Ex-Muslim Neil Littlejohn also know as ‘Ismaa’eel Abu Adam’ has produced a second video with the purpose of traducing the character of the Prophet Muhammad upon whom be peace.
Here is the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSV-0HdiFEM
This timely article provides a FULL account of the story including many facts deliberately left out in the video.
Content:
1. Introduction
2. What Led to the Battle of Khaybar
3. Why was Kinana And Safiyya’s father killed?
4. Did Safiyyah marry Prophet Muhammed Freely?
5. Did Safiyyah Hate Prophet Muhammed (p)?
6. Conclusion
1. Introduction
This article seeks to examine Safiyya’s marriage to Prophet Muhammed, the death of Huyayy Ibn Akhtab, kinana, and the events that occurred prior to the marriage. More importantly we will analyse some key details surrounding the Khaybar affair and the aftermath.
2. What Led to the Battle of Khaybar
Before analysing crucial details on Safiyya, her father, and Kinana, let’s revisit some important details surrounding the battle of Khaybar.
When the Muslims fled persecution from Makkah to Madinah, they made treaties with the Banu qaynuqa, Banu Nadir, and other tribes. It was stipulated that they would not help any enemy against the Muslims.
To recap, in previous years, the Banu Qaynuqa were…
View original post 6,095 more words
Categories: Hadith, History, Islam, Islamophobia
Blogging Theology 
Man this guy has you running scared! 😂
LikeLike
Sam, not really. His views are the same old stale half-truths and distortions beloved of Islamophobes. Brother Kaleef K. Karim has done a good job by giving a full account of as many facts were deliberately left out in the video.
LikeLike
Man these refutations have exposed your incompetence and deceit and falsehood shammy😁…run sammy run…. May the truth continue to always find you and expose you..ameen😉
Slanders about Prophet’s (PBUH) marriage with Safiya (RA)
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2009/11/slanders-regarding-holy-prophets-pbuh.html?m=1
LikeLiked by 2 people
You obviously haven’t thought this thru. It is these same supposedly half-truths and distortions that led him to abandon your false prophet and to see him for what he truly was. Now don’t tell me that is because he doesn’t know your deen or Arabic since the mane speaks it fluently and even went abroad to study your deen.
Fact is, the majority of converts end up leaving your deen within decade or less since they come to realize just how incoherent, irrational, and filthy it truly is. And many native bon Muslims are leaving too, thanks be to God! Don’t believe me? Well here you go: http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=aae0afdc12fe50f1fe70882957201e15;www
So keep deceiving yourselves into thinking that garbage like Kaleef’s will convince people like Ismail that you guys have answers to the immorality and irrationality of your prophet’s teachings and lifestyle, and watch as hundreds of thousands more leave your deen. 😉
LikeLike
Let me turn the tables right back at ya!
http://answeringislam.net/Shamoun/badawi_mhd_marriages1.htm
http://answeringislam.net/Shamoun/badawi_mhd_marriages2.htm
LikeLike
oh sammy..lolol… keep deceiving yourself into thinking that garbage you produce will convince knowledgeable people who know the facts and have answers to the irrationality and falsehood of your bogus arguements , and watch as hundreds of thousands continue to embrace Islam in the future..😉
LikeLike
hahah oh foolish sam..i read those articles this morning lol and again…your views are the same old stale half-truths and distortions beloved of Islamophobes…lol…😂😂😂… keep convincing yourself sammy…lol
LikeLike
Thank you Omar for reading my articles. That tells me you have good taste! 😉
LikeLike
“Thank you Omar for reading my articles. That tells me you have good taste!”
lol😁
LikeLike
Now if you are going to be fair then you will leave the links to my rebuttals to Zawadis feeble and miserable attempt to defend Muhammad’s marriage to Safiyya in place for others to read, since he basically used the same garbage arguments that Kaleef did ti no avail: http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah.htm
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah2.htm
LikeLike
Enjoy!
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah2.htm
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah3b.htm
LikeLike
hahah oh foolish sam..i read those articles this morning lol and again…your views are the same old stale half-truths and distortions beloved of Islamophobes…lol…😂😂😂… keep convincing yourself sammy…lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yasir Qadhi has a 100 episode you tube series on the Seerah that covers all these issues.
BTW Paul have you seen Revelation by Meeraj Mohiuddin, worth checking out.. A real novel approach to the Seerah. His recent talk at Zaytuna College is also very inspirational. Dig it out if you get a chance…
LikeLiked by 1 person
http://www.revelationthebook.com/
LikeLike
And Williams, let’s see what your boy Zawadi said about Safiyya hating your profit:
Just see how much Safiyyah loved the Prophet.
Here is Umm al- Mu’minin, Safiyyah, relates those moments when she hated the Prophet for killing her father and her ex-husband. The Prophet apologized to her saying, “Your father charged the Arabs against me and committed heinous act,” he apologized to the extent that made Safiyyah get rid of her bitterness against the Prophet. (Al-Bayhaqi, Dala’il an-Nubuwwah, vol. 4, p. 230, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.166)
Yes, indeed Safiyyah was angry at the Prophet at first but she forgave him later on. This is mainly due to the fact that she always knew that Muhammad was indeed a Prophet.
SOURCE: http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/safiyyah_the_wife_of_the_prophet.htm
Irony of ironies! Zawadi QUOTES THE SAME EXACT HADITH THAT ISMAIL DID, THE VERY ONE WHICH SAYS SAFIYYAH DID HATE MUHAMMAD FOR MURDERING HER FATHER AND HUSBAND! The difference is that Zawadi got his source second hand WHEREAS ISMAIL QUOTED DIRECTLY FROM THE ARABIC OF AL-BAYHAQI!
Now here is my response to Zawadi taken from my rebuttal to his garbage:
(2) Interestingly, Zawadi himself provides a quote that corroborates the veracity of al-Waqidi’s narratives. One of Zawadi’s sources admits that Safiyyah hated Muhammad for killing her family. Capital and underline emphasis is ours:
Here is Umm al- Mu’minin, Safiyyah, relates those moments WHEN SHE HATED THE PROPHET FOR KILLING HER FATHER AND HER EX-HUSBAND. The Prophet APOLOGIZED TO HER saying, “Your father charged the Arabs against me and committed heinous act,” he apologized to the extent that made Safiyyah get rid OF HER BITTERNESS AGAINST THE PROPHET. (Al-Bayhaqi, Dala’il an-Nubuwwah, vol. 4, p. 230, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p. 166)
This source expects us to really believe that Safiyyah was satisfied with Muhammad’s explanation when he was the one who started the hostilities against the Arabs and Jews, bullied the Jews into believing in him and threatened them with banishment or violence if they didn’t accept his prophetic claims:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, “Let us go to the Jews.” We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, “If you embrace Islam, YOU WILL BE SAFE. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 392)
Narrated Abu Huraira:
While we were in the mosque, Allah’s Apostle came out to us and said, “Let us proceed to the Jews.” So we went along with him till we reached Bait-al-Midras (a place where the Torah used to be recited and all the Jews of the town used to gather). The Prophet stood up and addressed them, “O Assembly of Jews! Embrace Islam AND YOU WILL BE SAFE!” The Jews replied, “O Aba-l-Qasim! You have conveyed Allah’s message to us.” The Prophet said, “That is what I want (from you).” He repeated his first statement for the second time, and they said, “You have conveyed Allah’s message, O Aba-l-Qasim.” Then he said it for the third time and added, “You should Know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to exile you from this land, so whoever among you owns some property, can sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle.” (See Hadith No. 392, Vol. 4) (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 85, Number 77)
In light of these circumstances, what else could these Jews do but try to seek a means of escaping the tyranny of Muhammad? (This assumes, of course, that these Muslim sources are accurately relaying events as they transpired as opposed to rewriting history to their liking.)
Be that as it may, this reference supports our argument that the last thing in a woman’s mind, who has seen her family murdered and has been taken captive, is to marry and sleep with the very person who caused the events which led to her tragic circumstances (provided that such a woman is sane and moral!).
Like I said, enjoy!
LikeLike
lolo again…nothing of your garbage undermines the reputations that have exposed your incompetence lolol…😂😂
LikeLike
What this deceptive missionary leaves out is that the Banu Nadir with others conspired to murder Muhammed (p) before the quote Scam-Moon mentions.
Al-Bayhaqi’s Sunan al-Kubra:
Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz – Ismail bin Muhammad al-Sha’raani on the authority of his grandfather – Ibrahim bin al-Mundhir al-Hizami – Muhammad bin Fulayh – Musa bin ‘Uqbah on the authority of Ibn Shihab said: This is the hadeeth of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) when he set out to the BANU NADIR to seek their help to settle the blood money of the Kilaabiyeen [i.e. Banu Kilab] and THEY HAD SPOKEN SECRETIVELY TO QURAYSH WHEN THEY WENT TO UHUD TO FIGHT THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH – peace be upon him – and incited them and informed them of their [i.e. the Muslims’s] weak spots…. [the story continues to tell the story of how the Prophet sat resting on the wall and how they conspired to kill him] (Al-Bayhaqi’s Sunan al-Kubra, Hadeeth no. 17,207, online source)
Ibn Hajar:
“The cause of the war [against Banu Quraidah] was DUE TO THEIR BREACH OF THE TREATY. As for al-Nadir [i.e. Banu Nadir], the reason [for their banishment] is due the following reason, which was mentioned by Musa bin ‘Uqba in “al-Maghazi”. He said: AL-NADIR SPOKE SECRETIVELY TO QURAYSH AND INCITED THEM TO FIGHT THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH – peace be upon him – and informed them of their weak spots [in the Muslims defense] …” (Ibn Hajar, Fath, volume 7, page 421)
More:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/10/analysing-the-banu-nadir-incident/
LikeLike
Furthermore, the act of thecl Prophet P marrying Safiyyah(R) was indeed a great honour for her, for this not only preserved her dignity, it also prevented her from becoming a slave.
Haykal notes that:
“The Prophet granted her freedom and then married her, following the examples of great conquerors who married the daughters and wives of the kings whom they had conquered, partly in order to alleviate their tragedy and partly to preserve their dignity.” Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad (North American Trust Publications, 1976), p. 373
The marriage to Safiyyah(R) had a political significance as well, as it helps to reduce hostilities and cement alliances.
John L. Esposito noted:
“As was customary for Arab chiefs, many were political marriages to cement alliances. Others were marriages to the widows of his companions who had fallen in combat and were in need of protection”
John L. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, pp. 19-20
LikeLike
Shamoun: Be that as it may, this reference supports our argument that the last thing in a woman’s mind, who has seen her family murdered and has been taken captive, is to marry and sleep with the very person who caused the events which led to her tragic circumstances (provided that such a woman is sane and moral!).
But the data show Saffiyah (ra) did anticipate marrying Muhammad(saw) and that whatever bitterness she initially had disappeared. Do you have contradictory data? No? Then stfu you pos.
LikeLike
Thank you Williams for being fair enough to allow my comments and links to stand without deleting them. You truly are fair and balanced!
And with that I bid you adios my amigo, since I have to get back finishing more articles and rebuttals!
LikeLiked by 1 person
bye bye sammy, go finishing more bogus articles and feeble ‘rebuttals’..lol..we will still be here waiting for you and continue to expose your misguidance and incompetence 😉
LikeLike
Sorry for all my typos since I don’t go over my comments to check for mistakes like I do when writing articles and rebuttals. My apologies.
LikeLike
me too..using my phone atm…
LikeLike
I don’t think you go over your whole argument to correct your mistakes! That’s your problem! Instead of going over your erroneous assertion, you get diarrhea in the mouth and be all over the place. Learn some humility and respect.
LikeLike
Here is a further rebuttal to Scam-Moon’s lies on the claim that Muhammed started war against Quraysh.
Historical reports testify that the Quraysh continued persecuting Muslims long before the Muslims left Makkah. They continued attacking Muslims even when they fled to Madinah (before battle of Badr). It seems mr Shamoon is the type of person happily defending murderers and rapists like the Quraysh:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/01/23/did-quraysh-persecute-muslims-when-they-fled-to-madinah/
Well I guess, he is the same guy that defends the rape passages in the Bible which Jesus (God) endorsed, he has a lot in common with these savages.
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. SINCE YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE WITH YOU, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
LikeLike
To now further add insult to injury, let me further break down Deuteronomy 21:10-14 to show how this passage condemns Muhammad as an adulterer and rapist:
“When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and attracted to her, YOU MAY TAKE HER AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband AND SHE SHALL BE YOUR WIFE. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her (innitah).” Deuteronomy 21:10-14
The word innitah comes from anah. Now let us see how other versions render this word in v. 14:
“But if you aren’t pleased with her, you must send her away as she wishes. You are not allowed to sell her for money or treat her as a slave because you have HUMILIATED her.” Common English Bible
“It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go [c]wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money, you shall not [d]mistreat her, because you have HUMBLED her.” New American Standard Bible
But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have DISHONORED her. New Revised Standard Version
And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not deal with her as a slave, because thou hast HUMBLED her. Jewish Publication Society 1917
And it will be, if you do not desire her, then you shall send her away wherever she wishes, but you shall not sell her for money. You shall not keep her as a servant, because you have AFFLICTED her. Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary
The reason why these versions rendered the word anah as dishonored, humbled, afflicted etc. is because the word is not being used here in the sense of forcing the captive woman to have sex, but of dishonoring or humiliating her by divorcing her and sending her on her way. That this word can and does mean refer to dishonoring someone, and not forcing them to have sex, is easily seen from the way this word is used in the following verses:
“This shall be a perpetual statute for you so that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and do no work of any kind, whether it is the native citizen or the stranger who sojourns among you. For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you to cleanse you, so that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord. It shall be a sabbath, a solemn rest for you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves. It is a perpetual statute. The priest, who is anointed and consecrated to minister as a priest in the place of his father, shall make atonement, and shall put on the linen garments, the holy garments. And he shall make atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, for the tent of meeting, and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.” Leviticus 16:29-33
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation to you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and offer a food offering made by fire to the Lord. You shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement to make atonement for you before the Lord your God. For whoever is not HUMBLED on that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people. And whoever does any work in that same day, that person I will destroy from among his people. You shall do no manner of work. It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings. It shall be to you a sabbath of complete rest, and you shall afflict your souls. On the ninth day of the month starting at the evening, from evening to evening, you shall celebrate your sabbath.” Leviticus 23:16-32
“You will have a holy assembly on the tenth day of this seventh month, and you will AFFLICT yourselves. You will not do any work on it.” Numbers 29:7
“You must carefully keep all the commandments that I am commanding you today, so that you may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the Lord swore to your fathers. You must remember that the Lord your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to HUMBLE you, and to prove you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. He HUMBLED you and let you suffer hunger, and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man does not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord. Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your feet swell these forty years. You must also consider in your heart that, as a man disciplines his son, so the Lord your God disciplines you… who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your fathers did not know, that He might HUMBLE you and that He might prove you, to do good for you in the end. ” Deuteronomy 8:1-5, 16
Thus, this text doesn’t permit Israelite men to rape captive women like Muhammad’s god allowed his profit and jihadi thugs. Rather, it is telling them they can only have sex with women taken captive BY FIRST MARRYING THEM! Even the very translation used by this demented liar AFFIRMS THAT THE ISRAELITES HAD TO MARRY THE CAPTIVE WOMEN, AND WERE TO SET THE FREE AND NOT SELL THEM AS SLAVES IF THEY ENDED UP DIVORCING THEM, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT WHO NOT ONLY RAPED THEM WITHOUT MARRYING THEM BUT THEN SOLD THEM OFF AFTER HE GOT DONE VIOLATING THEM!
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like AND WANT TO MARRY HER. 12 take her your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, YOU MAY MARRY HER. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. since you forced her to have intercourse with you, YOU CANNOT TREAT HER AS A SLAVE AND SELL HER.
OUCH!
MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOU CANNOT QUOTE A SINGLE VERSE FROM THE BIBLE WHICH SAYS THAT ISRAELITES OR BELIEVES CAN RAPE MARRIED WOMEN THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN CAPTIVE, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT!
DOUBLE OUCH!!!!
You could only wish that your profit had shown the same decency and civility towards captive women that this passage from Deuteronomy does, a passage which predates your filthy Quran by approximately 2200 years!
Like I said, keep producing your trash and filth and keep watching hundreds of thousands leave your wicked and filthy deen to the glory of Christ, Muhammad’s God and Judge!
With that said give me a time and date when you can come to my paltak room so we can compare Deuteronomy 21:10-14 with the filth of Quran 4:24 and your profit’s implementation of it so all can see how well you do defending your garbage.
LikeLike
You need to stop calling me your profit’s pet names. Here is the obliteration to your lie:
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/antagonizing.htm
http://answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/mo_antagonizer.html
And let me demolish your filthy gross perversion of Deuteronomy 21:10-14, since you have it confused with your wicked profit raping married women:
BEGIN
For instance, the following verse permits Muslim men (which includes Muhammad himself) to sleep with married women whom they have taken captive:
Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath God ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, – desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and God is All-knowing, All-wise. S. 4:24 Y. Ali
Tragically, this did not remain a mere abstraction but was readily put into practice by Muhammad’s sexually craved jihadists:
Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri: O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger mentioning al-‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger, and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371)
And:
Abu Said al-Khudri said: The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess’. That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150)
This same narration is found in all of the major hadith collections:
Chapter 36. What Has Been Related (About A Man) Who Captures A Slave Woman That Has A Husband, Is It Lawful For Him To Have Relations With Her?
1132. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri narrated: We got some captives on the day of Awtas, and they had husbands among their people. They mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah, so the following was revealed: And women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess. (Hasan) (English Translation of Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Compiled by Imam Hafiz Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad Ibn ‘Eisa At-Tirmidhi, From Hadith No. 544 to 1204, translated by Abu Khaliyl (USA), ahadith edited and referenced by Hafiz Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: November 2007], Volume 2, p. 502; underline emphasis ours)
And:
1137. Jabir bin ‘Abdullah narrated: “We practiced ‘Azl while the Qur’an was being revealed.” (Sahih)
(Abu ‘Eisa said:) The Hadith of Jabir is a Hasan Sahih Hadith. It has been reported from him through other routes.
There are those among the people of knowledge, among the Companions of the Prophet and others, who permitted ‘Azl. Malik bin Anas said: “The permission of the free woman is to be requested for ‘Azl, while the slave woman’s permission need not be requested.” (Ibid., Chapter 39. What Has Been related About ‘Azl, p. 507)
Finally:
(3) 3016. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “On the Day of Awtas, we captured some women who had husbands among the idolaters. SO SOME OF THE MEN DISLIKED THAT, so Allah, Most High, revealed: ‘And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….’” (Sahih)
[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.
(4) 3017. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “we captured some women on the Day of Awtas and they had husbands among their people. That was mentioned to the Messenger of Allah so Allah revealed: ‘…And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….” (Sahih)
[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.
This is how it was reported by Ath-Thawri, from ‘Uthman Al-Batti, from Abu Al-Khalil, from Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri from the Prophet and it is similar. “From Abu ‘Alqamah” is not in this Hadith and I do not know of anyone who mentioned Abu ‘Alqamah in this Hadith except in what Hammam mentioned from Qatadah. Abu Al-Khalil’s name is Salih bin Abi Mariam. (Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Volume 5, From Hadith No. 2606 to 3290, Chapter 4. Regarding Surat An-Nisa’, pp. 331-332; capital and underline emphasis ours)
Thus, Muhammad and his deity condoned and encouraged men to virtually rape their female captives whether they were married or not.
Now unless this taqiyyist wants us to believe that such women whose families had just been murdered and (in some cases) whose husbands were still alive would actually consent to having sex with their captors, it should be apparent that the Islamic deity is actually permitting, and even encouraging, rape and adultery in his so-called holy book!
How truly sad and tragic for these women that Muhammad and his god did not share the shame and concern of the jihadists regarding the highly unethical nature of raping captives whose husbands were still alive. Instead, Allah and his messenger rushed to justify such a perverted and heinous crime!
Contrast this filth with what Deuteronomy teaches concerning the issue of female captives:
“When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.” Deuteronomy 21:10-14
Here we see that, instead of permitting men to rape captive women, the Holy Bible forces the Israelites to marry them if they wanted to have sex with them, and then letting them go free in case of a divorce. This means that the Holy Bible is actually dignifying these women by not allowing them to be treated the way Allah and his “messenger” had them treated, namely like animals. Now this is a command which predates the Quran by approximately 2200 years!
To say that such an injunction was truly shocking and revolutionary for that time period would be a wild understatement, just as the following commentaries illustrate:
“The law focuses on the rights of the woman by stating that the man who marries a female prisoner of war and subsequently becomes dissatisfied with her, for whatever reasons, is not permitted to reduce her to slavery. Such a woman had legal rights in ancient Israel, and moral obligations ensue from the fact that the man initiated a sexual relationship with her. Perhaps the most significant conclusion to draw from this text is the respect for the personhood of a captured woman. A primary concern in the laws of Deut 21–25 is for protecting the poor and vulnerable in society from exploitation on the part of the powerful.” (Duane L. Christensen, Word Biblical Commentary: Deuteronomy 21:10–34:12 [Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN 2002], Volume 6b, p. 475; bold emphasis ours)
“Throughout the ancient Mediterranean world, captive women of vanquished peoples were assumed to be the due sexual prerogative of the victors. This law exceptionally seeks to provide for the human rights of the woman who falls into this predicament… the verb ‘inah is also sometimes used for rape, and its employment here astringently suggests that the sexual exploitation of a captive woman, even in a legally sanctioned arrangement of concubinage, is equivalent to rape.” (Robert Alter, The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary [W. W. Norton & Company, 2008], p. 982; bold emphasis ours)
“The instructions given for the treatment of female captives in Deuteronomy 21:10-14 take it for granted that a conquering army have the right to dispose of the conquered population in any way that it wishes. It is hard for those coming from a different cultural context to see this as anything other than appalling, but this approach would have been unquestioned within the ancient Near East, and we have to see these instructions within that setting. What is remarkable is that although the woman may have had no choice in the matter–the soldier who fancied her has every right to make her this wife–nevertheless her identity as a human being is at least to some extent recognized. She is not to be thrown into the new situation but must be allowed time to mourn for her parents and her past life… Within these oppressive situations the laws are geared to provide at least a level of protection for the women involved… Women who were bought as wives or captured in war and taken as wives could not be sold as slaves or even neglected (Ex 21.11; Deut 21.14).” (The IVP Women’s Bible Commentary, eds. Catherine Clark Kroeger & Mary J. Evans [InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL 2002], pp. 100, 102)
“The space given for weeping is not primarily a period of mourning (though it is perhaps to be assumed that the woman’s father has died in the herem; 20:13, 15). Rather, it is given in compassionate consideration of the large adjustment she must make, and the accompanying trauma. It is an acknowledgment, too, that her former life is ended and a new life is to begin (cf. Ps. 45:10). The hints of compassion breaking through the brutality of the age reflect an awareness of divine compassion, however limited by the thought climate of the times.” (Ian Cairns, Word and Presence: A Commentary on the book of Deuteronomy (International Theological Commentary), [William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI 1992], p. 189; bold emphasis ours)
For more on the humanitarian nature of this OT passage we recommend the following article: A note on the humanitarian character of Deut 21.10-14.
Unfortunately, there’s more to the story. The so-called sound ahadith report that Muhammad taught that Allah has predestined the amount of adultery a person must necessarily commit:
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:
I did not see anything so resembling minor sins as what Abu Huraira said from the Prophet, who said, “Allah has written for the son of Adam his INEVITABLE share of adultery whether he is aware of it or not: The adultery of the eye is the looking (at something which is sinful to look at), and the adultery of the tongue is to utter (what it is unlawful to utter), and the innerself wishes and longs for (adultery) and the private parts turn that into reality or refrain from submitting to the temptation.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 77, Number 609)
Verily Allah has fixed the very portion of adultery which a man will indulge in, and which he OF NECESSITY MUST COMMIT (or there would be no escape from it). (Sahih Muslim, Book 033, Number 6421; see also Number 6422)
In other words, these Muslims were only carrying out the very sexual filth which their god had predestined for them!
END
With that said give me a time and date when you can come to my paltalk room so we can see how well you do defending the filth of your profit and your perversion of the Holy Bible. TIME AND DATE PLEASE!
