In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.
CHRISTIANITY–SEX SLAVES & PREPUBESCENT GIRLS
The Answering Islam Christian apologist and critic (on the Internet) wrote: “Slave-girls are sexual property for their (Muslim) male owners. The Quran in Sura 4:24 says: And forbidden to you are wedded wives of other people except those who have fallen in your hands (as prisoners of war) . . . (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 319). “No sex or marriage should take place between married female prisoners of war and their captors. In fact, no sex should take place between women captives and their Muslim overlords. But Islam traffics in injustice too often. Islam allows deep immorality with women who are in their most helpless condition. This crime is reprehensible, but Allah wills it nonetheless—the Quran says so. See also Suras 4:3; 23:5-6; 33:50; 70:22-30, all of which permit male slave-owners to have sex with their slave-girls. Suras 23:5-6 and 70:22-230 allow men to have sex with them in the Meccan period, during times of peace before Muhammad initiated his skirmishes and wars while being based in Medina. The hadith demonstrate that Muslim jihadists actually have sex with the captured women, whether or not they are married.” (Highlight added).
Response: Qur’an 4:3; 23:5-6; 33:50; 70:22-30 speak about whom your right hands possess; this phrase relates to captives of war, (and includes both male and female), but it does not mean that the Muslim man can have sex with female captives outside of marriage.
Sura 4:3-4 allows the Muslim man to marry up to four wives (see Islam-polygamy); it says: “…marry such women as seem good to you, two, or three, or four; but if you fear that you will not do justice, then (marry) only one or that which your right hands possess. This is more proper that you may not do injustice. And give women their dowries as a free gift. ”
Clearly, Muslims are instructed to marry either a free believing women or a war-captive; and to even give them “dowries.” This verse clearly sanctions marriage between Muslims and their female captives. This is made even clearer in verse 25 which states: “And whoever of you cannot afford to marry free believing women, (let him marry) such of your believing maidens as your right hands possess…So MARRYthem with the permission of their MASTERS, and give them their dowries justly.”
Clearly, the charge that Islam allows Muslims to have illegal sex with their captives is baseless. In fact, the Prophet Mohammad taught: “The man shall have a double reward who has a slave-girl and he trains her in the best manner and he gives her the best education, then he sets her free and marries her”–(Bokhari Vol. 4 # 655; & 3:720).
Sura 23:5-6 says: “Successful indeed are the believers, who are humble in their prayers….And who restrain their sexual passions –except in the presence of their mates or those whom their right hands possess.”
(Sura 70:22-30 says the same as 23:5-6). The claim that these verses of Suras 23 and 70 being Makkan Suras allowed sex with slave women is also baseless.
Whereas Suras 23 and 70 were revealed towards the end of the early Makkan period, Sura 17 which is of the mid early Makkan period requires Muslims to not even do the things (such as touching, amorous speech and intense/sultry gazing) that lead to zinaa (sexual intercourse between people who are not married to each other; and which includes both adultery and fornication).
Here is the verse (17:32): “And go not nigh to adultery/fornication: for it is a shameful deed. And an evil, opening the road (to other evils),” and Sura 25 which is also of the same Makkan period says in verses 68 (speaking about those who will inherit paradise): “And they who call not upon another god with Allāh….nor commit adultery/fornication.”
These Suras (23, 70, 17 and 25) are of the Makkan period and it would be poor cerebration to surmise that Allāh would require abstention from illegal sex and also enjoin the commission of illegal sex. Muhammad Ali explains Qur’an 23:5-6:
“Furuj, plural of farj, indicates the part of a person which it is indecent to expose(LL), particularly the pudenda. In this sense hifz al-farjmeans generally the observing of continence, or the restraining of sexual passions.The words au ma malakat aimanu-hum, of which a literal rendering is given in the translation, usually indicate slaves. It should be noted that this chapter is a Makkan revelation, and the conditions under which slave-girls could be taken as wives were given later at Madinah; see 4:25a. If the reference here is to sexual relations, the permission regarding those whom their right hands possessmust be read subject to the conditions of 4:25. It may be added that slave-girls, when taken as wives, did not acquire the full status of a free wife, and hence they are spoken of distinctly. It may, however, be added that hifz al-farjin a wider sense means the covering of parts of the body which it is indecent to expose, and in this connection it must be borne in mind that according to Islamic rules of decency, the exposure of such parts of the body, as are generally exposed in ballrooms and theatres, is disallowed, but a certain degree of freedom is allowed to women in the presence of their husbands and female servants and to men in the presence of their wives and male servants”(much like men showering together at a gym).
