There are so many things about Islam that I like, and one of those is that Islam has satisfying answers/explanations for other faiths.
For example: Islam explains in details who Jesus (pbuh) and what message he brought etc.
Meanwhile, while I know that many christians have always attacked Islam, I have not yet heard/read any explanations the christians give for Islam and Muhammad (SAW), which I find very strange, to put it mildly.
If all of christianity is from God, surely it also gives accounts for Islam and Muhammad (SAW) who claimed that he was sent by the same God that sent Jesus (pbuh), and who worshiped the same god that Jesus (pbuh) worship?
So, I am interested to get answers from other non-muslims here about accounts/explanations that their religion/faith for Islam and Muhammad (SAW).
This has been on my mind for quite a while actually.
When I was a Christian I was taught that Islam was a religion sent to derail people from the true path of God. That Muhammad (pbuh) listened to the whispers of Satan and that's why there are a few scientific things in the Qur'an to make it sound like it's the right religion.
As a Christian I was taught that the God of Islam is not the same God of Judaism and Christianity and everyone who follows anything other than Judaism or Christianity will burn forever. But in stricter circles of Christianity, it's pretty much that if you're not a Christian then you have no chance. I was told that Islam offers no salvation for people because it teaches that its followers can only get into Paradise by doing good deeds and good deeds alone won't save you. I was taught that it was a disgusting oppressive religion that brainwashes people into hurting others and doing evil things. That it was spread by the sword, that women are there only for the pleasure and enjoyment of men but people stay with it because they're trapped or possessed by evil and Christianity is the only way to break free from it.
To sum it up, the Christian explanation for why Islam is there is to derail humanity from the true path of God which I was told is Christianity.
Actually, I've heard about those charges, but what I am more interested in is whether those accusations and charges are backed up by their books and scriptures. I'd like to know what the books of christianity (or any other faith) explain Islam.
In the same vein, any muslim could also easily say "christianity are from the devil ... etc.." but that is not exactly what Qur'an and ahadeeth explain about christianity, and in this section there have been hundred of threads and thousands of posts that elucidate christianity and explanations from Islam, based on Qur'an and ahadeeth.
Yes, here I will quote some verses in the Bible for you that Christians use to say that Islam is a false religion. Now understand that none of this gets into specifics and could be used to explain problems within Christianity itself but this is what is quoted to outright say that Islam is a false religion. Any Biblical scholar could explain these verses to the time and place that they apply but people use this to apply to modern times as well.
Matthew 7:15 15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. I don't think I have to explain why some would apply this to Muhammad(pbuh).
Deuteronomy 4:2 2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you. Some Christians see the Qur'an as an attempt to add to the Word of God.
Revelation 22:18
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. Some Christians will use this as an example as the why the Muslim world is not so stable right now.
Matthew 24:10-14 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Don't think I have to explain how some Christians would say this correlates to the current state of world at the moment.
2 Peter 2:1-3 1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
2 Peter 2:17-22 17 These people are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them. 18 For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. 19 They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for “people are slaves to whatever has mastered them.” 20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. 22 Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,”[g] and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.”
Titus 1:10-11 10 For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. 11 They must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain.
I could go on writing more and more Bible verses like this but I don't really know of any quotes that specifically relate to Muslims that are really a justification for condemning Islam other than what Christians say of Islam as a false religion and how some verses in the Bible can be used to relate to what Islam has become today. Maybe someone else on here can give you more to talk about it. All that I was taught was just a matter of opinion. When I asked the question WHY are Muslims bad? Why is Islam a false religion? I always got the answer because Muslims reject Jesus (pbuh) as their savior and reject him as God which is against the right path. Nothing else needed to be said. There didn't need to be specific quotes from the Bible to support that.
How do christian justify the 'sainthood' of Paul? he in fact did all the above.. he & a whole bunch of other creative writers in fact (titus) included & especially so those views on circumcision ..
With Paul it was one of those things that was just accepted. Asking questions like this is something that wasn't really encouraged because it could lead you away from the religion. This is what I was told many times so I was careful. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable could explain how Paul is accepted as a saint. The brand of Christianity that I followed didn't really stress the importance of people who were declared saints. They were just nice people. Nothing more. Nothing to really study.
As a Christian the other prophets weren't really that important in the way I was taught either. In fact, in some cases, prophets like Solomon (pbuh) were made fun of and made as an example of what not to do because he had multiple wives. In Christianity it's all about Jesus, pbuh. He can do no wrong. He is the truth. He is god or at least the son and to someone who really believes that in their heart it's difficult to untangle whatever justification they have for it beyond that and they won't let go no matter what you tell them. Islam just is not and will might not ever be a factor.
The terrible things that Muhammad (pbuh) is said to have done just runs too deep in the narrative that I was taught about Islam. The whole thing with the pedophilia (I really hate to write that here), the hatred, that it's a pagan religion, worshiping the sun, moon and stars, and that there is no real proof that the Qur'an has never been corrupted or changed, the whole idea about "The Satanic verses". Or how the Qur'an never says that Allah is the actual name of God like Yahweh is named but a variation of one of the pagan gods, that Muhammad (pbuh) could read, that he stole these ideas from Christianity, etc... I was taught more about ALL of that before I was taught about anything in the actual beliefs of Muslims which is why I was disgusted and utterly repulsed by Islam for many, many years. All of that would send anyone away from it and I'm sorry to say that most people probably wouldn't look into it again after that and many don't. The forces against discrediting Islam as a legitimate religion are strong. Although, I think proving that Islam isn't a real religion might come from more outside sources than quotes from the Bible but I guess that is what makes it even more solid for some people. Some of the ideas used to discredit Muhammad (pbuh) as a prophet are also used to discredit the Mormon Joseph Smith.
I hope maybe someone else can explain all of this better for your question. I'm just sharing my experience with you here.
Last edited by Aprender; 09-28-2011 at 06:34 AM.
Reason: Better clarification
Islam is the spirit(uality) of Hagar and her descendants. Mohammad is her son who magnified it most and initiated its spread in the whole world.
Last edited by Amigo; 09-28-2011 at 08:16 AM.
"Happy the nation that knows the cry of praise! They will walk in the light of your presence, Lord,
and rejoice in your name all the day – for you are the splendour of their strength,
and by your good will our standard is held high." Ps.88
Islam is the spirit(uality) of Hagar and her descendants. Mohammad is her son who magnified it most and initiated its spread in the whole world.
Now let's be clear to point out that Hagar, peace be upon her, is not his biological mother. But I can understand where this argument comes from as well, especially with Hajj and everything. I was taught in some circles that Muhammad (pbuh) never really participated in Hajj and that it was just there take control of Mecca from the paganism and to pay homage to what Hagar went through to make it look legitimate.
I've also heard that Muhammad's (pbuh) wife Khadijah (pbuh) was a strict monotheist and her family put this whole idea into his head to get everyone away from the paganism and that is why Islam is not really a continuation of Judaism and Christianity since the previous knowledge was there with others helping/surrounding him. He was just the puppet to get it done. I was taught in public school that it was kids or a servant that was whispering to Muhammad (pbuh) in the cave on that day and not the angel Gabriel. There was no text to back that up, just what the teacher said to the class.
