Sami Zaatari's Refutations

[Grace Seeker]

Because the view being held by Sami is that the passage is referring to a virgin being raped, when the correct reading of the passage is a virgin having sexual relations with a man outside of marriage.

Yeah, I thought that might be what you were trying to say, but I still get the sense that it was not consenual from words like "he siezes her".

 

[Keltoi]

Yeah, I thought that might be what you were trying to say, but I still get the sense that it was not consenual from words like "he siezes her".

Well, if one looks at the actual Hebrew words used in this passage, one will notice that the Hebrew word for rape, which is used in other passages referring to forced sexual intercourse, isn't used in this instance. I realize that doesn't repair the English translation of the passage, but I like to refer to the original Hebrew when matters like this come up.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Well, if one looks at the actual Hebrew words used in this passage, one will notice that the Hebrew word for rape, which is used in other passages referring to forced sexual intercourse, isn't used in this instance. I realize that doesn't repair the English translation of the passage, but I like to refer to the original Hebrew when matters like this come up.

I would too, but I only speak Greek, not Hebrew. When you said:

I believe a better translation of the passage in question would be as follows.

I thought that what was posted there was something that you were then comfortable with and had researched for the best way to translate the verbs involved. Which is why, when I saw the phrase "he siezes her" that I said I really didn't see any significant difference.

Having now examined it as best as I can, given my limited knowledge, I see that the verb you translated as "siezed" and that Mr. Zaatari translates as "lay hold" is the same word used in Deuteronomy 21:19 of relationships between parents and a son -- "take hold of". Obviously there it does not mean rape, but it does contain the idea of using force. And a man taking hold of or siezing a woman in order to have sex with her still does not sound consenual. And checking it in my Hebrew dictionary still leaves me feeling the same about it.

I think it is an issue that needs to be seriously addressed. Whether you call it rape or something else, is non-consenual sex forced on a woman by a man something that God ever condones? While my gut response is NO. I think we need to provide better then either my gut or your translation of "and he siezes her and lies with her" if we are going to honestly deal with the problem presented in the text.

 

[Keltoi]

I would too, but I only speak Greek, not Hebrew. When you said: I thought that what was posted there was something that you were then comfortable with and had researched for the best way to translate the verbs involved. Which is why, when I saw the phrase "he siezes her" that I said I really didn't see any significant difference.

Having now examined it as best as I can, given my limited knowledge, I see that the verb you translated as "siezed" and that Mr. Zaatari translates as "lay hold" is the same word used in Deuteronomy 21:19 of relationships between parents and a son -- "take hold of". Obviously there it does not mean rape, but it does contain the idea of using force. And a man taking hold of or siezing a woman in order to have sex with her still does not sound consenual. And checking it in my Hebrew dictionary still leaves me feeling the same about it.

I think it is an issue that needs to be seriously addressed. Whether you call it rape or something else, is non-consenual sex forced on a woman by a man something that God ever condones? While my gut response is NO. I think we need to provide better then either my gut or your translation of "and he siezes her and lies with her" if we are going to honestly deal with the problem presented in the text.

My point was that I believe the passage is referring to a consensual sexual encounter. Notice the passage that refers to a married woman screaming to signal her struggle? The laws in that case are very clear. The guilty man would be put to death and no sin should be attached to the woman. Now notice the last segment of the passage, the one in question, where it adds the phrase, "and they are found out." Doesn't that seem to imply a consensual act on both their parts?, and that opposed to the married woman both parties are guilty? I understand the discomfort with the word "seized", and that is how I felt about the passage for many years. However, after studying up on the Hebrew translations and meanings behind the passage, it has answered the concerns that I had. In any event, I think you and I as Christians would dismiss any claim that God condones rape, which is probably more important than arguments over specific passages.

 

[Sami Zaatari]

the verses are about rape, you should read the passages in context and the context points it out, why? well the verses first say that if a man forces a lady a non virgin one and has sex with her he shall be put to death, but the lady will have no sin, she has no sin why? because she was raped and didnt take part in the sexual act but was forced to hence she is innocent and only the man dies, and notice the verses are making it clear that this is refering to a non virgin, then the next passages move on to a virgin, the entire context is about rape, and anyone will see that, the verses first deal with the raped non virgin, and then it moves to the raped virgin, only this time it stipulates a different ruling, which is that the man must marry the rape victim and pay a fine. why would the verses switch from a non virgin to a virgin just like that? because it wants to make the point clear that rape laws are different regarding virgins and non virgins.

 

[Sami Zaatari]

was the prophet Muhammad a pagan? nope! in this new article here we examine some of the common arguments and misconceptions that are raised against the blessed prophet to try and prove that he is a paga, very inconsistent claims:

http://muslim-responses.com/Was_he_a_Pagan/Was_he_a_Pagan_

 

[rebelishaulman]

and then it moves to the raped virgin, only this time it stipulates a different ruling, which is that the man must marry the rape victim and pay a fine. why would the verses switch from a non virgin to a virgin just like that? because it wants to make the point clear that rape laws are different regarding virgins and non virgins.

Because of the virgin, not the crime, and if she would be able to get married. She overall has the choice to put him to death if enough witnesses are there, but most of the time he would be exiled, or jailed.

 

[Sami Zaatari]

salam all, one common claim anti-Islamics bring is the killing of Kinana the Jew, they claim the prophet tortured and murdered him, but is this true? as usual no:

http://muslim-responses.com/The_Killing_of_Kinana/The_Killing_of_Kinana_

should be helpful for those who have come across this argument and didnt know what to say.