Slave-girls are NOT the sexual property of their Muslim owners; slave girls are the sexual property of their Christian owners; Solomon and his son, Rehoboam, had “three hundred” and “sixty” concubines between the two of them. (More on this further on).
Answering Islam continues: “Moreover, jihadists may not practice coitus interruptus with the women they capture, but not for the reason that the reader may expect. While on a military campaign and away from their wives, Muslim jihadists “received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus.” They asked the prophet about this, and it is important to note what he did not say. He did not scold them or prohibit any kind of sex whatsoever. Rather, he invokes the murky, quirky doctrine of fate: It is better for you not to do so [practice coitus interruptus]. There is no person that is destined to exist, but will come to existence, till the Day of Resurrection.”
Response: Christians claim that the Bible does not allow its followers to have sex with captives is a hallucination. Here is what God (and as Christians claim that Jesus is God, here is what Jesus) commands:
“thou shalt smite every male thereof: But the women, and the little ones …shalt thou take unto thyself;”
“And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded Moses….And Moses said unto them…. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves (for the Israelites to know who was virgin they would have had to literally “finger” these little girls; this is what the Christian God, Jesus, requires)….and of WOMEN that had not known man by lying with him (virgin girls), were 32,000 (of which half, 16,000, went to the soldiers).… EVERYONE KEPT HIS BOOTY FOR HIMSELF”–(Deut.20:12-14; Numbers 31:1-53).
Note well the verse says women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, which would indicate that these were pubescent as well as prepubescent girls.
And as noted further on Ezekiel 16:4-14 says, as the Christian submits, that a girl is ready for sex upon attaining puberty. That God says in Deuteronomy 21:10-14. that a man who desires a female captive of war to be his wife, that he must first marry her does NOT negate the men having sex with female captives out of marriage. The operative word is that the man desires her to be his wife, his life’s companion, as opposed to her being his concubine. That the Biblical God does NOT oppose sex with women other than one’s wife is plainly shown in this verse where God told David, because of David’s adulterating with Uriah’s wife, that He will give his wives to his neighbor to have sex with them: “Thus saith the Lord, Behold…I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun”–(2 Samuel 12:11).
As the Biblical/Christian’s God will take one person’s wives and give them to his neighbor to have sex He can clearly have His “people” marry captives as well as adulterate with captive women and girls. Moreover, if it was forbidden to have sex with women other than your wives it is doubtful that Solomon and his son, Rehoboam, both kings/rulers and even prophet(s) (and who came AFTER Moses) would have “three hundred” and “sixty” concubines between the two of them,1 some of whom may very well have been war-captives –women and budding girls!
If Mohammad allowed his followers to have sex with their captives Mohammad was only following the Bible –as he did on other matters such as apostasy and homosexuality– until he received revelation from Allāh in the matter. And as shown above, Allāh instructs us to not only avoid adultery/fornication but also to avoid things that lead to them.
Moreover, since it was allowed for Solomon and his son to have hundreds of “concubines,” since it was allowed for Abraham to have sexual relations with his “handmaid” (as Christians claim that Hagar was a bondswoman) and to even father a son, Ishmael, with her,2 and allowed for Jacob to have sexual relations with Bilhah and Zilpah, handmaids of his wives Rachel and Leah, respectively,3 and even had sons with them that became Tribes of Israel,4 since Judah can commit adultery with his daughter-in-law, Tamarr, fathering twins,5 and can be a Tribe of Israel6 and David can commit adultery with Bathsheba7 and be prophet, where is the problem if Mohammad allowed his men to have sex with their “slave-girls?”
(As noted above, God told David, because of his dallying with Uriah’s wife, He will give his wives to his neighbor to have sex with them. What kind of a God and Book are Christians following that would have one man’s wives defiled/violated by another man? And for the sin of their husband? This is not only a desecration, it is demeaning to the wives/women and an injustice against them. Thus, deadly, ‘heavenly’ desecration and injustice and sexual violence against women “sits at the heart of” Christianity —in Jesus’ commands (as Christians say Jesus is God), and in the Bible.
Christianity “therefore” can never be a religion of peace or justice. And as it stands its cardinal doctrines are NOT even Divine revelation. Moreover, son of God belief is paganism instituted by St.(???) Paul).