But like I said, most of these stories are the opinions of others that I was taught growing up. Not sure most of the sources it is based on but it seems to be outside sources from what I can tell. Sometimes textbooks from authors who hate Islam etc.
oh is Hagar also meant to be something abominable to Christians?
an Egyptian princess whom Pharaoh king of Egypt gave to Sarah as a gift. She grew up in the home of Abraham and Sarah, and converted. Sarah initially had to persuade Hagar to marry Abraham.
This is from the Jewish Encyclopedia http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/...sh-and-aggadah
btw according to the bible Sarah is Abraham's sister.. we've all seen the bible endorse incest anyway with lot before so why not Abraham as well
also how old was Mary when 'God' came to announce that he's about to impregnate her with himself? for that matter how old was she and how old was Joseph?
Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit.Matthew 1:18
"When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother"). A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age, Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice God had made of Joseph, and two years later the Annunciation took place."
btw the age of consent here in the U.S in 15 in such states as Delaware was 7..
so who is the hypocrite here save for Jews & Christians.. Every pagan practice incestuous and bizarre relationship does indeed emanate from them and in order to deflect that they project it unto Muslims.
btw Apprender I wouldn't say people don't care about Islam unless they were Muslims. Even the Vatican were complaining as to how we are growing and outnumbering them
if they're making you feel otherwise.. Know that it is the desperation of an ailing old devil who wants to go attacking every which way and only appeals to like minded idiots ..
best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
As a Christian I was taught that the God of Islam is not the same God of Judaism and Christianity and everyone who follows anything other than Judaism or Christianity will burn forever. But in stricter circles of Christianity, it's pretty much that if you're not a Christian then you have no chance. I was told that Islam offers no salvation for people because it teaches that its followers can only get into Paradise by doing good deeds and good deeds alone won't save you. I was taught that it was a disgusting oppressive religion that brainwashes people into hurting others and doing evil things. That it was spread by the sword, that women are there only for the pleasure and enjoyment of men but people stay with it because they're trapped or possessed by evil and Christianity is the only way to break free from it.
To sum it up, the Christian explanation for why Islam is there is to derail humanity from the true path of God which I was told is Christianity.
I hope I understood your question correctly.
I find it quite funny Christians spread these things about other religions yet in their own societies they have these exact problems, women are there for the pleasure and enjoyment of men very much in the west, the adult film industry for instance, the naked women in TV commercials selling a product, the women who has to tart her self up and wear a shorter skirt than all the competitors to improve her chances of getting a job and pleasing the interviewer if he's male, tbh all I see is prostitution in various formats, some forms of prostitution have been made to look appropriate such as a woman selling a product on TV whilst wearing hardly anything, what I see is a woman taking her clothes off for the camera for some money how degrading, I don't see how this is any different from approaching a prostitute on the street and paying her money to look her, how about all the disgusting music videos where women run around naked, they're forced to do this because if they didn't no one would watch their music video or it wouldn't get as much attention so she's prostituting herself again in order to get more viewers this is how I see it, so I find it quite hypocritical that Christians say this yet they live in a society that legalizes disgusting filthy stuff.
I really am surprised women in the west haven't woken up to how they're nothing more than sexual objects in the modern world, just look at all the magazine covers, the sad thing is, there is even no regulations so young people are not even protected from being brain washed by the increasing sexuality of music videos and tv shows/ads, the result is a society where 13 year olds are sexually active and becoming pregnant
I mean what kind of world do these people live in. I don't see how they're liberated when they sell their bodies whether it be on a street corner, legalized adult movie, TV ad because men will only think of her in one way and that is an object for sex. What kind of liberation is this, more like slave to the desires of men but doesn't even realize it, that's how I view women in the western world,
Last edited by Salahudeen; 09-28-2011 at 05:06 PM.
The paedophilia accusation is the most hypocritical accusation of all and quite comical that people lack the intelligence that they are unable to comprehend that 1400 years ago the world was a different place, I mean I figured this out by myself and I'm not even that clever, It literally took me 30 mins of thinking before I concluded that it's a mistake to compare today's society and culture to that of 1400 years ago, and just because this society thinks something is correct doesn't mean it is, I mean this society is hardly the model society is it, when it becomes the model society then they can go round criticizing other societies around the world where girls get married young but until then they should learn to shut up, they set the legal age of consent at 18 but no one actually obeys this age of consent lol look up teenage pregnancies, not so long ago the age of consent in the west was 13, so 13 year olds were free to engage in relationships with men of any age, they raised it to 18 not so long ago that's just in the UK, in some other Euro countries it's still quite low at 13-14 which means its legal for men of any age to engage in relationships with them, cos they've reached the age of consent.
This will be a very informative read for you.
Introduction
Islamaphobes claim that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was a pedophile, arguing that he married Aisha (peace be upon her) when she was too young. Islamic Law (Shari’ah), say these critics, condones pedophilia by allowing marriage to children. Most of these Islamaphobes come from Jewish and Christian backgrounds. Yet, the truth is that these Jews and Christians live in a great big glass house; in this book, we will throw stones at this house and completely shatter it.
Islamic Law (Shari’ah) does in fact allow some nine year old girls to be married. But as we shall prove in this book, Jewish Law (Halacha) sets the minimum age of marriage at three years of age, whereas Christian Law asserts that the absolute minimum age of marriage is seven years old.
First, we will cite the Jewish and Christian Law from a theological standpoint. Then, we will establish the historical proof that Jews and Christians routinely married their daughters off at an extremely young age—younger than Aisha (peace be upon her). After this, we will cite numerous examples of Christian prophets, saints, popes, kings, royals, and nobles who either themselves married girls of such a young age or who actively condoned it.
After having dealt with the Jewish and Christian criticism, we will shift our focus to the rest of the world, proving that marriage at such a young age was something considered normal in all ancient civilizations. We will cite so many examples from so many cultures that it will leave the staunchest Islamaphobes at a loss for words. Finally, we will look at the Islamic Law, the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha (peace be upon her), and the medico legal aspects of pedophilia.
The honest reader will become convinced, the stubborn opponent will be routed, and the truth-seeker will be guided to the path of Islam. God Willing.Ya Allah (O God), sharpen my pen and make my task easy.
Age of Marriage Under Jewish Law
The Jewish website, Jewfaq.org, says:
The minimum age for marriage under Jewish law is 13 for boys, 12 for girls; however, the kiddushin [betrothal] can take place before that, and often did in medieval times. (JewFaq.org, http://www.jewfaq.org/marriage.htm)
The age of twelve approximates the commencement of puberty. According to Jewish Law, marriage at this age is not just allowed, but rather it is actively encouraged and fathers are advised to quickly wed their pubescent daughters.
We read:
One passage that would echo long and loud for Ashkenazic Jews throughout the Middle Ages held that a man who marries off his sons and daughters near the period of puberty (samukh le-firkan) will receive the scriptural blessing:
“you shall know that your tent is in peace” (Job 5:24), evidently understood to mean that if one’s children were married, they would not succumb to sexual temptation” (Biale, 19974995[)50-] (G.U.S.: A World Reference Atlas, http://www2.rz.huberlin.de/sexology/...DLEEASTOLD.HTM)
So Jewish Law allows men to marry twelve year olds, whom today would be considered “child brides”. But the plot thickens! Even the age limit of twelve is not absolute. Rather, twelve years old is merely the age at which a girl can herself decide to get married. Before that, however, her father can have her married off, without her permission.