 

[Sami Zaatari]

does Islamic scholarship approve of incest and sodomy?

http://muslim-responses.com/Incest_and_Sodomy/Incest_and_Sodomy_

refuting a perverted missionary of Answering-Islam.

 

[Sami Zaatari]

salam all, as you all know many anti-Islamics always bring up the argument that Islam allows wife beating, however so let us see what the blessed prophet Muhammad had to say on this matter and what the Islamic concensus is concerning this matter:

http://muslim-responses.com/Wife_Beating/Wife_Beating_

 

[Grace Seeker]

salam all, as you all know many anti-Islamics always bring up the argument that Islam allows wife beating, however so let us see what the blessed prophet Muhammad had to say on this matter and what the Islamic concensus is concerning this matter:

http://muslim-responses.com/Wife_Beating/Wife_Beating_

I appreciate this article on wife beating. If all this is true and well known, I would think there would be very little or no beating of one's wife among pious Muslim men. However, as it does occur, is it the author's opinion that it is because these directives regading wife beating are not well known, or is it more likely because many men are less than truly pious?

(Note: The same problem exists in some circles of Christianity. I think it generally occurs then because men listen more to their own voices than to God's voice.)

 

[Grace Seeker]

A man may discipline his wife as he would discipline a child. Are Muslim women to be seen as children?
A man may only do this if his wife is recalcitrant, like a camel. Are Muslim women to be seen as beasts of burden?
Is this the respect that Islam has for women that I am always hearing about?


Also this line from the link:

The Prophet explained it by "dharban ghayra mubarrih" which means "a light tap that leaves no mark". He further said that face must be avoided.

So, one may not do it with an intent to cause harm. If it is so light a touch that it leaves no mark, then perhaps it would be better on the face where if a man was being abusive it could be seen by others. I've known of men who savagely punched their wives in the stomach because there would be no mark left.

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

A man may discipline his wife as he would discipline a child. Are Muslim women to be seen as children?
A man may only do this if his wife is recalcitrant, like a camel. Are Muslim women to be seen as beasts of burden?
Is this the respect that Islam has for women that I am always hearing about?

The answer to your questions is no, that is untrue. This issue has been discussed in depth in a number of places on this forum and its associated site, see for example:
http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...erse-34-a.html (Tafsir of Sura An-Nisa, verse 34)
http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...e-beating.html (Wife beating?)
http://www.load-islam.com/family_soc...hp?topic_id=14
http://www.islamicboard.com/islamic-...hts-quran.html (womens rights in the quran)

If it is so light a touch that it leaves no mark, then perhaps it would be better on the face where if a man was being abusive it could be seen by others. I've known of men who savagely punched their wives in the stomach because there would be no mark left.

But the face is such that even a light touch can have a devastating effect - if one poked the eye for example. And a tap on the face would probably feel worse than if someone did the same on the arm. The most important thing is how much a person fears Allaah, both in open and in secret and abiding by His commands even if our logic may not enable us to understand.

 

[MTAFFI]

How many days did it take to create Heavens and Earth ?

Quran 7: 54 Your gurdian-Lord is Allah who created the heavens and earth in Six Days

Quran 10: 3 Verily your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and earth in Six Days

Quran 11:7 He it is Who created the heavens and earth in Six Days
Quran-25:29: He Who created the heavens and earth and all that is between, in Six Days

The above verses clearly state that God created the heaven and Allah created the heaven and the Earth in 6 days. But the verses below stated-

Quran 41: 9 Is it that ye deny Him who created the earth in Two Days ?

Quran 41: 10 He set on the (earth) Mountains standing firm high above it, and bestowed blessing on the earth, and measured therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in FOUR DAYS…

Quran 41: 12 So He completed them (heavens) as seven firmaments in Two days and …

 

[MTAFFI]

Allah’s Days Equal to 1000 Years or 50,000 Years?

Quran 22: 47 A day in the sight of the Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning. Quran-32:5: To Him, on a Day, the space whereof will be a thousands years of your rekoning

Quran 70: 4 The angels and the spirit ascend unto him in a day the measure whereof is Fifty thousands years.

 

[MTAFFI]

Does Earth Spread Out Like Carpet (flat)?
Quran 15: 19 And the earth We have spread out (like a carpet); set thereon Mountains firm and immovable;

Quran 78: 6-7 Have We not made the earth as a wide expanse, And the mountains as pegs (anchor)?

 

[MTAFFI]

Is Man Created From Clotted Blood?
Quran-23:14: Then fashioned We the drop (semen) a CLOT OF CONGEALED BLOOD then fashioned We the Clot a little lump (foetus), fashioned We the little lump into bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of Creators. ( Bengali translated Quran said: “Zamaa’t Raokto theeke Manoosh banieesi” And this Ayat has been repeated again and again throughout the Quran ) Quran-75:38: Then he becomes a CLOT; then (Allah) shaped and fashioned…

Quran 96: 2 Created man, out of a mere clot of congealed blood

 

[MTAFFI]

A resting place for Sun!?
Quran 36: 38 And the sun runneth on unto a resting place for him. That is the measuring of the Mighty, the Wise.
Quran 36: 39 And for the moon We have appointed mansions till she return like an old shrivelled palm leaf.
Quran 36: 40 It is not for Sun to overtake the moon, nor doth the night outstrip the day. They float each in an orbit.

Really I thought that we orbited around the sun?

 

[MTAFFI]

My point in posting the above is to show that there are inaccuracies in every religion

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

It doesnt help taking stuff out of context, especially when half the verses your posting start with and, which means something came before or after it.