I won’t be holding my breath. 😉
LikeLike
Instead of Sham-Moon dealing with the refutation to his claims on banu Nadir, he jumps on another topic, that is Awtas incident. We wont go into details. but all the claims he has made on Awtas and 4:24 has been refuted in the following article:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/06/23/what-happened-to-the-captive-women-in-awtas-incident/
Let’s look into Deuteronomy the and Jesus (God) endorsing rape:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
What Scam-Moon deceptively hides the fact is that even though they were married, these women were FORCED into the marriage. They were FORCED to have intercourse as the GNT translation shows. But let’s look further what Christian scholars say:
According to the Book: ‘The International Standard Bible Encloypedia’, the Hebrew word ‘Anah’ means:
1. OT.-A. As a verb. 1. Sexual Intercourse. Heb. ‘ana’ is used in Gen. 34:2 of Shechem’s RAPE of Dinah. Ezekiel condemns the men of Jerusalem who ‘humble’ (ana) women ‘unclean in their impurity’ (22:10). The verb is thus a EUPHEMISM FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (cf. Dt. 21:14; 22:24, 29) AND IS FREQUENTLY EQUIVALENT TO RAPE (Jgs. 19:24; 20:5; 2S. 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Lam. 5:11). [2]
Biblical Scholar K. Renato Lings also echoes the same words as the previous statement on the word ‘Anah’, he writes:
“The verb ‘anah’ is deployed in some parts of the HB to describe seduction, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR RAPE-LIKE SCENARIOS. On account of its primary meaning ‘OPPRESS’ OR ‘HUMILIATE’, SEXUAL AGGRESSION is regarded as an act of humiliation. In genesis 34:2, for instance, Shechem saw Jacob’s daughter Dinah and took her, lay with her and ‘humiliated’ or ‘debased’ her.” [3]
So we see the ‘Humane’ teaching by Scam-Moon in reality is RAPE.
LikeLike
A further rebuttal to Scam-Moon’s lies on banu Nadir. Scam-Moon wants to paint a picture of Banu Nadir as being a bunch of hippies who didn’t do anything wrong. History tells us that they conspired and in a number of times sided with Quraysh in killing the Prophet:
Ibn Ishaq:
THE DEPORTATION OF THE B. AL-NADIR, A.H. 4
According to what Yzaid b. Ruman told me the apostle went to B. al-Nadir to ask for their help in paying the bloodwit for the two men of B. Amir whom Amr b. Umayya al-Damri had killed after he had given them a promise of security. There was a mutual alliance between B. AL-NADIR and B. Amir. When the apostle came to the about the bloodwit they said that of course they would contribute in the way he wished; but they took counsel with one another apart, saying, ‘You will never get such a chance again. WHO WILL GO TO THE TOP OF THE HOUSE AND DROP A ROCK ON HIM (T. SO AS TO KILL HIM) and rid us of him?’ The apostle was sitting by the wall of one of their houses at the time. ‘Amr b. Jihash B. Ka’b volunteered to do this and went up TO THROW DOWN A ROCK. As the apostle was with a number of his companions among who were Abu Bakr, Umar, and Ali news came to him from heaven about what these people intended, so he got up (T. and said to his companions, ‘Don’t go away until I come to you’) and he went back to Medina. When his companions had waited long for the prophet, they got up to search for him and met a man coming from Medina and asked him about him. He said that he had seen him entering Medina, and they went off, and when they found him he told them of the treachery which the Jews meditated against him. The apostle ordered them to prepare for war and to march against them (670), Then he went off with the men until he came upon them (680). (Ibn Ishaq, page 437) [1]
itab Al-tabaqat Al-Kabir – Ibn Sa’d:
“They said: O Abu al-Qasim, we will do as you like. Then some of them went into secret consultation and decided to ACT TREACHEROUSLY AGAINST HIM (PROPHET). Amr Ibn Jihash Ibn Ka’b Ibn Basil al-Nadari said: I shall ascend on the roof of the house from WHERE I SHALL THROW A STONE DOWN (ON HIM). Thereupon Sallam Ibn Mishkam said: Do not do it. By Allah, he will come to know what you intend to do with him. It would be a violation of our agreement with him. The Apostle of Allah, received information of what they intentended to do.” (Kitab al-tabaqat al-Kabir vol. 2. Pg 69) [2]
Kitab Futuh al-Buldan:
“The Prophet once accompanied by Abu Bakr, Umar and Usaid ibn Hudair came to the Banu an-Nadir who were Jews and solicited their aid for raising the bloodwit of two men of the Banu-Kilab ibn Rabi’ah who had made peace with him and who were killed by Amr ibn Umaiyah ad-Damri. THE JEWS INTENDED TO DROP A STONE ON HIM but the Prophet left them and sent them word ordering them to evacuate his city [Yathrib] because of their perfidy and VIOLATION OF COVENANT. THE JEWS REFUSED TO COMPLY, AND ANNOUNCED HOSTILITY. …” (Kitab Futuh al-Buldan, vol.1, Pg 34)
Notice the above report, the Prophet is asking for them to make a new peace treaty, instead they wanted war.
More:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/10/analysing-the-banu-nadir-incident/
LikeLike
You need to stop calling me your profit’s pet names. Here is the obliteration to your lie:
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/antagonizing.htm
http://answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/mo_antagonizer.html
And let me demolish your filthy gross perversion of Deuteronomy 21:10-14, since you have it confused with your wicked profit raping married women:
BEGIN
For instance, the following verse permits Muslim men (which includes Muhammad himself) to sleep with married women whom they have taken captive:
Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath God ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, – desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and God is All-knowing, All-wise. S. 4:24 Y. Ali
Tragically, this did not remain a mere abstraction but was readily put into practice by Muhammad’s sexually craved jihadists:
Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri: O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger mentioning al-‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger, and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371)
And:
Abu Said al-Khudri said: The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess’. That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150)
This same narration is found in all of the major hadith collections:
Chapter 36. What Has Been Related (About A Man) Who Captures A Slave Woman That Has A Husband, Is It Lawful For Him To Have Relations With Her?
1132. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri narrated: We got some captives on the day of Awtas, and they had husbands among their people. They mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah, so the following was revealed: And women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess. (Hasan) (English Translation of Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Compiled by Imam Hafiz Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad Ibn ‘Eisa At-Tirmidhi, From Hadith No. 544 to 1204, translated by Abu Khaliyl (USA), ahadith edited and referenced by Hafiz Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: November 2007], Volume 2, p. 502; underline emphasis ours)
And:
1137. Jabir bin ‘Abdullah narrated: “We practiced ‘Azl while the Qur’an was being revealed.” (Sahih)
(Abu ‘Eisa said:) The Hadith of Jabir is a Hasan Sahih Hadith. It has been reported from him through other routes.
There are those among the people of knowledge, among the Companions of the Prophet and others, who permitted ‘Azl. Malik bin Anas said: “The permission of the free woman is to be requested for ‘Azl, while the slave woman’s permission need not be requested.” (Ibid., Chapter 39. What Has Been related About ‘Azl, p. 507)
Finally:
(3) 3016. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “On the Day of Awtas, we captured some women who had husbands among the idolaters. SO SOME OF THE MEN DISLIKED THAT, so Allah, Most High, revealed: ‘And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….’” (Sahih)
[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.
(4) 3017. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “we captured some women on the Day of Awtas and they had husbands among their people. That was mentioned to the Messenger of Allah so Allah revealed: ‘…And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….” (Sahih)
[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.
This is how it was reported by Ath-Thawri, from ‘Uthman Al-Batti, from Abu Al-Khalil, from Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri from the Prophet and it is similar. “From Abu ‘Alqamah” is not in this Hadith and I do not know of anyone who mentioned Abu ‘Alqamah in this Hadith except in what Hammam mentioned from Qatadah. Abu Al-Khalil’s name is Salih bin Abi Mariam. (Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Volume 5, From Hadith No. 2606 to 3290, Chapter 4. Regarding Surat An-Nisa’, pp. 331-332; capital and underline emphasis ours)
Thus, Muhammad and his deity condoned and encouraged men to virtually rape their female captives whether they were married or not.
Now unless this taqiyyist wants us to believe that such women whose families had just been murdered and (in some cases) whose husbands were still alive would actually consent to having sex with their captors, it should be apparent that the Islamic deity is actually permitting, and even encouraging, rape and adultery in his so-called holy book!
How truly sad and tragic for these women that Muhammad and his god did not share the shame and concern of the jihadists regarding the highly unethical nature of raping captives whose husbands were still alive. Instead, Allah and his messenger rushed to justify such a perverted and heinous crime!
Contrast this filth with what Deuteronomy teaches concerning the issue of female captives:
“When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.” Deuteronomy 21:10-14
Here we see that, instead of permitting men to rape captive women, the Holy Bible forces the Israelites to marry them if they wanted to have sex with them, and then letting them go free in case of a divorce. This means that the Holy Bible is actually dignifying these women by not allowing them to be treated the way Allah and his “messenger” had them treated, namely like animals. Now this is a command which predates the Quran by approximately 2200 years!
To say that such an injunction was truly shocking and revolutionary for that time period would be a wild understatement, just as the following commentaries illustrate:
“The law focuses on the rights of the woman by stating that the man who marries a female prisoner of war and subsequently becomes dissatisfied with her, for whatever reasons, is not permitted to reduce her to slavery. Such a woman had legal rights in ancient Israel, and moral obligations ensue from the fact that the man initiated a sexual relationship with her. Perhaps the most significant conclusion to draw from this text is the respect for the personhood of a captured woman. A primary concern in the laws of Deut 21–25 is for protecting the poor and vulnerable in society from exploitation on the part of the powerful.” (Duane L. Christensen, Word Biblical Commentary: Deuteronomy 21:10–34:12 [Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN 2002], Volume 6b, p. 475; bold emphasis ours)
“Throughout the ancient Mediterranean world, captive women of vanquished peoples were assumed to be the due sexual prerogative of the victors. This law exceptionally seeks to provide for the human rights of the woman who falls into this predicament… the verb ‘inah is also sometimes used for rape, and its employment here astringently suggests that the sexual exploitation of a captive woman, even in a legally sanctioned arrangement of concubinage, is equivalent to rape.” (Robert Alter, The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary [W. W. Norton & Company, 2008], p. 982; bold emphasis ours)
“The instructions given for the treatment of female captives in Deuteronomy 21:10-14 take it for granted that a conquering army have the right to dispose of the conquered population in any way that it wishes. It is hard for those coming from a different cultural context to see this as anything other than appalling, but this approach would have been unquestioned within the ancient Near East, and we have to see these instructions within that setting. What is remarkable is that although the woman may have had no choice in the matter–the soldier who fancied her has every right to make her this wife–nevertheless her identity as a human being is at least to some extent recognized. She is not to be thrown into the new situation but must be allowed time to mourn for her parents and her past life… Within these oppressive situations the laws are geared to provide at least a level of protection for the women involved… Women who were bought as wives or captured in war and taken as wives could not be sold as slaves or even neglected (Ex 21.11; Deut 21.14).” (The IVP Women’s Bible Commentary, eds. Catherine Clark Kroeger & Mary J. Evans [InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL 2002], pp. 100, 102)
“The space given for weeping is not primarily a period of mourning (though it is perhaps to be assumed that the woman’s father has died in the herem; 20:13, 15). Rather, it is given in compassionate consideration of the large adjustment she must make, and the accompanying trauma. It is an acknowledgment, too, that her former life is ended and a new life is to begin (cf. Ps. 45:10). The hints of compassion breaking through the brutality of the age reflect an awareness of divine compassion, however limited by the thought climate of the times.” (Ian Cairns, Word and Presence: A Commentary on the book of Deuteronomy (International Theological Commentary), [William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI 1992], p. 189; bold emphasis ours)
For more on the humanitarian nature of this OT passage we recommend the following article: A note on the humanitarian character of Deut 21.10-14.
Unfortunately, there’s more to the story. The so-called sound ahadith report that Muhammad taught that Allah has predestined the amount of adultery a person must necessarily commit:
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:
I did not see anything so resembling minor sins as what Abu Huraira said from the Prophet, who said, “Allah has written for the son of Adam his INEVITABLE share of adultery whether he is aware of it or not: The adultery of the eye is the looking (at something which is sinful to look at), and the adultery of the tongue is to utter (what it is unlawful to utter), and the innerself wishes and longs for (adultery) and the private parts turn that into reality or refrain from submitting to the temptation.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 77, Number 609)
Verily Allah has fixed the very portion of adultery which a man will indulge in, and which he OF NECESSITY MUST COMMIT (or there would be no escape from it). (Sahih Muslim, Book 033, Number 6421; see also Number 6422)
In other words, these Muslims were only carrying out the very sexual filth which their god had predestined for them!
END
With that said give me a time and date when you can come to my paltalk room so we can see how well you do defending the filth of your profit and perversion of the Holy Bible. TIME AND DATE PLEASE!
I won’t be holding my breathe. 😉
LikeLike
no no no sammy…you are confusing the filthy gross Deuteronomy 21:10-14, that your bogus preexisting son of god jesus belief that commanded the raping of women..
Here is the obliteration to your lie:😉
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwi1xqv4msPNAhWMj5QKHXULB6QQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.answering-christianity.com%2Fkarim%2FKarim_-_articles_islamic_answers_-_part_3%2FBiblical%2520law%2520permits%2520rape%2520of%2520female%2520captives.pdf&usg=AFQjCNG6KzQltaipc2zpUsmG8ifwZVJnPw
LikeLike
In other words, the Bible confirms people were only carrying out the very sexual filth which according to your erroneous christological polytheistic belief your preexisting son of god Jesus had predestined for them!😉
END
LikeLike
the thead – Does Islam Permit Muslim Men to Rape Their Slave Girls? – Has over and over dismantled your repetitive lies and incompetence on this topic shammy lol… did you forget fish brain!?😂
LikeLike
To now further add insult to injury, let me further break down Deuteronomy 21:10-14 to show how this passage condemns Muhammad as an adulterer and rapist:
“When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and attracted to her, YOU MAY TAKE HER AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband AND SHE SHALL BE YOUR WIFE. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her (innitah).” Deuteronomy 21:10-14
The word innitah comes from anah. Now let us see how other versions render this word in v. 14:
“But if you aren’t pleased with her, you must send her away as she wishes. You are not allowed to sell her for money or treat her as a slave because you have HUMILIATED her.” Common English Bible
“It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go [c]wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money, you shall not [d]mistreat her, because you have HUMBLED her.” New American Standard Bible
But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have DISHONORED her. New Revised Standard Version
And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not deal with her as a slave, because thou hast HUMBLED her. Jewish Publication Society 1917
And it will be, if you do not desire her, then you shall send her away wherever she wishes, but you shall not sell her for money. You shall not keep her as a servant, because you have AFFLICTED her. Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary
The reason why these versions rendered the word anah as dishonored, humbled, afflicted etc. is because the word is not being used here in the sense of forcing the captive woman to have sex, but of dishonoring or humiliating her by divorcing her and sending her on her way. That this word can and does mean refer to dishonoring someone, and not forcing them to have sex, is easily seen from the way this word is used in the following verses:
“This shall be a perpetual statute for you so that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and do no work of any kind, whether it is the native citizen or the stranger who sojourns among you. For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you to cleanse you, so that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord. It shall be a sabbath, a solemn rest for you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves. It is a perpetual statute. The priest, who is anointed and consecrated to minister as a priest in the place of his father, shall make atonement, and shall put on the linen garments, the holy garments. And he shall make atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, for the tent of meeting, and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.” Leviticus 16:29-33
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation to you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and offer a food offering made by fire to the Lord. You shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement to make atonement for you before the Lord your God. For whoever is not HUMBLED on that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people. And whoever does any work in that same day, that person I will destroy from among his people. You shall do no manner of work. It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings. It shall be to you a sabbath of complete rest, and you shall afflict your souls. On the ninth day of the month starting at the evening, from evening to evening, you shall celebrate your sabbath.” Leviticus 23:16-32
“You will have a holy assembly on the tenth day of this seventh month, and you will AFFLICT yourselves. You will not do any work on it.” Numbers 29:7
“You must carefully keep all the commandments that I am commanding you today, so that you may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the Lord swore to your fathers. You must remember that the Lord your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to HUMBLE you, and to prove you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. He HUMBLED you and let you suffer hunger, and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man does not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord. Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your feet swell these forty years. You must also consider in your heart that, as a man disciplines his son, so the Lord your God disciplines you… who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your fathers did not know, that He might HUMBLE you and that He might prove you, to do good for you in the end. ” Deuteronomy 8:1-5, 16
Thus, this text doesn’t permit Israelite men to rape captive women like Muhammad’s god allowed his profit and jihadi thugs. Rather, it is telling them they can only have sex with women taken captive BY FIRST MARRYING THEM! Even the very translation used by this demented liar AFFIRMS THAT THE ISRAELITES HAD TO MARRY THE CAPTIVE WOMEN, AND WERE TO SET THE FREE AND NOT SELL THEM AS SLAVES IF THEY ENDED UP DIVORCING THEM, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT WHO NOT ONLY RAPED THEM WITHOUT MARRYING THEM BUT THEN SOLD THEM OFF AFTER HE GOT DONE VIOLATING THEM!
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like AND WANT TO MARRY HER. 12 take her your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, YOU MAY MARRY HER. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. since you forced her to have intercourse with you, YOU CANNOT TREAT HER AS A SLAVE AND SELL HER.
OUCH!
MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOU CANNOT QUOTE A SINGLE VERSE FROM THE BIBLE WHICH SAYS THAT ISRAELITES OR BELIEVES CAN RAPE MARRIED WOMEN THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN CAPTIVE, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT!
DOUBLE OUCH!!!!
You could only wish that your profit had shown the same decency and civility towards captive women that this passage from Deuteronomy does, a passage which predates your filthy Quran by approximately 2200 years!
Like I said, keep producing your trash and filth and keep watching hundreds of thousands leave your wicked and filthy deen to the glory of Christ, Muhammad’s God and Judge!
With that said give me a time and date when you can come to my paltak room so we can compare Deuteronomy 21:10-14 with the filth of Quran 4:24 and your profit’s implementation of it so all can see how well you do defending your garbage.
LikeLike
Instead of Sham-Moon dealing with the refutation to his claims on banu Nadir, he jumps on another topic, that is Awtas incident. We wont go into details. but all the claims he has made on Awtas has been refuted here:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/06/23/what-happened-to-the-captive-women-in-awtas-incident/
Let’s look into Deuteronomy the and Jesus (God) endorsing rape:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
What Scam-Moon deceptively hides the fact is that even though they were married, these women were FORCED into the marriage. They were FORCED to have intercourse as the GNT translation shows. But let’s look further what Christian scholars say:
According to the Book: ‘The International Standard Bible Encloypedia’, the Hebrew word ‘Anah’ means:
1. OT.-A. As a verb. 1. Sexual Intercourse. Heb. ‘ana’ is used in Gen. 34:2 of Shechem’s RAPE of Dinah. Ezekiel condemns the men of Jerusalem who ‘humble’ (ana) women ‘unclean in their impurity’ (22:10). The verb is thus a EUPHEMISM FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (cf. Dt. 21:14; 22:24, 29) AND IS FREQUENTLY EQUIVALENT TO RAPE (Jgs. 19:24; 20:5; 2S. 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Lam. 5:11). [2]
Biblical Scholar K. Renato Lings also echoes the same words as the previous statement on the word ‘Anah’, he writes:
“The verb ‘anah’ is deployed in some parts of the HB to describe seduction, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR RAPE-LIKE SCENARIOS. On account of its primary meaning ‘OPPRESS’ OR ‘HUMILIATE’, SEXUAL AGGRESSION is regarded as an act of humiliation. In genesis 34:2, for instance, Shechem saw Jacob’s daughter Dinah and took her, lay with her and ‘humiliated’ or ‘debased’ her.” [3]
https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/07/04/safiyyah-huyayy-kinana-and-khaybar-affair/#comments
So we see the ‘Humane’ teaching by Scam-Moon in reality is RAPE.
LikeLike
Now to further add salt to your injury Sammy let me further break down Deuteronomy 21:10-14 to show how this passage contextually exposes your incompetence and deceptions that have caused you to wonder in a maze of denial and error lol…
In reference to Deut, Hebrew text reveals us that the biblical warrior “enjoyed” the captive
woman. The expression “and hast delighted in her” is a reference to sexual intercourse by force. The
renown Bible scholar Mathew Poole confirms this view. In his commentary on v. 11 Poole writes:
11…. “hast taken delight in her” ; which may be a modest expression for lying with her, and seems
probable, because it is said, ver. 14 “that he had humbled her”, to wit, by military insolence, when he
took her captive, not after he had married her, for then he would have expressed it thus, “because thou
hast married her”, which had been more emphatical than to say, “because thou hast humbled her”
Let us take a look again at Deut. 21:14: “….And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then
thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt
not make merchandise of her, because thou.hast humbled..her…..” [.“initah”.from.the.root.“anah”.]
The Hebrew verb “anah” which is often translated as “humbled her” in this verse [ v. 14 ] describes
the harm done to the captive woman after the warrior “hast taken delight in her” [ enjoyed her by
sexual intercourse ]. Classical reference books indicate that the verb “anah” signifies and act of
violence. For example, the concordance of Madelkern offered the Latin equivalent “opprimere, vin
affere”
Another source also confirms this conclusion:
The general meaning of the Heb. Piel of “ana” is “humble” or “force into submission”. In other
passages where it denotes forcing sexual relations upon a woman the RSV renders it “humble” [ Gen.
34:2; Ezk. 22:10 ] , “humiliate” [ Dt. 21:14 ] , “violate” [ 22:24, 29 ] , or “force” [ 2. S 13:12, 14, 22, 32 ].
Mathew Poole also points out that the expression “humbled her” in Deut. 21:14 is a reference to
sexual intercourse [ rape ] that took place earlier between the female captive and her captor, see:
Humbled her – i.e. lain with her , as this phrase is often used, as Gen. xxxiv.2; Deut. xxii. 24, 29….
More proof for this conclusion can be found in the fact that many early Jewish scholars permitted a
soldier to have intercourse with his female captive.
In the Talmud Bavli 12 we see in Kiddushin
21b the general agreement that a soldier is allowed one act of intercourse with a captive, but not on
the battlefield. Another opinion is also mentioned by the jews: “..it seems to Rabbenu Tam 13 that a
first cohabitation is permitted in war..” [ Tosefot Kiddushin 22a ] , i.e. in public, and only the second
cohabitation “is forbidden until she shall be a convert in his home..”. Another source also confirms
that a soldier is permitted to have sex with his female captive before he decides to marry her 14 , see:
handsome woman – esp. ( ref. to Deut. XXI, 10 sq. ) a gentile captive with whom the captor had has
intercourse.before.deciding.on.converting.and.making.her.his.legitimate.wife”
“handsome woman – esp. ( ref. to Deut. XXI, 10 sq. ) a gentile captive with whom the captor had has
intercourse.before.deciding.on.converting.and.making.her.his.legitimate.wife..”
The law of the foreign captive woman is also listed among the positive commands in the “613
Mitzvot” 16 . R. L. Eisenberg explains this law in the light of traditional rabbinic sources and states:
“If the Jewish captor eventually decided not to marry the captive woman… He was forbidden to sell
her…The rationale given is that he had “afflicted her” , either by forcing her to have sexual relations
with.him..when.she.was.first.captured.or..by.requiring.that.she.stay..in.his.home.for.a prolonged..time”
LikeLike
Brother Paul, I think it is not a good idea giving credit to that guy by showing his vid on your beautiful blog. Mention him without giving his vid more exposure. Expose his claims. Just my thoughts, Salaam
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for your genuine concerns which I quite understand.
However, I want people to be strong enough to look these distorted claims in the eye and then hear them refuted by knowing the complete truth.
This is possibly an uncomfortable experience, but in our world of ubiquitous internet and social media I don’t see an alternative.
LikeLike
To now further add insult to injury, let me further break down Deuteronomy 21:10-14 to show how this passage condemns Muhammad as an adulterer and rapist:
“When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and attracted to her, YOU MAY TAKE HER AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband AND SHE SHALL BE YOUR WIFE. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her (innitah).” Deuteronomy 21:10-14
The word innitah comes from anah. Now let us see how other versions render this word in v. 14:
“But if you aren’t pleased with her, you must send her away as she wishes. You are not allowed to sell her for money or treat her as a slave because you have HUMILIATED her.” Common English Bible
“It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go [c]wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money, you shall not [d]mistreat her, because you have HUMBLED her.” New American Standard Bible
But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have DISHONORED her. New Revised Standard Version
And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not deal with her as a slave, because thou hast HUMBLED her. Jewish Publication Society 1917
And it will be, if you do not desire her, then you shall send her away wherever she wishes, but you shall not sell her for money. You shall not keep her as a servant, because you have AFFLICTED her. Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary
The reason why these versions rendered the word anah as dishonored, humbled, afflicted etc. is because the word is not being used here in the sense of forcing the captive woman to have sex, but of dishonoring or humiliating her by divorcing her and sending her on her way. That this word can and does mean refer to dishonoring someone, and not forcing them to have sex, is easily seen from the way this word is used in the following verses:
“This shall be a perpetual statute for you so that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and do no work of any kind, whether it is the native citizen or the stranger who sojourns among you. For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you to cleanse you, so that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord. It shall be a sabbath, a solemn rest for you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves. It is a perpetual statute. The priest, who is anointed and consecrated to minister as a priest in the place of his father, shall make atonement, and shall put on the linen garments, the holy garments. And he shall make atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, for the tent of meeting, and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.” Leviticus 16:29-33
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation to you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and offer a food offering made by fire to the Lord. You shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement to make atonement for you before the Lord your God. For whoever is not HUMBLED on that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people. And whoever does any work in that same day, that person I will destroy from among his people. You shall do no manner of work. It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings. It shall be to you a sabbath of complete rest, and you shall afflict your souls. On the ninth day of the month starting at the evening, from evening to evening, you shall celebrate your sabbath.” Leviticus 23:16-32
“You will have a holy assembly on the tenth day of this seventh month, and you will AFFLICT yourselves. You will not do any work on it.” Numbers 29:7
“You must carefully keep all the commandments that I am commanding you today, so that you may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the Lord swore to your fathers. You must remember that the Lord your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to HUMBLE you, and to prove you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. He HUMBLED you and let you suffer hunger, and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man does not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord. Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your feet swell these forty years. You must also consider in your heart that, as a man disciplines his son, so the Lord your God disciplines you… who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your fathers did not know, that He might HUMBLE you and that He might prove you, to do good for you in the end. ” Deuteronomy 8:1-5, 16
Thus, this text doesn’t permit Israelite men to rape captive women like Muhammad’s god allowed his profit and jihadi thugs. Rather, it is telling them they can only have sex with women taken captive BY FIRST MARRYING THEM! Even the very translation used by this demented liar AFFIRMS THAT THE ISRAELITES HAD TO MARRY THE CAPTIVE WOMEN, AND WERE TO SET THE FREE AND NOT SELL THEM AS SLAVES IF THEY ENDED UP DIVORCING THEM, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT WHO NOT ONLY RAPED THEM WITHOUT MARRYING THEM BUT THEN SOLD THEM OFF AFTER HE GOT DONE VIOLATING THEM!