Regarding Mohammad and coitus-interruptus. Onanism –named after Onan– is the Christian’s term for coitus-interruptus. According to the Bible God “slew” Judah’s eldest son, Er, because he was “wicked.” As Er did not have any offspring, Judah instructed his second son, Onan, to “Go in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.” But Onan was averse to the idea; so “when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it (his seed) on the ground (coitus interruptus).”
This act of coitus interruptus must have displeased God to such an extent that God “slew” Onan: “And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also.”–(Gen. 38:1-10).
Why then is the Christian carping at, and trying to ridicule, Mohammad (regardless of his reason) for suggesting that his followers refrain from this practice which seemed so heinous to God that He killed Onan for doing it? Christians are to sing Hosanna! Hosanna! –“Save, we pray”– to Mohammad. (Matt. 21:9; Psalm 118:25-26).
Answering Islam opines: “Mature men are allowed to marry prepubescent girls,” and he notes Qur’an 65:1, 4 where Allāh says: “O Prophet, when you divorce women, divorce them for their prescribed period, and calculate the period…..And those of your women who despair of menstruation, if you have a doubt, their prescribed time is three months, and of those, too, who have not had their courses. And the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden”–(Qur’an 65:1, 4).
Response:What needs to be pointed out is that this verse, in fact this entire section (65:1-7) is about divorce. “Iddat” is the period of waiting for a woman to know if she is pregnant.
There are three points in this verse, 65:4:
(i) women who have passed the age of menstruation
(ii) women who have not have their periods and are not certain if they are pregnant; thus they “despair of menstruation” because they are in the process of a divorce and have not yet have their courses (thinking they may be pregnant at a time when they are in a process of divorce). The ending of this verse (65:4) seems to make this explanation still clearer as it says, “And the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden.”
This verse would also include young women who suffer from what is now medically known as “Primary amenorrhea” whereby a young woman has never had a period. Because of a “genetic problem” in which the ovaries “do not make enough estrogen” to effect periods.
(iii) women whose pregnancies are confirmed.
Since the three month waiting period is to determine whether conception has occurred or not, those “who have not had their courses” could not refer to pre-pubescent girls because they could not become pregnant without having their courses, and thus it would be pointless for them to have a waiting period. Those “who have not had their courses” could only refer to women who are uncertain if they are pregnant.
Thus, Qur’an 65:4 about women “who have not had their courses” –or who “despair of menstruation”– are women whose pregnancy are not confirmed and are uncertain if they are pregnant (they may have missed a period or are late in having it and therefore are not certain if they are pregnant).
To take the matter further. Maturity is the state when a person is “fully developed.” In the physical case of a woman it is when she has breasts, pubic hair, and menstruates. Thus a ten year old and even younger who has breasts, pubic hair, and menstruates is “mature” whereas a twenty-year old and older who is flat-chested, like some models, and who may even lack pubic hair and not even menstruate is not considered “mature” and may even be considered pre-pubescent. Thus according to critics of Islam the ten year-old can have sex but the twenty-year-old cannot have sex.
Since to be pre-pubescent is to be without breasts, pubic hair and period; thus the Qur’anic women “who have not had their courses” CANNOT be pre-pubescent girls; because by its very nature PRE-pubescent girls do NOT menstruate.
If these girls are pre-pubescent and are not developed and did not have their courses when they had sex why do they need a “waiting period” to know if they are pregnant when they cannot become pregnant without first having reached the stage of having their courses?
Even if there are cases where girls become pregnant before experiencing their first periods this does not mean that they did not have breasts and pubic hair and was not of marriageable state. As noted above there are women in late teens and even later that do not have breasts and perhaps even pubic hair and may not even be menstruating, does this mean they cannot marry?
Muhammad Ali notes: “No particular age has been specified for marriage in the Islamic law (and there is none in the Bible either); in fact, with the difference of climatic conditions, there would be a difference as to the marriageable age in different countries. But the Qur’an does speak of an age of marriage which it identifies with the age of majority: “And test the orphans until they reach the marriage (nikah). Then if you find in them maturity of intellect, make over to them their property, and consume it not extravagantly and hastily, against their growing up”–(Qur’an 4:6). Thus it will be seen that the age of marriage and the age of maturity of intellect are identified with full age or the age of majority.”8
Muhammad Ali also notes: “it is wrong to identify women who have not had their courses with minors, for there may be cases in which a woman reaches the age of majority though she has not had her courses and it is with such exceptional cases that this verse deals. (Perhaps there are girls that do not get their period till in their mid teens even though they may have developed breasts and grown pubic hair). At any rate, there is no mention anywhere in the Qur’an or Tradition of minors being married or divorced. In Jurisprudence, however, the legality of the marriage of a minor when contracted by a lawful guardian is recognised.”