We read from the website of the Special Rapporteur to the United Nations:
According to Jewish religious law (halacha), which in Israel confers validity on the marriage of Jews conducted within its borders, it is possible to marry a young girl of any age, but the girl herself may decide to marry only when she
has reached the age of 12 and a half. (U.N. representative, http://www.right-to-education.org/node/442)
The authoritative Jewish website, AskMoses.com, says:
What is the minimum age of marriage according to Jewish law? by Rabbi Naftali Silberberg...
In ancient (and not so ancient) times however, marriage was often-times celebrated at a rather young age. Although we do not follow this dictum, technically speaking, a girl may be betrothed the moment she is born, and married at the age of three. [Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 37:1.] A boy may betroth and marry at the age of thirteen. [Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 43:1] (AskMoses.com, http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/5...ewish-law.html)
The Talmud recommends that a daughter be given in marriage at around the age of twelve (i.e. the commencement of puberty), but Jewish fathers were historically allowed to marry their daughters off even before that age.
Surprisingly, the wife could be as young as three years old. According to Jewish Law, such marriages were officially sealed by the man having sex with the baby. We read:
In the ancient world, Jewish law seemed to require an act of intercourse for a betrothal to be recognised. The Mishnah said: «A girl three years old and one day may be betrothed by intercourse […]» (Mishnah, Nid. V. 4). Maimonides (A. D. 1180) states: «If she is three years and one day old she may be betrothed by an act of intercourse, with the consent of her father. If she is less than that, and her father has her betrothed by an act of intercourse, she is not betrothed»([197218][78]). Edwardes (1967a168)[79]: «The early-marriage tradition of Israel found acceptance in Christendom, whose precocious children bedded and wedded at or even before puberty...At the time of St. Paul, girls were married at puberty or a little before. (G.U.S.: A World Reference Atlas, http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GE...MIDDLEEAST.HTM)
Although twelve was set as the recommended age, Jewish fathers were marrying their daughters off well before that. We read:
Although the Talmud recommended that a daughter be given in marriage when na›rah, between the ages of twelve and twelve and a half, a father could marry her off well before that time…16th century Jewish history reveals a prevalence of girl «child» marriage, many of whom were between 12 and 14 years of age (Lamdan, 1996)[86]
The early marriage age may be attributed to several factors: an attempt to prevent the temptation of sexual relations before marriage; the effort to arrange the best possible match both socially and economically; the insecurity of diaspora Jews during the age of expulsions from Spain and Ottoman expansion, moving them to establish ties that would assure the children›s financial future; and the desire to raise a new generation of Jews as quickly as possible to assure the continuity of their people. (G.U.S.: A World Reference Atlas, http://www2.rz.huberlin.de/sexology/
GESUND/ARCHIV/GUS/MIDDLEEASTOLD.HTM)
Age for Marriage
According to many Jewish scholars, a girl should be married off as soon as she hits puberty and no later. The Jewish Encyclopedia says:
The first positive commandment of the Bible, according to rabbinic interpretation (Maimonides, «Minyan ha-Miẓwot,» 212), is that concerning the propagation of the human species (Gen. i. 28). It is thus considered the duty of every Israelite to marry as early in life as possible…Some urge that children should marry as soon as they reach the age of puberty. (Jewish Encyclopedia, http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/vi...er=M&artid=216)
In the journal entitled Women in Judaism, we find that Jews were still marrying at the age of puberty up until World War I:
A Daughter’s Coming of Age
In earlier days, girls got married at the age of nine…[following the] custom of marrying daughters at age eight to ten…if the maiden does not get married until the age of fifteen she has no hope of marriage, because she would be considered an old maid…At the end of the nineteenth century, despite these regulations, families still married their daughters at the age of twelve and thirteen…On the eve of World War I, the situation changed somewhat for the better when the legal age for marriage was raised to fifteen. (Women in Judaism: A Multidisciplinary Journal, http://www.utoronto.ca/wjudaism/jour...2/sehayek.html)
Jewish girls “got married at the age of nine”, a practice which continued up until “the eve of World War I”. Why then are the Jews criticizing Prophet Muhammad (peace e upon him) for marrying Aisha (peace be upon her) at the age of nine? Is this not hypocrisy? Is this not a case of living in a glass house and throwing stones? Why is it that Christian adversaries condemn Muslims but say nothing at all to their Jewish counterparts?
To conclude, we close with the words of Mark E. Pietrzyk:
According to the Talmud, the recommended age for marriage is sometime after twelve for females, and thirteen for males. Marriage below these ages was generally frowned upon. However, a father was allowed to betroth his daughter to another man at an earlier age, and sexual intercourse was regarded as a valid means of sealing a betrothal. The age limit for betrothal through sexual intercourse was shockingly low. According to the Talmud, “A girl of the age of three years and one day may be betrothed by intercourse.” (Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)
Age of Marriage under Christian Law
We have shown how the Jewish Encyclopedia says that under Jewish Law girls can marry at the age of twelve or even younger than that; let us now see what the Catholic Encyclopedia says of Christian laws with regards to marriage.
The Catholic Encyclopedia says:
The marriageable age is fourteen full years in males and twelve full years in females, under penalty of nullity (unless natural puberty supplies the want of years [i.e. if puberty occurs before the age of twelve])… The canonical age holds in England, Spain, Portugal, Greece(Ionian Isles excepted, where it is sixteen and fourteen), and as regards Catholics even in Austria. While in some parts of the United Statesthe canonical marriage age of fourteen and twelve still prevails, in others it has been enlarged by statutes. (Catholic Encyclopedia, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01206c.htm)
Elsewhere, the Catholic Encyclopedia says:
By the common law, the age at which minors were capable of marrying, known as the age of consent, was fixed at fourteen years for males and twelve years for females. Marriages under the age of seven years for both were void, but
between seven and the age of consent [14 for males, 12 for females] the parties could contract an imperfect marriage, which was voidable but not necessarily void. (Catholic Encyclopedia, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09691b.htm)
Although twelve was the general guideline, Christian fathers were allowed to marry their daughters off even before that. We read:
Medieval Christianity continued to maintain the age of twelve as a minimal age for females to enter into marriage. However, even this low age limit was not absolute. Using natural law logic, Catholic authorities argued that the decisive
factor which determined a child›s readiness for marriage and sexual relations was the onset of puberty, and not necessarily age as such. According to one Catholic scholar, “If it could be satisfactorily proved that puberty . . . was
actually attained by the boy before the completion of his fourteenth year, or by the girl before the completion of her twelfth year, then . . . the party could enter upon a valid marriage.” [1] (Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)
1 O›Dea, 13-; Rush, 303-
Similar to Jewish Law, Christian Law differentiated between the minimum age of marriage and the absolute minimum age of marriage. Twelve years old was the minimum age of marriage, called the age of consent; in other words, a girl had to be twelve years old before should could arrange her own marriage. But the absolute minimum age of marriage was in fact seven years of age, during which time her father could arrange her marriage without her permission. In the Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, we read:
Age of Consent: A Historical Overview
Age of Consent throughout history has usually coincided with the age of puberty although at sometimes it has been as early as seven…The Roman tradition served as the base for Christian Europe as well as the Christian Church itself which generally, essentially based upon biological development, set it at 12 or 14 but continued to set the absolute minimum at seven. In the past century there has been a tendency to raise the age of consent but the reasons for the change have not always been clear and the issue has been further complicated by the reluctance of many contemporary historians to
recognize what the actual age of consent in the past has been. This failure has distorted the importance of biology on age of consent in the past. (Age of Consent: A Historical Overview, http://www.haworthpress. com/store/ArticleAbstract.asp?sid=XH16E3FKBF7Q9P3MKLPC82LUJN KC41U5&ID=87429)
Saint Thomas Aquinas, considered by Catholics to be the greatest theologian of all time, wrote in The Summa Theologica:
If the parties are betrothed by another person [i.e. the father] before they reach the age of puberty, either of them or both can demur; wherefore in that case the betrothal does not take effect, so that neither does any affinity result therefrom. Hence a betrothal made between certain persons by some other takes effect, in so far as those between whom the betrothal is arranged do not demur when they reach the proper age, whence they are understood
to consent to what others have done. (The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, http://www.newadvent.org/
summa/5043.htm)
In other words, pre-pubertal marriages arranged by the father are recognized by the Church. Once the girl reaches puberty, she has the option of nullifying the marriage.