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like AND WANT TO MARRY HER. 12 take her your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, YOU MAY MARRY HER. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. since you forced her to have intercourse with you, YOU CANNOT TREAT HER AS A SLAVE AND SELL HER.
OUCH!
MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOU CANNOT QUOTE A SINGLE VERSE FROM THE BIBLE WHICH SAYS THAT ISRAELITES OR BELIEVES CAN RAPE MARRIED WOMEN THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN CAPTIVE, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT!
DOUBLE OUCH!!!!
You could only wish that your profit had shown the same decency and civility towards captive women that this passage from Deuteronomy does, a passage which predates your filthy Quran by approximately 2200 years!
Like I said, keep producing your trash and filth and keep watching hundreds of thousands leave your wicked and filthy deen to the glory of Christ, Muhammad’s God and Judge!
With that said give me a time and date when you can come to my paltak room so we can compare Deuteronomy 21:10-14 with the filth of Quran 4:24 and your profit’s implementation of it so all can see how well you do defending your garbage.
LikeLike
The Hebrew word ANAH = RAPE as the GNT and many of the scholars have said. Let me help you out again Shamoon 🙂
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
According to Christian scholars the word ‘Anah’ = rape:
According to the Book: ‘The International Standard Bible Encloypedia’, the Hebrew word ‘Anah’ means ‘RAPE’:
1. OT.-A. As a verb. 1. Sexual Intercourse. Heb. ‘ana’ is used in Gen. 34:2 of Shechem’s RAPE of Dinah. Ezekiel condemns the men of Jerusalem who ‘humble’ (ana) women ‘unclean in their impurity’ (22:10). The verb is thus a EUPHEMISM FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (cf. Dt. 21:14; 22:24, 29) AND IS FREQUENTLY EQUIVALENT TO RAPE (Jgs. 19:24; 20:5; 2S. 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Lam. 5:11). [2]
Biblical Scholar K. Renato Lings also echoes the same words as the previous statement on the word ‘Anah’, he writes:
“The verb ‘anah’ is deployed in some parts of the HB to describe seduction, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR RAPE-LIKE SCENARIOS. On account of its primary meaning ‘OPPRESS’ OR ‘HUMILIATE’, SEXUAL AGGRESSION is regarded as an act of humiliation. In genesis 34:2, for instance, Shechem saw Jacob’s daughter Dinah and took her, lay with her and ‘humiliated’ or ‘debased’ her.” [3]
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/12/does-deuteronomy-2110-14-condemn-rape-or-does-it-sanction-rape-forced-marriage/
LikeLike
With that said I really must be going. So Williams, please have that coward flying carpet email me so we can arrange for him to show up in my paltalk room to defend his filthy perversion of the Holy Bible and shameless defense of his profit’s gross immorality and harassment: sam.shmn@gmail.com
Once again Williams, thank you for allowing me to come here and put some of these deceivers in their place. Much appreciated.
LikeLike
Instead of Sham-Moon dealing with the refutation to his claims on banu Nadir, he jumps on another topic, that is Awtas incident. We wont go into details. but all the claims he has made on Awtas and 4:24 has been refuted here:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/06/23/what-happened-to-the-captive-women-in-awtas-incident/
Let’s look into Deuteronomy and Jesus (God) endorsing rape:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
What Scam-Moon deceptively hides is the fact that even though they were married, these women were FORCED into the marriage. They were FORCED to have intercourse as the GNT translation shows. But let’s look further what Christian scholars say:
According to the Book: ‘The International Standard Bible Encloypedia’, the Hebrew word ‘Anah’ means ‘RAPE’:
1. OT.-A. As a verb. 1. Sexual Intercourse. Heb. ‘ana’ is used in Gen. 34:2 of Shechem’s RAPE of Dinah. Ezekiel condemns the men of Jerusalem who ‘humble’ (ana) women ‘unclean in their impurity’ (22:10). The verb is thus a EUPHEMISM FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (cf. Dt. 21:14; 22:24, 29) AND IS FREQUENTLY EQUIVALENT TO RAPE (Jgs. 19:24; 20:5; 2S. 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Lam. 5:11). [2]
Biblical Scholar K. Renato Lings also echoes the same words as the previous statement on the word ‘Anah’, he writes:
“The verb ‘anah’ is deployed in some parts of the HB to describe seduction, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR RAPE-LIKE SCENARIOS. On account of its primary meaning ‘OPPRESS’ OR ‘HUMILIATE’, SEXUAL AGGRESSION is regarded as an act of humiliation. In genesis 34:2, for instance, Shechem saw Jacob’s daughter Dinah and took her, lay with her and ‘humiliated’ or ‘debased’ her.” [3]
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/12/does-deuteronomy-2110-14-condemn-rape-or-does-it-sanction-rape-forced-marriage/
So we see the ‘Humane’ teaching by Scam-Moon in reality is RAPE.
LikeLike
See what I said about this lying deceitful charlatan? I already anticipated and OBLITERATED his claim that anah means rape BY QUOTING VERSES WHERE THE WORD IS USED AND CANNOT POSSIBLY MEAN RAPE! Here they go again:
“This shall be a perpetual statute for you so that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and do no work of any kind, whether it is the native citizen or the stranger who sojourns among you. For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you to cleanse you, so that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord. It shall be a sabbath, a solemn rest for you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves. It is a perpetual statute. The priest, who is anointed and consecrated to minister as a priest in the place of his father, shall make atonement, and shall put on the linen garments, the holy garments. And he shall make atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, for the tent of meeting, and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.” Leviticus 16:29-33
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation to you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and offer a food offering made by fire to the Lord. You shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement to make atonement for you before the Lord your God. For whoever is not HUMBLED on that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people. And whoever does any work in that same day, that person I will destroy from among his people. You shall do no manner of work. It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings. It shall be to you a sabbath of complete rest, and you shall afflict your souls. On the ninth day of the month starting at the evening, from evening to evening, you shall celebrate your sabbath.” Leviticus 23:16-32
“You will have a holy assembly on the tenth day of this seventh month, and you will AFFLICT yourselves. You will not do any work on it.” Numbers 29:7
“You must carefully keep all the commandments that I am commanding you today, so that you may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the Lord swore to your fathers. You must remember that the Lord your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to HUMBLE you, and to prove you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. He HUMBLED you and let you suffer hunger, and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man does not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord. Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your feet swell these forty years. You must also consider in your heart that, as a man disciplines his son, so the Lord your God disciplines you… who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your fathers did not know, that He might HUMBLE you and that He might prove you, to do good for you in the end. ” Deuteronomy 8:1-5, 16
Flying carpet is reading the verse as if it is the Quran and Muhammad’s sunnah. So let’s send flying carpet on a ride to kiss the black stone by asking him the following challenges which he will be forced to answer if he ever shows his face in my paltalk room:
1. QUOTE AN OT TEXT WHICH SAYS THAT BELIEVERS CAN HAVE SEX WITH MARRIED CAPTIVE WOMEN LIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT DID AND ALLOWED OTHERS TO DO.
2. QUOTE AN OT TEXT WHICH SAYS BELIEVERS CAN SLEEP WITH CAPTIVE WOMEN WITHOUT FIRST MARRYING THEM LIKE HIS WICKED PROFIT DID AND ALLOWED OTHERS TO DO.
3. QUOTE AN OT TEXT WHICH SAYS BELIEVERS CAN THEN SELL CAPTIVE WOMEN OFF AS CHATTEL LIKE HIS WICKED PROFIT DID AND ALLOWED OTHERS TO DO.
He really must be feeling rather stupid right now since all he has done is to appeal to authority WITHOUT BOTHERING TO PROVE THAT HIS SOURCE IS CORRECT! Like I said, it is responses such as these that are causing hundreds of thousands of Muslims to leave Islam and see Muhammad for what he truly was.
OUCH!
LikeLike
For more proof that the word anah in and of itself DOES NOT MEAN RAPE, read my article here: http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/ot_and_rape.htm
ENJOY!
LikeLike
ANAH = RAPE as the GNT and many of the scholars have said. Let me help you out again:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
ANAH =RAPE according to scholars:
According to the Book: ‘The International Standard Bible Encloypedia’, the Hebrew word ‘Anah’ means ‘RAPE’:
1. OT.-A. As a verb. 1. Sexual Intercourse. Heb. ‘ana’ is used in Gen. 34:2 of Shechem’s RAPE of Dinah. Ezekiel condemns the men of Jerusalem who ‘humble’ (ana) women ‘unclean in their impurity’ (22:10). The verb is thus a EUPHEMISM FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (cf. Dt. 21:14; 22:24, 29) AND IS FREQUENTLY EQUIVALENT TO RAPE (Jgs. 19:24; 20:5; 2S. 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Lam. 5:11). [2]
Biblical Scholar K. Renato Lings also echoes the same words as the previous statement on the word ‘Anah’, he writes:
“The verb ‘anah’ is deployed in some parts of the HB to describe seduction, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR RAPE-LIKE SCENARIOS. On account of its primary meaning ‘OPPRESS’ OR ‘HUMILIATE’, SEXUAL AGGRESSION is regarded as an act of humiliation. In genesis 34:2, for instance, Shechem saw Jacob’s daughter Dinah and took her, lay with her and ‘humiliated’ or ‘debased’ her.” [3]
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/12/does-deuteronomy-2110-14-condemn-rape-or-does-it-sanction-rape-forced-marriage/
LikeLike
Scam-Moon
Further RAPE commands, passages endorsed by Jesus (God)
Three accurate translations which clearly show that the passage speaks about ‘female children’ are as follows:
Jubilee Bible 2000 – “But all the FEMALE CHILDREN that have not known a man by lying with him keep alive for YOURSELVES.” – Numbers 31:18
Webster’s Bible – “Translation But all the FEMALE CHILDREN that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.” – Numbers 31:18
Living Bible (TLB) – “Only the LITTLE GIRLS may live; you may keep them for YOURSELVES.” – Numbers 31:18
Whedon, Peter Pett, NIV and John Dummelow all refer to Deuteronomy 21:10 as evidence that these pre-pubescent girls were married within a month. Yes you read it right, ‘Prep-pubescent’ females were RAPED and FORCED into marriage within a month.
This is what Deuteronomy 21:10-14 says:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
Is this the ‘humane’ teachings you are speaking about Sham-Moon?
Will you condemn your Triune God for endorsing rape and forced marriages to pre-pubescent girls?
https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/10/29/child-marriage-in-the-bible/
LikeLike
He again reads Numbers 31 as if it is the filthy sunna of his profit. So let me add to his humiliation. Enjoy!
We now turn to the second text. First, here are Miller’s comments regarding Numbers 31:
Right off the bat, though, there are several obvious historical errors in these brief statements, and several assumptions that have no warrant whatsoever in either the text itself, or in the historical background of the ANE. The passage will be difficult enough to our sensibilities as it is, but let’s first ‘weed out the chaff’ among these allegations. [These ‘easy’ errors, however, in themselves might not be enough to exonerate God, so we will to dig deep into the passage/situation to surface the actual ethical issues and dynamics.]
[ … ]
First of all, there was no ‘test for virginity’ needed/used. In spite of the elaborate/miraculous one created by the later rabbi’s (ingenious, but altogether unnecessary) using the Urim and Thummim (!), the ‘test for virginity’ in the ANE was a simple visual one:
Was the female pre-pubescent?
Was the female wearing any attire, jewelry, or adornments required for/associated with virginity for that culture?
Was the female wearing any attire, jewelry, or adornments required for/associated with non-virginity for that culture (e.g., veil indicating married status)?
Because virginity was generally associated with legal proof for blood-inheritance issues in ancient cultures (e.g., land, property, kinship, relationships), virginity itself was often marked by some type of clothing (e.g., the robe of Tamar in 2 Sam 13) or by cosmetic means (cf. the Hindu ‘pre-marriage dot’); as was more typically non-virginal married status (e.g., veils, headwear, jewelry, or certain hairstyles). Of course, non-virginal unmarried status (e.g., temple prostitutes and secular prostitutes) were also indicated by special markings or adornments (e.g. jewelry, dress—cf. Proverbs 7.10; Hos 2.4-5).
For example, the erotic art of the ANE shows a consistent difference in hairstyles between women and sacred prostitutes:
“In fact, the physical characteristics of the women on the [erotic] plaques are totally different from those of other female representations in Mesopotamian and Syrian art. As with the clay figurines, they are frequently naked and their hair is loose—none of these traits is to be found in statues or seals that represent women…These groups [associations of cultic prostitutes] were defined by a generic name [the ‘separated ones’], while their specific names of individual associations hinted at their garments, which were particularly luxurious, or odd, their coiffure, or to their general appearance, which distinguished them from other women.” [OT:CANE:2526]
Some of these patterns varied by culture/age:
“Once married, women were not veiled in Babylonia. Legal texts imply that married women were veiled in Assyria.” [OT:DLAM:135]
“The bride was covered with a veil that the groom removed. Married women were not veiled in Babylonia but seem to have had a special headgear; legal texts, however, suggest that married women were veiled in Assyria.” [OT:CANE:489]
In other words, the process of identifying the females who were (a) not married and (b) not prostitutes, either sacred or secular, would have been relatively straightforward—at the precision level required by the event.
Secondly, the accusation that these girls were for “sex slave” purposes contradicts what we know about the culture and about the event. [But at least one of the writers above—to their credit—added the word ‘presumably’, realizing that the text doesn’t actually say anything about it…]
1. Most girls were married soon/immediately after they began menstruating in the ANE (circa 12 years of age), and since infant and child mortality was so high, the average age of the girls spared would have been around 5 years of age or slightly lower (life expectancy wasn’t a straight line, with childhood risks so high). Of all the horrible things ascribed to Israel in the OT, pedophilia is the one conspicuous omission. That these little kids would have been even considered as ‘sex slaves’ seems quite incongruent with their ages.
And, at this tender age, they would not have been very useful as ‘slaves’ at all! Children raised in Israelite households were ‘put to work’ around this age, sometimes doing light chores to help the mother for up to four hours per day by the age of 7 or 8 [OT:FAI:27], but 5 is still a bit young. Instead, the Israelite families would have had to feed, clothe, train, care, protect, and shelter them for several years before they could make much contribution to the family’s existence and survival. [Also note that ‘slavery’ in the ANE/OT generally means something quite different from “New World” slavery, which we normally associate with the word ‘slavery’, and most of what is called that in popular literature should not be so termed. See qnoslave.html for the discussion and documentation.]
2. Unlike the Greeks and Romans, the ANE was not very ‘into’ using slaves/captives for sexual purposes, even though scholars earlier taught this:
“During the pinnacle of Sumerian culture, female slaves outnumbered male. Their owners used them primarily for spinning and weaving. Saggs maintains that their owners also used them for sex, but there is little actual evidence to support such a claim” [OT:EML:69]
3. And the Hebrews were different in this regard ANYWAY:
“This fidelity and exclusivity [demands on the wife] did not apply to the husband. Except among the Hebrews, where a husband’s infidelity was disparaged in the centuries after 800 BC, a double standard prevailed, and husbands were routinely expected to have sex not only with their wives, but with slavewomen and prostitutes.” [WS:AHTO:39; note: I would disagree with the remark about ‘after 800 bc’ because that dating presupposes a very late date for the composition of the narratives under discussion…If the narrative events occurred closer to the purposed times, then this ‘disparagement’ applied earlier in Israel as well as later.]
4. Even if we allow the age range to be older, to include girls capable of bearing children, the probability is that it was not sex-motivated, but population/economics-motivated, as Carol Meyers points out [“The Roots of Restriction: Women in Early Israel”, Biblical Archaeologist, vol 41):
“Beyond this, however, the intensified need for female participation in working out the Mosaic revolution in the early Israelite period can be seen in the Bible. Looking again at Numbers 31, an exception to the total purge of the Midianite population is to be noted. In addition to the metal objects which were exempt from utter destruction, so too were the “young girls who have not known man by lying with him” (Num 31:18). These captives, however, were not immediately brought into the Israelite camp. Instead, they and their captors were kept outside the camp for seven days in a kind of quarantine period. (Note that the usual incubation period for the kinds of infectious diseases which could conceivably have existed in this situation is two or three to six days [Eickhoff 1977].) Afterward, they thoroughly washed themselves and all their clothing before they entered the camp. This incident is hardly an expression of lascivious male behavior; rather, it reflects the desperate need for women of childbearing age, a need so extreme that the utter destruction of the Midianite foes—and the prevention of death by plague—as required by the law of the herem could be waived in the interest of sparing the young women. The Israelites weighed the life-death balance, and the need for females of childbearing age took precedence.”
[But note that the traditional rabbinic interpretation of the passage is that all females which were capable of bearing children were killed—not just those who actually were non-virginal. This would drive the average age quite low, although the Hebrew text offers only limited support at best for their interpretation.]
[I should also point out that the “for yourselves” phrase (31.18) is NOT actually referring to “for your pleasure”, but is a reference to the opposite condition of “for YHWH” which applied to all people or property which was theoretically supposed to be destroyed in such combat situations. The herem (or ‘ban’) specifically indicated that all enemy people or property which was ‘delivered over to YHWH’ was to be killed/destroyed. By referring to ‘for yourselves’, then, in this passage, means simply ‘do not kill them’. This can also be seen in that this ‘booty’ was not ‘for themselves’ actually, but was distributed to others within the community.]
[ … ]
5. The 32,000 girls who were absorbed/assimilated into Israel would have been actually a small number. According to the distribution of them, the 12,000 ‘soldiers’ received 16,000 (half of them), making an average 1.5 per household. The other half (16,000) was distributed throughout all of Israel, meaning that very few families would get one. This would still have been some hardship for the Israelite families, who at this time are still nomadic peoples without any material base from which to live. More than one commentator has noted that this seems to be a surprise act of mercy, and it is interesting to note that Whiston, in a footnote on his 18th-century translation of Josephus’ account of this passage [Antiq, VII] argues that this sparing of the little girls is a surprise of mercy, given the practical demands of this type of combat in the OT/ANE (which we will discuss later):
“The slaughter of all the Midianite women that had prostituted themselves to the lewd Israelites, and the preservation of those that had not been guilty therein; the last of which were no fewer than thirty-two thousand… and both by the particular command of God, are highly remarkable, and shew that, even in nations otherwise for their wickedness doomed to destruction, the innocent were sometimes providentially taken care of, and delivered from that destruction”
Later, when Israel was more established and settled in the land, and had adequate economic means, they would be able to absorb all the women and children (from hostile-but-conquered foreign cities), but at this early stage this was quite an impossibility. They had no need for “slaves,” nor means to support them at this time. (Source: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/midian.html)
One point we would like to add to Miller’s comments is regarding the statement of Numbers 31:40 that ‘32 of these virgins were given as tribute to the Lord.’ The context explains what this exactly means:
“The LORD said to Moses, ‘Take the count of the booty that was taken, both of man and of beast, you and Elea’zar the priest and the heads of the fathers’ houses of the congregation; and divide the booty into two parts, between the warriors who went out to battle and all the congregation. And levy for the LORD a tribute from the men of war who went out to battle, one out of five hundred, of the persons and of the oxen and of the asses and of the flocks; take it from their half, and give it to Elea’zar the priest as an offering to the LORD. And from the people of Israel’s half you shall take one drawn out of every fifty, of the persons, of the oxen, of the asses, and of the flocks, of all the cattle, and give them to the Levites who have charge of the tabernacle of the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea’zar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses. Now the booty remaining of the spoil that the men of war took was: six hundred and seventy-five thousand sheep, seventy-two thousand cattle, sixty-one thousand asses, and thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had not known man by lying with him. And the half, the portion of those who had gone out to war, was in number three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, and the LORD’s tribute of sheep was six hundred and seventy-five. The cattle were thirty-six thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was seventy-two. The asses were thirty thousand five hundred, of which the LORD’s tribute was sixty-one. The persons were sixteen thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was thirty-two persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which was the offering for the LORD, to Elea’zar the priest, as the LORD commanded Moses. From the people of Israel’s half, which Moses separated from that of the men who had gone to war- now the congregation’s half was three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, thirty-six thousand cattle, and thirty thousand five hundred asses, and sixteen thousand persons- from the people of Israel’s half Moses took one of every fifty, both of persons and of beasts, and gave them to the Levites who had charge of the tabernacle of the LORD; as the LORD commanded Moses. Then the officers who were over the thousands of the army, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, came near to Moses, and said to Moses, ‘Your servants have counted the men of war who are under our command, and there is not a man missing from us. And we have brought the LORD’s offering, what each man found, articles of gold, armlets and bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and beads, to make atonement for ourselves before the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea’zar the priest received from them the gold, all wrought articles. And all the gold of the offering that they offered to the LORD, from the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, was sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty shekels. (The men of war had taken booty, every man for himself.) And Moses and Elea’zar the priest received the gold from the commanders of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it into the tent of meeting, as a memorial for the people of Israel before the LORD.” Numbers 31:25-54 RSV
Thus, the context shows that the virgins who were set apart for the Lord were to be given to God’s ministers, the priests.
As one can see from the preceding data, the laws prescribed in the Holy Bible are actually for the benefit and protection of the woman’s honor and integrity. This is unlike Islam, which permits Muslims to rape and sell slave women at will:
http://answering-islam.org/Silas/femalecaptives.htm
http://www.muhammadanism.org/Hadith/Topics/Adultery.htm
http://answer-islam.org/Rape.html
LikeLike
Now flying carpet, instead of acting tough and brave here in a comments section, GIVE ME A TIME AND DATE WHEN YOU CAN SHOW UP IN MY PALTALK TO SEE HOW WELL YOU DO IN A LIVE EXCHANGE WHERE I NAIL YOU EVERYTIME FOR LYING AND SHAMELESSLY DEFENDING YOUR PROIT’S FILTH!
But we both know that you will never step up to the plate and defend such filth since you know what I will end up doing to you and your profit. 😉
LikeLike
For more proof that the word anah in and of itself DOES NOT MEAN RAPE, read my artile here: http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/ot_and_rape.htm
ENJOY!
LikeLike
Scam-Moon stop lying and using deception as your Lord Paul commands you too:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/28/1-corinthians-9-apostle-pauls-missionary-deception-taqiyya/
These girls did NOT hit puberty. they were children, as the following translations show:
Jubilee Bible 2000 – “But all the FEMALE CHILDREN that have not known a man by lying with him keep alive for YOURSELVES.” – Numbers 31:18
Webster’s Bible – “Translation But all the FEMALE CHILDREN that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.” – Numbers 31:18
Shaye J. D. Cohen who is a renowned Professor writes that the word lachem (yourselves) used in the verse is meant sexually:
“Moses enjoins upon the returning warriors to kill their Midianite female captives who have lain with a man, but ‘spare for yourselves every young woman who has not had carnal relations with a man’; WE MAY BE SURE THAT ‘FOR YOURSELVES’ MEANS THAT THE WARRIORS MAY ‘USE’ THEIR VIRGIN CAPTIVES SEXUALLY.52 The law in numbers differs from the law in Deuteronomy- perhaps the most significant distinction is that the law in Deuteronomy does not care whether the captive is a virgin or not- but it too permits Israelite warrior to marry (or ‘marry) a foreign woman.”
In the same page, in footnote 52, Professor Shaye J.D. Cohen goes further on the verse, he writes:
“I do not know why the new Jewish version omits ‘for yourselves’; the Hebrew lakhem is unambiguous. That the intent of ‘FOR YOURSELVES’ IS SEXUAL OR MATRIMONIAL IS OBVIOUS; the passage is correctly understood by Rabbi Simeon Yohai in the Sifrei ad loc (177 212H).” [4]
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/14/bible-does-numbers-3118-sanction-pre-pubescent-marriages-child-marriage-2/
So we see not just from Professor Shaye Cohen but ancient Rabbis that these pre-pubescent girls were used by Jesus’s warrior men for their sexual pleasure. Disgusting!!!