Muhammad Ali also points out that “there is no case on record showing that the marriage of a minor through his or her guardian was allowed by the Prophet after details of the law were revealed to him at Madinah.”9
To restate. Women “who have not had their courses” could not refer to PRE-pubescent girls because having no courses they cannot become pregnant and thus have no need for a “waiting period” to determine if they are pregnant.
Those “who have not had their courses” could only refer to women whose pregnancy are not confirmed and are uncertain if they are pregnant; and to exceptional cases where a mature woman have not yet begin to menstruate.
(Woman has the right to choose her husband–(Qur’an 2:232; 2:240). And the Prophet says: “A matron should not be given in marriage except after consulting her; and a virgin should not be given in marriage except after her permission” –(Bokhari Vol. 7, # 67, 68; Vol. 9, # 98, 100); and that “If a man gives his daughter in marriage in spite of her disagreement, such marriage is invalid”–it notes the dissolution of such a marriage by the Prophet on behalf of a “matron” who disliked the marriage her father had arranged–(Bokhari Vol. 7, # 69; Vol. 9, # 78). See Islam-women).
In contrast. It is the Bible that allows sex with pre-pubescent girls (and as Christians say Jesus is God then this is what Jesus allowed):
“Then the Lord spake unto Moses, saying…And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded Moses, and they slew ALL THE MALES….And they brought the CAPTIVES and the prey and the spoil to Moses, and Eleazar…And Moses said unto them…Now therefore kill every MALE among the LITTLE ONES (of the captives), and kill EVERY WOMAN who hath known man by lying with him (to know which woman and girls were virgins Moses and/or the soldiers must have had to physically examine them), but ALL THE WOMEN CHILDREN, that have not known a man by lying with him (virgin girls) KEEP ALIVE FOR YOURSELVES…And the Lord spake unto to Moses, saying, Take the sum of the PREY (BOOTY) that was taken, both of MAN and of beast, thou and Eleazar …And divide the PREY into two parts; between them that took the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the congregation And LEVY A TRIBUTE UNTO THE LORD….And the BOOTY, being the rest of the prey which the men of war had caught was 675,000 sheep, 72,000 cattle, and 61,000 asses, and of WOMEN that had not known man by lying with him (virgin girls), were 32,000. And the half, which was the portion of them that went out to war, was 337,500 sheep; 36,000 cattle, 30,500 asses, and 16,000 persons (virgin girls.And of the congregation’s half portion of these 16.000 virgin girls, 320 were given to the Levite priests, as “the Lord commanded Moses.” And the LORD’S TRIBUTE (of the (booty) was 675 sheep; 72 cattle; 61 donkeys; and 32 persons….the men of war had taken SPOIL (BOOTY), EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF.”
(Surely, these 16,000 young “virgin” girls who were “booty’ were taken by the “warriors” not for ploughing fields. And the 320 given to the Levite priests could have hardly been for “altar”-girl service. And as Christians say Jesus is God, then according to Christians it was Jesus who commanded that these little virgin girls be taken as sex slaves and even assigned some for himself).
Unless and until he received Divine Revelation in a matter the Prophet Mohammad followed the Bible. Thus, if Mohammad’s followers engaged in marriages to pre-pubescent girls they were only following what the Bible –Judaism and Christianity– allows. Why then carp at the Qur’an/Mohammad for doing what the Biblical/Christian’s God allows?
(Even if charges against Allāh, Islam, the Qur’an, and the Prophet Mohammad, were proved yet this would not make Jesus God or son of God or vicarious atoner or that mankind inherited sin from Adam. These doctrines are lies, falsehood and blasphemy).