However, there is a big catch to this: if the man has sex with the pre-pubertal girl, then she can no longer nullify the marriage. Catholic popes argued that even if marriage took place before twelve years of age and before puberty,
then such a marriage would still be binding by the law. We read:
"Sexual intercourse which took place before marital age limits or puberty was not necessarily illicit or sinful. On the contrary, some popes ruled that intercourse below the age of twelve/fourteen had the effect of sealing a marriage contract, as long as such intercourse took place after the age of discretion, which was seven. [2 Rush, 3234] Once intercourse had taken place, the marriage could not be annulled". (Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)
This is a very important point, and shatters the glass house that the Christians live in.
The popes—who, due to the backing of the Holy Ghost, are considered infallible when they issue such religious edicts—ruled that a girl could be married off after the age of seven, before the age of consent. In other words, she could be married against her will.
If the husband had sex with her (even against her will), then this sealed the marriage and the girl could not annul the marriage.
In the twelfth century, Pope Alexander III ruled:
If a girl of tender age is betrothed and delivered to her husband, and afterwards desires to marry a different man, her petition is not to be granted if her husband swears that he has had carnal knowledge of her even at the early age of eleven or twelve. [3] 3 Quoted in John Fulton, The Laws of Marriage (New York: E. and J.B. Young, 1883), 112.
The Christian scholars ruled that even if a seven year old girl had sex before reaching the age of puberty, the fact that she had sex proves that she was mature enough to be married. In other words, the minimum criteria to marry a girl is that a man can have sex with her. When a man wants to marry a young girl, all he has to do is marry her and then have sex with her. In a very circular logic, the sex he had with her will validate his marriage and prevent an annulment. Christian Law therefore dictates that it does not matter how young a girl is, or whether or not she has attained the age of puberty; all that truly matters is that her husband can penetrate her and have sex. Once he does this, nobody can oppose or annul the marriage.
C. Yandell writes in “Carpe Corpus: Time and Gender in Early Modern France”:
In canon law, puberty normally determines marriageable age, although the minimum age for marriage is seven years, «the age of reason», when a child is deemed capable of consent. The lawyer Estienne Pasquier notes that the Digest compiled by Justinian specifies fourteen years for men, twelve for women, but, he adds, if one is capable of carnal cohabitation before this age, marriage is permitted.
(Carpe Corpus: Time and Gender in Early Modern France, by Cathy Yandell p.37, http://books.google.com/books?id=YXs...KGHQigfa&sig=0
Pv95S0Z7pBtjVz9GZHbuWc53ho#PPP1,M1)
We read further:
Thus even for very young partners, the act of intercourse bound the two of them together for life. As one Catholic scholar has written, “carnal relations between the parties seemed to indicate sufficient maturity and made up for the defect of years.” [4] Sexual intercourse below the age of discretion (seven) was not a crime, but merely “invalid,” and thus, inconsequential, as under Jewish law. [5]
4 O›Dea, 8.
5 For an example, see Charles Edward Smith, Papal Enforcement of Some Medieval Marriage
Laws (Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1940), 14244-.
Parents arranged marriages for their pre-pubescent children during the Middle Ages for a variety of dynastic, economic, and cultural reasons. [6] Such marriages were usually consummated at the age of twelve. Although physicians warned of the dangers of impregnating very young girls and implored husbands to wait until the wife reached the age of at least fourteen, such warnings usually went unheeded, and the Catholic Church continued to bless marital bonds with twelve-year-old girls. [7]
Although technically the consent of the child was necessary for a marriage to take place, the child was usually not in a position to challenge his or her parents and resist an unwanted union. This led to a number of abuses which went unchallenged by the Church. In 1526, the Dutch scholar Erasmus complained,
“It is no uncommon case, especially in France, for a girl of scarce ten years to be married and a mother next year. . . . It seems portentous, and yet we sometimes see it, especially in Britainand Italy, that a tender child is married to a septuagenarian [i.e. a man in his seventies]. . . . Yet Church laws do not rescind such nuptials” [8]
In later centuries, some Christian commentators would denounce sexual relations with young girls as being equivalent to rape. In the sixteenth century, canonist Egidio Bossi argued for this interpretation on the grounds that a child could hardly be considered as being in a position to give consent. However, he recommended that the age of consent be fixed at only six or seven years of age. [9]
6 V.H.H. Green, Medieval Civilization in Western Europe(London: Edward Arnold Ltd.,1971), 18485-
7 William J. Fielding, Strange Customs of Courtship and Marriage (New York: The New Home Library, 1942), 16668-.
8 Quoted in G.G. Coulton, Medieval Panorama (New York: MacMillan, 1944), 639.
9 “Rape and Marriage in the Medieval Canon Law,” in James A. Brundage, ed., Sex, Law and Marriage in the Middle Ages (Brookfield, Vermont: Ashgate, 1993), 67.
At the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century, there was some discussion among the Church leadership about possibly raising the age for marriage. Cardinal Charles De Guise of Lorraine, France, advocated raising the age of marriage for women to twenty and for men to twenty-five. The bishop of Cordia, Spain, argued for the ages of twenty for women and twenty-two for men. However, the majority of those on the Council were opposed to raising the age for marriage on the grounds that adolescents would be tempted to commit fornication unless they were permitted to marry. The conservatives prevailed: the age limit remained at twelve for females and fourteen for males.