Furthermore, Whedon, Peter Pett, NIV and John Dummelow commentaries all say these females were married within a month. Yes a MONTH, pre-pubescent girls were forced into marriage. The four commentaries mentioned all use Deuteronomy 21:10-14, clearly this passages endorses rape and FORCED marriage with pre-pubescent girls:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
There you have it Scam-Moon, your Bible endorses RAPE, FORCED marriage and many more filthy things. Give up, reject the Bible 🙂
LikeLike
More PROOF that ANAH means RAPE as the GNT and many of the scholars have said. Let me help you out again 🙂
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
What Scam-Moon deceptively hides is the fact that even though they were married, these women were FORCED into the marriage. They were FORCED to have intercourse as the GNT translation shows. But let’s look further what Christian scholars say:
According to the Book: ‘The International Standard Bible Encloypedia’, the Hebrew word ‘Anah’ means ‘RAPE’:
1. OT.-A. As a verb. 1. Sexual Intercourse. Heb. ‘ana’ is used in Gen. 34:2 of Shechem’s RAPE of Dinah. Ezekiel condemns the men of Jerusalem who ‘humble’ (ana) women ‘unclean in their impurity’ (22:10). The verb is thus a EUPHEMISM FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (cf. Dt. 21:14; 22:24, 29) AND IS FREQUENTLY EQUIVALENT TO RAPE (Jgs. 19:24; 20:5; 2S. 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Lam. 5:11). [2]
Biblical Scholar K. Renato Lings also echoes the same words as the previous statement on the word ‘Anah’, he writes:
“The verb ‘anah’ is deployed in some parts of the HB to describe seduction, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR RAPE-LIKE SCENARIOS. On account of its primary meaning ‘OPPRESS’ OR ‘HUMILIATE’, SEXUAL AGGRESSION is regarded as an act of humiliation. In genesis 34:2, for instance, Shechem saw Jacob’s daughter Dinah and took her, lay with her and ‘humiliated’ or ‘debased’ her.” [3]
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/12/does-deuteronomy-2110-14-condemn-rape-or-does-it-sanction-rape-forced-marriage/
LikeLike
Flying spaghetti monster/stoner kisser, thanks for again proving my point. Like I said, the articles, rebuttals and comments here are more than enough to expose you as shameless charlatan who will do everything to excuse your wicked profit’s instructions to rape married captive women, even if it means shamelessly butchering biblical texts that actually expose how wicked your profit is since no biblical passage condones raping women, let alone prepubescent girls, like your wicked profit did.
Now when you prove to be man enough to defend your profit’s filth and lies sent me an email so I can set up a time in my paltalk room to expose and shame you for all to see and hear.
Thanks again for allowing me to expose your profit and demonstrate how glorious the Bible is in comparison, all thanks be to the Lord Jesus, Muhammad’s God and Judge! 😉
LikeLike
Every open-minded reader will see that you are a deceptive missionary defending the indefensible. Using lies and deception to hide rape commands from Jesus your Lord in the Bible.
I don’t do debates, busy writing exposing the lies of Christianity. Ijaz might be free to debate 🙂
LikeLike
I can’t believe that I almost let flying toilet mouth get away with this filth and blasphemy:
“Shamoun you claim to worship Jesus (God) fully, so my question is, do you also worship his pen*s?
“What about worshipping Jesus’s excrem*nt ??”
This poor pagan doesn’t realize he just gave me further ammo to prove that Muslims are nothing more than man worshipers. Note what he said about worshiping penises and excrement, and now compare that with the sick idolatrous obsession flying diarrhea’s child marrying, women enslaving/raping profit’s companions showed to him:
BEGIN
Unless noted otherwise most of our quotations will be taken from a classical Sunni work, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta’rif huquq al-Mustafa (Healing by the recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), authored by a Muslim scholar named Qadi ‘Iyad Ibn Musa al-Yahsubi. We will be using Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley’s English translation, published by Madinah Press (Inverness, Scotland, U.K., third reprint 1991, paperback). All capital emphasis mine.
OBSESSIVE MUSLIM BEHAVIOUR AND DEVOTION TO MUHAMMAD
The worship which Muslims gave (give) to Muhammad can be seen from situations where his followers would drink Muhammad’s urine and smear his spittle on themselves, thinking that they would receive a blessing or a cure as a result of it!
One of the scholars concerned with reports about the Prophet and his qualities related that when he wanted to defecate, the earth split open and swallowed up his faeces and urine, and it gave off a fragrant smell.
Muhammad ibn Sa’d, al-Waqidi’s scribe, related that ‘A’isha said to the Prophet, “When you come from relieving yourself, we do not see anything noxious from you.” He said, “‘A’isha, don’t you know that the earth swallows up what comes out of the prophets so that none of it is seen?”
Although this tradition is not famous, the people of knowledge still mention the purity of his faeces and urine…
There was also a time when Malik ibn Sinan DRANK HIS BLOOD on the Day of Uhud AND LICKED IT UP. The Prophet allowed him to do that and then said, “THE FIRE WILL NOT TOUCH YOU.”
Something similar occurred when ‘Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr DRANK CUP BLOOD. The Prophet said, “Woe to you from the people and woe to the people from you,” BUT HE DID NOT OBJECT TO WHAT HE HAD DONE.
Something similar is related about when a woman DRANK SOME OF HIS URINE. He told her, “YOU WILL NEVER COMPLAIN OF A STOMACH-ACHE.”
He did not order any of them to wash their mouths out NOR DID HE FORBID THEM TO DO IT AGAIN.
The hadith of the woman drinking the urine IS SOUND. Ad-Daraqutni follows Muslim and al-Bukhari who relate it in the Sahih. The name of this woman was Baraka, but they disagree about her lineage. Some say that it was Umm Ayman, a wooden cup he placed under his bed in which he would urinate during the night. One night he urinated in it and when he examined it in the morning there was nothing in it. He asked Baraka about that. She said, “I got up and felt thirsty, SO I DRANK IT WITHOUT KNOWING.” The hadith is related by Ibn Jurayj and others.
The Prophet was born circumcised with his umbilical cord cut… (pp. 35-37)
Note that the drinking of blood is a clear violation of God’s true Word, the Holy Bible:
“If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood. Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.” Leviticus 17:10-14
“but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood… For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.” Acts 15:28-29
They even violated the commands of the Quran!
He has only forbidden you what dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 2:173 Shakir
Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter, and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you divide by the arrows; that is a transgression. This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 5:3 Shakir
Say: I do not find in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be what has died of itself, or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine — for that surely is unclean — or that which is a transgression, other than (the name of) Allah having been invoked on it; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 6:145 Shakir
He has only forbidden you what dies of itself and blood and flesh of swine and that over which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 16:115 Shakir
Muhammad and his followers were therefore guilty of sinning against God. Iyad continues:
When Quraysh sent ‘Urwa ibn Mas’ud to the Messenger of Allah in the year of al-Hudaybiyya, he saw the unparalleled respect which his Companions displayed towards him. Whenever he did ‘wudu they ran to get his leftover ‘wudu water and nearly fought over it. If he spat they took it with their hands and wiped it on their faces and bodies. If a hair of his fell they ran to get it. If he commanded them to do something, they ran to do his command. If he spoke, they lowered their voices in his presence. They did not stare at him due to their respect for him. When he returned to Quraysh, he said, “People of Quraysh! I have been to Chosroes in his kingdom, and Caesar in his kingdom and the Negus in his kingdom, but by Allah, I have not seen any king among his people treated anything like the way Muhammad is treated by his Companions.” …
Anas said, “I saw the Messenger when his hair was being shaved. His companions were around him and whenever a lock fell, a man picked it up.” (Iyad, pp. 236-237)
The sahih ahadith narrate the same thing:
… Before embracing Islam Al-Mughira was in the company of some people. He killed them and took their property and came (to Medina) to embrace Islam. The Prophet said (to him, “As regards your Islam, I accept it, but as for the property I do not take anything of it. (As it was taken through treason). Urwa then started looking at the Companions of the Prophet. By Allah, whenever Allah’s Apostle spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) WHO WOULD RUB IT ON HIS FACE AND SKIN; if he ordered them they would carry his orders immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke to him, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect. Urwa returned to his people and said, “O people! By Allah, I have been to the kings and to Caesar, Khosrau and An-Najashi, yet I have never seen any of them respected by his courtiers as much as Muhammad is respected by his companions. By Allah, if he spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them, they would carry out his order immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891)
END
OUCH!
Here we have Muhammad permitted his followers to drink his piss, blood, dirty disgusting left over water, and smear his filthy saliva all over them, and this pagan flying stone kisser has the audacity to ask me if I worship penises and excrement! ROFL!
Man what a joke!
And seeing that this blasphemous idolater believes that it is his god who created piss and excrement, does this mean he believes that his false deity full of crap! 😉
There is more to this sick, demonic idolatrous obsession with flying carpet’s immoral profit. According to Qadi ‘Iyad, this veneration and worship doesn’t cease now that Muhammad is dead:
BEGIN
It is just as necessary to have esteem and respect for the Prophet after his death as it were when he was alive. This means to show it whenever the Prophet, his hadith or sunna are mentioned, when anyone hears his name or anything about his life or how his family and relatives behaved. It includes respect for the People of his House (ah al-bayt) and his Companions…
Abu Humayd said, “Abu Ja’far, the Amir al-Mu’minin, had a dispute with Malik in the Prophet’s mosque. Malik said to him, ‘Amir al-Mu’minin, do not raise your voice in this mosque. Allah taught the people how to behave by saying, “Do not raise your voices above the Prophet” (49:2) He praises people with the words, “Those who lower their voices in the presence of the Messenger of Allah.” (49:3) He censures people, saying, “Those who call you…” Respect for him when he is dead is the same as respect for him when he was alive.”
“Abu Ja’far was humbled by this. He asked Malik, ‘Abu Abdullah, do you face qibla when you supplicate or do you face the Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘Why would you turn your face from him when he is YOUR MEANS and the means of your father, Adam, to Allah on the Day of Rising? I face him and ASK HIM to intercede and Allah will grant his intercession. Allah says, “If, when you wronged yourselves, they had come to you.”‘” (4:64) (pp. 237-238)
Here is a man who faces Muhammad’s grave when he prays, and actually prays to Muhammad in order to ask him for intercession!
And:
When there were many people around Malik, he was asked, “If only you would appoint someone to whom you could dictate and then he could make the people hear.” He replied, “Allah said, ‘O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet.’ (49:2) The respect due to him when he is dead is the same when he was alive.”
Ibn Sirin used to laugh at times but when the hadiths of the Prophet were mentioned in his presence he became humble. When a hadith of the Prophet was recited, ‘Abdu’r-Rahman ibn Mahdi commanded them to be silent, saying, “Do not raise your voice above the voice of the Prophet.” He interpreted the above as meaning that the people must be silent when the Prophet’s hadiths are recited, just as if they were listening to him speaking. (p. 239)
Praying for Muhammad and visiting his grave also violates the Holy Scriptures which prohibit believers from contacting the dead:
“When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a wizard or a necromancer, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God, for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this.” Deuteronomy 18:9-14
“And when they say to you, ‘Inquire of the mediums and the necromancers who chirp and mutter,’ should not a people inquire of their God? Should they inquire of the dead on behalf of the living? To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.” Isaiah 8:19-20
END
Now what was that about you guys not being Muhammadans!
Like I said, anytime this vile idolatry dares to blaspheme his God and Creator Jesus Christ, Muhammad’s Judge and Destroyer, I promise to expose his profit to further shame and disgrace.
And Williams, instead of worrying about controlling me, be consistent and start muzzling and taming these wicked blasphemous swine whom you allow to hurl insults, blasphemies and foul language even against brothers like Ken who go out of their way to show them respect and love, none of which they deserve.
Anyway Williams, nice chatting with you. Enjoy the rest of your day friend! 😉
LikeLike
Sham-Moon stop copy pasting, answer the simple question
Do you worship your Man-made LORD fully including his you P and excre*m**t or not?
Stop running around, either you dont worship him fully, that would make you a fake Jesus follower. Do you that early Christians worshipped his P?
I am just highligting the above, to show everyone that you have more in common with pagans, hindus than Monotheistic religions.
LikeLike
That’s enough of the obscenities. This particular discussion is at an end.
Thanks Paul
LikeLike
Williams, this time I really am leaving since I have said enough to expose and shame this charlatan, a.k.a. flying stone kisser! 🙂
LikeLike
Aren’t you the one who worship a man’s pen*s everyday, praying and worshipping him as your Lord?
LikeLike
You again have me confused with your profit who spoke of biting off men’s penises,
Ubayy b. Ka‘b told that he heard God’s messenger say, “If anyone proudly asserts his descent in the manner of the pre-Islamic people, tell him to bite his father’s penis, AND DO NOT USE A EUPHEMISM.” It is transmitted in Sarah [sic] as-sunna. (Mishkat Al Masabih, English Translation With Explanatory Notes By Dr. James Robson [Sh. Muhammad Ashraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore, Pakistan, Reprinted 1994], Volume II, Book XXIV – General Behaviour, Chapter XIII. Boasting and Party-Spirit, p. 1021; bold and capital emphasis ours)
{Sidenote: Sarah is a misspelling for Sharh, so that it should have read Sharh as-sunna.}
And:
And in the words of Abu Bakr As-Sideeq to ‘Urwah: “Suck Al-Lat’s clitoris!”[2] – there is a permissibility of speaking plainly the name of the private parts if there is some benefit to be gained thereby, just as he [Muhammad] permitted a plain response to the one who made the claims of the Jahiliyyah (i.e. claims of tribal superiority), by saying: “Bite your father’s penis!”[3] And for every situation there is a (fitting) saying. (Provisions for the Hereafter (Mukhtasar Zad Al-Ma’ad), by Imam Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah, summarized by Imam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab At-Tamimi [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: September 2003], Chapter. Regarding the Story of Al-Hudaibiyyah, p. 383; source; words within brackets ours)
whose companions spoke of sucking the clitoris of false goddesses!
… Then ‘Urwah said: “Muhammad, tell me: if you extirpate your tribesmen, have you ever heard of any of the Arabs who destroyed his own race before you? And if the contrary comes to pass, by God I see both prominent people and rabble who are likely to flee and leave you.” Abu Bakr said, “Go suck the clitoris of al-Lat!” – al-Lat was the idol of Thaqif, which they used to worship – “Would we flee and leave him?” … (The History of al-Tabari – The Victory of Islam, translated by Michael Fishbein [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1997], Volume VIII (8), p. 76)
and whose god delights to blow into women’s vaginas/vulvas,
And (remember) her who guarded her SEXUAL ORGAN (Arabic- farjahaa): We breathed into her from Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a Sign for all people. S. 21:91
And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her SEXUAL ORGAN (Arabic- farjahaa) and We breathed INTO IT of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His revelations, and was one of the devout (servants). S. 66:12
The word farjahaa, from farj, refers to a person’s private area, to their private parts. Here are some verses which use this word in this connection:
Prosperous are the believers who in their prayers are humble … and guard their private parts (lifuroojihim). S. 23:1-2,5 Arberry
Say to the believers, that they cast down their eyes and guard their private parts (furoojahum); that is purer for them. God is aware of the things they work. And say to the believing women, that they cast down their eyes’ and guard their private parts (furoojahunna), and reveal not their adornment save such as is outward; and let them cast their veils over their bosoms, and not reveal their adornment save to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husbands’ fathers, or their sons, or their husbands’ sons, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or what their right hands own, or such men as attend them, not having sexual desire, or children who have not yet attained knowledge of women’s private parts; nor let them stamp their feet, so that their hidden ornament may be known. And turn all together to God, O you believers; haply so you will prosper. S. 24:30-31 Arberry
Men and women who have surrendered, believing men and believing women, obedient men and obedient women, truthful men and truthful women, enduring men and enduring women, humble men and humble women, men and women who give in charity, men who fast and women who fast, men and women who guard their private parts (furoojahum), men and women who remember God oft — for them God has prepared forgiveness and a mighty wage. S. 33:35 Arberry
and guard their private parts (lifuroojihim). S. 70:29 Arberry
In the above references which speak of Christ’s conception, this word is used to describe Allah penetrating Mary’s private area by breathing his Spirit into it.
Mahmoud M. Ayoub contrasts the birth narratives of the Gospel of Luke with that mentioned in the Quran. All bold and capital emphasis is ours:
“The language of this verse (author- Luke 1:35) is clearly circumspect. It implies no sexual union or divine generation of any kind. Furthermore, while Luke’s description agrees both in form and spirit with the Qur’anic idea of the conception of Christ, the language of the Qur’an IS FAR MORE GRAPHIC AND OPEN TO INTERPRETATION.” (Christian-Muslim Encounters, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad & Wadi Z. Haddad [University Press of Florida, 1995], p. 67)
He goes on to say:
“… Then of Mary He (author-allegedly God) continues: ‘And she who guarded well [lit. fortified] her chastity [lit. GENERATIVE ORGAN], and thus We breathed INTO HER of our spirit, and We made her and her son a sign [or miracle, ‘Aya] for all beings’ (S. 21:90-91)…
“In the second instance the Qur’an speaks of Mary as a righteous woman who lived in strict chastity and obedience to God: ‘And Mary daughter of ‘Imran who guarded well her GENERATIVE ORGAN farjaha, and thus We breathed INTO HER of our spirit’ (S. 66:12). THE BOLD AND GRAPHIC STATEMENT APPEARS TO HAVE SHOCKED TRADITIONISTS AND COMMENTATORS, so that most of them tried to cover it up with different and FARFETCHED significations or glossed over it with out comment…
“Ibn Kathir interprets the phrase ‘guarded well her generative organ’ to mean: ‘safeguarded and protected it. Guarding well ihsan signifies chastity and high birth.’ He comments on the phrase, ‘and thus We breathed into it of our spirit’ thus ‘that is, through the angel Gabriel. This is because God sent him to her, and he took for her the form of a man of good stature (S. 19:17). God commanded him to breathe INTO THE BREAST OF HER CHEMISE. HIS BREATH WENT DOWN AND PENETRATED HER GENERATIVE ORGAN, AND THUS CAUSED HER TO CONCEIVE JESUS …’” (Ibid.)
Finally:
“Abu Ja’far al-Tusi, the jurist doctor of the Shi’i community, as well as his well known disciple al-Tabarsi, read the words, ‘We breathed INTO IT’ literally. Al-Tusi says: ‘It has been held that Gabriel BREATHED INTO MARY’S GENERATIVE ORGAN then God created Christ in it’ …” (Ibid., p. 68)
Ibn Kathir provides additional evidence for the very graphic and distasteful nature of the Quranic birth narratives. In his comments on S. 66:12, Ibn Kathir writes:
meaning who protected and purified her honor, by being chaste and free of immorality,
meaning, through the angel Jibril. Allah sent the angel Jibril to Maryam, and he came to her in the shape of a man in every respect. Allah commanded him TO BLOW into a gap of her garment and that breath went into her womb THROUGH HER PRIVATE PART; this is how ‘Isa was conceived. This is why Allah said here,
meaning His decree and His legislation. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir – Abridged, Volume 10, Surat At-Tagabun to the end of the Qur’an, pp. 75-76; capital emphasis ours)
Ibn Kathir makes the following comments in reference to S. 19:22-23:
“Allah, the Exalted, informs about Maryam that when Jibril had spoken to her about what Allah said, she accepted the decree of Allah. Many scholars of the predecessors (Salaf) have mentioned that at this point the angel (who was Jibril) blew into the opening of her garment that she was wearing. Then the breath descended until it entered INTO HER VAGINA and she conceived by the leave of Allah.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 6, Surat Al-Isra’, Verse 39 To the end of Surat Al-Mu’minun, first edition July 2000, p. 244; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Ibn Kathir’s notes on S. 2:223 also help us to see the very graphic nature of the term farj:
this refers to Al-Farj (THE VAGINA), as Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid and other scholars have stated. Therefore, anal sex is prohibited, as we will further emphasize afterwards, Allah willing…
Ibn Jurayj (one of the reporters of the Hadith) said that Allah’s Messengers said …
((From the front or from behind, as long as it occurs IN THE FARJ (VAGINA).)) …
Abu Bakr bin Ziyad Naysaburi reported that Isma’il bin Ruh said that he asked Malik bin Anas, “What do you say about having sex with women in the anus?” He said, “You are not an Arab? Does sex occur but in the place of pregnancy? Do it only IN THE FARJ (VAGINA).” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 1, Parts 1 and 2 (Surat Al-Fatihah to Verse 252 of Surat Al-Baqarah), first edition January 2000, pp. 618, 619, 622; bold and capital emphasis ours)
In responding to the Shia position regarding the permissibility of temporary marriages (mutah), this Sunni writer defines farj as:
I’arat al-Furuj (Loaning of Vaginas)
The Shi’ah books of fiqh carry a separate chapter entitled “I’arat al-Furuj.” This could literally be translated as “The Loaning of Vaginas.” … (Dr. Ahmad ‘Abdullah Salamah, Shi’ah Concept of Temporary Marriage (Mut’ah); online edition)
Here is the final Muslim example showing that farj refers to the female organ:
Narrated Basrah:
A man from the Ansar called Basrah said: I married a virgin woman in her veil. When I entered upon her, I found her pregnant. (I mentioned this to the Prophet). The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: She will get the dower, for you made her VAGINA (farj) lawful for you. The child will be your slave. When she has begotten (a child), flog her (according to the version of al-Hasan). The version of Ibn AbusSari has: You people, flog her, or said: inflict hard punishment on him. (Sunan of Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2126)
And here is how one lexical source defines the term:
Fa-Ra-Jiim = To open, separate, cleave, split, enlarge, part, let a space between, make a room, comfort anything in, dispel cares. An opening, intervening space [gap or breach] between two things. Ex: Parting hind legs or intervening spaces between fingers.
He opened, made room, ample space.
Furijat – Cloven, split, rent, opened.
Farjun (Pl. Furuj) – PUDENDA (SEX ORGAN); chastity, space between legs (of horse or mare), part/s of a person (male/female) INDECENT TO EXPOSE, EXTERNAL PORTIONS OF THE ORGANS OF GENERATION [OF A MALE/FEMALE]. ALSO THE POSTERIOR OF PUDENDUM because it is a place of opening, of between the legs.
faraja vb. (1) perf. pass. 77:9
farj n.m. (pl. furuj) 21:91, 23:5, 24:30, 24:31, 33:35, 50:6, 66:12, 70:29
LL, V6, p: 143, 144, 145 (Project Root List; capital emphasis ours)
Christian writer Abd al-Masih helps to put this in perspective. Commenting on S. 21:91, al-Masih notes:
“Whoever reads verse 91 of Sura al-Anbiya’ 21 carefully could be embarrassed. It is scandalous how Muhammad and his spirit of revelation lift Mary up as the most important of all women, and at the same time tear away her veil of chastity. Her self-protection is not described in a euphemism, but is calculated brutally, as in a business deal:
And she guraded her vagina [farj] so we breathed into her of our spirit. (Sura al-Anbiya’ 21:91)
This revelation is not an honour, but an exposition. Maybe it was customary among Bedouins to speak contemptuously and carelessly about women. But this only shows the rule of Arabic men and their contempt for women. If the best of women is spoken about like this, what about others! The men are never written about like this. They remain covered, holier-than-thou and self-righteous.” (Abd al-Masih, Who Is The Spirit From Allah In Islam? [Light of Life, P.O. Box 13, A-9503, VILLACH AUSTRIA], pp. 46-47)
He notes regarding S. 66:12:
“The second problem is caused by the Arabic language. In Arabic, Allah does not say: ‘so we breathed into her of our spirit’, but ‘into him’. Who is it, into whom the spirit was breathed? The embryo ‘Isa? That is difficult to accept, for then ‘Isa would have existed in Mary’s womb already before the spirit was breathed into her. That would mean that Allah created ‘Isa beforehand or that he existed before he was conceived. Both options are out of the question for Islamic scholars.
Who is it then, into whom the Spirit from Allah was breathed? IT IS ALMOST UNSPEAKABLE, but the last expression in the previous sentence, which is masculine in Arabic, IS THE EXPRESSION FOR MARY’S GENITALS.[43] The literal meaning of Allah’s statement in Arabic is then, ‘so we breathed into her vagina [farj] of our spirit.’ This turns the stomachs of some of our readers.
Rudi Paret, the best translator of the Qur’an into German, confirms the meaning of this phrase in a footnote. This seems not only to us, but also to many Islamic scholars to be a blasphemy. Ibn Mas’ud went so far as to suggest that the Qur’anic text should be changed to read ‘so we breathed into her [Mary] of our spirit.’ It is comforting to see that there are Muslims who prefer the possibility of a fallible Qur’an to a blasphemy like this.
