Slave-girls as sexual property in the Quran

  • Thread starter Thread starter discipleofJesus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
discipleofJesus:
Slave-girls as sexual property in the Quran by James M. Arlandson
answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/women_slaves.htm

MUHAMMAD AND THE FEMALE CAPTIVES by Silas
answering-islam.org/Silas/femalecaptives.htm

Adultery: Do it! Do it! Do it!
muhammadanism.org/Hadith/Topics/Adultery.htm
Click to expand...
This topic has nothing much difference with other topic about kinana. yet, it still good topic to discuss. 👍
 
More articles on Islam and women

Polygamy in the Quran
by James M. Arlandson
answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/women_polygamy.htm

“Plowing fields” and marrying little girls in the Quran
by James M. Arlandson
answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/women_inferior.htm

Domestic violence in Islam
The Quran on beating wives
by James M. Arlandson
answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/beating.htm

A strange divorce and remarriage law in the Quran
by James M. Arlandson
answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/women_remarry.htm

More articles by James M. Arlandson answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/index.htm
 
To get the discussion going, lets look at how the Bible treats slave-girls.

Male Israelite slaves are to be released after seven years, but if an man sells his daughter into slavery, she and her children serve indefinitely. However, if a slave-girl is taken to be the wife of himself or his son then she is to be well treated.
Exodus 21:2-11

If a man beats a slavegirl and she dies during the beating, he should be punished. But if she doesn’t die until the day after beating, its okay - after all its his money he lost.
Exodus 21:20-21

Although the book of Leviticus (20:10) states that adulterers are to be punished with death, commiting adultery with a slave girl is a lesser offense. Leviticus 19:20-22
 
It is important to note that Jesus taught us to be perfect, to love all, to love even our enemies.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."
(Matthew 5:43-48)

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
(Matthew 7:12)

Hence, if the early Christians did what Jesus taught us, and if the early Christians owned any slaves, they would have loved them (the slaves) and treated them the way they (the masters) would want to be treated. That would have lead to releasing the slaves, if that is what the slaves wanted (and in most/all cases, I assume that is what they would have wanted. But if the slaves had a loving Christian master who treated them well, they may have wanted to remain slaves to him/her).

If I have stated anything wrong, please correct me.
 
40.png
coptic_believer:
It is important to note that Jesus taught us to be perfect, to love all, to love even our enemies.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."
(Matthew 5:43-48)

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
(Matthew 7:12)

Hence, if the early Christians did what Jesus taught us, and if the early Christians owned any slaves, they would have loved them (the slaves) and treated them the way they (the masters) would want to be treated. That would have lead to releasing the slaves, if that is what the slaves wanted (and in most/all cases, I assume that is what they would have wanted. But if the slaves had a loving Christian master who treated them well, they may have wanted to remain slaves to him/her).

If I have stated anything wrong, please correct me.
Click to expand...
It is important to note that Jesus taught us to be perfect, to love all, to love even our enemies = It is important to note that Jesus taught us to be perfect, to love all people, to love even our enemies.
 
40.png
coptic_believer:
It is important to note that Jesus taught us to be perfect, to love all, to love even our enemies.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."
(Matthew 5:43-48)

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
(Matthew 7:12)"
Click to expand...
It is also important to note that the Quran does **not ** teach Muslims to love all people, to love even their enemies. There is also no verse/s in the Quran that teach Muslims
“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
(Matthew 7:12)
 
Allah said in the Quran, “worship Allah and do not associate anything with Him [in worship]. and [be] charitable [in conduct] with the parents, the relatives, the orphans, the poor, the close neighbour, the distant neighbour, the companion at the side, the wayfarer and what your right hands possess (i.e., slaves). surely Allah does not love the one who is conceited and boastful.” (4:36)

Allah also says in the Quran, “Allah does not prohibit that you to be charitable [in conduct] to those who did not fight you with regards to the religion and did not expel you from your homes and that you be just towards them.” (60:8).

Allah also said, “and whatever the messenger gave you, then take it. and whatever he prohibited you from, then leave it.” (59:7) so know that it is obligatory to accept and follow the statements and commands of Allah’s messenger, prophet muhammad. and among his statements are those like:

“none of you [truly] believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.” (saheeh al-bukhaaree).

“by Allah, he does not believe. by Allah, he does not believe. by Allah, he does not believe.” it was said, “who, o Allah’s messenger?” he said, “the one whose neighbour is not safe from his calamity.” (saheeh al-bukhaaree)

“whoever was believing in Allah and the Last Day, then he should not harm his neighbour. and whoever was believing in Allah and the Last Day, then let him be generous/kind to his guest. and whoever was believing in Allah and the Last Day, then let him speak good or remain silent.” (saheeh al-bukhaaree).

and due to the general wordings used in all of these verses and hadeeths, they apply to both the muslims and the non-muslims from among those types of people mentioned.
 
😃 beautiful and long explanation…but has it anything to do with slave girls? 😃
May be we need to see the criteria of mukmin according to Koran. Care to quote us Al Mukminun, Gonzalees Raul? May be 23:6 will be soooooo nice… 😃
 
40.png
r.gonzales:
Allah also says in the Quran, “Allah does not prohibit that you to be charitable [in conduct] to those who did not fight you with regards to the religion and did not expel you from your homes and that you be just towards them.” (60:8).
Click to expand...
"2) Abrogation

The earlier passages (Cf. 60:8-9) have been abrogated by the later citations which command Muslims to wage offensive war on unbelievers, especially Jews and Christians (Cf. surah 9:5,29 etc.).

The Quran, in several places, speaks of Allah abrogating specific injunctions which were supposedly given to Muslims:

And for whatever verse We abrogate or cast into oblivion, We bring a better or the like of it; knowest thou not that God is powerful over everything? S. 2:106 Arberry

And when We exchange a verse in the place of another verse and God knows very well what He is sending down – they say, ‘Thou art a mere forger!’ Nay, but the most of them have no knowledge. S. 16:101 Arberry

Hence, it is very plausible that passages encouraging tolerance such as surah 60:8-9 were later abrogated. Interestingly, this has actually been the position of many renowned Muslim scholars. We provide a few examples of Muslim scholarly opinions on passages such as surah 9:1,5 and 29 which are taken from this online source.

…

**Surah 9:29

Ibn Juzayy:**

(Fight those of the people who do not have iman in Allah and the Last Day) A command to fight the People of the Book and denying their belief in Allah because of the words of the Jews, “'Uzayr is the son of Allah” and the words of the Christians, “The Messiah is the son of Allah.” Their belief in the Last Day is denied because their belief in it is incorrect. They do not accept the Next World or the Reckoning.

(who do not make haram what Allah and His Messenger have made haram) because they consider as lawful carrion, blood, pork, etc. (and do not take as their deen the deen of Truth) i.e. THEY DO NOT ENTER ISLAM.

(who were given the Book) Clarifying those they were commanded to fight. When this ayat was revealed, the Messenger of Allah set out on the expedition to Tabuk to fight the Christians.

(until they pay the jizya) Scholars agree about accepting jizya from the Jews and Christians. The Magians/Zoroasterians have been added to them going by the words of the Prophet, “Treat them as People of the Book.” There is disagreement about accepting it from idolaters and Sabians. It is not collected from women, children or the insane. Malik says that it is 4 dinars for the people who use gold and 40 dirhams for the people who use silver. It is a head tax. (with their own hands) This has two interpretations. One is that the dhimmi pays it with his own hand and does not send anyone with it nor postpone it as is said, “from hand to hand.” The second is submission and obedience as you say, “he gave his hand to so-and-so [an _expression meaning “he surrendered to so-and-so”].” (STATE OF ABASEMENT) i.e. they are humble.

answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi_tolerance.htm
‘The Myth of Islamic Tolerance
Addressing A Common Muslim Polemic’ by Sam Shamoun (see the article for more quotes by other scholars (such as Ibn Kathir) on this verse and other verses. Also, see the article for Ibn Juzayy on verse 9:5)

r.gonzales said:
“none of you [truly]
believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.” (saheeh al-bukhaaree).
Click to expand...

I don’t think brother here means non-Muslim, I think it means Muslims and/or biological Muslim brothers (however, it seems to mean Muslims in general more than biological Muslim brothers specifically). If you disagree, show me where in the Quran or Sahih Bukhari it says brother means non-Muslim.

r.gonzales said:
“by Allah, he does not believe. by Allah, he does not believe. by Allah, he does not believe.” it was said, “who, o Allah’s messenger?” he said, “the one whose neighbour is not safe from his calamity.” (saheeh al-bukhaaree)

“whoever was believing in Allah and the Last Day, then he should not harm his neighbour. and whoever was believing in Allah and the Last Day, then let him be generous/kind to his guest. and whoever was believing in Allah and the Last Day, then let him speak good or remain silent.” (saheeh al-bukhaaree).
Click to expand...

Well who is your neighbour according to Islam? Show me where the Quran or Sahih Bukhari it explains who your neighbour is? Maybe it is just referring to people who live next door and nearby? Maybe it is referring to a neighbour who must be Muslim too?
 
Anyway, the main points of the first three articles that I linked to above are:
  1. Islam allows Muslim men to have sex with an unlimited number of female slaves/captives (that they own). e.g. if a Muslim owns 15 slaves/captives, he can have sex with all of them.
  2. Islam allows Muslim men to **rape ** an unlimited number of female slaves/captives (that they own). e.g. if a Muslim owns 15 slaves/captives, he can have sex with all of them.
 
