that…not what their founder did 1400 years ago in a culture so far removed from mine I can’t even fathom the differences that exist.