Other commentators explain the expression into him as Mary’s heart or body, which are masculine in Arabic, but not mentioned in the text. These are nothing but attempts to cover up the problem, but the problem itself remains. The assumption that it was an unclean spirit that spoke through Muhammad is obvious. It is almost impossible to imagine that Muslims claim that Jibril himself did this. Here the false statement of an unclean spirit stands against the noble Holy Spirit.” (Ibid., pp. 53-54; capital emphasis ours)
In the above indicated footnote, the author states:
43. According to al-Nasafi: “in her vagina” (Madarik al-Tanzil, vol. 4, p. 272). (Ibid., p. 53)
OUCH!
Time and date coward!
LikeLike
Are you saying that you don’t worship Jesus fully, that means you don’t worship his private part? Hence it means you are a fake Jesus follower who is not devoted to worshipping his pen*s as well?
Are you saying you are a unitarian now Sham-Moon?
And on the Hadith of biting, you are a proper pervert always thinking about sex. here is a refutation:
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2013/08/explained-bite-father-penis-hadith.html
LikeLike
lolol cheap shots from sammy the chistological polytheist…keep going sammy…keep demonstrating and entertaining us with your incompetence to refute anything so far lolol😂…. Thank you for sharing how truly misguided you are…
LikeLike
before you go sammy read this biblical bedtime story to your wife and kids:
Ezekiel 23
“When she carried on her prostitution openly and exposed her naked body, I turned away from her in disgust, just as I had turned away from her sister. Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled.”
😉😉😉😉😉😉
LikeLike
further exposing sammys incompetence:😂😂😂
It was narrated from Ubayy ibn Ka‘b that a man boasted in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, so he told him to bite his father’s male member, and he did not use a metaphor. The people looked askance at him, so he said to the people: I can see what you are thinking, and I can only say this: that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) instructed us: “If you hear someone boasting in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, then tell him to bite his father’s male member, and do not use a metaphor.”
Narrated by Ahmad (35/157); classed as hasan by the commentators on al-Musnad.
It was narrated from Ubayy (may Allah be pleased with him) that a man boasted of his tribal lineage, and Ubayy told him to bite his father’s male member, and they said: You were never given to obscene speech! He said: We were instructed to do that.
Narrated by Ahmad (35/142); classed as hasan by the commentators on al-Musnad and as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami‘.
Abu Ja‘far at-Tahhaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
in this hadith, the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) gave those instructions concerning the one who is heard boasting in that ignorant manner. Someone said: How could you accept this report from the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) when you narrate from him the words, “Shyness is part of faith and faith leads to Paradise, and foul speech is part of harshness, and harshness is of the Fire”?
He said:
In this hadith it states that foul speech is in the Fire, and what is meant by foul speech being in the Fire is that the people of foul speech will be in the Fire, because foul speech is not an entity that exists by itself; rather what is meant by mentioning it is those who have that characteristic.
Our response concerning that – with the help of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted – is as follows:
The foul speech referred to in this hadith is something other than the foul speech referred to in the first hadith. It is foul speech that is addressed to one who does not deserve to be spoken to in that manner. The one who speaks in a foul manner to one who does not deserve that is subject to the warning in the hadith mentioned. As for that which is mentioned in the first hadith, it is a punishment to the one who promoted ignorant attitudes, because he is promoting pride in a man who is one of the people of Hell. It is like when they used to call their tribes with a sense of pride in being the descendants of Bakr, Tameem, Hamdaan, and so on (ancestors of Arab tribes). Whoever shows pride in these people of Jaahiliyyah, who are among the inhabitants of Hell, deserves to be punished, and the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) ordained that his punishment should be that he is responded to as mentioned in the second hadith, so as to insult him and the one in whom he seeks pride, so that people would stop doing that in the future and not go back to it.
This hadith was also narrated without this particular wording:
It was narrated that ‘Utayy ibn Damurah said: One day I saw him – i.e., Ubayy ibn Ka‘b – when a man was boasting in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, and he told him to bite that part of his father, and he did not use a metaphor. It was as if the people found that odd, so he said: Do not blame me, for the Prophet of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said to us: “Whoever you see boasting in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, then tell him to bite that, and do not use a metaphor.”
The meaning is the same as the hadith quoted above, because what is meant by “one who is boasting in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage” is that he is attributing himself to the people of Jaahiliyyah.
Bayaan Mushkil al-Athaar (8/51-54)
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Hence some of the scholars said that this indicates that it is permissible to bluntly state the name of the private part if there is a need to do so or there is an interest to be served thereby, and this does not come under the heading of obscene speech that is forbidden, as in the hadith of Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, according to which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said:
“If you hear someone boasting in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, then tell him to bite his father’s male member, and do not use a metaphor.” Narrated by Ahmad. And Ubayy ibn Ka‘b heard a man saying: O So and so, and he said: Bite your father’s penis. Something was said to him about that, and he said: This is what the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) instructed us to do (in the case of such a person).
Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (8/408, 409)
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said, commenting on the hadith of Abu Dawood: A man sneezed in the presence of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and said: As-salaamu ‘alaykum (peace be upon you). The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “And upon you be peace and upon your mother.”
Mentioning the mother here is similar to mentioning the penis of the father in the case of one who boasts in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage. It may be said to him: Bite your father’s penis, and mentioning the father’s penis here is more effective in admonishing and rebuking the one who boasts in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, because it is reminding him of the part of his father from which he emerged, namely his father’s penis, so he should not go beyond the bounds in pride and arrogance. Similarly, in the other example, mentioning the mother is more effective in rebuking him, by suggesting that he is still as illiterate or ignorant as the day on which his mother bore him [this is a play on words in Arabic, as the word ummiyyah (illiteracy) is similar to the word umm (mother)]. And Allah knows best what the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) meant.
Zaad al-Ma‘aad fi Hadiy Khayr al-‘Ibaad (2/438)
Fifthly:
The senior Sahaabah acted on this advice and regarded it as a punishment to be carried out on whoever deserved it, and they did not regard it as rude in any way. We have mentioned above the words of Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, who narrated the hadith on this topic. This was also said by Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq (may Allah be pleased with him), when ‘Urwah ibn Mas‘ood, who came as a negotiator on behalf of the mushrikeen at al-Hudaybiyah, said to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him): By Allah I see faces, and I see a mixture of people who are most likely going to flee and desert you. Abu Bakr said to him: Suck the clitoris of al-Laat! Would we flee and desert him? He said: Who is that? They said: Abu Bakr.
Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2581)
Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The clitoris is the piece of flesh that remains in the woman’s vulva after circumcision (removal of the prepuce of the clitoris). Al-Laat is the name of one of the idols that Quraysh and Thaqeef used to worship. It was the custom of the Arabs to revile one another in this manner, but by mentioning the mother, so Abu Bakr wanted to go further in reviling ‘Urwah by referring to his object of worship instead of his mother. What made him do that was his anger towards him when he accused the Muslims of being cowards and saying that they would flee. This also indicates that it is permissible to say words that are regarded as foul or bad for the purpose of rebuking one who behaves in a manner that leads to him deserving that. Ibn al-Munayyir said: In the words of Abu Bakr we see an insult to the enemy, rejection of their beliefs, and highlighting the flaws in their belief when they said that al-Laat was the daughter of Allah – exalted be Allah far above that – by suggesting that if she was a daughter that she would have what every female has.
Fath al-Baari (5/340)
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The words of Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq to ‘Urwah – “Suck the clitoris of al-Laat – indicate that it is permissible to name of the private part bluntly, if that will serve the purpose, according to the situation, as the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) gave permission to mention the father’s male member bluntly to the one who boasted in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, to whom it may be said: “Bite your father’s penis”, without using a metaphor. Every situation is to be dealt in the manner that is appropriate to it.
😘
LikeLike
Are you saying that you don’t believe your god when he said he created Jesus pure? And are you saying that your god didn’t send his spirit to appear as a man?
And mention in the Book Mary when she withdrew from her people to an eastern place, and she took a veil apart from them; then We sent unto her OUR SPIRIT that presented himself to her A MAN WITHOUT FAULT. She said, ‘I take refuge in the All-merciful from thee! thou fearest God … He said, ‘I am but a messenger come from thy Lord, to give thee a boy MOST PURE. She said, ‘How shall I have a son whom no mortal has touched, neither have I been unchaste?’ He said, ‘Even so thy Lord has said: “Easy is that for Me; and that We may appoint him a sign unto men and a mercy from Us; it is a thing decreed.”‘ Arberry
And are you saying that when he appeared as a man he didn’t have a penis? So then your god’s spirit didn’t appear as a perfect man since he had no genitalia?
And are you saying that your god didn’t create all the penises and vulvas in the world?
In fact, are you saying that your god didn’t create all those swelling breasted whores of paradise, and created all you jihadi thugs with eternally erected penises to use to deflower these whores forever, thereby turning paradise into a whore house?
begin
Wherein both will be those (maidens) restraining their glances upon their husbands, whom no man or jinn yatmithhunna (has opened their hymens with sexual intercourse) before them… Houris (beautiful, fair females) restrained in pavilions; Then which of the Blessings of your Lord will you both (jinns and men) deny? Whom no man or jinn yatmithhunna (has opened their hymens with sexual intercourse) before them. S. 55:56, 72-74 Hilali-Khan
Surely for the godfearing awaits a place of security, gardens and vineyards and maidens WITH SWELLING BREASTS, like of age, and a cup overflowing. S. 78:31-34 Arberry
Thus, the Quran speaks of heavenly creatures who have swelling breasts and who shall be physically penetrated, or deflowered, by both men and jinn!
Lest this child of Lucifer deny that the Quran describes Allah’s abode as a whore house we will cite some of Islam’s premier scholars to refute him:
meaning, wide-eyed maidens WITH FULLY DEVELOPED BREASTS. Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid and others have said, …
“This means ROUND BREASTS. They meant by this THAT THE BREASTS OF THESE GIRLS WILL BE FULLY ROUNDED AND NOT SAGGING, because they will be virgins, equal in age…” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), (Surat At-Tagabun to the end of the Qur’an), First Edition: September 2000, Volume 10, pp. 333-334)
Interestingly, there is one Sunni Muslim writer that quotes certain Muslim authorities who admit that the Quran’s language here is quite erotic and that this particular reference even causes persons to get aroused. In response to the unfairness of men having up to 70 wives whereas women will only have one husband in paradise, Shaykh G.F. Haddad states:
We do not know with certainty that there will be such a restriction on women even if the reverse would hardly be mentionable to a decent woman. A woman in the traditional world would and does consider it a horrible thing to say to her that “You can have all the men you want”! The Qur’an would never use inappropriate language. However, the Qur’an does mention that for the inhabitants of Paradise – male and female – {There wait on them immortal youths} (56:17), {There serve them youths of everlasting youth, whom, when you see them, you would take for scattered pearls} (76:19). If this does not make a believing woman happy then, as Imam al-Shafi`i said to the one WHO IS NOT MOVED BY EROTIC POETRY, “You have no feelings.” As for the believing men, as one of the Awliya said, some of them will need GHUSL just FOR HEARING THE VERSE {Same-age young-bosomed girls} (78:33). As for us hard-hearted analphabets we may read it and read it without effect. (Haddad, Sex with slaves and women’s rights)
Ghusl refers, in this specific context, to the ritual bathing of the body that a Muslim must perform after sexual intercourse or because of a seminal discharge. What the author is essentially saying is that Surah 78:33 can cause a person to be aroused to such an extent that he ends up having an emission!
Another famous commentator, ar-Razi, stated in his Tafsir (Volume 8, p. 311) that:
“The kawa`ib are the buxom girls (nawahid) whose breasts have become FULL (taka“abat) and ROUND (tafallakat).”
This accounts for why the following translations all read breasts in Q. 78:33:
And young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age; Hilali-Khan
maidens with pears-shaped breasts who are of equal age (to their spouses) Muhammad Sarwar
and girls with swelling breasts of the same age as themselves, Palmer
And damsels with swelling breasts, their peers in age, Rodwell
and [damsels] with swelling breasts, of equal age [with themselves], Sale
Ibn Kathir said of Q. 55:56 that:
chaste females, wives restraining their glances, desiring none except their husbands, seeing them as the most beautiful men in Paradise. This was said by Ibn `Abbas, Qatadah, `Ata’ Al-Khurasani and Ibn Zayd. It was reported that one of these wives will say to her husband, “By Allah! I neither see anything in Paradise more handsome than you nor more beloved to me than you. So praise be to Allah Who made you for me and made me for you.” Allah said, …
meaning they are delightful virgins of comparable age who never had sexual intercourse with anyone, whether from mankind or Jinns, before their husbands. This is also a proof that the believers among the Jinns will enter Paradise. Artat bin Al-Mundhir said, “Damrah bin Habib was asked if the Jinns will enter Paradise and he said, `Yes, and they will get married. The Jinns will have Jinn women and the humans will have female humans.’” Allah’s statement, …
Then Allah describes these women for the proposed…
Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Ibn Zayd and others said, “They are as pure as rubies and white as Marjan.” So here they described Marjan as pearls… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), (Surat Al-Jathiyah to the end of Surat Al-Munafiqun), First Edition: September 2000, Volume 9, pp. 400-401; source)
He also wrote the following regarding Q. 56:35-37:
Abu Dawud At-Tayalisi recorded that Anas said that the Messenger of Allah said…
Anas said, “I asked, ‘O Allah’s Messenger! Will one be able to do that? He said,
((He will be given the strength OF A HUNDRED (MEN).))
At-Tirmidhi also recorded it and said, “Sahih Gharib.” Abu Al-Qasim At-Tabarani recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah was asked, “O Allah’s Messenger! Will we have sexual intercourse with our wives in Paradise?” He said…
((The man will be able to have sexual intercourse WITH A HUNDRED VIRGINS IN ONE DAY.))
Al-Hafiz Abu ‘Abdullah Al-Maqisi said, “In my view, the Hadith meets the criteria of the Sahih, and Allah knows best.” (Ibid., pp. 429-430)
The two Jalals noted in reference to Q. 56:36 that,
and made them virgins, immaculate – every time their spouses enter them they find them virgins, nor is there any pain [of defloration] – (Tafsir al-Jalalayn)
And regarding Q. 36:55 they say:
Indeed today the inhabitants of Paradise are busy (read fi shughlin or fi shughulin), [oblivious] to what the inhabitants of the Fire are suffering, [busy] delighting in pleasures such as deflowering virgins – not busy with anything wearisome, as there is no toil in Paradise – rejoicing, blissful (fakihuna is a second predicate of inna, the first being fi shugulin, ‘busy’); (Tafsir al-Jalalayn)
And here is what the hadith compiler Ibn Majah stated about the sexual organs of the men and the maidens of paradise:
4337. Abu ‘Umama (Allah be pleased with him) reported that Allah’s Messenger (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, “Allah will not admit anyone in the Paradise but Allah, the Mighty and Glorious, will marry him with seventy two wives: two will be from virgins (haurine) with big eyes and seventy will be his inheritance from the people of the Hell-Fire (1). Everyone of them will have A PLEASANT VAGINA and HE (the man) WILL HAVE A SEXUAL ORGAN THAT DOES NOT BEND DOWN (during sexual intercourse).”
Hisham b. Khalid says, “The words ‘out of his inheritance (due) from the denizens of the Fire’, many men who will enter the Fire and the inmates of the Paradise will inherit their wives just as Faraoh’s[sic] wife will be inherited (by the believer).”
According to al-Zawa’id, its isnad has some controversy. Al-‘Ajali has declared Khalid b. Yazid b. Abi Malik reliable while Imam Ahmad, Ibn Mu’in, Abu Dawud, Nasa’i, Ibn Jarud Sahi, ‘Uqail etc., have declare[sic] Ahmad b. Salih al-Misri da’if. (Sunan Ibn-I-Majah (Imam Abu Abdullah Muhammad b. Yazid Ibn-I-Maja Al-Qazwini), English version by Muhammad Tufail Ansari [Kazi Publications, Lahore (Pakistan), 1st edition 1995], Chapter NO. XXXIX, “The Description of the Paradise”, Volume V, p. 546; capital and underline emphasis ours)
END
And are you saying that Abu Bakr didn’t tell people to suck the clitoris of Allat? And are you saying that your god didn’t create her clitoris or the idol maker whom he then empowered to fashion the clitoris of Allat?
BEGIN
And according to this next verse Allah also creates the idols which the people worship:
And he cast a glance at the stars, and he said, ‘Surely I am sick.’ But they went away from him, turning their backs. Then he turned to their gods, and said, ‘What do you eat? What ails you, that you speak not?’ And he turned upon them smiting them with his right hand. Then came the others to him hastening. He said, ‘Do you serve what you hew, and Allah created you AND WHAT YOU MAKE?’ S. 37:88-96
Abraham supposedly claimed that Allah made them and their idols, meaning that it was Allah who moved them to make statues of false gods!
END
And are you saying your wicked profit didn’t recent your so-called “holy” Quran in the lap of his child bride while she was menstruating, which your god created and called an illness?
BEGIN
The Quran expressly prohibits a man from approaching his wife during her monthly cycle:
They will question thee concerning the monthly course. Say: ‘It is HURT; so go apart from women during the monthly course, and do not approach them till they are clean. When they have cleansed themselves, then come unto them as God has commanded you.’ Truly, God loves those who repent, and He loves those who cleanse themselves. S. 2:222 Arberry
Here is another version:
They ask you concerning menstruation. Say: that is an Adha (A HARMFUL THING FOR A HUSBAND TO HAVE A SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH HIS WIFE WHILE SHE IS HAVING HER MENSES), therefore keep away from women during menses and go not unto them till they have purified (from menses and have taken a bath). And when they have purified themselves, then go in unto them as Allah has ordained for you (go in unto them in any manner as long as it is in their vagina). Truly, Allah loves those who turn unto Him in repentance and loves those who purify themselves (by taking a bath and cleaning and washing thoroughly their private parts, bodies, for their prayers, etc.). Hilali-Khan…
As if this weren’t bad enough Muhammad would even recite the Quran, the supposed eternal speech of Allah, while in the lap of his menstruating child bride!
Narrated ‘Aisha:
The Prophet used to lean on my lap and recite Qur’an while I was in menses. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 6, Number 296)
Narrated ‘Aisha:
The Prophet used to recite the Quran with his head in my lap while I used to be in my periods (having menses). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 639)
What makes this rather ironic is that faithful Muslims do not dare touch the Quran in a state of ritual impurity and will often wash their hands before touching their scripture, and yet their prophet had no qualms with reciting and mentioning his god’s name while reclining on a cermonially impure child!
END
Are you saying any of the above? 😉
You really must be feeling stupid right about now.
Like I said before, any time you open your vile, blasphemous. pagan mouth to insult the Lord Jesus, Muhammad’s God and Judge, and I will punish your profit. So keep helping me expose your wicked profit, since I truly do appreciate it.
LikeLike
Be a man and answer this question Sham-Moon;
Are you saying that you don’t worship Jesus fully, that means you don’t worship his private part? Hence it means you are a fake Jesus follower who is not devoted to worshipping his pen*s as well?
As you claim him to be ‘God’ fully, do you worship your human-man Lord’s excrem*nt, as well?
Are you saying you are a unitarian now Sham-Moon?
And on the Hadith of biting, you are a proper pervert always thinking about sex. here is a refutation:
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2013/08/explained-bite-father-penis-hadith.html
And here is a refutation to Mary’s claims you made:
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/09/quran-description-virginal-conception.html
LikeLike
😂😂😂hahah sam what an idiotic post that refuted nothing!!! your getting desperate sammy lol.. seriously sam you really must be feeling stupid right about now as we continuously expose your deceitful feeble attempts to spread misinformation about Islam
Like we said before, any time you open your vile, blasphemous. pagan mouth sammy to insult Allah Jesus’s God and Judge, we will punish you with counter refutations. So keep helping us expose your wicked polytheism , since we truly do appreciate it.
LikeLike
Flying stone kisser, is this all you got to say after I just pwned your god and profit for creating all those penises that you have such a sick fascination with?
I will be a man and answer you when you pretend to be a man and agree to come to my paltalk room so you and I can go at it so others can see what I will do to your profit and you. I promise to answer your question there and then. But we both know that you are only a man when surrounded with a dozen more jihadis with knives and guns to protect. So I won’t be holding my breath.
Like I said, you must really feel so stupid for opening your mouth and exposing your wicked and sick penis fixation. I don’t blame you since you are only imitating your god and profit who also had sick sexual fetishes, which is why your Quran is filled with references to breasts, vulvas, as well as heavenly whores waiting to be deflowered etc.
Really sucks being you. 😉
By by for now!
LikeLike
Sorry for using this language brother Paul, but this pagan Sham-Moon needs to get into his head that he is a idol worshipper. He wont get away from using filthy language about the Quran or our Nabi.
Here I go again,
Shamoun you claim to worship Jesus (God) fully, so my question is, do you also worship his pen*s?
What about worshipping Jesus’s excrem*nt ??
Come on answer the question, be a man for once. Stop running away.
LikeLike
dude thats crossing the line! Inappropriate!
LikeLike
brother Paul Williams, fair enough I could understand bro. If you don’t want brothers to throw questions like this (however inappropriate), could you keep control and now allow Shamoon’s filthy comments on Mary and Muhammed?
LikeLike
It’s difficult to control Sam. But we can rise above him in our replies.
LikeLike
I can’t believe that I almost let flying toilet mouth get away with this filth and blasphemy:
“Shamoun you claim to worship Jesus (God) fully, so my question is, do you also worship his pen*s?
“What about worshipping Jesus’s excrem*nt ??”
This poor pagan doesn’t realize he just gave me further ammo to prove that Muslims are nothing more than man worshipers. Note what he said about worshiping penises and excrement, and now compare that with the sick idolatrous obsession flying diarrhea’s child marrying, women enslaving/raping profit’s companions showed to him:
BEGIN
Unless noted otherwise most of our quotations will be taken from a classical Sunni work, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta’rif huquq al-Mustafa (Healing by the recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), authored by a Muslim scholar named Qadi ‘Iyad Ibn Musa al-Yahsubi. We will be using Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley’s English translation, published by Madinah Press (Inverness, Scotland, U.K., third reprint 1991, paperback). All capital emphasis mine.
OBSESSIVE MUSLIM BEHAVIOUR AND DEVOTION TO MUHAMMAD
The worship which Muslims gave (give) to Muhammad can be seen from situations where his followers would drink Muhammad’s urine and smear his spittle on themselves, thinking that they would receive a blessing or a cure as a result of it!
One of the scholars concerned with reports about the Prophet and his qualities related that when he wanted to defecate, the earth split open and swallowed up his faeces and urine, and it gave off a fragrant smell.
Muhammad ibn Sa’d, al-Waqidi’s scribe, related that ‘A’isha said to the Prophet, “When you come from relieving yourself, we do not see anything noxious from you.” He said, “‘A’isha, don’t you know that the earth swallows up what comes out of the prophets so that none of it is seen?”
Although this tradition is not famous, the people of knowledge still mention the purity of his faeces and urine…
There was also a time when Malik ibn Sinan DRANK HIS BLOOD on the Day of Uhud AND LICKED IT UP. The Prophet allowed him to do that and then said, “THE FIRE WILL NOT TOUCH YOU.”
Something similar occurred when ‘Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr DRANK CUP BLOOD. The Prophet said, “Woe to you from the people and woe to the people from you,” BUT HE DID NOT OBJECT TO WHAT HE HAD DONE.
Something similar is related about when a woman DRANK SOME OF HIS URINE. He told her, “YOU WILL NEVER COMPLAIN OF A STOMACH-ACHE.”
He did not order any of them to wash their mouths out NOR DID HE FORBID THEM TO DO IT AGAIN.
The hadith of the woman drinking the urine IS SOUND. Ad-Daraqutni follows Muslim and al-Bukhari who relate it in the Sahih. The name of this woman was Baraka, but they disagree about her lineage. Some say that it was Umm Ayman, a wooden cup he placed under his bed in which he would urinate during the night. One night he urinated in it and when he examined it in the morning there was nothing in it. He asked Baraka about that. She said, “I got up and felt thirsty, SO I DRANK IT WITHOUT KNOWING.” The hadith is related by Ibn Jurayj and others.
The Prophet was born circumcised with his umbilical cord cut… (pp. 35-37)
Note that the drinking of blood is a clear violation of God’s true Word, the Holy Bible:
“If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood. Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.” Leviticus 17:10-14
“but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood… For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.” Acts 15:28-29
They even violated the commands of the Quran!