Answering Islam continues: (Notably whereas the Bible does NOT give the physical age of maturity when a girl is to be married) the Christian critic wrote:
“the Holy Bible makes a reference to the general age of a girl considered for marriage. The reference is found in a parable where God likens Israel to a baby girl whom Yahweh took in and then eventually married.” The verse in reference reads: “On the day you were born your cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water to make you clean, nor were you rubbed with salt or wrapped in cloths. No one looked on you with pity or had compassion enough to do any of these things for you. Rather, you were thrown out into the open field, for on the day you were born you were despised. Then I passed by and saw you kicking about in your blood, and as you lay there in your blood I said to you, ‘Live!’ I made you grow like a plant of the field. You grew up and developed and became the most beautiful of jewels. Your breasts were formed and your hair grew, you who were naked and bare. Later I passed by, and when I looked at you and saw that you were old enough for love, I spread the corner of my garment over you and covered your nakedness. I gave you my solemn oath and entered into a covenant with you, declares the Sovereign LORD, and you became mine. I bathed you with water and washed the blood from you and put ointments on you. I clothed you with an embroidered dress and put leather sandals on you. I dressed you in fine linen and covered you with costly garments. I adorned you with jewelry: I put bracelets on your arms and a necklace around your neck, and I put a ring on your nose, earrings on your ears and a beautiful crown on your head. So you were adorned with gold and silver; your clothes were of fine linen and costly fabric and embroidered cloth. Your food was fine flour, honey and olive oil. You became very beautiful and rose to be a queen. And your fame spread among the nations on account of your beauty, because the splendor I had given you made your beauty perfect, declares the Sovereign LORD.” Ezekiel 16:4-14. God mentions that the young babe attained the age for lovemaking after her breasts had formed and her pubic hairs had grown, clear signs of puberty. The reason we believe that the reference is to pubic hair is because a) the hair on the head of a girl grows many years before reaching the time of puberty, and b) the connection to nakedness suggests that the exposure of her body parts needed to be covered since it was shameful for them to be exposed for all to see. In other words, there was no shame for the hair of a girl’s head to be uncovered, but exposing one’s pubic hairs would be.” Pay attention to the fact that it is only after the young girl attained maidenhood, puberty, that God passed by again and then proceeded to marry her. God’s spreading the corner of his garment and making a covenant with the young maiden refers to marriage.” “Thus, we have a biblical text establishing puberty as the minimum age for marriage.” (The Christian also notes the views of others and concludes): “In light of the foregoing we conclude that the Bible does set forth the acceptable age of marriage. Yahweh’s parable to his people presupposes their prior knowledge and acceptance of the marriageable age being set sometime after a young maiden has attained puberty. Anything before this would be viewed as abnormal and unusual.” (Highlight added).
Response: (The main purpose of the Christian’s bush-dance seems to be an attempt to denigrate the Prophet Mohammad for his marriage to nine-year old ‘‘Aisha, supposing that ‘Aisha was prepubescent when the Prophet had marital relations with her).
Firstly, a girl may develop breasts and pubic hair years before having her period.
Secondly, if breasts and pubic hair are the criteria for having sex what about those women who do not develop breasts (and perhaps some women may not even have pubic hair), are these adult women not ready for marriage/sex?
According to Christians the Bible is the word of God. And according to God as He revealed in Ezekiel 16:4-14 above, and as the Christian submitted, a girl is ready for marriage when her breasts are formed and she has pubic hair which are indications of puberty. According to news report and other materials on the Internet an alarming number of girls in America –from those examined, 10 percent of Whites, 14 percent of Hispanics and 23 percent of Blacks– begin puberty at the age of seven (7) years, developing breasts, pubic hair and even menstruating.
Thus, according to the Christian’s God/Bible girls of about eight or nine are capable of marriage. And as noted in ‘Aisha, “Al-Hassan bin Salih said “I saw a neighboress of mine who became a grandmother at the age of twenty-one” (the footnote to this narration explains that “This woman attained puberty at the age of nine and married to give birth to a daughter at ten; the daughter had the same experience”).
Obviously then, Arab and Jewish girls must have developed “breasts” and “pubic hair” and menstruating at an early age –which is in accordance with the Bible, Ezekiel 16:4-14– as the Christian points out (and also in accordance to modern reports). In fact, seems that Eastern girls also began/begin womanhood at the age of about seven (7) years as the Biblical declaration finds resonance in Hinduism which teaches that “after being seven years old, the sooner a girl is married, the better.”
Further, as noted in ‘Aisha, apart from Al-Hassan bin Salih’s neighboress who “attained puberty at the age of nine and married to give birth to a daughter at ten;” it notes the following reports:
-“Mom elated 10-year-old gave birth to daughter;”
-“U.S. teen birth rate at 60-year low, agency reports,” saying that the drop in births were “4 percent among girls aged 10 to 14;”
-“the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland has revealed it is paying the bills of a poor, pregnant 12-year-old to prevent her from having an abortion;”
-“At 14, Kimberly is a veteran of Toronto’s sex trade,” she “began selling her body when she was 11 years old;”
-in Costa Rica girls say “they’ve been working as prostitutes for a year, since they were 11 and 12,” the “youngest” of these prostitutes was one who was a “9-year-old;”
-“At least 17 Israeli soldiers are under investigation” for having sex with “an 11-year-old girl;” according to the girl “the sex was consensual.”