[10]
(Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)
In a paper published at a symposium on Byzantine Studies, we read:
Baptism, usually at birth, was the fundamental rite of incorporation into the body of Christ and the Church…Betrothal, sometimes as early as the age of five, marked another stage in the child’s social incorporation. (Byzantine Studies: 2006 Spring Symposium, http://www.doaks.org/byz_2006_ symposium_abstracts.html)
Aisha (peace be upon her) was around the age of puberty when she married. Christians criticize the Prophet’s marriage to her on the grounds that she was too young. Yet, Christian Law not only allowed girls to marry at the age of puberty, but rather it was encouraged by the Church to marry at this young age. In an article entitled “The Practice and Theory of Marriage in Roman North Africa”, we read:
"Other canons require that lectors, upon reaching puberty, should either marry or take vows of celibacy".
(The Practice and Theory of Marriage in Roman North Africa, http://people.vanderbilt.edu/~james....huntermar.html)
10 O›Dea, 46-
In the article entitled “Marriage: Laws and Customs”, we read:
Legal Age for Marriage
Roman law gave the minimum age for marriage as that of puberty which was 14 for boys and 12 for girls; these remained the legal age for marriage until the late 19th Century in Britain…There is however evidence that child marriages were reasonably common in North West England in the 16th century…(Marriage: Laws and Customs, http://www.isle-of- man.com/manxnotebook/famhist/genealgy/marr.htm)
In an article entitled “Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe”, we read:
Ordinary people who chose not to devote their lives to ascetic observances were often advised that their best defense against the ever present urge to copulate was to marry early. For this reason, St. Chrysostom warned parents
to see to it that their children married soon after they reached the age ofpuberty.(Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe, http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/book-sum/medevl1.html)
When girls neared the approximate age of puberty, they were considered marriage material. These pre-pubescent and pubescent girls were routinely married off to men who were the same age as their grandfathers. We read:
Christian canon law followed Roman law in setting the minimum age of marriage at twelve for females and fourteen for males. The logic behind these marital age limits was that these were the approximate ages of puberty for both genders, indicating readiness for procreation. In ancient Rome, among both pagans and Christians, marriage at an early age was frequent. Betrothals often occurred even before puberty, although the consummation of marriage through intercourse usually did not take place until after the girl’s first menstruation. Very often, the age of discrepancy of marriage partners was great. According to one historian, “the matching of a man with a woman young enough to be his daughter or even granddaughter was generally accepted.” [11]
(Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)
11 Treggiari, 102; John C. O›Dea, The Matrimonial Impediment of Nonage (Washington, DC:
Catholic University of America Press, 1944), 1.
Historical Age of Marriage in Western Countries
Age of Marriage During Biblical Times
It is ironic that Christian missionaries attack Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for his marrying Aisha (peace be upon her) at such a young age, but we find that this was the normal age of marriage during Biblical times. Theology.edu, a website maintained by a reputable Christian ministry, clearly mentions in an article entitled “Ancient Israelite Marriage Customs” that the age of marriage was around the age of puberty:
The wife was to be taken from within the larger family circle (usually at the outset of puberty or around the age of 13) in order to maintain the purity of the family line. (Jim West, ThD; http://www.theology.edu/marriage.htm)
In the book entitled Life in Biblical Israel, a Christian priest writes:
It is safe to assume the bride was considerably younger than the groom, and childbearing would have begun shortly after puberty.
(Life in Biblical Israel, p.58,http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=...+biblical+isra el&pg=PP1&ots=k_Uryl4rgv&sig=gbiH8WI_FNKI7tA9nMra9 m3LcLo&prev=ht tp://www.google.com.pk/search?hl=en&q=Life+in+Biblical+Israel+&btnG=Goo gle+Search&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail#PPR2,M1)
In the book Ancient Jewish Epitaphs, we read:
For Jewish women—as for women in antiquity generally—marriage was often entered into early. We do not have many inscriptions recording the age at which women were married, but the few who record it mention ages ranging from 12...
In the book entitled The Age of Marriage in Ancient Rome, we read:
Traditionally in pre-modern societies, AAFM [age at first marriage] for girls corresponded with the visible onset of puberty. In these early societies, high mortality rates demanded an offsetting high-birth rate. As a result, younger marriages were required to facilitate population growth.(The Age of Marriage in Ancient Rome, http://osdir.com/ml/education.public.../msg00028.html)
In a scholarly article about the Roman Empire, we read that marriage would oftentimes precede the onset of puberty:
Durry (1955a/b/c, 1956)[48] had argued that Roman girls were married before puberty, that puberty was not important in fixing the age of marriage, and that such early marriages were consummated before puberty…
Taking into consideration epigraphic and literary material, Hopkins concludes that «[w]hether pre-pubertal or not, girl›s age at marriage was by our standards very young and marriages were generally immediately consummated» …
At least one author believed that a girl «should be married and deflowered as soon as she reaches puberty (i.e., the socially determined age of puberty)… «
Psychohistorians[66] cite Rouselle (198833) in arguing that Roman misconceptions about the hymen «could only be the result of girls being deflowered before puberty», being lawfully married before puberty.
In the article “The Age of Roman Girls at Marriage”, we read:
In fact menarche (onset of menses) was not always a pre-condition of marriage; nevertheless marriages were usually consummated immediately… they (prepubertal marriages) were not exceptional and were condoned.
Around AD 530, and at least as far back as the reign of Augustus, the legal minimum age of marriage for girls was 12 and for boys 14 (Hopkins,p313n22)…At least for the aristocracy, early ages are frequently mentioned. Betrothal could take place within a poorly defined period before this age; at least it must be assumed that a minimum legal age of seven was in vogue (p313n23)[49]… Plutarche (historian, philosopher), and Soranus (doctor,
practising at Rome), both Greeks, implied that early marriage (12 or before)
and defloration would occur…
The great Roman leader Augustus fixed the minimum age of marriage at ten years old:
Roman children of the aristocracy married youngest (Hopkins, 1965:316ff; 1983[57]94; Weaver, 1986156)[58]. Roman marriage arrangements usually began with a betrothal, which was possible before age ten[59], at least in the case of the aristocracy, or when political gains were in vogue (Balsdon, p87,275n18)[60]. Augustus (AD 9) had fixed the minimum age at ten (Rawson,198621)[61]…(Janssen, D.F.; Oct 2002. G.U.S.. Volume I: World Reference Atlas. InterimReport. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, http://www2.huberlin.de/sexology/GES...M#_Toc26337172)
Age of Marriage in Greece
In the Ancient Greek civilization, the time to marry was at the onset of puberty: Flacelière (59) also mentioned that girls could marry as soon as puberty hit.(Daily Life in Greeceat the Time of Pericles,
Athenian men married out of a sense of civic duty and put off the fateful day until the age of 30 or more, at which time they married girls of half their age whose youth made them more easily controlled.
In an article about Medieval times, MolloyCollege’s website says:
Women were marriageable right after puberty, marriage arrangements were made while they were in infancy; they were wed at the age of twelve or fourteen to men in their twenties or thirties. Puberty was linked to virginity, a highly sought after quality.
As Anthony Molho persuasively illustrates, the cultural imperative to marry young women soon after they reached sexual maturity even prompted many Florentine fathers to falsify their daughters› ages to give them more time to negotiate a favorable marriage.
This is an average, meaning that many girls were getting married much younger than that. Why then are the Christians up in arms about Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who married Aisha (peace be upon her) more than1,400 years ago?