He has only forbidden you what dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 2:173 Shakir
Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter, and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you divide by the arrows; that is a transgression. This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 5:3 Shakir
Say: I do not find in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be what has died of itself, or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine — for that surely is unclean — or that which is a transgression, other than (the name of) Allah having been invoked on it; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 6:145 Shakir
He has only forbidden you what dies of itself and blood and flesh of swine and that over which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 16:115 Shakir
Muhammad and his followers were therefore guilty of sinning against God. Iyad continues:
When Quraysh sent ‘Urwa ibn Mas’ud to the Messenger of Allah in the year of al-Hudaybiyya, he saw the unparalleled respect which his Companions displayed towards him. Whenever he did ‘wudu they ran to get his leftover ‘wudu water and nearly fought over it. If he spat they took it with their hands and wiped it on their faces and bodies. If a hair of his fell they ran to get it. If he commanded them to do something, they ran to do his command. If he spoke, they lowered their voices in his presence. They did not stare at him due to their respect for him. When he returned to Quraysh, he said, “People of Quraysh! I have been to Chosroes in his kingdom, and Caesar in his kingdom and the Negus in his kingdom, but by Allah, I have not seen any king among his people treated anything like the way Muhammad is treated by his Companions.” …
Anas said, “I saw the Messenger when his hair was being shaved. His companions were around him and whenever a lock fell, a man picked it up.” (Iyad, pp. 236-237)
The sahih ahadith narrate the same thing:
… Before embracing Islam Al-Mughira was in the company of some people. He killed them and took their property and came (to Medina) to embrace Islam. The Prophet said (to him, “As regards your Islam, I accept it, but as for the property I do not take anything of it. (As it was taken through treason). Urwa then started looking at the Companions of the Prophet. By Allah, whenever Allah’s Apostle spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) WHO WOULD RUB IT ON HIS FACE AND SKIN; if he ordered them they would carry his orders immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke to him, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect. Urwa returned to his people and said, “O people! By Allah, I have been to the kings and to Caesar, Khosrau and An-Najashi, yet I have never seen any of them respected by his courtiers as much as Muhammad is respected by his companions. By Allah, if he spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them, they would carry out his order immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891)
END
OUCH!
Here we have Muhammad permitted his followers to drink his piss, blood, dirty disgusting left over water, and smear his filthy saliva all over them, and this pagan flying stone kisser has the audacity to ask me if I worship penises and excrement! ROFL!
Man what a joke!
And seeing that this blasphemous idolater believes that it is his god who created piss and excrement, does this mean he believes that his false deity full of crap! 😉
There is more to this sick, demonic idolatrous obsession with flying carpet’s immoral profit. According to Qadi ‘Iyad, this veneration and worship doesn’t cease now that Muhammad is dead:
BEGIN
It is just as necessary to have esteem and respect for the Prophet after his death as it were when he was alive. This means to show it whenever the Prophet, his hadith or sunna are mentioned, when anyone hears his name or anything about his life or how his family and relatives behaved. It includes respect for the People of his House (ah al-bayt) and his Companions…
Abu Humayd said, “Abu Ja’far, the Amir al-Mu’minin, had a dispute with Malik in the Prophet’s mosque. Malik said to him, ‘Amir al-Mu’minin, do not raise your voice in this mosque. Allah taught the people how to behave by saying, “Do not raise your voices above the Prophet” (49:2) He praises people with the words, “Those who lower their voices in the presence of the Messenger of Allah.” (49:3) He censures people, saying, “Those who call you…” Respect for him when he is dead is the same as respect for him when he was alive.”
“Abu Ja’far was humbled by this. He asked Malik, ‘Abu Abdullah, do you face qibla when you supplicate or do you face the Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘Why would you turn your face from him when he is YOUR MEANS and the means of your father, Adam, to Allah on the Day of Rising? I face him and ASK HIM to intercede and Allah will grant his intercession. Allah says, “If, when you wronged yourselves, they had come to you.”‘” (4:64) (pp. 237-238)
Here is a man who faces Muhammad’s grave when he prays, and actually prays to Muhammad in order to ask him for intercession!
And:
When there were many people around Malik, he was asked, “If only you would appoint someone to whom you could dictate and then he could make the people hear.” He replied, “Allah said, ‘O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet.’ (49:2) The respect due to him when he is dead is the same when he was alive.”
Ibn Sirin used to laugh at times but when the hadiths of the Prophet were mentioned in his presence he became humble. When a hadith of the Prophet was recited, ‘Abdu’r-Rahman ibn Mahdi commanded them to be silent, saying, “Do not raise your voice above the voice of the Prophet.” He interpreted the above as meaning that the people must be silent when the Prophet’s hadiths are recited, just as if they were listening to him speaking. (p. 239)
Praying for Muhammad and visiting his grave also violates the Holy Scriptures which prohibit believers from contacting the dead:
“When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a wizard or a necromancer, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God, for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this.” Deuteronomy 18:9-14
“And when they say to you, ‘Inquire of the mediums and the necromancers who chirp and mutter,’ should not a people inquire of their God? Should they inquire of the dead on behalf of the living? To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.” Isaiah 8:19-20
END
Now what was that about you guys not being Muhammadans!
Like I said, anytime this vile idolatry dares to blaspheme his God and Creator Jesus Christ, Muhammad’s Judge and Destroyer, I promise to expose his profit to further shame and disgrace.
And Williams, instead of worrying about controlling me, be consistent and start muzzling and taming these wicked blasphemous swine whom you allow to hurl insults, blasphemies and foul language even against brothers like Ken who go out of their way to show them respect and love, none of which they deserve.
Anyway Williams, nice chatting with you. Enjoy the rest of your day friend! 😉
LikeLike
Sham-Moon stop copy pasting, answer the simple question
Do you worship your Man-made LORD fully including his you P and excre*m**t or not?
Stop running around, either you dont worship him fully, that would make you a fake Jesus follower. Do you know that early Christians worshipped his P?
I am just highlighting the above, to show everyone here that you have more in common with pagans, hindus than Monotheistic religions.
LikeLike
That’s enough of the obscenities.
This particular discussion is at an end.
Thanks Paul
LikeLike
A apologise again brother Paul Williams, but as long as he throws filthy things on Mary, Muhammed I will respond with the same language.
If he wants me to not say those things, then he needs to grow up and have a critical discussion instead of the language he has been using ever since he landed on this article.
Why do you think every Muslim Daee has blocked him, they dont do debates, because he has a filthy mouth. He can’t control himself, always speaks about things that has no historical truth to it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
even so bro, we must not use obscenities like that about Jesus.
LikeLike
sammy you Pagan/pokytheist thanks for again proving our point. Like we said, the articles, rebuttals and comments here are more than enough to expose you as shameless charlatan you will do everything to excuse your wicked falsehood and instructions commanded by your preexising god the on to rape married captive women, even if it means shamelessly butchering Quranic texts that actually expose how wicked your polytheistic beliefs since no Quanic passage condones raping women, let alone prepubescent girls, like your wicked preexisting god the son commanded
Sammy Thanks again for allowing us to expose your imcompetence and demonstrate how glorious the Quran is in comparison, all thanks be to the Allah, Jesus’ God and Judge!
LikeLike
Salaams
LikeLike
salam..
LikeLike
These long copy-paste jobs need to stop!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, we finally agree on something!
Anyway, gotta run so take care.
LikeLike
I agree!
LikeLike
bye pagan sammy!😉
LikeLike
It’s an excellent summary with the relevant sources by Kaleef. I really enjoyed that. The way articles should be – easy to follow and informative.
The Ex Christian and Ex Muslim gentleman who is made the video using selective citations (and one particularly devious partial citation) in order to argue against Prophet Muhammad p doesn’t do his credibility any good at all. Smart people will notice this.
This is a video highlighting the unscholarly and misleading approach he used
LikeLiked by 1 person
So your defence of this vile and savage act of torture, enslavement and rape is to appeal to muslim sources that claim this poor jewish woman actually grew to love the wicked man who murdered her family?
Good enough for brainwashed and gullible muslims, but everyone else sees through it.
And, seriously, are you guys really trying to justify the torture of kinana and the raping of his wife by saying that he deserved it because he opposed the profit?
Your sense of justice is barbaric and worthy of disdain.
LikeLike
Man I love you! 😉
LikeLike
its intriguing to see 2 polytheists united in love for their misguidance and false presumptions reflected in their bogus posts😉
LikeLike
Paul’s Pal
And you are an inspiration. Keep up the great work of exposing this debased religion of submission to a mere man.
Omar
Poor omar, I’m still waiting for you to post some coherent comment on your bizarro 99 personality god, who cannot be known, even by his attributes.
That aside, why don”t you answer the charge?
Do you agree that it is just to torture people who oppose your religion? Do their wives deserve to be forced into marriage? If you disagree, then you can no longer follow your profit.
LikeLike
Poor D , what are you waiting!? you were referred to click on a detailed exposition article that refutes your false misunderstanding that clearly shows claims about bizarro 99 personality god, who cannot be known, even by his attributes is false 😉
Do i agree that it is just to torture people who oppose your religion? No of course not D..you know why:😉
Becaus Islam is the religion of mercy and justice; it commands us to call others to the religion of Allaah in a kind and good manner, and to encourage people to enter this great religion. If some people persist in rejecting the religion of Allaah and stand in the way of ruling by that which Allaah has revealed on earth, or they fight against the call to Allaah, then we give them the choice of three things:
Either they become Muslim; or if they refuse they pay the jizyah (whereby they pay a specified amount to the Muslims in return for being allowed to remain their land, and the Muslims undertake to protect them); or, if they refuse that, there is nothing left but the way which they themselves have chosen, which is fighting and dealing violently with those who have persecuted the Muslims and put obstacles in the path of the Islamic da’wah. In this way the Muslims will gain the upper hand and the enemies will be humiliated; then when we have killed and wounded many of them and gained the upper hand over them, we may take prisoners and bind a bond firmly on them [cf. Muhammad 47:4], because in that case it is more in tune with the idea of mercy by choice (not because we are afraid of them); at that point war should not continue any longer than is necessary.
War in Islam should not be waged for the sole purpose of shedding blood or seeking vengeance. If the Muslims capture them and take them to a place that has been prepared for them, they should not harm them or torture them with beatings, depriving them of food and water, leaving them out in the sun or the cold, burning them with fire, or putting covers over their mouths, ears and eyes and putting them in cages like animals. Rather they should treat them with kindness and mercy, feed them well and encourage them to enter Islam.
Thumaamah ibn Athaal – the leader of Bani Haneefah – was brought (to Madeenah) as a prisoner and tied to one of the pillars of the mosque. The Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to him and said, “What do you think, O Thumaamah?” He said, “What I think, O Muhammad, is good. If you kill me, you will kill one with blood on his hands – i.e., I will deserve to be killed because I have killed Muslims – and if you release me you will release one who will be grateful. If you want money, then ask, and I will give you whatever you want.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) left him for three days, and each day he would come and ask him similar questions, and Thumaamah would give similar answers. After the third day, he commanded that he should be released. Thumaamah went to a stand of date-palms near the mosque where he bathed (did ghusl), then he came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and said, “I bear witness that there is no god except Allaah and I bear witness that Muhammad is the slave of Allaah and His Messenger.” Then he said: “O Messenger of Allaah, by Allaah there was no one on earth whose face was more hateful to me than yours, but now your face is the most beloved of all faces to me. By Allaah, there was no religion that was more hateful to me than your religion, but now your religion has become the most beloved of all religions to me. By Allaah, there was no land more hateful to me than your land, but now your land has become the most beloved to me. Your cavalry captured me when I was on my way to perform ‘Umrah, so what do you think I should do?”
The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) congratulated him, and told him to go for ‘Umrah. When he came to Makkah, someone asked him, “Have you changed your religion?” He said, “No, but I have submitted with the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and by Allaah you will not get a grain of wheat from al-Yamaamah unless the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) gives permission.”
Think about this story, may Allaah bless you, and how the kind treatment of Thumaamah led to his embracing Islam, which could not have happened were it not primarily by the grace of Allaah, and also the kind treatment which Thumaamah received.
In the Qur’aan, Allaah says of the righteous (interpretation of the meaning):
“And they give food, in spite of their love for it (or for the love of Him), to the Miskeen (the poor), the orphan, and the captive,
(Saying): ‘We feed you seeking Allaah’s Countenance only. We wish for no reward, nor thanks from you’”
[al-Insaan 76:8-9]
Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Ibn ‘Abbaas said: in those days their prisoners were mushrikeen; on the day of Badr the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded them to be kind to their prisoners, so they used to put them before themselves when it came to food… Mujaahid said, this refers to the one who is detained, i.e., they would give food to these prisoners even though they themselves desired it and loved it.”
The ruling on tying up prisoners:
It is well known that if prisoners are able to escape they will not hesitate to do so, because they may be afraid of dying and they do not know what awaits them. Hence the Muslims were commanded to tie up their prisoners and to tie their hands to their necks, lest they run away. This is something that still happens and is well known to all people.
The wisdom behind permitting the taking of prisoners is so as to weaken the enemy and ward off his evil by keeping him away from the battlefield so that he cannot be effective or play any role; it also creates a means of freeing Muslim prisoners by trading the prisoners whom we are holding.
Detaining prisoners
Prisoners should be detained until it is decided what is the best move. The ruler of the Muslims should detain prisoners until he decides what is in the Muslims’ best interests. He may ransom them for money, or exchange them for Muslim prisoners, or release them for nothing in return, or distribute them among the Muslims as slaves, or kill the men, but not the women and children, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade killing the latter. The purpose behind detaining prisoners is so that the Muslims may be protected from their evil. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to enjoin the Muslims to treat prisoners well, whereas the Romans and those who came before them the Assyrians and Pharaohs, all used to put out their prisoners’ eyes with hot irons, and flay them alive, feeding their skins to dogs, such that the prisoners preferred death to life
LikeLike
omar
LOL!!
Islamo-fascism at its most honest.
So your profit was wrong to engage in the torture of kinana? And he was wrong to force his widow into marriage?
That aside, your profit left a guy tied up for three days and he is merciful? And released him when he agreed to become a brainwashed muslim? How about not waging war in the first place, or just letting the guy go for its own sake?
of course, these are muslim sources with dubious historical authenticity and great probablity of later redaction done to make your profit look less barbaric than even his later followers must have realized. Even if I do accept that your profit showed mercy to some – and by no means all or many – of his opponents, my sense of reason requires that I question whether there were political reasons. That is, were there economic, political and military benefits to this supposed mercy that was shown to these vanquished people?
Logic says, yes , that is likely.
And being kind to prisoners is a good thing, not engaging in combative and aggressive religious activities that provokes those who near you into feeling threatened is even better. Did the early muslims bring this mistrust and aggression onto themselves with their own behaviour?
The islamic sources claim that Thumamah became enraged upon receiving a letter from mohammed asking him to convert to islam. That sounds kind of dumb and unlikely. If it does turn out to be true and the became murderously angry, you have to ask yourself the question: what vileness did your profit write to this guy to make him so?
It is likely that the conflict that caused the downfall of this guy was incited by your profit – and in your brainwashed mind, you think that having started a war, it was great to show mercy to the innocents whose lives he destoryed. LOL!!
More extremely scary islamic logic at work.
And please, would you explain your bizarro tawheed/multi-personality/unknowable god to us?
LikeLike
D another ashes in the wind response from you 😂..
Its your turn for a hug now🤗
LikeLike
omar
LOL!!
Poor omar.
Has no idea how to explain the muslim concept of god and has come to realize that his profit did not act according to the principle of a merciful and peaceful religion.
I’ll take your refusal to answer as evidence that you agree your profit was wring to torture a prisoner – in order to steal his gold – and that he was wrong to force the guy’s wife into marriage.
And what’s with all the “hug” talk? Are you that muslim guy who wanted to prove that muslims were peaceful by offering free hugs, who then was arrested on terrorism charges?
LikeLike
And in reference to the Kinana issue the story is actually invalid without a source!
Note the following illustrates Kinanah was a war criminal:
Having left Medina and settled at Khaibar, the Banu Nadir started hatching a wide-spread conspiracy against Islam. Their leaders, Sallam Ibn Abi-al Huqauaiq, Huyayy Ibn Akhtab, Kinana al-Rabi and others came to Mecca, met the Quraish and told them that Islam could be destroyed.” (Allama Shibli Nu’Mani, Sirat-Un-Nabi, volume II, p 106)
Let’s read on…
” While describing the battle of Khaibar, the history writers have committed a serious blunder in reporting a totally baseless report, which has become a common place. It is said that the Prophet ( Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had granted amnesty to the Jews on condition that they would not hide anything. When Kinana Ibn Rabi’ refused to give any clue to the hidden treasures, the Prophet ( peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) ordered Zubair to adopt stern measures to force a disclosure. Zubair branded his chest with a hot flint again and again, till he was on the point of death. At last he ordered Kinana to be put to death and all the Jews were made slaves.
The whole truth in the story is that Kinana was put to death. But it was not for his refusal to give a clue to the hidden treasure. He was put to death because he had killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (also Muslima). Tabari had reported it in unambiguous words: ” Then the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) gave Kinana to Muhammad Ibn Maslama (Muslima), ” and he put him to death in retaliation of the murder of his own brother, Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima).”
In the rest of the report, both Tabari and Ibn Hisham have quoted it from Ibn Ishaq, but Ibn Ishaq does not name any narrator. Traditionalists, in books on Rijal, have explicitly stated that Ibn Ishaq used to borrow from the Jews stories concerning the battle of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). As Ibn Ishaq does not mention the name of any narrator whatsoever in this case, there is every likelihood of the story of having been passed on by the Jews.
That a man should be tortured with burns on his chest by the sparks of a flint is too heinous a deed for a Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) who had earned for himself the title of Rahma’lil Alamin (Mercy for all the worlds). After all, did he not let the woman who had sought to poison him go scot free? Who would expect such a soul to order human body to be so burnt for the sake of a few coins.
As a matter of fact, Kinana Ibn Rabi Ibn al-Huquaiq had been granted his life on the condition that he would never break faith or make false statements. He had also given his word, according to one of the reports, that if he did anything to the contrary, he could be put to death. Kinana played false, and the immunity granted to him was withdrawn. He killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima) and had, therefore to suffer for it, as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari.” (Allama Shibli Nu’Mani, Sirat-Un-Nabi, volume II, p 173-174)
As we can see there is no evidence what so ever for this story of Kinana because there is no narration or source given. It was contrary to the teachings of the Quran and the Prophet’s character. Therefore, Christians have to stop using this argument against the glorious Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
😘
LikeLike
lolol no D im not the muslim guy who wanted to prove that muslims were peaceful by offering free hugs, who then was arrested on terrorism charges..lol…
LikeLike
Omar
Poor omar! LOL!!
Kinana was an innocent man defending his people from muslim aggression – not a war criminal. And seriously, “the jews”? You’re blaming the jews for this story? So what if it was the jews who reported it, why shouldn’t I believe their word? Why would they lie, weren’t they treated well by your merciful pyromaniac profit?
Even the sources you are quoting admit that your profit tortured an innocent man to steal the man’s gold. Dude, you are so brainwashed that you can’t even see that the sources you cite acknowledge the torture. LOL!!!
You cannot defend this behaviour and you know it.
LikeLike
lol DDummy dude …you cant read!!!..The whole truth in the story you intentional misread is that Kinana was put to death. But it was not for his refusal to give a clue to the hidden treasure. He was put to death because he had killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (also Muslima)
Dude, you are so brainwashed that you can’t even see that the sources i cite really illustrates your a silly Dude LOL!!!
Also Dummy D Scholar, Shaykh Allama Shibli Numani states:
“While describing the battle of Khaibar, the history writers have committed a serious blunder in reported a totally baseless report, which has become a common place. It is said that the Prophet (p) had granted amnesty to the Jews on condition that they would not hide anything. When Kinana Ibn Rabi refused to give any clue to the hidden treasures, the Prophet (p) ordered Zubair to adopt stern measures to force a disclosure. Zubair branded his chest with a hot flint again and again, till he was on the point of death. At last he ordered Kinana to be put to death and all the Jews were made slaves.
The whole truth in the story is that Kinana was put to death. But it was not for his refusal to give a clue to the hidden treasure. He was put to death because he had killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (also Muslima). Tabari has reported it in unambiguous words: ‘Then the Holy Prophet (p) gave Kinana to Muhmmad Ibn Maslama (Muslima), ‘and he put him to death in retaliation of the murder of his own brother, Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima).’ In the rest of the report, both Tabari and Ibn Hisham have quoted it from Ibn Ishaq, but Ibn Ishaq does not name any narrator.
Traditionists, in books on Rijal, have explicitly stated that Ibn Ishaq used to borrow from the Jews stories concerning the battle of the Prophet (p). As Ibn Ishaq does not mention the name of any narrator whatsoever in this case, there is every likelihood of the story having been passed on by the Jews.
That a man should be tortured with burns on his chest by the sparks of a flint is too heinous a deed for a Prophet (p) who had earned for himself the title of Rahma’lil Alamin (Mercy for all the Worlds). After all, did he not let the woman who had sought to poison him to go scot-free. Who would expect such a soul to order human body to be so burnt for the sake of a few coins.”
As a matter of fact, Kinana Ibn Rabi Ibn al-Huquaiq had been granted his life on the condition that he would never break faith or make false statements. He had also given his word, according to one of the reports, that if he did anything to the contrary, he could be put to death. Kinana played false, and the immunity granted to him was withdrawn. He killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (or Muslima) and had, therefore, to suffer for it, as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari.”
and😉😉😉😉
“Story of Kinana’s being subjected to exhortion and put to death for hiding some treasure, for which he had contravened his contact, is altogether a spurious one. Kinana was executed in retaliation for treacheriously killing Mahmud, the brother of Mohammad-bin-Moslama, to whom he was made over for execution. There is one tradition, without any authority, to the effect, that Zobeir was producing fire on Kinana’s breast by the friction of flint and steel. This, if it be a fact, does not show that it was done by Mohammad’s direction and approval. One the contrary, there are several traditions from the Prophet himself in which he has forbidden to punish any one with fire. It is related by Bokharee from Ibn Abbas, that Mohammad said, ‘God only can punish with fire.’ It is also related by Abu Daood from Abdullah, that the Prophet said, ‘No body ought to punish any one with fire except the Lord of the fire.”
A Critical Exposition of the Popular Jihad (Original 1885) – By Cheragh Ali
D You cannot keep living as an incompetent deceitful liar and you know it.😉
Come on hug time!😘
LikeLike
Scholar Shaykh Allama Shibli Numani also confirms:
“Having left Medina and settled at Khaibar, the Banu Nadir started hatching a wide-spread conspiracy against Islam. Their leaders, Sallam Ibn Abi al-Huqaiq, Huyayy Ibn Akhtab, Kinana Ibn al-Rabi and others came to Mecca, met the Quraish, and told them that Islam could be destroyed root and branch provided they lent their support. The Quraish were already waiting for an opportunity. Assured of their help, the Jews next visited the Ghatfan tribes and made tempting offer of assigning to them half the proceeds of Khaibar in perpetuity.”
FOOTONOTE:
1. Tabari has it thus: ‘Those whp incited the people to war against the Prophet were the leaders of the Banu Nadir who had been banished from their hands.’ The most reliable book on Maghazi is that of Musa Ibn Uqba. Hafiz Ibn Hajar, while giving details of the battle of the Trenches (Allies) in his book Fath al-Bari has quoted these words: ‘Huyayy Ibn Akhtab after the eviction of the Banu Nadir went to Mecca to incite the Quraish to fight the Holy Prophet (p). Kinana Ibn Rabi, Ibn Abi al-Huquaiq went to the tribe of Ghatfan and incited them against the Prophet the Prophet and promised to pay them half the yield of dates of Khaibar. Uaina Ibn Hisn, Ibn Hudhaifa and Ibn Badr agreed to this and they wrote to their allies, the Banu Asad and they and their followers came under the
command of Talha Ibn Khuwailid”..
Sirat -un- Nabi By Shaykh Allama Shibli Numani, volume 2, page 106
Reading the above shows that Kinana was involved inciting the Quraish against the Muslim community and that he took an innocent life. Hence, he was punished accordingly!
Comprehende D? yes!? no!?… maybe!?…. 😀
LikeLike
omar
Poor omar! LOL!!! Now the insults come out – a true follower of the example of your profit.
Dude, the fact that kinana was put to death is only the icing on he barbaric cake of islamic jurisprudence. Your profit tortured him and then forced his widow into an unwelcome marriage. Stop avoiding this fact.
Even worse, you are trying to justify the barbarity of your profit’s torture by blaming kinana for some unspecified crime that somehow warranted torture. It doesn’t matter that your profit was merciful occasionally – he wasn’t merciful all the time or even most of the time.
Citing cases when he was merciful does not change this fact. Of course, given islam’s skewed concept of god in which he can just blow off sin without redress, it is no surprise that you think we can ignore the vile brutality of the first muslims just because they were occasionally merciful. LOL!!!
Remember dude, I am not a brainwashed and gullible muslim – you can fool those kinds of folks, but everyone else sees through the BS.
LikeLike
Omar
Also, citing exclusively muslim sources does not help your case – of course they would redact stories that show your profit to be behaving in ways that would have embarrassed Jeffery Dahmer.
LikeLike
lolol more feeble comprehension and further false presumptions and misunderstandings on your part D lolol..😁
Remember dude, you are obviously and seriously a brainwashed and gullible misguided Christian – you can fool those kinds of folks, but everyone else sees through your incompetence here!.. May God Almighty cure you..😉
LikeLike
omar
LOL!!!
Poor omar!
Your best shot at defending your profit backfires badly! At best you cite a guy who claims that if the torture took place then the profit had nothing to do with it – if that’s the case, why didn’t this merciful soul condemn the action? And why did he force kinana’s wife into marriage?
Again, only brainwashed gullible muslims believe that BS of countless redactions of the original sources that prove irrevocably that you revere a guy who committed torture and enslavement of innocent people.
And when are you going to explain your bizarro god to us? Dawah cannot wait!
LikeLike
Your best shot at responding to the facts that expose your incompetence and lack of comprehension backfires badly! At best you obscure the facts and add false presumptions not taking to consideration all the context and details of the issues presented that obviously have you wonderng in a mazeof error D lolol…
Again, only brainwashed gullible Christian believe that your BS of countless misrepresentations lack of contextual understanding and rejecting source of information to create false presumptions dummy D…your misguidance are self inflicted wounds!
Redactions of the original sources that prove irrevocably that we revere our Prophet who is innorcent of that your brainwashed false obscurities and assumptions.. lolol
Understanding who Allah your true Lord is….was a click away from the answers you seek😉 Click D and the truth will set you free from misguidance😉
LikeLike
wait D..lol one more for your consideration 😉
Hajjah Amina Adil:
…” Oh Travel on the Way of Truth! While this is historica ltruth, there are some historians who, though they have no knowledge of the real course of events, nonetheless assert that in the lifetime of the Prophet a certain Kinana (the husband of Safiya) had hidden a great treasure. (This had belonged to the Bani Nadir who had fled to Khaybar after the Battle of the Trench). They claim that in order to procure wealth for themselves, the Muslims tormented Kinana and put his whole family to death. However, this is a fabrication. For one thing, Kinana was the murdered of Muhammad (Mahmud) bin Maslama, and he was put do death in retaliation.
It is simply not true that his whole family was punished by death, for his own brother was still alive in the of Umar’s Khalifate. The Holy Prophet never permitted any person to be tortured for the purpose of procuring information.”
Muhammad, the Messenger of Islam: His Life & Prophecy By Hajjah Amina Adil, page 449 – 450
LikeLike
Omar
Poor omar! LOL!!!
Your profit did not torture to procure information, he tortured to procure gold. LOL!!!
In truth, you are probably a decent person and would not intentionally harm a fly – yet, your morality is compromised by the behaviour of the profit you are obliged to follow. Why else would you try so desperately – and vainly – to justify such barbaric behaviour?
Turn away from the evil ways of mohammed and come into the light of truth – jesus requires only that we love each other as ourselves and love the god almighty.
No torture here, no warfare and warmongering, no enslaving of innocent people. Come on, join us!
You’re better than islam.
LikeLike
poor D still living in denial of the facts that clearly illustrate our Prophet did not tortured to procure gold. LOL!!!…. you just dont have the propensity to grasp the truth of the matter D lol…
In truth, you are probably a decent person and would not intentionally harm a fly – yet, your morality is compromised by the behaviour of your misguidance that emanates from your polythestic beliefs that you bindly follow and the immoral commands issued by your pre-existing god the son in your Bible. Why else would you try so desperately – and vainly – to justify such barbaric behaviour?
Turn away from the evil ways of your christological polytheism and come into the light of truth – Muhammaf requires only that we love each other as ourselves and love the God Almighty.
No torture here, no unjust warfare and warmongering, no enslaving of innocent people. Come on, join us!..embrace Islam D.. Submit to Islam and Allah will forgive you…
You’re better than Christianity D .
“O you who have believed, respond to Allah and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life. And know that Allah intervenes between a man and his heart and that to Him you will be gathered.” 8:24
Say: “If ye do love Allah, Follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” 3:31
😊
LikeLike
Taking break from Christological polytheistic comedy now…😂Watching ‘See No Evil, Hear No Evil ‘Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder lolol…
LikeLike
I love reading the Muslim justification for practicing Islam on NON Muslims. The author first starts out with ….
“The Banu Nadir on the other hand, gave over information to the Quraysh on the weak spots of the Muslims, at the battle of Uhud. So as to give the Quraysh advantage over the Muslims. And they further, also tried assassinating the Prophet (p). With these treacheries committed by them, the Prophet (p) expelled them.”
Now whats funny about this is that it was allegedly a handful of the Banu Nadir tribe who did these things. As a matter of fact the alleged attempt to kill Mohamed was only carried out by a few unbeknownst to the rest of the tribe. But what does Mohamed do he does what ZIONIST Jews are doing today to the Palestinians, COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT. See how Muslims want to practice Islam on non Muslims but they never want it practiced on themselves.
But the funniest the best part so far is…
“Did Safiyyah marry Prophet Muhammed Freely?
Before the battle of Khaybar ensued, Safiyya had a dream that a ‘moon’ had landed on her lap:
and
“When Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) reached Khyber while Safiya was a bride at her place. She saw in her dream that a sun came into her lap.”
LOL yah thats believable
LikeLike
It wasn’t ‘few’ of them as you claim. All their leaders participated in assassinating and giving over information to Quraysh to harm the Muslims. Even when Banu Nadir were asked to sign a NEW PEACE TREATY, they refused and waged war. Why didn’t those who you claim didn’t do anything come out and surrender and say we are not with them?
Abu Dawud:
The infidels of the Quraysh again wrote (a letter) to the Jews after the battle of Badr: You are men of weapons and fortresses. You should fight our companion or we shall deal with you in a certain way. And nothing will come between us and the anklets of your women. When their letter reached the Prophet, THEY GATHERED BANU AN-NADIR TO VIOLATE THE TREATY. They sent a message to the Prophet: Come out to us with thirty men from your companions, and thirty rabbis will come out from us till we meet at a central place where they will hear you. If they testify to you and believe in you, we shall believe in you. The narrator then narrated the whole story. When the next day came, the Apostle of Allah went out in the morning with an army, and surrounded them. He told them: I swear by Allah, you will have no peace from me until you conclude a TREATY with me. But THEY REFUSED TO CONCLUDE A TREATY WITH HIM. He therefore fought them the same day. Next he attacked Banu Quraysh [Qurayzah] with an army in the morning, and left Banu an-Nadir. He asked them to sign a treaty and they signed it. He turned away from them and attacked Banu an-Nadir with an army. He fought with them until they agreed to expulsion. Banu an-Nadir were deported, and they took with them whatever their camels could carry, that is, their property, the doors of their houses, and their wood. … (Sunan Abi Dawud Book 19, Hadith 2998)
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/10/analysing-the-banu-nadir-incident/
Furthermore Christian missionaries have NO leg to stand on, when your Jesus (God) ordered the rape and massacre of women and children:
17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. Numbers 31:17-18 (KJV)
https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/10/29/child-marriage-in-the-bible/
Lastly on Safiyya, if you going to accept this missionary’s stance on Safiyya, surely you will have to accept the rest of the other reports which highlight that she was given a choice in marriage.
You cant just pick and choose, either you accept all our Islamic sources or you reject everything on Safiyya.
LikeLike
This is why i say this guy is a joke. Go and read his desperate attempt of justifying his immoral profit’s murdering boys who could have been as young as 12 by the most shameless butchering of a single source to prove they were pubescent. Moreover, read my obliteration of his claim that Safiyyah was giving a choice and this somehow justifies Muhammad having sex with a woman who initially hated him for murdering her father and husband:
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah.htm
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah2.htm
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah3a.htm
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zawadi_safiyyah3b.htm
This is why this child knows better than to come to my paltalk room and defend his garbage since he knows what I will do to him and his profit if he even had the guts to man up and defend his “rebuttals.” 😉
LikeLike
The kind of things that you are describing could only be found in your Bible. Let me help out. Here Jesus (God) allows rape and mass genocide of innocent women and little children boys:
17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. Numbers 31:17-18 (KJV)
Yes, Jesus (God) allowed rape of pre-pubescent females:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/10/29/child-marriage-in-the-bible/
As for your lie on 12 year old thing (I think you’re referring to Banu Qurayza), here is a refutation to your lies:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/01/01/re-examining-banu-qurayzah-incident/
Lastly, on Safiyya, here is a refutation:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/07/04/safiyyah-huyayy-kinana-and-khaybar-affair/
LikeLike
You really are starting to get just as boring as your child marrying, married/single women enslaving and raping profit:
BEGIN
We now turn to the second text. First, here are Miller’s comments regarding Numbers 31:
Right off the bat, though, there are several obvious historical errors in these brief statements, and several assumptions that have no warrant whatsoever in either the text itself, or in the historical background of the ANE. The passage will be difficult enough to our sensibilities as it is, but let’s first ‘weed out the chaff’ among these allegations. [These ‘easy’ errors, however, in themselves might not be enough to exonerate God, so we will to dig deep into the passage/situation to surface the actual ethical issues and dynamics.]
[ … ]
First of all, there was no ‘test for virginity’ needed/used. In spite of the elaborate/miraculous one created by the later rabbi’s (ingenious, but altogether unnecessary) using the Urim and Thummim (!), the ‘test for virginity’ in the ANE was a simple visual one:
Was the female pre-pubescent?
Was the female wearing any attire, jewelry, or adornments required for/associated with virginity for that culture?
Was the female wearing any attire, jewelry, or adornments required for/associated with non-virginity for that culture (e.g., veil indicating married status)?
Because virginity was generally associated with legal proof for blood-inheritance issues in ancient cultures (e.g., land, property, kinship, relationships), virginity itself was often marked by some type of clothing (e.g., the robe of Tamar in 2 Sam 13) or by cosmetic means (cf. the Hindu ‘pre-marriage dot’); as was more typically non-virginal married status (e.g., veils, headwear, jewelry, or certain hairstyles). Of course, non-virginal unmarried status (e.g., temple prostitutes and secular prostitutes) were also indicated by special markings or adornments (e.g. jewelry, dress—cf. Proverbs 7.10; Hos 2.4-5).
For example, the erotic art of the ANE shows a consistent difference in hairstyles between women and sacred prostitutes:
“In fact, the physical characteristics of the women on the [erotic] plaques are totally different from those of other female representations in Mesopotamian and Syrian art. As with the clay figurines, they are frequently naked and their hair is loose—none of these traits is to be found in statues or seals that represent women…These groups [associations of cultic prostitutes] were defined by a generic name [the ‘separated ones’], while their specific names of individual associations hinted at their garments, which were particularly luxurious, or odd, their coiffure, or to their general appearance, which distinguished them from other women.” [OT:CANE:2526]
Some of these patterns varied by culture/age:
“Once married, women were not veiled in Babylonia. Legal texts imply that married women were veiled in Assyria.” [OT:DLAM:135]
“The bride was covered with a veil that the groom removed. Married women were not veiled in Babylonia but seem to have had a special headgear; legal texts, however, suggest that married women were veiled in Assyria.” [OT:CANE:489]
In other words, the process of identifying the females who were (a) not married and (b) not prostitutes, either sacred or secular, would have been relatively straightforward—at the precision level required by the event.
Secondly, the accusation that these girls were for “sex slave” purposes contradicts what we know about the culture and about the event. [But at least one of the writers above—to their credit—added the word ‘presumably’, realizing that the text doesn’t actually say anything about it…]
1. Most girls were married soon/immediately after they began menstruating in the ANE (circa 12 years of age), and since infant and child mortality was so high, the average age of the girls spared would have been around 5 years of age or slightly lower (life expectancy wasn’t a straight line, with childhood risks so high). Of all the horrible things ascribed to Israel in the OT, pedophilia is the one conspicuous omission. That these little kids would have been even considered as ‘sex slaves’ seems quite incongruent with their ages.
And, at this tender age, they would not have been very useful as ‘slaves’ at all! Children raised in Israelite households were ‘put to work’ around this age, sometimes doing light chores to help the mother for up to four hours per day by the age of 7 or 8 [OT:FAI:27], but 5 is still a bit young. Instead, the Israelite families would have had to feed, clothe, train, care, protect, and shelter them for several years before they could make much contribution to the family’s existence and survival. [Also note that ‘slavery’ in the ANE/OT generally means something quite different from “New World” slavery, which we normally associate with the word ‘slavery’, and most of what is called that in popular literature should not be so termed. See qnoslave.html for the discussion and documentation.]
2. Unlike the Greeks and Romans, the ANE was not very ‘into’ using slaves/captives for sexual purposes, even though scholars earlier taught this:
“During the pinnacle of Sumerian culture, female slaves outnumbered male. Their owners used them primarily for spinning and weaving. Saggs maintains that their owners also used them for sex, but there is little actual evidence to support such a claim” [OT:EML:69]
3. And the Hebrews were different in this regard ANYWAY:
“This fidelity and exclusivity [demands on the wife] did not apply to the husband. Except among the Hebrews, where a husband’s infidelity was disparaged in the centuries after 800 BC, a double standard prevailed, and husbands were routinely expected to have sex not only with their wives, but with slavewomen and prostitutes.” [WS:AHTO:39; note: I would disagree with the remark about ‘after 800 bc’ because that dating presupposes a very late date for the composition of the narratives under discussion…If the narrative events occurred closer to the purposed times, then this ‘disparagement’ applied earlier in Israel as well as later.]
4. Even if we allow the age range to be older, to include girls capable of bearing children, the probability is that it was not sex-motivated, but population/economics-motivated, as Carol Meyers points out [“The Roots of Restriction: Women in Early Israel”, Biblical Archaeologist, vol 41):
“Beyond this, however, the intensified need for female participation in working out the Mosaic revolution in the early Israelite period can be seen in the Bible. Looking again at Numbers 31, an exception to the total purge of the Midianite population is to be noted. In addition to the metal objects which were exempt from utter destruction, so too were the “young girls who have not known man by lying with him” (Num 31:18). These captives, however, were not immediately brought into the Israelite camp. Instead, they and their captors were kept outside the camp for seven days in a kind of quarantine period. (Note that the usual incubation period for the kinds of infectious diseases which could conceivably have existed in this situation is two or three to six days [Eickhoff 1977].) Afterward, they thoroughly washed themselves and all their clothing before they entered the camp. This incident is hardly an expression of lascivious male behavior; rather, it reflects the desperate need for women of childbearing age, a need so extreme that the utter destruction of the Midianite foes—and the prevention of death by plague—as required by the law of the herem could be waived in the interest of sparing the young women. The Israelites weighed the life-death balance, and the need for females of childbearing age took precedence.”
[But note that the traditional rabbinic interpretation of the passage is that all females which were capable of bearing children were killed—not just those who actually were non-virginal. This would drive the average age quite low, although the Hebrew text offers only limited support at best for their interpretation.]
[I should also point out that the “for yourselves” phrase (31.18) is NOT actually referring to “for your pleasure”, but is a reference to the opposite condition of “for YHWH” which applied to all people or property which was theoretically supposed to be destroyed in such combat situations. The herem (or ‘ban’) specifically indicated that all enemy people or property which was ‘delivered over to YHWH’ was to be killed/destroyed. By referring to ‘for yourselves’, then, in this passage, means simply ‘do not kill them’. This can also be seen in that this ‘booty’ was not ‘for themselves’ actually, but was distributed to others within the community.]
[ … ]
5. The 32,000 girls who were absorbed/assimilated into Israel would have been actually a small number. According to the distribution of them, the 12,000 ‘soldiers’ received 16,000 (half of them), making an average 1.5 per household. The other half (16,000) was distributed throughout all of Israel, meaning that very few families would get one. This would still have been some hardship for the Israelite families, who at this time are still nomadic peoples without any material base from which to live. More than one commentator has noted that this seems to be a surprise act of mercy, and it is interesting to note that Whiston, in a footnote on his 18th-century translation of Josephus’ account of this passage [Antiq, VII] argues that this sparing of the little girls is a surprise of mercy, given the practical demands of this type of combat in the OT/ANE (which we will discuss later):
“The slaughter of all the Midianite women that had prostituted themselves to the lewd Israelites, and the preservation of those that had not been guilty therein; the last of which were no fewer than thirty-two thousand… and both by the particular command of God, are highly remarkable, and shew that, even in nations otherwise for their wickedness doomed to destruction, the innocent were sometimes providentially taken care of, and delivered from that destruction”
Later, when Israel was more established and settled in the land, and had adequate economic means, they would be able to absorb all the women and children (from hostile-but-conquered foreign cities), but at this early stage this was quite an impossibility. They had no need for “slaves,” nor means to support them at this time. (Source: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/midian.html)
One point we would like to add to Miller’s comments is regarding the statement of Numbers 31:40 that ‘32 of these virgins were given as tribute to the Lord.’ The context explains what this exactly means:
“The LORD said to Moses, ‘Take the count of the booty that was taken, both of man and of beast, you and Elea’zar the priest and the heads of the fathers’ houses of the congregation; and divide the booty into two parts, between the warriors who went out to battle and all the congregation. And levy for the LORD a tribute from the men of war who went out to battle, one out of five hundred, of the persons and of the oxen and of the asses and of the flocks; take it from their half, and give it to Elea’zar the priest as an offering to the LORD. And from the people of Israel’s half you shall take one drawn out of every fifty, of the persons, of the oxen, of the asses, and of the flocks, of all the cattle, and give them to the Levites who have charge of the tabernacle of the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea’zar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses. Now the booty remaining of the spoil that the men of war took was: six hundred and seventy-five thousand sheep, seventy-two thousand cattle, sixty-one thousand asses, and thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had not known man by lying with him. And the half, the portion of those who had gone out to war, was in number three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, and the LORD’s tribute of sheep was six hundred and seventy-five. The cattle were thirty-six thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was seventy-two. The asses were thirty thousand five hundred, of which the LORD’s tribute was sixty-one. The persons were sixteen thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was thirty-two persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which was the offering for the LORD, to Elea’zar the priest, as the LORD commanded Moses. From the people of Israel’s half, which Moses separated from that of the men who had gone to war- now the congregation’s half was three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, thirty-six thousand cattle, and thirty thousand five hundred asses, and sixteen thousand persons- from the people of Israel’s half Moses took one of every fifty, both of persons and of beasts, and gave them to the Levites who had charge of the tabernacle of the LORD; as the LORD commanded Moses. Then the officers who were over the thousands of the army, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, came near to Moses, and said to Moses, ‘Your servants have counted the men of war who are under our command, and there is not a man missing from us. And we have brought the LORD’s offering, what each man found, articles of gold, armlets and bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and beads, to make atonement for ourselves before the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea’zar the priest received from them the gold, all wrought articles. And all the gold of the offering that they offered to the LORD, from the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, was sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty shekels. (The men of war had taken booty, every man for himself.) And Moses and Elea’zar the priest received the gold from the commanders of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it into the tent of meeting, as a memorial for the people of Israel before the LORD.” Numbers 31:25-54 RSV
Thus, the context shows that the virgins who were set apart for the Lord were to be given to God’s ministers, the priests.
As one can see from the preceding data, the laws prescribed in the Holy Bible are actually for the benefit and protection of the woman’s honor and integrity. This is unlike Islam, which permits Muslims to rape and sell slave women at will:
http://answering-islam.org/Silas/femalecaptives.htm
http://www.muhammadanism.org/Hadith/Topics/Adultery.htm
http://answer-islam.org/Rape.html
END
And you do need stop confusing your god and profit with the glorious Lord Jesus:
Now when you pretend to be man enough to debate me on paltalk let me know via email so I can show everyone what I will do to you and profit for your lies, blasphemies, and shameless attempt of defending the filthy and immoral actions of your deen. Like I said, Muslims like you are causing more people to abandon the lie of Islam since you help them to see how evil Muhammad truly was: https://www.facebook.com/alltomislamse/videos/1715784138685984/?pnref=story
LikeLike
And you will really love this one since it is by an agnostic who literally obliterates the lie that the Quran accurately foretells the development of the human embryo. Study his arguments and employ them in your witness: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMT_kNtOTIs
LikeLike
Stick to one discussion, don’t to another topic. First try defend it and let’s move to the next discussion.
These girls did NOT hit puberty. they were children, as the following translations show:
Jubilee Bible 2000 – “But all the FEMALE CHILDREN that have not known a man by lying with him keep alive for YOURSELVES.” – Numbers 31:18
Webster’s Bible – “Translation But all the FEMALE CHILDREN that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.” – Numbers 31:18
Shaye J. D. Cohen who is a renowned Professor writes that the word lachem (yourselves) used in the verse is meant sexually:
“Moses enjoins upon the returning warriors to kill their Midianite female captives who have lain with a man, but ‘spare for yourselves every young woman who has not had carnal relations with a man’; WE MAY BE SURE THAT ‘FOR YOURSELVES’ MEANS THAT THE WARRIORS MAY ‘USE’ THEIR VIRGIN CAPTIVES SEXUALLY.52 The law in numbers differs from the law in Deuteronomy- perhaps the most significant distinction is that the law in Deuteronomy does not care whether the captive is a virgin or not- but it too permits Israelite warrior to marry (or ‘marry) a foreign woman.”
In the same page, in footnote 52, Professor Shaye J.D. Cohen goes further on the verse, he writes:
“I do not know why the new Jewish version omits ‘for yourselves’; the Hebrew lakhem is unambiguous. That the intent of ‘FOR YOURSELVES’ IS SEXUAL OR MATRIMONIAL IS OBVIOUS; the passage is correctly understood by Rabbi Simeon Yohai in the Sifrei ad loc (177 212H).” [4]
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/14/bible-does-numbers-3118-sanction-pre-pubescent-marriages-child-marriage-2/
So we see not just from Professor Shaye Cohen but ancient Rabbis that these pre-pubescent girls were used by Jesus’s warrior men for their sexual pleasure. Disgusting!!!
Furthermore, Whedon, Peter Pett, NIV and John Dummelow commentaries all say these females were married within a month. Yes a MONTH, pre-pubescent girls were forced into marriage. The four commentaries mentioned all use Deuteronomy 21:10-14, clearly this passages endorses rape and FORCED marriage with pre-pubescent girls:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
There you have it Shamoon, your Bible endorses RAPE, FORCED marriage and many more filthy things.
LikeLike
You are like your profit who would lie without shame thinking he could get away with it. Here is my response to your wicked, shameless butchering of Deuteronomy 21:10-14 FOR THE THIRD:
To now further add insult to injury, let me further break down Deuteronomy 21:10-14 to show how this passage condemns Muhammad as an adulterer and rapist:
“When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and attracted to her, YOU MAY TAKE HER AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband AND SHE SHALL BE YOUR WIFE. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her (innitah).” Deuteronomy 21:10-14
The word innitah comes from anah. Now let us see how other versions render this word in v. 14:
“But if you aren’t pleased with her, you must send her away as she wishes. You are not allowed to sell her for money or treat her as a slave because you have HUMILIATED her.” Common English Bible
“It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go [c]wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money, you shall not [d]mistreat her, because you have HUMBLED her.” New American Standard Bible
But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have DISHONORED her. New Revised Standard Version
And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not deal with her as a slave, because thou hast HUMBLED her. Jewish Publication Society 1917
And it will be, if you do not desire her, then you shall send her away wherever she wishes, but you shall not sell her for money. You shall not keep her as a servant, because you have AFFLICTED her. Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary
The reason why these versions rendered the word anah as dishonored, humbled, afflicted etc. is because the word is not being used here in the sense of forcing the captive woman to have sex, but of dishonoring or humiliating her by divorcing her and sending her on her way. That this word can and does mean refer to dishonoring someone, and not forcing them to have sex, is easily seen from the way this word is used in the following verses:
“This shall be a perpetual statute for you so that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and do no work of any kind, whether it is the native citizen or the stranger who sojourns among you. For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you to cleanse you, so that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord. It shall be a sabbath, a solemn rest for you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves. It is a perpetual statute. The priest, who is anointed and consecrated to minister as a priest in the place of his father, shall make atonement, and shall put on the linen garments, the holy garments. And he shall make atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, for the tent of meeting, and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation.” Leviticus 16:29-33
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation to you, and you shall HUMBLE yourselves, and offer a food offering made by fire to the Lord. You shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement to make atonement for you before the Lord your God. For whoever is not HUMBLED on that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people. And whoever does any work in that same day, that person I will destroy from among his people. You shall do no manner of work. It shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations in all your dwellings. It shall be to you a sabbath of complete rest, and you shall afflict your souls. On the ninth day of the month starting at the evening, from evening to evening, you shall celebrate your sabbath.” Leviticus 23:16-32
“You will have a holy assembly on the tenth day of this seventh month, and you will AFFLICT yourselves. You will not do any work on it.” Numbers 29:7
“You must carefully keep all the commandments that I am commanding you today, so that you may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the Lord swore to your fathers. You must remember that the Lord your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to HUMBLE you, and to prove you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not. He HUMBLED you and let you suffer hunger, and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man does not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord. Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your feet swell these forty years. You must also consider in your heart that, as a man disciplines his son, so the Lord your God disciplines you… who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your fathers did not know, that He might HUMBLE you and that He might prove you, to do good for you in the end. ” Deuteronomy 8:1-5, 16
Thus, this text doesn’t permit Israelite men to rape captive women like Muhammad’s god allowed his profit and jihadi thugs. Rather, it is telling them they can only have sex with women taken captive BY FIRST MARRYING THEM! Even the very translation used by this demented liar AFFIRMS THAT THE ISRAELITES HAD TO MARRY THE CAPTIVE WOMEN, AND WERE TO SET THE FREE AND NOT SELL THEM AS SLAVES IF THEY ENDED UP DIVORCING THEM, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT WHO NOT ONLY RAPED THEM WITHOUT MARRYING THEM BUT THEN SOLD THEM OFF AFTER HE GOT DONE VIOLATING THEM!