That these 12-9 year-old girls, having “breasts” and “pubic hair,” and even menstruating can be wives is substantiated by the Bible. And the 9, 10 and 11, were probably having sex before these ages.
Mohammad’s marriage to ‘Aisha is supported not only by historical and medical facts, but, whereas Christians try to denigrate Mohammad for marrying ‘Aisha, the Christian’s Bible exonerates and supports Mohammad for marrying ‘Aisha. (For the reasons for Mohammad’s many marriages see Mohammad-and Moulood).
(As noted the Christian critic states: “the Holy Bible makes a reference to the general age of a girl considered for marriage. The reference is found in a parable where God likens Israel to a baby girl whom Yahweh took in and then eventually married….You grew up and developed and became the most beautiful of jewels. Your breasts were formed and your hair grew, you who were naked and bare. Later I passed by, and when I looked at you and saw that you were old enough for love.” And as noted, the Bible sanctions sex with seven year-olds.
Jehovah’s Witnesses govern by the Biblical teaching that “ONE Witness shall NOT rise up against a man for ANY iniquity or for ANY sin”–(Deut. 19:15). The Toronto Star, Tuesday, July 3, 2012, notes in its article by Wendy Gillis, “Sex abuse verdict emboldens Canadians” which reports the story of a Jehovah’s Witnesses girl when “she was 9 years old” being “repeatedly molested” by a male “fellow churchgoer;” that if the accused denies the charges against him and there is no one to substantiate the charges then the Jehovah’s Witnesses ““elders cannot take action”” because the Scriptures say ““‘No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin.’””
It would be interesting to note the Jehovah’s Witnesses response if a 9-7 year-old Jehovah’s Witnesses girl was to have consensual sex with a Jehovah’s Witnesses adult male and if the man was charged by the State, if Jehovah’s Witnesses would apply the defense in court that the Biblical teaching allows girls who have sprouted breasts and genital hairs as being ready for sex).
Answering Islam continues: (Referring to Ezekiel 16:4-14 above, showing that a girl is ready for marriage when she develops breasts and pubic hair, the Christian apologist states):
“The foregoing also puts to rest the slander and false claim that passages such as Numbers 31:17-18 allow men to have sex with young, prepubescent girls, something nowhere stated within the chapter itself. The passage from Ezekiel establishes the point that these young girls could not be touched until they attained the age of puberty, and even then the men had to marry them as the following citation states: “When you go out to battle against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take them away captive, and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and have a desire for her and would take her as a wife for yourself, then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails. She shall also remove the clothes of her captivity and shall remain in your house, and mourn her father and mother a full month; and after that you may go in to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go WHEREVER SHE WISHES; BUT YOU SHALL CERTAINLY NOT SELL HER FOR MONEY, YOU SHALL NOT MISTREAT HER, because you have humbled her.” Deuteronomy 21:10-14. Islam, however, allows for the raping and selling of captive women even if they are married! (Cf. Sura 4:24). More importantly, the Ezekiel text provides further evidence that Muhammad was not a true prophet and that the Quran is not God’s word. Muhammad’s marriage to a prepubescent girl and the Quran allowing men to both marry and divorce prepubescents are in direct conflict with God’s true Word, the Holy Bible.” (Highlight added).
Response: As shown above the Bible supports Mohammad’s marriage to ‘Aisha; and that the verses of Qur’an 65:1, 4 are NOT about “prepubescent” girls.
Regarding Qur’an 4:24(25) which states: “And all married women except those whom your right hand possess (are forbidden for you to marry). And lawful for you are (all women) besides those, provided that you seek (them) with your property, taking (them) in marriage, not committing fornication.”
That all married women are forbidden for Muslims to marry except those whom your right hand possess (war captives) does not mean that Muslims can marry them against their wishes or can have unlawful sex with them. As Muhammad Ali explains this verse:
“It is thus forbidden to a man that he should marry a woman who is already married. An exception is made, however, regarding those whom your right hand possess, by which expression are generally meant in the Holy Qur’an those who are taken prisoners in war. It sometimes happened that such prisoners became converts to Islam, and therefore they could not be sent back. Such women it was lawful to take in marriage, even though they might not have been divorced formally by their former husbands. The words ma malakat aimanu-kum may, however, also mean those whom you have lawfully taken in marriage, because lawful possession is clearly implied in the word aiman, which signifies covenant, marriage also being a covenant. The meaning of the passage may therefore be that all free women are prohibited to you except those whom you have lawfully married.”
As shown above it is the Bible (and as Christians say Jesus is God then it is Jesus) that allows sex with captives. If it was forbidden to have sex with women other than your wives it is doubtful that Solomon and his son, Rehoboam, both kings/rulers and even prophet(s) (and who came after Moses) would have “three hundred” and “sixty” concubines between the two of them. (See next item).
Answering Islam: The Christian wrote:
“Muslims often point to Numbers 31:17-18 to show how the Holy Bible permits the raping of young girls.” Num-bers 17-18 states: “The LORD said to Moses, ‘Avenge the people of Israel on the Mid’ianites;….They warred against Mid’ian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and slew every male.…Moses said to them (his com-manders), ‘Have you let all the women live? Behold, these caused the people of Israel, by the counsel of Balaam, to act treacherously against the LORD in the matter of Pe’or, and so the plague came among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”
And the Answering Islam Christian critic states: “God commanded the Israelites to take vengeance on the Midianites, as well as the Moabites, for leading Israel into committing idolatry and sexual immorality:” “God spared the young girls as an act of mercy since they didn’t partake of the sins of the other women who lured the Israelites into committing sexual immorality, thereby angering God. Yet the Lord didn’t have to spare them and could have easily demanded that they too be destroyed with the rest. After all, from God’s perspective all flesh is born sinful which means that it is inevitable that all humans turn out to be rebel sinners who will grow up to defy God: Thus, the foregoing conclusively shows that Numbers 31 did not permit the Israelite men to spare the young virgin girls so as to rape them. They were commanded to spare them as an act of mercy since they did not share in the guilt of enticing Israel into committing sexual immorality.” (Highlight added).
Response: So the little boys and male infants were not deserving of the “act of mercy,” they also were guilty of “leading Israel into com-mitting idolatry and sexual immorality:”(???) Is this how the Christian’s God gives justice?
These “every male among the little ones” could have been kept and reared as soldiers or laborers (and men were more needed to fight wars).
And why not keep all the young girls also who had lain with men; why only the virgins? Isn’t it possible that there were mature women who had not lain with men? And how did these men know that some of these young girls had “not known man by lying with him” (they would have had to physically examine these girls and women; or they only assumed and slaughtered left right and centre and even killing innocent girls and women).
And since “from God’s perspective all flesh is born sinful which means that it is inevitable that all humans turn out to be rebel sinners who will grow up to defy God,” why then fault people when God, as Christians’ claim, loaded Adam’s sin onto them and they were Divinely destined to commit evil? And there was no “blood” of Christ then to free them. In fact, every non-Israelite of the time should have been killed to prevent them from “inevitable” becoming “rebel sinners’ and “defy God.” Evidently, the Christian’s God is not only unjust (loading Adam’s sin onto everyone) but also tyrannical (made people into “inevitable” “rebel sinners” and then killing them for being “sinners”). (Welcome to Allāh the God Who created everyone in a pure nature and forgives all sins).10
That these “virgin” girls were kept for sex is enshrined in the ending words of the verse which clearly says to “keep (them) alive for YOURSELVES.”
That “virgin” girls were/are part of the Christian’s war “booty” is cemented in this Divine edict of Numbers 31:1-53 (and as Christians say Jesus is God then this is what Jesus commanded of the war “booty”): of which even God came in for a share of booty:
“Then the Lord spake unto Moses, saying…And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded Moses, and they slew ALL THE MALES….And they brought the CAPTIVES and the prey and the spoil to Moses, and Eleazar…And Moses said unto them…Now therefore kill every MALE among the LITTLE ONES (of the captives), and kill EVERY WOMAN who hath known man by lying with him, but ALL THE WOMEN CHILDREN, that have not known a man by lying with him (virgin girls) KEEP ALIVE FOR YOURSELVES….And the Lord spake unto to Moses, saying, Take the sum of the PREY (BOOTY) that was taken, both of MAN and of beast, thou and Eleazar…And divide the PREY into two parts; between them that took the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the congregation And LEVY A TRIBUTE UNTO THE LORD….And the BOOTY, being the rest of the prey which the men of war had caught was 675,000 sheep, 72,000 cattle, and 61,000 asses, and of WOMEN that had not known man by lying with him (virgin girls), were 32,000. And the half, which was the portion of them that went out to war, was 337,500 sheep; 36,000 cattle, 30,500 asses, and 16,000 persons (virgin girls.And of the congregation’s half portion of these 16.000 virgin girls, 320 were given to the Levite priests, as “the Lord commanded Moses.” And the LORD’S TRIBUTE(of the (booty) was 675 sheep; 72 cattle; 61 donkeys; and 32 persons….the men of war had taken SPOIL (BOOTY), EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF.” (Surely, these 16,000 young “virgin” girls who were “booty’ were taken by the “warriors” not for ploughing fields. And the 320 given to the Levite priests could have hardly been for “altar”-girl service. And as Christians say Jesus is God, then according to Christians it was Jesus who commanded that these little virgin girls be taken as sex slaves and even assigned some for himself).