Revered Christian Figures
Christian Saints
We have already clearly established that Jewish and Christian Law allowed for girls to be married off at such a young age. We have also shown that such marriages were not only allowed, but encouraged; they were in fact the norm. Yet perhaps a Christian polemicist would argue that the matter is not about what the masses did but what the leaders did; after all, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was the leader of the Muslims, not just any follower.
To refute this point, we first point to the Christian popes who sanctioned such early marriages and actively encouraged them. But to further weaken their spurious argument, we will cite the example of numerous Christian saints who married young girls. Therefore, if the Christians attack Prophet Muhammad, then let them first throw stones at their own revered heroes. Let us begin:
1. Saint Augustine: Saint Augustine, who is credited with having formulated Christian theology, betrothed himself to a ten year old girl, and this was when he was thirty-one years of age. He waited two years for her body to mature, after which she moved into Saint Augustine’s at the age of twelve. How is it then that the Christians attack Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for marrying Aisha (peace be upon her) when she was nine or ten, when their venerated Saint Augustine himself betrothed a ten year old girl?
We read:
One such example of betrothal between a mature male and young girl is that of St. Augustine (354439- A.D.). At the age of thirty-one, Augustine betrothed himself to a ten-year-old girl.
(Mark E. Pietrzyk, http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html)
Saint Agnes:
Another very famous Christian figure in history, Saint Agnes—who is known as the patron saint of chastity—fielded marriage proposals when she was younger than twelve years old. Yet suddenly the Christians turn their noses up when we Muslims say that Aisha (peace be upon her) fielded marriage proposals at a similar age.
Domestic-Church.com says:
Saint Agnes› name means chaste or pure in Greek and lamb or victim in Latin. She has always been regarded by the Church as a special patroness of purity. Agnes was martyred early in the persecution of Diocletian, who began his
persecution of Christians in March of 303. She was only twelve or thirteen years old at the time of her death (accounts differ). Even at that young age, her wealth and beauty had attracted the attention of the young noblemen of Rome, who competed with each other for her hand in marriage.
(Domestic-Church.com,http://www.domesticchurch.com/CONTEN...TS/STAGNES.HTM)
3. Saint Hedwig of Andechs: Saint Hedwig is revered by the Christians as the patron saint of orphans. She was married off at the age of twelve to Henry I of Silesia.
4. Saint Rita of Cascia: She is considered by Christians to be the patron saint of hopeless causes, and was betrothed at the age of twelve to a man named Paola Mancini.
5. Saint Mary of Jesus Crucified: She was betrothed at the age of thirteen.
6. Saint Elizabeth of Portugal, patron of the Third Order of St. Francis, was married off at the age of twelve.
7. Saint Joseph, the supposed foster father of Jesus, was in his nineties when he married the twelve year old Mary. Some claim that Joseph was in his thirties—and not his nineties—but the fact remains that he was a grown man
who married a twelve year old. And there are many other examples from amongst the venerated Christian
saints…
Christian Kings, Royals, and Nobles
The Christian royals were marrying girls as young as nine, according to an article written by Professor Lynda Garland of the University of New England:
Child brides, whether Byzantines or foreign princesses, were the norm rather than the exception, especially from the late twelfth century. Irene Ducaena, wife of Alexius I Comnenus, was twelve at her marriage, and empress before
she was fifteen; the Byzantine princess Theodora, Manuel›s niece, was in her thirteenth year when she married Baldwin III of Jerusalem; and Margaret-Maria of Hungary married Isaac II Angelus at the age of nine.
(Professor Lynda Garland of University of New England, http://www.romanemperors.org/aggiefran.htm)
It should be noted that these Christian kings, royals, and nobles married with the blessing and sanction of the Church. As such, the countless examples that we will provide serve as a strong proof against the Christians and their insincere criticisms of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). In this article, we will only provide a few of the many examples, as follows:
1. King Richard II, at the age of thirty, married a French princess named Isabella who was only seven years old at the time.
2. Duchess of Milan, Bianca of Savoy, was married off at the age of thirteen
3. Theodora Comnena was married off at the age of thirteen to King Baldwin III, who was more than double her age.
4. King Adronikos I Komnenos, the valiant Christian leader of the Byzantine Empire, married the twelve year old Agnes of France when he was sixty-four years old.
5. King Denis of Portugal married the twelve year old Saint Elizabeth of Portugal.
6. Girolamo Riario, Lord of Imola and Forli, married the nine year old Caterina Sforza.
7. Jeanne III of Navarre was wed at the age of thirteen.
8. Giovanni Sforza married the thirteen year old Lucrezia Borgia.
9. King Haakon VI of Norway married the ten year old Queen Margaret.
10. Count Agness of Essex was betrothed at the age of only three years old and married off at the age of twelve to a man who was almost fifty years of age.
11. Prince Edward of Wales married the French king’s daughter, Isabella, who was only seven years old.
12. Romanos II married Bertha (renamed Eudokia), the daughter of the King of Italy, when she was only four years old!
13. Stephen Milutin, the Kral of Serbia, married Simonis, the daughter of Emperor Andronikos II, when she was only five years old. At the time of the marriage, Stephen Milutin was fifty years old.
14. Edward I married the nine year old Eleanor of Castile.
15. Richard of Shrewsbury, King Edward IV’s son, married the five year old Anne Mowbray of Norfolk.
16. Mary Stewart married Henry VIII when she was only six.
And there are many other examples…
Perhaps a Christian polemicist would argue that these Christian royals were individuals and do not represent Christianity. Yet, this argument is weakened when we take into account that no royal marriage was validated without the consent and approval of the Christian Church! Papal consent was a prerequisite of the time. To illustrate this, we can look at the example of the marriage of Prince Edward to the young Isabella:
Given that twelve was the canonical age for marriage, and that in 1298 the Pope had stipulated that she should marry Prince Edward as soon as she reached that age, these dates are viable. In the same document of June 1298, the Pope describes Isabella as being ‹under seven years›, which places her birth at any time from 1291 onwards. Furthermore, the Treaty of Montreuil (June 1299) provided for Isabella›s betrothal and marriage to take place when she reached the respective canonical ages of seven and twelve. So she must
It is safe to say that if Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) had been Christian, then the Church itself would have sanctioned his marriage to Aisha (peace be upon her)! But because the Prophet (peace be upon him) is Muslim, the Church instead has levied allegations of “pedophilia” against him! This is the two-faced nature of the Crusader bigots.
Jewish and Christian Prophets
1. Abraham: When the ignorant Christians condemn Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for marrying a young girl fifty years younger than him, they are actually attacking the Prophets in their Bible as well. Do they not recall the story of Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) who, according to the Bible, slept with Hagar (peace be upon her) who was sixty or seventy younger than him?