40.png
discipleofJesus:
it is very plausible that passages encouraging tolerance such as surah 60:8-9 were later abrogated.
Click to expand...
to say that a particular verse has been abrogated requires proof, whether from the Quran itself or from authentic hadeeths. just because a particular scholar or group of scholars say that the verse is abrogated doesn’t necessitate that this is truly the case. the evidence is what is to be followed.

the verse of the sword (i.e., 9:29) was revealed when Allah commanded prophet muhammad to fight the romans, who at the time were gathering up an army to attack them as is mentioned in the history books. the context of the verse is one of conflict and hostility being shown towards the muslims and has nothing to do with what is mentioned in the first first i quoted from, which clearly states that the muslims are not forbidden from being charitible in conduct towards those who do not fight them in respect to religion, nor drove them from their homes (i.e., the polytheist makkans who drove the muslims out of makkah), nor are they forbidden from being just towards these people. it should also be pointed out the al-imam al-bukhaaree, whose compilation of saheeh hadeeths is considered to be the most authentic collection of hadeeths available, includes in his book of good manners (kitaab al-adab) this hadeeth under the subheading, “connecting the ties of kinship with the polytheist father”:
asmaa’ bint abee bakr (prophet muhammad’s sister-in-law) said, “my mother came to me desiring something during the lifetime of the prophet. so i asked the prophet, may Allah send greetings and peace upon him, should i connect the ties of kinship with her? he said, ‘yes.’” ibn 'uyainah (one of the narrators of this hadeeth) said, "then Allah, exalted is He, revealed, ‘Allah does not prohibit that you to be charitable [in conduct] to those who did not fight you with regards to the religion…’ (60:8).
40.png
discipleofJesus:
I don’t think brother here means non-Muslim
Click to expand...
my quoting of this verse was more in response to your claim that islam doesn’t teach muslims to treat others as they wished to be treated. and this claim of yours is false.
40.png
discipleofJesus:
Well who is your neighbour according to Islam? Show me where the Quran or Sahih Bukhari it explains who your neighbour is? Maybe it is just referring to people who live next door and nearby? Maybe it is referring to a neighbour who must be Muslim too?
Click to expand...
neighbour means neighbour, those who live around you - and the terms “close” and “distant” in the verses are with regards to ties of kinship or relations. so it refers to those you know and those you don’t know, whether muslim or non-muslim.
 
You mean charitable with the slave, by sleeping with her? However God given him ‘what your right hands possess’…
 
Cyber Knight:
This topic has nothing much difference with other topic about kinana. yet, it still good topic to discuss. 👍
Click to expand...
How about we discuss this: 👍

These are your fruits…

Survey:
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops commissioned a survey of Roman Catholic church records of abusive clergy, to be completed by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. The survey is one component of the Dallas Charter, a plan developed by the bishops in 2002 to respond to allegations of widespread child abuse by priests, and of extensive cover-ups by the church. CNN.com obtained a draft copy of the report and posted a summary on their web site on 2004-FEB-17. 1 The final version was released on 2004-FEB-27.
Some of the raw data contained in the report:

Years covered: 1950 to 2002.

Percentage of bishops who provided information: 97% 3

Total number of allegations of sexual abuse of children by priests: 11,000.

Number substantiated: 6,700 (61%).

Number unsubstantiated: 1,000 (9.1%).

Number which were not investigated because the allegations were made after the priest’s death: 3,300.

Number of priests who served during the interval: 110,000.

Number of priests alleged to have abused children: 4,450.

Percentage of abusive priests: 4.0%

Number of priests who are currently serving: 44,000

Number of cases of abuse per priest:

Most priests were accused of a single event

1,112 priests (25.0%) had two or three allegations

578 priests (13%) had four to nine allegations.

133 priests (2.9%) had ten or more allegations.

Age of the victims:

Almost 6% were 7 years of age or younger.

16% were 8,9 or 10 years old.

78% were 11 to 17 years old.

Factors contributing to the abuse problem, as stated by the report:

Failure by the hierarchy to grasp the seriousness of the problem.

Overemphasis on the need to avoid a scandal.

Use of unqualified treatment centers.

Misguided willingness to forgive.

Insufficient accountability.

That’s in the U.S. alone; God knows what’s going on in the rest of the world. :tsktsk:
cuttingedge.org/news/n1614.cfm
 
😃 And after sleeping with slaves and captives, you are still Al Mukminun… 😃 And you don’t need to d “azl” (coiptus interuptus).
Hehehe…reminding me of Mary the Coptic, one of the prophet’s wives’ servant. 👍
 
😃 I think Koran gives a very strange influence, like Raceland…she becomes Out of Topic… 😃
 
footy said:
😃 And after sleeping with slaves and captives, you are still Al Mukminun… 😃 And you don’t need to d “azl” (coiptus interuptus).
Hehehe…reminding me of Mary the Coptic, one of the prophet’s wives’ servant. 👍
Click to expand...

Technical error, Mary the Coptic was Muhammad’s servant/maid/slave/concubine, not one of Muhammad’s wives’ servant.
 
40.png
raceland:
How about we discuss this: 👍

These are your fruits…
Click to expand...
Your going off topic, don’t try and change the topic.

The Bible doesn’t allow priests to do these abusive, wrong things anyway, they are doing it against what the Bible teaches. However, if Muslims
  1. have sex with an unlimited number of female slaves/captives (that they own)
  2. rape an unlimited number of female slaves/captives (that they own)
they will be doing it in accordance with the Quran/Islam.

By the way, by you trying to change the topic to some abusive, wrong things that some priests did implies that you find something wrong with the above Islamic teachings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top