If it was forbidden to have sex with women other than their wives it is doubtful that Solomon and his son, Rehoboam, both kings/rulers and even prophet(s) (and who came AFTER Moses) would have “three hundred” and “sixty” concubines between the two of them. It was not forbidden for Biblical men to commit adultery. If it was, it is doubtful that five hundred years after Moses’ “thou shalt not commit adultery” Solomon and his son, Rehoboam, would have nearly four hundred concubines between the two of them.
The Bible may say “thou shalt not commit adultery;” but this directive is clearly for the married woman. According to Jews and Christians Hagar was a bondswoman. Thus according to them Abraham committed ‘adultery” with Hagar (and impregnated her and tossed her out the house) and he is the head prophets of all nations; Jacob committed “adultery” with not one but two of his wives handmaids; Judah committed adultery with his daughter-in-law. And these were prophets.
Even hundreds of years after the Mosaic law of “adultery” David committed “adultery” with Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba (God even threatened to give David’s wives to his neighbor so his neighbor can have sex with them–(2 Samuel 12:11); Solomon committed “adultery” with some three hundred concubines; and his son Rehoboam committed “adultery” with his five dozen concubines. And David and Solomon were also prophets.
That the Biblical “thou shalt not commit adultery” is to the married woman only is gleaned from the fact that it is the damsel alone without “the tokens of virginity” that is stoned to death for playing the “whore” in her father’s house. And even Jesus knew this; for when the Jews brought the woman whom they said was taken in adultery requiring that she be “stoned” as the law requires, there was no man that she committed the act with to be “stoned;” nor did Jesus asked for him.
Contrast the Bible with the Qur’an which teaches: that women slaves are to be taken as mates in marriage only, and are to be given “dowries” as a free gift:
-“…marry such women as seem good to you, two, or three, or four; but if you fear that you will not do justice, then (marry) only one or that which your right hands possess. This is more proper that you may not do injustice. And give women their dowries as a free gift”–(Qur’an 4:3-4);
-“And whoever among you cannot afford to marry free believing women, (let him marry) such as your believing maidens as your right hands possess…and give them their dowries..”–(Qur’an 4:25);
-“And marry those among you who are single, and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves”–(Qur’an 24:32).
-Muslims are forbidden to even marry the idolatrous women until they embrace Islam: “And marry not the idolatresses until they believe”–(Qur’an 2:221).
In contrast to the BIBLE WHICH DESIGNATES WOMEN AS PART OF THE WAR BOOTY, there is no place in the Qur’an where such a designation is made.
It is NOT THE QUR’AN, it is the BIBLE (and as Christians say that Jesus is God it is Jesus) that allows sex with slave girls. (For other responses to the Answering Islam Christian see Answering Islam critic; Mohammad, housefly & the critic).
1. “But king Solomon….had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines”–(1 Kings 11:1-3). “And Rehoboam….(for he took eighteen wives, and threescore concubines)”–( 2 Chr. 11:21).
2. Gen. 16:1-4.
3. Gen. 30:1-13.
4. Rev. 7: 5-8.
5. Gen. 38:11-27.
6. Rev. 7: 5-8.
7. 2 Samuel 11:2-5.
8. Muhammad Ali, The Religion of Islam, p. 600.
9. Ibid; p. 601.
10. “Certainly We created man in the best make;” “And no bearer of a burden can bear the burden of another”–(Qur’an 95:4; 17:15); “Say: O My servants who have sinned against their souls, despair not of the mercy of Allāh; surely Allāh forgives all sins. Verily, He is Most Forgiving, Ever Merciful”–Qur’an 39:53).