If the Christians have an issue with Prophet Muhammad being in his fifties, do they not say anything when Prophet Abraham was in his eighties? We read:
Sarai his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife. He (Abram) slept with Hagar, and she conceived…So Hagar bore Abram a son, and Abram gave the name Ishmael to the son she had borne. Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore him Ishmael. (Genesis, Chapter 16, verses 1–4, 15–16, NIV)
2. David: We read in the Bible that King David lay beside a young virgin, by which was meant a girl who had just attained the age of puberty. We read:
When King David was old and well advanced in years, he could not keep warm even when they put covers over him. So his servants said to him, ‘Let us look for a young virgin to attend the king and take care of him. She can lie beside him so that our lord the king may keep warm.’ Then they searched throughout Israel for a beautiful girl and found Abishag, a Shunammite, and brought her to the king. (1 Kings, Chapter 1, verses 1–4, NIV)
3. Isaac: According to the Judeo-Christian tradition, Prophet Isaac (peace be upon him) was forty years old when he married Rebecca (Rivka) who was only three years old at the time! And it should be remembered that Prophet Isaac is considered by the Jews to be one of the most important of Prophets, and Rebecca is one of the four matriarchs of the Jews. What is interesting to note is that just like there are some defeatist Muslims who deny that Aisha was nine years old when she was married, there are also some defeatist Jews who deny that Rebecca was three years old when she was married. We refer the reader to the following defeatist website made by contemporary Jews who seek to deny what their classical scholars say on the matter: http://www.jewishlegends.com/displayExp.php?rumor=122
In this article, the Jewish writers admit that they are taught in Jewish schools that Rebecca was three years old when she was married:
We all came home from school saying that Rivka was three years old when she got married, and most of us had a hard time believing it. Our teachers explained that people in those days matured faster, so 3 years old then was not what 3 years old is now. What they did not tell us (probably because they did not know), is that there is another opinion that says that she was 14. (JewishLegends.com, http://www.jewishlegends.com/displayExp.php?rumor=122)
How oddly similar is this claim made by these Jewish defeatists (“another opinion that says she was 14”) to the claim made by some Muslim defeatists who claim that “another opinion says that Aisha was nineteen years of age.” Jewish apologists further the following argument: Rivka, shortly before her marriage (Berei**** 24:16), is called NA’ARAH,
which refers to a girl of at least 12 years of age! (JewishLegends.com, http://www.jewishlegends.com/displayExp.
php?rumor=122)
Muslim apologists use a strikingly similar argument. We cite the example of Understanding-Islam.com, a Muslim website that takes unorthodox opinions: All those who know the Arabic language, are aware that the word «bikr» in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine-year old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier is «Jariyah». «Bikr» on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady, and obviously a nine year old is not a «lady». (Understanding-Islam, http://understandingislam.com/relate...estion&qid=375)
Both sites (Jewish and Muslim) engage in some simplistic mathematical arguments in order to find discrepancies in dating. In fact, both groups use similar methodology to question the historicity of these early marriages. What is not similar, however, is the amount of ink wasted attacking Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) on the one hand and on the other hand
the silence on Prophet Isaac’s marriage to the three year old Rebecca. The Zionists lead the charge in the attacks against Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), so should we now expose their hypocrisy? If they argue that their
classical scholars were wrong for saying that the forty year old Prophet Isaac married a three year old, then logic and fairness dictate that the Muslims are also absolved because they too have defeatists who simply deny that Aisha
was nine at the time of marriage!
4. Jesus: And if the Christians wish to stick a spear in our hearts by attacking Prophet Muhammad, then what of Prophet Jesus’s mother Mary (peace be upon her) who was only twelve years old when she was betrothed to the ninety year old Saint Joseph?
The Catholic Encyclopedia says: The priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age. Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates.
(Catholic Encyclopedia, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm)
According to the “Oxford Dictionary Bible” commentary, Mary was twelve years old when she became pregnant. As for the age of Saint Joseph, the traditional opinion was that he was a ninety year old widower at the time. It has only been very recently that suddenly the defeatists have sought to deny this, claiming that Joseph was “only” in his thirties. Whether or not Joseph was in his thirties or nineties is largely inconsequential, since the fact is that he was a grown man who married a twelve year old girl. In any case, the Christian East still accepts the idea that Saint Joseph was in his eighties and that Mary was twelve. An Eastern Orthodox website says:
An Elderly Joseph
The New Testament Apocrypha speak of Joseph as an elderly man, a widower with adult children, who was quite reluctant to be included among those from among whom a protector for Mary would be chosen. Although the Apocrypha were not included in the canon of Scripture their importance is great and much in evidence in the liturgical texts of some of the great Feasts.
However the Gospels too give evidence for an elderly Joseph. For example he is no longer mentioned after Jesus› trip to the temple as an adolescent. Note also that as Jesus was dying upon the Cross He asked John to look after His mother.
That would have been unnecessary - and even insulting to Joseph had he been alive. But as an elderly man he would have reposed well before Jesus› crucifixion at the age of 3233-. Mary, however, would only have been in her middle age…
The Christian East›s picture of Joseph as a courageous, faithful, God-centred elderly widower rings true. It also tells us that «old people» are quite capable of being chosen for and embarking upon extraordinary adventures in which they obtain remarkable success by God›s mercy and provision.
This picture may not be very attractive - particularly in a youth-fixated culture such as ours in which «old» has become a pejoritive expression. One can understand the appeal of the youthful Joseph. But truth may have an attraction all its own.(Ukrainian-Orthodoxy, http://www.unicorne.org/orthodoxy/ar...s_a/joseph.htm)
Therefore, if the Christian West seeks to **** the Muslims for our belief in an elderly Prophet who married a young virgin, then let them cast the first stone against their own brothers in the East first. In any case, even if we accept the claim that Saint Joseph was in his thirties when he was betrothed to Mary (peace be upon her), does this change the fact that Mary was twelve years old?
The priest of Saint Mary’s Catholic Church said: “Mary’s husband is believed to be around 36. Mary was only 13 when she married Joseph. When she first was arranged with Joseph, she was between 7 to 9 years old.” So even the Western Christians believe that a grown man well into his thirties married a young girl and impregnated her.
If the Christians of today are shocked at Aisha’s age, then should they not be equally shocked by the age of Mary? But we find that they are hypocritical in their attitude towards the Muslims, and we know this is only because the people hate to accept the Truth, and we recognize that all the Prophets were maligned and criticized by the disbelieving people. God will deal with them just like God dealt with all those who maligned the Prophets.
Reading at those bible verses, I really cannot see how any of them applicable for Islam and Muhammad (SAW) and they didn't even imply Islam nor Muhammad (SAW), and in fact reading those I immediately think of some of christians saints and jews' rabbis and their scribes.
But let's discuss each one (I am going to discuss each one per post as I don't have much time to write everything at once)
format_quote Originally Posted by Aprender
Matthew 7:15
15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
I don't think I have to explain why some would apply this to Muhammad(pbuh).
I think you have to explain because I failed to see how this is referring to Muhammad SAW.
let's re-read again the verse:
Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
The verse says to watch out for false prophets. But how can we identify false prophets?
The verse explains who the false prophets: They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves
Clearly, according to this verse, false prophets are those who hide their true identity and/or intent (ferocious wolves) and put on the facade (sheep's clothing). So the false prophets are people with secrets and/or agendas of their own.
So let's put the magnifying glass on Muhammad (SAW)'s life.