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like AND WANT TO MARRY HER. 12 take her your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, YOU MAY MARRY HER. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. since you forced her to have intercourse with you, YOU CANNOT TREAT HER AS A SLAVE AND SELL HER.
OUCH!
MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOU CANNOT QUOTE A SINGLE VERSE FROM THE BIBLE WHICH SAYS THAT ISRAELITES OR BELIEVES CAN RAPE MARRIED WOMEN THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN CAPTIVE, UNLIKE YOUR WICKED PROFIT!
DOUBLE OUCH!!!!
You could only wish that your profit had shown the same decency and civility towards captive women that this passage from Deuteronomy does, a passage which predates your filthy Quran by approximately 2200 years!
Like I said, keep producing your trash and filth and keep watching hundreds of thousands leave your wicked and filthy deen to the glory of Christ, Muhammad’s God and Judge!
With that said give me a time and date when you can come to my paltak room so we can compare Deuteronomy 21:10-14 with the filth of Quran 4:24 and your profit’s implementation of it so all can see how well you do defending your garbage.
LikeLike
i know I am casting pearls before swine in dealing with you because it is impossible to shame an idolater who blindly follows and justifies the filth and immorality of Muhammad. But here goes!
Here is the obliteration to your lie:
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/antagonizing.htm
http://answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/mo_antagonizer.html
And let me demolish your filthy gross perversion of Deuteronomy 21:10-14, since you have it confused with your wicked profit raping married women:
BEGIN
For instance, the following verse permits Muslim men (which includes Muhammad himself) to sleep with married women whom they have taken captive:
Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath God ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, – desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and God is All-knowing, All-wise. S. 4:24 Y. Ali
Tragically, this did not remain a mere abstraction but was readily put into practice by Muhammad’s sexually craved jihadists:
Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri: O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger mentioning al-‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger, and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371)
And:
Abu Said al-Khudri said: The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess’. That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150)
This same narration is found in all of the major hadith collections:
Chapter 36. What Has Been Related (About A Man) Who Captures A Slave Woman That Has A Husband, Is It Lawful For Him To Have Relations With Her?
1132. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri narrated: We got some captives on the day of Awtas, and they had husbands among their people. They mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah, so the following was revealed: And women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess. (Hasan) (English Translation of Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Compiled by Imam Hafiz Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad Ibn ‘Eisa At-Tirmidhi, From Hadith No. 544 to 1204, translated by Abu Khaliyl (USA), ahadith edited and referenced by Hafiz Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: November 2007], Volume 2, p. 502; underline emphasis ours)
And:
1137. Jabir bin ‘Abdullah narrated: “We practiced ‘Azl while the Qur’an was being revealed.” (Sahih)
(Abu ‘Eisa said:) The Hadith of Jabir is a Hasan Sahih Hadith. It has been reported from him through other routes.
There are those among the people of knowledge, among the Companions of the Prophet and others, who permitted ‘Azl. Malik bin Anas said: “The permission of the free woman is to be requested for ‘Azl, while the slave woman’s permission need not be requested.” (Ibid., Chapter 39. What Has Been related About ‘Azl, p. 507)
Finally:
(3) 3016. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “On the Day of Awtas, we captured some women who had husbands among the idolaters. SO SOME OF THE MEN DISLIKED THAT, so Allah, Most High, revealed: ‘And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….’” (Sahih)
[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.
(4) 3017. Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri said: “we captured some women on the Day of Awtas and they had husbands among their people. That was mentioned to the Messenger of Allah so Allah revealed: ‘…And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess….” (Sahih)
[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan.
This is how it was reported by Ath-Thawri, from ‘Uthman Al-Batti, from Abu Al-Khalil, from Abu Sa‘eed Al-Khudri from the Prophet and it is similar. “From Abu ‘Alqamah” is not in this Hadith and I do not know of anyone who mentioned Abu ‘Alqamah in this Hadith except in what Hammam mentioned from Qatadah. Abu Al-Khalil’s name is Salih bin Abi Mariam. (Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Volume 5, From Hadith No. 2606 to 3290, Chapter 4. Regarding Surat An-Nisa’, pp. 331-332; capital and underline emphasis ours)
Thus, Muhammad and his deity condoned and encouraged men to virtually rape their female captives whether they were married or not.
Now unless this taqiyyist wants us to believe that such women whose families had just been murdered and (in some cases) whose husbands were still alive would actually consent to having sex with their captors, it should be apparent that the Islamic deity is actually permitting, and even encouraging, rape and adultery in his so-called holy book!
How truly sad and tragic for these women that Muhammad and his god did not share the shame and concern of the jihadists regarding the highly unethical nature of raping captives whose husbands were still alive. Instead, Allah and his messenger rushed to justify such a perverted and heinous crime!
Contrast this filth with what Deuteronomy teaches concerning the issue of female captives:
“When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.” Deuteronomy 21:10-14
Here we see that, instead of permitting men to rape captive women, the Holy Bible forces the Israelites to marry them if they wanted to have sex with them, and then letting them go free in case of a divorce. This means that the Holy Bible is actually dignifying these women by not allowing them to be treated the way Allah and his “messenger” had them treated, namely like animals. Now this is a command which predates the Quran by approximately 2200 years!
To say that such an injunction was truly shocking and revolutionary for that time period would be a wild understatement, just as the following commentaries illustrate:
“The law focuses on the rights of the woman by stating that the man who marries a female prisoner of war and subsequently becomes dissatisfied with her, for whatever reasons, is not permitted to reduce her to slavery. Such a woman had legal rights in ancient Israel, and moral obligations ensue from the fact that the man initiated a sexual relationship with her. Perhaps the most significant conclusion to draw from this text is the respect for the personhood of a captured woman. A primary concern in the laws of Deut 21–25 is for protecting the poor and vulnerable in society from exploitation on the part of the powerful.” (Duane L. Christensen, Word Biblical Commentary: Deuteronomy 21:10–34:12 [Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN 2002], Volume 6b, p. 475; bold emphasis ours)
“Throughout the ancient Mediterranean world, captive women of vanquished peoples were assumed to be the due sexual prerogative of the victors. This law exceptionally seeks to provide for the human rights of the woman who falls into this predicament… the verb ‘inah is also sometimes used for rape, and its employment here astringently suggests that the sexual exploitation of a captive woman, even in a legally sanctioned arrangement of concubinage, is equivalent to rape.” (Robert Alter, The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary [W. W. Norton & Company, 2008], p. 982; bold emphasis ours)
“The instructions given for the treatment of female captives in Deuteronomy 21:10-14 take it for granted that a conquering army have the right to dispose of the conquered population in any way that it wishes. It is hard for those coming from a different cultural context to see this as anything other than appalling, but this approach would have been unquestioned within the ancient Near East, and we have to see these instructions within that setting. What is remarkable is that although the woman may have had no choice in the matter–the soldier who fancied her has every right to make her this wife–nevertheless her identity as a human being is at least to some extent recognized. She is not to be thrown into the new situation but must be allowed time to mourn for her parents and her past life… Within these oppressive situations the laws are geared to provide at least a level of protection for the women involved… Women who were bought as wives or captured in war and taken as wives could not be sold as slaves or even neglected (Ex 21.11; Deut 21.14).” (The IVP Women’s Bible Commentary, eds. Catherine Clark Kroeger & Mary J. Evans [InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL 2002], pp. 100, 102)
“The space given for weeping is not primarily a period of mourning (though it is perhaps to be assumed that the woman’s father has died in the herem; 20:13, 15). Rather, it is given in compassionate consideration of the large adjustment she must make, and the accompanying trauma. It is an acknowledgment, too, that her former life is ended and a new life is to begin (cf. Ps. 45:10). The hints of compassion breaking through the brutality of the age reflect an awareness of divine compassion, however limited by the thought climate of the times.” (Ian Cairns, Word and Presence: A Commentary on the book of Deuteronomy (International Theological Commentary), [William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI 1992], p. 189; bold emphasis ours)
For more on the humanitarian nature of this OT passage we recommend the following article: A note on the humanitarian character of Deut 21.10-14.
Unfortunately, there’s more to the story. The so-called sound ahadith report that Muhammad taught that Allah has predestined the amount of adultery a person must necessarily commit:
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:
I did not see anything so resembling minor sins as what Abu Huraira said from the Prophet, who said, “Allah has written for the son of Adam his INEVITABLE share of adultery whether he is aware of it or not: The adultery of the eye is the looking (at something which is sinful to look at), and the adultery of the tongue is to utter (what it is unlawful to utter), and the innerself wishes and longs for (adultery) and the private parts turn that into reality or refrain from submitting to the temptation.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 77, Number 609)
Verily Allah has fixed the very portion of adultery which a man will indulge in, and which he OF NECESSITY MUST COMMIT (or there would be no escape from it). (Sahih Muslim, Book 033, Number 6421; see also Number 6422)
In other words, these Muslims were only carrying out the very sexual filth which their god had predestined for them!
END
With that said give me a time and date when you can come to my paltalk room so we can see how well you do defending the filth of your profit and your perversion of the Holy Bible. TIME AND DATE PLEASE!
I won’t be holding my breath.
LikeLike
And I am going to repost this as well just in case you missed this. OUCH!
I can’t believe that I almost let flying toilet mouth get away with this filth and blasphemy:
“Shamoun you claim to worship Jesus (God) fully, so my question is, do you also worship his pen*s?
“What about worshipping Jesus’s excrem*nt ??”
This poor pagan doesn’t realize he just gave me further ammo to prove that Muslims are nothing more than man worshipers. Note what he said about worshiping penises and excrement, and now compare that with the sick idolatrous obsession flying diarrhea’s child marrying, women enslaving/raping profit’s companions showed to him:
BEGIN
Unless noted otherwise most of our quotations will be taken from a classical Sunni work, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta’rif huquq al-Mustafa (Healing by the recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), authored by a Muslim scholar named Qadi ‘Iyad Ibn Musa al-Yahsubi. We will be using Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley’s English translation, published by Madinah Press (Inverness, Scotland, U.K., third reprint 1991, paperback). All capital emphasis mine.
OBSESSIVE MUSLIM BEHAVIOUR AND DEVOTION TO MUHAMMAD
The worship which Muslims gave (give) to Muhammad can be seen from situations where his followers would drink Muhammad’s urine and smear his spittle on themselves, thinking that they would receive a blessing or a cure as a result of it!
One of the scholars concerned with reports about the Prophet and his qualities related that when he wanted to defecate, the earth split open and swallowed up his faeces and urine, and it gave off a fragrant smell.
Muhammad ibn Sa’d, al-Waqidi’s scribe, related that ‘A’isha said to the Prophet, “When you come from relieving yourself, we do not see anything noxious from you.” He said, “‘A’isha, don’t you know that the earth swallows up what comes out of the prophets so that none of it is seen?”
Although this tradition is not famous, the people of knowledge still mention the purity of his faeces and urine…
There was also a time when Malik ibn Sinan DRANK HIS BLOOD on the Day of Uhud AND LICKED IT UP. The Prophet allowed him to do that and then said, “THE FIRE WILL NOT TOUCH YOU.”
Something similar occurred when ‘Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr DRANK CUP BLOOD. The Prophet said, “Woe to you from the people and woe to the people from you,” BUT HE DID NOT OBJECT TO WHAT HE HAD DONE.
Something similar is related about when a woman DRANK SOME OF HIS URINE. He told her, “YOU WILL NEVER COMPLAIN OF A STOMACH-ACHE.”
He did not order any of them to wash their mouths out NOR DID HE FORBID THEM TO DO IT AGAIN.
The hadith of the woman drinking the urine IS SOUND. Ad-Daraqutni follows Muslim and al-Bukhari who relate it in the Sahih. The name of this woman was Baraka, but they disagree about her lineage. Some say that it was Umm Ayman, a wooden cup he placed under his bed in which he would urinate during the night. One night he urinated in it and when he examined it in the morning there was nothing in it. He asked Baraka about that. She said, “I got up and felt thirsty, SO I DRANK IT WITHOUT KNOWING.” The hadith is related by Ibn Jurayj and others.
The Prophet was born circumcised with his umbilical cord cut… (pp. 35-37)
Note that the drinking of blood is a clear violation of God’s true Word, the Holy Bible:
“If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood. Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.” Leviticus 17:10-14
“but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood… For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.” Acts 15:28-29
They even violated the commands of the Quran!
He has only forbidden you what dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 2:173 Shakir
Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter, and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you divide by the arrows; that is a transgression. This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 5:3 Shakir
Say: I do not find in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be what has died of itself, or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine — for that surely is unclean — or that which is a transgression, other than (the name of) Allah having been invoked on it; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 6:145 Shakir
He has only forbidden you what dies of itself and blood and flesh of swine and that over which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 16:115 Shakir
Muhammad and his followers were therefore guilty of sinning against God. Iyad continues:
When Quraysh sent ‘Urwa ibn Mas’ud to the Messenger of Allah in the year of al-Hudaybiyya, he saw the unparalleled respect which his Companions displayed towards him. Whenever he did ‘wudu they ran to get his leftover ‘wudu water and nearly fought over it. If he spat they took it with their hands and wiped it on their faces and bodies. If a hair of his fell they ran to get it. If he commanded them to do something, they ran to do his command. If he spoke, they lowered their voices in his presence. They did not stare at him due to their respect for him. When he returned to Quraysh, he said, “People of Quraysh! I have been to Chosroes in his kingdom, and Caesar in his kingdom and the Negus in his kingdom, but by Allah, I have not seen any king among his people treated anything like the way Muhammad is treated by his Companions.” …
Anas said, “I saw the Messenger when his hair was being shaved. His companions were around him and whenever a lock fell, a man picked it up.” (Iyad, pp. 236-237)
The sahih ahadith narrate the same thing:
… Before embracing Islam Al-Mughira was in the company of some people. He killed them and took their property and came (to Medina) to embrace Islam. The Prophet said (to him, “As regards your Islam, I accept it, but as for the property I do not take anything of it. (As it was taken through treason). Urwa then started looking at the Companions of the Prophet. By Allah, whenever Allah’s Apostle spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) WHO WOULD RUB IT ON HIS FACE AND SKIN; if he ordered them they would carry his orders immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke to him, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect. Urwa returned to his people and said, “O people! By Allah, I have been to the kings and to Caesar, Khosrau and An-Najashi, yet I have never seen any of them respected by his courtiers as much as Muhammad is respected by his companions. By Allah, if he spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them, they would carry out his order immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891)
END
OUCH!
Here we have Muhammad permitted his followers to drink his piss, blood, dirty disgusting left over water, and smear his filthy saliva all over them, and this pagan flying stone kisser has the audacity to ask me if I worship penises and excrement! ROFL!
Man what a joke!
And seeing that this blasphemous idolater believes that it is his god who created piss and excrement, does this mean he believes that his false deity full of crap!
There is more to this sick, demonic idolatrous obsession with flying carpet’s immoral profit. According to Qadi ‘Iyad, this veneration and worship doesn’t cease now that Muhammad is dead:
BEGIN
It is just as necessary to have esteem and respect for the Prophet after his death as it were when he was alive. This means to show it whenever the Prophet, his hadith or sunna are mentioned, when anyone hears his name or anything about his life or how his family and relatives behaved. It includes respect for the People of his House (ah al-bayt) and his Companions…
Abu Humayd said, “Abu Ja’far, the Amir al-Mu’minin, had a dispute with Malik in the Prophet’s mosque. Malik said to him, ‘Amir al-Mu’minin, do not raise your voice in this mosque. Allah taught the people how to behave by saying, “Do not raise your voices above the Prophet” (49:2) He praises people with the words, “Those who lower their voices in the presence of the Messenger of Allah.” (49:3) He censures people, saying, “Those who call you…” Respect for him when he is dead is the same as respect for him when he was alive.”
“Abu Ja’far was humbled by this. He asked Malik, ‘Abu Abdullah, do you face qibla when you supplicate or do you face the Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘Why would you turn your face from him when he is YOUR MEANS and the means of your father, Adam, to Allah on the Day of Rising? I face him and ASK HIM to intercede and Allah will grant his intercession. Allah says, “If, when you wronged yourselves, they had come to you.”‘” (4:64) (pp. 237-238)
Here is a man who faces Muhammad’s grave when he prays, and actually prays to Muhammad in order to ask him for intercession!
And:
When there were many people around Malik, he was asked, “If only you would appoint someone to whom you could dictate and then he could make the people hear.” He replied, “Allah said, ‘O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet.’ (49:2) The respect due to him when he is dead is the same when he was alive.”
Ibn Sirin used to laugh at times but when the hadiths of the Prophet were mentioned in his presence he became humble. When a hadith of the Prophet was recited, ‘Abdu’r-Rahman ibn Mahdi commanded them to be silent, saying, “Do not raise your voice above the voice of the Prophet.” He interpreted the above as meaning that the people must be silent when the Prophet’s hadiths are recited, just as if they were listening to him speaking. (p. 239)
Praying for Muhammad and visiting his grave also violates the Holy Scriptures which prohibit believers from contacting the dead:
“When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a wizard or a necromancer, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God, for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this.” Deuteronomy 18:9-14
“And when they say to you, ‘Inquire of the mediums and the necromancers who chirp and mutter,’ should not a people inquire of their God? Should they inquire of the dead on behalf of the living? To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.” Isaiah 8:19-20
END
Now what was that about you guys not being Muhammadans!
Like I said, anytime this vile idolatry dares to blaspheme his God and Creator Jesus Christ, Muhammad’s Judge and Destroyer, I promise to expose his profit to further shame and disgrace.
And Williams, instead of worrying about controlling me, be consistent and start muzzling and taming these wicked blasphemous swine whom you allow to hurl insults, blasphemies and foul language even against brothers like Ken who go out of their way to show them respect and love, none of which they deserve.
Anyway Williams, nice chatting with you. Enjoy the rest of your day friend!
LikeLike
You are like your LORD Paul who would lie and endorse people likeyou to use christian-Taqiyya to further Christianity
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/28/1-corinthians-9-apostle-pauls-missionary-deception-taqiyya/
Bear in mind readers, the rape that is sanctioned in Deuteronomy 21:10-14, this is not my claim but rather what CHRISTIAN SCHOLARS themselves say:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE with you, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
What Scam-Moon deceptively hides the fact is that even though they were married, these women were FORCED into the marriage. They were FORCED to have intercourse as the GNT translation shows. But let’s look further what Christian scholars say:
According to the Book: ‘The International Standard Bible Encloypedia’, the Hebrew word ‘Anah’ means:
1. OT.-A. As a verb. 1. Sexual Intercourse. Heb. ‘ana’ is used in Gen. 34:2 of Shechem’s RAPE of Dinah. Ezekiel condemns the men of Jerusalem who ‘humble’ (ana) women ‘unclean in their impurity’ (22:10). The verb is thus a EUPHEMISM FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (cf. Dt. 21:14; 22:24, 29) AND IS FREQUENTLY EQUIVALENT TO RAPE (Jgs. 19:24; 20:5; 2S. 13:12, 14, 22, 32; Lam. 5:11). [2]
Biblical Scholar K. Renato Lings also echoes the same words as the previous statement on the word ‘Anah’, he writes:
“The verb ‘anah’ is deployed in some parts of the HB to describe seduction, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR RAPE-LIKE SCENARIOS. On account of its primary meaning ‘OPPRESS’ OR ‘HUMILIATE’, SEXUAL AGGRESSION is regarded as an act of humiliation. In genesis 34:2, for instance, Shechem saw Jacob’s daughter Dinah and took her, lay with her and ‘humiliated’ or ‘debased’ her.” [3]
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/12/does-deuteronomy-2110-14-condemn-rape-or-does-it-sanction-rape-forced-marriage/
So we see the ‘Humane’ teaching by Sham-Moon in reality is RAPE.
LikeLike
Why waste time on this retard, he is a total sad case, Whatsit is a despicable ‘person’ at the end throws some ‘nice words’ to Make PW happy, ignore this pathetic attention seeker for life!!!!
LikeLike
lolol my goodness… sam i have readevery single one of your posts and articles and still you recirculate the same repetitive bogus arguments that have not directly engaged the direct rebuttals that have obliviated your false pesumption and conjectured eisegesis where you have merely introduced your own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the Quranic text..lol..and intentionally not engaged and left out biblical contextual commentaries and traditions that have drilled holes in your feeble attempt to save your scriptures, especially Deut lolol…😂
Like we said, anytime your vile idolatry dares to blaspheme our God and Creator Allah, Jesus’s Judge and Creato, we promise to expose your pre-existing god the son biblical commands and you sammy to further shame and disgrace.
Sammy boy you consistently vomit wicked blasphemous insults, blasphemies and foul language against our brothers here who go out of their way to show you respect and love, none of which they deserve…
sammy please keep posting your incompetent bogus articles that continuously reflect you are wondering in maze of polytheism and deceit…
and Flying Pir keep up the fantastic direct rebuttals to Sam’s feeble arguments and misinformation… you have dismantled his falsehoods over and over mashallah .
.great work!…. just tone down the language a little..lol…
LikeLike
This couldn’t be any more timely in light of Converted2Islam’s video where he lists Muhammad’s enslaving, raping and selling women whom he had taken captive as one of many reasons why he left this evil religion. Pray for the plight of these poor girls, that our risen Lord will arise in their defense and protection: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/islamic-state-tightens-grip-on-captives-held-as-sex-slaves/ar-AAi96Ta?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout
So what was that about Safiyyah and Quran 4:24, and flying verbal diarrhea’s supposedly refuting me? 😉
LikeLike
Sham-Moon, here is the true Christianity in work, raping and murdering in the name of Jesus.
LRA rebels step up attacks, abduct children in C.Africa: UN. Brief statement on what the LRA (Lord’s Resistance Army) have done in the past few months:
“The Lord’s Resistance Army rebels, who mutilate civilians and kidnap children to use as fighters and SEX SLAVES, stepped-up attacks and abductions in the Central African Republic during the first three months of this year, the United Nations said on Wednesday.” – 13th June 2016
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2016/06/16/lra_rebels_step-up_attacks_in_the_central_african_republic/1237585
Let me guess where they get their teachings from? Oops, the Bible sanctions rape and genocide:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. SINCE YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE WITH YOU, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
And what about Safiyya? Your lies have been refuted here:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/07/04/safiyyah-huyayy-kinana-and-khaybar-affair/
There are more Christian Militias who rape and commit genocide in the name of Lord Jesus (God) who endorsed such in the Old Testament.
LikeLike
This couldn’t be any more timely in light of Converted2Islam’s video where he lists Muhammad’s enslaving, raping and selling women whom he had taken captive as one of many reasons why he left this evil religion. Pray for the plight of these poor girls, that our risen Lord will arise in their defense and protection: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/islamic-state-tightens-grip-on-captives-held-as-sex-slaves/ar-AAi96Ta?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout
So what was that about Safiyyah and Quran 4:24? 😉
LikeLike
Sham-Moon, here is the true Christianity in work, raping and murdering in the name of Jesus.
LRA rebels step up attacks, abduct children in C.Africa: UN. Brief statement on what the LRA (Lord’s Resistance Army) have done in the past few months:
“The Lord’s Resistance Army rebels, who mutilate civilians and kidnap children to use as fighters and SEX SLAVES, stepped-up attacks and abductions in the Central African Republic during the first three months of this year, the United Nations said on Wednesday.” – 13th June 2016
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2016/06/16/lra_rebels_step-up_attacks_in_the_central_african_republic/1237585
Let me guess where they get their teachings from? Oops, the Bible sanctions rape and genocide:
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. SINCE YOU FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE WITH YOU, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.
And what about Safiyya? Your lies have been refuted here:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/07/04/safiyyah-huyayy-kinana-and-khaybar-affair/
There are more Christian Militias who rape and commit genocide in the name of Lord Jesus (God) who endorsed such in the Old Testament.
LikeLike
😂😂oh Shammy..May Allah, the Lord of Muhammad and Jesus cure you from dimenture..ameen!..your oft-repeated diarrhea misinformation about Safiyyah and Quran 4:24 has been exposed and refuted over and over..lol..the fact that you compare Isis with Islam is like lolol…
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=if+isis+is+islam+then+this+is+a+mercedes&prmd=ivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiB6ZnP4d_NAhVIJ5QKHRsrAvoQ_AUIBygB&biw=360&bih=512#imgrc=lgGVmwahf257VM%3A
im actually starting to feel sorry for you now shammy!…do you want to talk about it!?..lol..
in the meantine shammy go worship your false pre-existing god the son who biblically commands to the enslaving, raping and selling of women taken captive exactly like your ISIS friends…😉
LikeLike
Intellect I’m going to delete this comment – just to give you a bit of warning
LikeLike