Now, anyone with cursory knowledge of religions and history would know that NO ONE in the history of mankind whose life is more chronicled to the minutae and whose almost every sayings and actions more preserved than Muhammad (SAW). In fact, christians would know A LOT more (if they are willing to read) about the life of Muhammad (SAW) through ahadeeth than the lives of Jesus (pbuh) and ALL his disciples combined. And it is evident that he had no secret agenda because everything he brought and said and did was scrutinized, memorized and written, and even his enemies found no fault in his (SAW) character, as they were only against the message that he brought.
Here'swhat Hindu Professor KS Ramakhrisna Rao says: "Historical records show that all contemporaries of Muhammad, both friend and foes, acknowledged the sterling qualities, the spotless honesty, the noble virtues, the absolute sincerity, and the absolute trustworthiness of the apostle of Islam in all walks of life and in every sphere of human activity. Even the Jews and those who did not believe in his message accepted him as arbitrator in their personal disputes on account of his scrupulous impartiality" Muhammad the Prophet of Islam, K. S. Ramakrishna Rao, p. 13
Now, what is another criteria for true or false prophet that Jesus (pbuh) himself said:
"Beloved, believe not every spirit (prophet), but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." 1 John 4:1-3
This one is very easy to understand: Every prophet who does not confess that Jesus (pbuh) came in the flesh was not sent by God. He is a false prophet. But any prophet that confesses that Jesus (pbuh) came in the flesh was sent by God. What does the Qur'an and Muhammad (pbuh) say about Jesus (pbuh)? They say that a Muslim is not a Muslim if he does not believe in Jesus (pbuh), in his miraculous birth, in his giving life to the dead by God's permission, in his healing of the lepers and the blind by God's permission, in his piety and chastity, in his truthfulness, and in the fact that he was the Messiah (the Christ). The Qur'an contains many verses to this effect. For example, in A'al-Umran(3):40 we read:
"And the angles said 'O Mary, Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name is Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, High honored in this world and the next, of those near stationed to Allah."
So now we must ask: Has Muhammad (pbuh) fulfilled this criteria or not? This is all the more remarkable when it is contrasted with the popular opinion of the time such as the claims of the Jews regarding Jesus (pbuh) and his mother Mary (pbuh) as seen in part nine of section 6.3 (Karen Armstrong, . As a matter of fact, Jesus is referred to by name in the Qur'an fully sixteen times, as compared to only four places in the whole Qur'an where Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned by name.
No other religion in the whole world outside Christianity makes it an article of faith for its adherents to believe in, love and honor Jesus except Islam. Reading the Qur'an bears testimony to that (see for example (19):16-36, A'al-Umran(3):33-68, Al-Nissa(5): 72-77). Here we have the testimony of Jesus himself in the Bible that Muhammad was a prophet of God. If Jesus' words carry any weight at all with us then we must concede that Muhammad was a prophet of God and therefore spoke in the name of God.
That Muhammad (pbuh) listened to the whispers of Satan
I can accept that Muhammad received a revelation from an angel. But for me the question is: Which angel it was? I know that there are two kinds of these spiritual beings: the angels of God and the evil spirits.
A fragment from Muhammad’s life:
“Then he took me and squeezed me vehemently and then let me go and repeated the order ‘Recite.’ ‘I cannot recite' said I, and once again he squeezed me and let me go till I was exhausted. Then he said, ‘Recite.' I said, ‘I cannot recite.’ He squeezed me for a third time and then let me go and said...'
If it really was holy angel of God Gabriel, then why should he torment a man, God’s creature in this way, all the more if this man is supposed to be God-pleasing? This is what I’m interested to know from a Muslim.
P.S. Please don’t see this post as an intended insult or a challenge for a heavy debate. It’s just a fair discussion.
If it really was holy angel of God Gabriel, then why should he torment a man, God’s creature in this way, all the more if this man is supposed to be God-pleasing? This is what I’m interested to know from a Muslim.
If God really loved Jesus or in this case Jesus loved himself & thought that he shouldn't abrogate his own commandments at least as far as suicide or self-immolation, why did he torture himself after he spent a night of prayer to self or a greater god in Gethsemane?.. that's what I'd like to know from a christian..
The bottom line should be which religion is asking us to worship God, and which forgo everything known to Abrahamic faith in favor of idol/man worship..
P.S. Please don’t see this post as an intended insult or a challenge for a heavy debate. It’s just a fair discussion
Reading at those bible verses, I really cannot see how any of them applicable for Islam and Muhammad (SAW) and they didn't even imply Islam nor Muhammad (SAW), and in fact reading those I immediately think of some of christians saints and jews' rabbis and their scribes.
And I agree with you there. Especially now that I've learned more. But I've seen those verses applied to modern times out of the historical context. Back then I didn't question the "logic" of it. It was just the way it was. I really don't know of any clear Biblical sources or anything to justify all of this being said about Islam or Muhammad (SAW). It was all just a matter of opinion from different people and I don't know where they got the information from. Perhaps another member here can direct you to something as in my Christian days, people didn't really question the bishops or pastors.
I can accept that Muhammad received a revelation from an angel. But for me the question is: Which angel it was? I know that there are two kinds of these spiritual beings: the angels of God and the evil spirits.
A fragment from Muhammad’s life:
“Then he took me and squeezed me vehemently and then let me go and repeated the order ‘Recite.’ ‘I cannot recite' said I, and once again he squeezed me and let me go till I was exhausted. Then he said, ‘Recite.' I said, ‘I cannot recite.’ He squeezed me for a third time and then let me go and said...'
If it really was holy angel of God Gabriel, then why should he torment a man, God’s creature in this way, all the more if this man is supposed to be God-pleasing? This is what I’m interested to know from a Muslim.
I don't understand your logic here. Please help me understand what you are saying. You said that you can accept that Muhammad (SAW) recieved revelation from an angel. Then you said that there are two kinds but you said "evil spirits". I'm guessing you mean demons? That's not the same thing as an angel. But I guess it makes sense for you because in Christianity Satan is seen as the fallen angel...
But I don't understand how being squeezed and let go of is torment? Explain please.
I don't understand your logic here. Please help me understand what you are saying. You said that you can accept that Muhammad (SAW) recieved revelation from an angel. Then you said that there are two kinds but you said "evil spirits". I'm guessing you mean demons? That's not the same thing as an angel. But I guess it makes sense for you because in Christianity Satan is seen as the fallen angel...
But I don't understand how being squeezed and let go of is torment? Explain please.
Yes, indeed; I said that there are angels of God and the fallen angels (i.e. demons).
I don’t know if you would like if someone would vehemently squeeze you till you become exhausted; but I’m sure that for a normal human being (not for a masochist) it would be painful and therefore tormenting. So, why did he cause pain to Muhammad?
I don’t know if you would like if someone would vehemently squeeze you till you become exhausted; but I’m sure that for a normal human being (not for a masochist) it would be painful and therefore tormenting. So, why did he cause pain to Muhammad?
How's being squeezed 'demonic' or 'angelic' Do you think when your God allegedly died on the cross that he was in pain? Why would 'God' cause 'God' a painful death?.. Why would he a 'loving' 'merciful' God cause 'pain' and worst yet 'death' on God?
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Aprender
4995[)50-] (G.U.S.: A World Reference Atlas, 
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks