[MERGED]-Debmey: SHOW PROOF THAT PROPHET MOHAMMAD IS A PAEDOPHILE?

Yes, muhammad lived in the 7th century, why put him in our century? The point i was making is, muhammad the seal of prophets, God inspired, should know best NOT to engaged to such marriage because it will be condemned in the 21st century. The fact remains, his marriage to aisha will be condemned in our time thus muhammad is NOT the perfect example for all time.

Again you are missing the point.  The point it, in HIS TIME it was acceptable.  In Moses's time, it was acceptable to bed a girl of 3 years and one day of age.  Did anyone condemn that?  No?  Because it was acceptable.  We cannot also judge Abraham for marrying his half sister because in HIS TIME, it was acceptable.  All these 3 men, Abraham, Moses and Mohammad were all human, a man, a father, a husband, just like anyone else who led their daily life like any other ordinary man following the norm of their societies.  The ONLY thing that made them SPECIAL was that they were CHOSEN by God to spread HIS message.

You can't compare an apple to an orange.  Even today, in the boxing competition, we have featherweight, lightweight and heavyweight because We KNOW that it would be unfair for a person of 150kg boxing with a person of 55 kg.  Just like Bush or Mahathir Mohammd, they went to school when they were young, they were canned like any other child, they are married, they are a father, they bleed when cut, but what made them special is that they are leaders, the top person, the ONE selected to led their country.

It is you that can't comprehend the scientific proof. If this knowledge was available in the 7th century, we wont have a 53 year old man marrying a 6 year old, wont we?

Oh, finally there's a flicker of light there in your head!  If they had known back then in the 7th Century that having first menses does not equate to adulthood, would they have carried on the tradition?  As the years go by, the world progresses, what we do not know 60 years ago, we know now.  In this 21st century, the world is medically advanced, people are more educated and we can differentiate things better now then they did 2000 years ago.

That is why i asked, betrothal or marriage? Here we have hadith contradicting it self. One says marriage, the other says betrothal. Some suggest aisha was 14 when she married muhammad. So is this how it works? Discredit the 'marriage' part and accept the 'betrothal' instead so it will look good for muhammad. Pathetic.

It's lost in translation.  English translation of hadith uses the word marriage for everything, but the arabic hadith differentiate those "marriages" with zawaj (betrothed), aqd (contracted) etc etc.  That is why Muslims do not take the hadiths per say.  

Let me give you an example, if you were chosen to represent the country in, oh let say, latin language competition, would the country send you because you are so equipped with a english-latin dictionaries, or would the country chose you because you are very proficient in latin?

It's the same thing with the Quran, translation is OK BUT for the ultimate reference, it must the "original" Quran ie. arabic.

So you're using this as proof of aisha have reached puberty? You forget one thing though, she was still playing with dolls when the marriage occurs. Go ahead, do your reseach in arab culture, only girls that havent reach puberty are allowed to play with dolls.

Oh, the flicker of light in your head died!  Like I said, if they had known back then in the 7th century, heck even the Pope decretales written in the 15th century gives the age consent at 12, how could they have know that then puberty does not mean adulthood?

Have you ever seen movies where some character were transported back in time from the future, do you ever wonder why the movie director or producer never make a movie were the year was in 50s or even a century earlier with peope from that era doing things like the people in the year 2005 does?  And when this actor from the future came, he does things in a peculiar way that is alien in that particular yester year but familiar to us all?  Simply because, this future person is technically or even medically advanced compared to the yester years people he visited.

Put it this way, you know the plague that killed millions of people in the 17-18th century?  The plague was only the flu.  Have you ever seen anybody in the 21st century died of the flu (HIV/Aids patients are exeptional)?  No?  Why?  If the people in the 17-18th century were medically advanced like us in this time, they would've known how to control it, they would've known that it only requires a jab of antibiotics, but of course, they didn't because ...... I let you answer this, if you can't, I don't know what to say.

[ Last edited by samerosie on 4-3-2005 at 12:03 PM ]

DivinePonytail

Again you are missing the point.  The point it, in HIS TIME it was acceptable.  In Moses's time, it was acceptable to bed a girl of 3 years and one day of age.  Did anyone condemn that? ...

Nope, i do get you're point. Read my post to FUZZMAN.

Oh, finally there's a flicker of light there in your head!  If they had known back then in the 7th Century that having first menses does not equate to adulthood, would they have carried on the tradition?  As the years go by, the world progresses, what we do not know 60 years ago, we know now.  In this 21st century, the world is medically advanced, people are more educated and we can differentiate things better now then they did 2000 years ago.

Exactly my point. If they known then, muhammad will labelled as a child molester. Science prove the tradition, culture and muhammad were wrong. I ask you again, is muhaamad a perfect example to follow?

It's lost in translation.  English translation of hadith uses the word marriage for everything, but the arabic hadith differentiate those "marriages" with zawaj (betrothed), aqd (contracted) etc etc.  That is why Muslims do not take the hadiths per say..

Are you saying the hadith is not reliable?

Oh, the flicker of light in your head died!  Like I said, if they had known back then in the 7th century, heck even the Pope decretales written in the 15th century gives the age consent at 12, how could they have know that then puberty does not mean adulthood?

Don't side step. I ask you a valid question. Where is it in the hadith saying aisha have reached puberty. And you might also consider Faithhealer post, as to why muhammad waited 3 years to consumate aisha.

And did you do your research on child playing with dolls in arab culture?

Nope, i do get you're point. Read my post to FUZZMAN.

And as I have explained to you, as the years go by, the world progresses.  If the world had not progressed at all from the 7th Century to the 21st century, marrying a child and slavery would have been accepted now as well.  

By the way
1)  cannibalism was not the norm then either.  Can you give evidence that cannibalism was practised worldwide?  No you can't because it was only restricted to certain group of people, a few isolated tribes.

2)  Slavery still exists today by different name.  Look around you, you have foreign maids, you pay her minimal wage yet you expect her to do everything in the house from cleaning the house, minding the kids, pets and some ill parents to washing your cars.  She works 7 hours a week, 23 hours a day with no off days and no "overtime".  She walks behind you, eats after you had eaten and some gets punishment for forgetting things, doing things wrongly.  

Exactly my point. If they known then, muhammad will labelled as a child molester. Science prove the tradition, culture and muhammad were wrong.

What science in the 7th century?  Did they cure the flu with antibiotics or did they cure the flu with bathing in onions?  Medical science only developed in the late 18th and 19th century and it was only less than 60 years ago that we know about the human reproduction system ie ovaries, embryo, semens etc.

Science has helped us to understand a lot of things of traditional culture.  We wonder why it was customs to marry off your daughters after they have their menses which according to science, the body of the girls is ready for reproduction.  Science also helped us to understand that the life span of a human during those times where shorter, so people settle down earlier.

I ask you again, is muhaamad a perfect example to follow?

Yes.  Now I ask you, is Jesus a perfect example to follow?

Are you saying the hadith is not reliable?

I said the hadith is not as important as the Quran.  Hadith is accepted and taken as the way it was narrated, how and why it was done and to take into account the time of Mohammad, the norm of the society then in order to justify a particular practice.  It is not mandatory in Islam and it is recognised that certain practises change with the time (in the Sharia law this is known as the "al-urf", that takes into consideration of the changes in the customs/culture of Muslim societies, in order to determine changes in the fiqh ie jurisprudence).

Don't side step. I ask you a valid question. Where is it in the hadith saying aisha have reached puberty.

Not until you can give me your proof that aisha had not reached puberty at that age.....don't give that she was still playing with dolls.  

And you might also consider Faithhealer post, as to why muhammad waited 3 years to consumate aisha.

No, I cannot consider Faithhealer's post, and I will tell you why.  This is the whole hadith by Bukhari as narrated by Aisha

"The prophet 1) engaged me when I was a girl of six.  2) We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj.  3) Then I got ill and my hair fell down.  Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me.  She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house.  I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it.  Then she took me into the house.  There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's blessing and a good luck."  Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage).  Unexpectedly Allah's messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age."

And the same one from sahih Muslim

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine. 4) She further said: We went to Medina and I had an attack of fever for a month, and my hair had come down to the earlobes. Umm Ruman (my mother) came to me and I was at that time on a swing along with my playmates.

1)  Aisha narrated in this hadith by Bukhari that she was engaged at 6.  

2)  "We" here did not mean Mohammad and Aisha but Aisha and her mother.  Mohammad and Abu Bakar was the last person to migrate to Medina.

3)  When exactly was "then" and when exactly was "later"?  As far as we know, "then" could mean a second after an event occurred or it could also be 4-5 years after an event occurred, same thing with "then".

4)  Finally she gave a duration of illness as a month.

And did you do your research on child playing with dolls in arab culture?

You dont have to be an arab child to be playing with dolls, not only a child, any idiot can also play with dolls.   That was my research.

[ Last edited by samerosie on 4-3-2005 at 02:55 PM ]

Fuzzman

FaithHeckler wrote: That ain't no theory dude, its a fact, according to Imam Bukhari. Imam Bukhari is numero-uno when it comes to recording the crazy things p.Muhammad had said and done.

Bukhari aint' no numero-uno when it comes to the prophet because there are many others too! Bukhari is more of a self-motivated numerus incumbo whose contribution in making done the effort of recognosco frequento the thoughts and deeds of the prophet must be applauded. Do not make the mistake of counting out Abu Bakr himself whose quick thinking and strong memories played an important role in correcting issues regarding the prophet proper after the passing of the prophet. Abu Bakr was the CHOSEN first caliph that brought forth Islam to greater heights with his daughter Aishah who was pretty much instrumental in the passing on of the laws of the Quran and the life of submission to God. [Islam]

However you have yet to show that Bukhari has written an element of disdain or distaste  towards the ways of the prophet in his writings, which you cannot, in mention of the marrige of the prophet to Aishah where it must be shown that Bukhari disapproves of the contractual marriage. You must show that Bukhari has recorded for all time the paedophilia of the prophet in pure clarity and not by some hocus pocus DIY concoction only feasible to the likes of you.

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 4-3-2005 at 02:50 PM ]

Originally posted by Debmey at 4-3-2005 11:05 AM:
Aisha was a six year old, she couldn't disagree even if she wanted. Come to think of it, she confessed that she didn't even know what was happening.

At least if she was able to disagree, there was a provision that she can deny the marriage but she never did.  She could have also asked for a divorce but she never regretted marrying Mohammad and stayed with him until he passed on.

I think what your statement above should be directed to the 4-5 year old Chinese girls, they couldn't disagree even by the time they knew what's going on, they cannot get a divorce or they will have to repay their parents debt so they were stuck.

DivinePonytail

1)  cannibalism was not the norm then either.  Can you give evidence that cannibalism was practised worldwide?  No you can't because it was only restricted to certain group of people, a few isolated tribes.

Does it have to be practiced worldwide to be a culture norms?
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/ ... drugfree/sa1lk2.htm

"Cultural norms are behavior patterns that are typical of specific groups. Such behaviors are learned from parents, teachers, peers, and many others whose values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors take place in the context of their own organizational culture...."

2)  Slavery still exists today by different name.  Look around you, you have foreign maids, you pay her minimal wage yet you expect her to do everything in the house from cleaning the house, minding the kids, pets and some ill parents to washing your cars.  She works 7 hours a week, 23 hours a day with no off days and no "overtime".  She walks behind you, eats after you had eaten and some gets punishment for forgetting things, doing things wrongly.

Well this is new. Never heard of people calling foreign maid, sort of like a slave. Work is work my dear, no matter how hard it is. When one hold your life, do what they want to do to you, beat you, rape you, then thats a slave.

I'll continue later.

Does it have to be practiced worldwide to be a culture norms?
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/ ... drugfree/sa1lk2.htm

"Cultural norms are behavior patterns that are typical of specific groups. Such behaviors are learned from parents, teachers, peers, and many others whose values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors take place in the context of their own organizational culture...."
----------------
Read the whole content before you post.  Can you honestly believe this can justify your "cannibalism" culture?

Cannibalism was not the norm culture, yes it was practised by certain group of people, isolated tribes.  If it was meant to be taken generally like you posted ie culture norm, can you name any country where ALL of their people eat other people?  Did the whole of South Americans at one time practise cannibilism?  No, only isolated tribes in the Amazon did.  Was it an accepted culture worldwide, then?  No.  If yes, this would mean at one time, the inhabitants of more than 80% of the world practised cannibilism, that it was just another normal thing.



Well this is new. Never heard of people calling foreign maid, sort of like a slave. Work is work my dear, no matter how hard it is. When one hold your life, do what they want to do to you, beat you, rape you, then thats a slave.
-----
You want me to find news articles on maids beaten and raped for you?

wira_melayu

WOW!what an interesting debate we got here,sadly i'm a little to late to participate on this topic.Anyone mind to give me a headstart to where it all started?Maybe i can help on this matter eventhough i humbly admit that i do have limited knowledge on this issues:ah:
For whatever the outcome is,please don't be too scared !!

wira_melayu

Originally posted by FaithHealer3 at 26-2-2005 06:41 AM:

Wonder how long these muhammadans can go on denying the pedophilic act?

Pedophile : An adult who is sexually attracted to a child or children.
ref. [url]ht ...

yeah but you forget to tell me which dictionary you taken that from?especially the year?Does the word pedophile exist in the 13th centuries?:no:

Any court of law in the 7th,8th,9th,10th,11th,12th mention that it's illegal to married someone who is under 10?Your assumption of prophet Muhammad being a pedophile is morally baseless just like you assume that there's an aeroplane in the 2nd or 3rd centuries.Now in the 21st century you want to claim that a man in 7th centuries commit pedophile.Seriously there's no logic to it.:stp:
Did you ever ask your parents or your grandma about how old when they get married?:cak:

Since you can't prove any court ruling against the marriage at that time or even 10 centuries after that, then according to my logic you've failed again to associates prophet Muhammad with pedophile.:nana:

DivinePonytail

Read the whole content before you post.  Can you honestly believe this can justify your "cannibalism" culture?

Yes it does. Read it again. I thought you're good in school. I gave you proof, you gave me none. You only offer your worthless unsubstantiated opinion. Want further proof? Here it is;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_norm

In the practical sense a culture norm is a society's propensity towards certain ideals; their aversion from others; and their standard, ritualistic practices. Essentially what the 'norm' is a summation of typical activities and beliefs of group of people.

http://www.arts.telegraph.co.uk/ ... 3/10/22/ixconn.html

...Now we know that cannibalism was a widespread norm in the past, we need to find out why particular societies gave it up. Somewhat uncomfortably, the reason in Papua New Guinea, after the Australian government's suppression of funerary cannibalism in the Fifties, seems to have been a desire on the part of the indigenous population to be reincarnated as affluent white people.

You want me to find news articles on maids beaten and raped for you?

Ah yes, but there's a difference; slave are forced, maids work for their employer on their own will to earn money. I guess, wives that's been beaten, raped and sodomized are considered slave, according to you too right?

DivinePonytail

Yes.  Now I ask you, is Jesus a perfect example to follow?

Yes? You are being hypocritical. How can you say muhammad is the perfect example to follow, but at the same time, saying such marriage is not acceptable in our time? You don't make sense.

And how can you compare Jesus to muhammad? In my belief, Jesus is not an 'odinary' man, he's the son of God. To the trinity, He is God. We are normal human, Jesus lives the sinless life. Jesus is perfect. We are not, so is muhammad.

I said the hadith is not as important as the Quran.  Hadith is accepted and taken as the way it was narrated, how and why it was done and to take into account the time of Mohammad, the norm of the society then in order to justify a particular practice.  It is not mandatory in Islam and it is recognised that certain practises change with the time (in the Sharia law this is known as the "al-urf", that takes into consideration of the changes in the customs/culture of Muslim societies, in order to determine changes in the fiqh ie jurisprudence).

Then i suggest you throw away the hadith. Just use the Quran. Save you the troubles.

Not until you can give me your proof that aisha had not reached puberty at that age.....don't give that she was still playing with dolls.

You dont have to be an arab child to be playing with dolls, not only a child, any idiot can also play with dolls.   That was my research.

I will in due time. Giving you a hint; Imam Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani.

FaithHealer3

Originally posted by wira_melayu at 2005-3-4 10:32 PM:


yeah but you forget to tell me which dictionary you taken that from?especially the year?Does the word pedophile exist in the 13th centuries?:no:

Any court of law in t ...

You Muhammadans fail to understand that the term pedophile is used to describe an adult person, who had engaged sexually with prepubescent kid, regardless of condition, time or era.

The word pedophile is coined from the greek words and in early 19century, a Vienna psychiatrist called Richard, gave the defination for pedophilia.

In recent times, science has shown us that grown up having sex with a child is bad for the child, physically and mentally. So such unnatural acts are condenmed and deemed illegal acts that other should not imitate.

It dosn't matter whether the ancient people craved for prepubescent flesh or not.. Bottimline ancient people who practice sex with kid are not suitable to be praised as examplar for others to follow.

Why pick on p.Muhammad when there were many ancient people had sex with kids? Its simply because those ancient weidos are not deemed as excellent examplar for other people, but Muhammadans claim that p.Muhammad is an excellent examplar for others.. and that is wrong.

aenemy7

Marriage solved the question about phedophilia charge againts Prophet Muhammad.....at that time women have less thing to do not like today schools,homework,tuition...etc!! they all just do house work and farming that's all, so young marriage is common at that time,if the girl already have their period they considered matured at that time and fit to married!!

look at the 9 year old thai girl who delivered a baby as examples.....it's still happening today! It's a sign about Aisha fit to married the prophet, her parents and the society at that time didn't opposed the marriage at all including the non muslim around there!!!

Try again folks...:lol :lol :lol


Allah Knows Best,Peace Yall.....

FaithHealer3

Originally posted by Fuzzman at 2005-3-4 02:48 PM:

However you have yet to show that Bukhari has written an element of disdain or distaste  towards the ways of the prophet in his writings, which you cannot, in mention of the marrige of the prophet to Aishah where it must be shown that Bukhari disapproves of the contractual marriage. You must show that Bukhari has recorded for all time the paedophilia of the prophet in pure clarity and not by some hocus pocus DIY concoction only feasible to the likes of you.

Bukhari like most ancient people, didn't know right from wrong. They lived in an uncivilized culture. They were gullible people.. who believes in p.Muhammad. What p.Muhammad had done or said is right for them.

Why would Bukhari want to show any disgust or distaste when it was done by "the examplar for others to follow".

From what Bukhari, Muslim & Abu-Dawud had recorded, is more than enough to draw conclusion that the consummation(sex) of the marriage of p.Muhammad with the 9year old Aisha was a pedophilic act.

Only a non-believer can see the follies of p.Muhammad not the blind-believers.


[font]

FaithHealer3

Originally posted by aenemy7 at 2005-3-5 02:45 AM:
... so young marriage is common at that time,if the girl already have their period they considered matured at that time and fit to married!!...

A7 you can stop laughing and.. Show me just one hadith that says Aisha ALREADY had her period BEFORE p.Muhammad consummated his marriage with her.

just one sahih hadith.. aiyaa even a weak hadith will do.



[ Last edited by FaithHealer3 on 5-3-2005 at 03:18 AM ]

aenemy7

Aisha parents is wise enough to tell if their daughter fit or not to married,well they married wasn't it????can't u think about that simple thing???it's clear they are married, just look at the hadith post in this forum and u'll see it's proof of the marriage.........

:lol :lol :lol

Allah Knows Best,Peace Yall...

Baiduri Othman

Originally posted by FaithHealer3 at 2005-3-5 03:09 AM:


Bukhari like most ancient people, didn't know right from wrong. They lived in an uncivilized culture. They were gullible people.. who believes in p.Muhammad. What p.Muhammad had  ...

My response:-

Yeah, of course we all know Bukhari & the rest are ancient people. So what abt ancient people? Ancient people remain as ancient people & you can't bring them back as modern people. So why're you comparing their culture with modern people? As far as I'm concerned modern age people are acting more like barbarians & uncivilized each day. Things seem to be out of places!

At least, the Prophet's marriage to Siti Aisya' is legitimate despite of her age. Furthermore, there was no laws on age to get married in the ancient days but still it was done in a proper way. What more do you want? The Prophet himself never mentioned anything that the Muslim men shd get a 9 yr old girl for their wives.

But I know many non-Muslims with abnormal sexual desires flog in Thailand for young flesh as young as 6 yr old children. In fact they love having sex with babies. Yucks yucks yucks yucks :puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:

Sorry Fuzzman, ff:

sonny~~

so beat goes on


hehe  :cak:

Fuzzman

DivinePonytail wrote: In the practical sense a culture norm is a society's propensity towards certain ideals; their aversion from others; and their standard, ritualistic practices. Essentially what the 'norm' is a summation of typical activities and beliefs of group of people.

We can cut out on the dessert here and get straight on to the wine and cigars. There's one point that needs "examplar" exposure here for your understanding as Fuzzman sees you're not that "well-informed" when it comes to "cultural norms, normalities and even abnormalities" that seems to support your view and accusation of paedophilia. Are you aware of the fact that getting married at puberty was an accepted practice amongst not only today's "primitive cultures", but specifically amongst the Semitic [ i.e. Hebrew, Arab, Syriac, etc.] peoples of the Middle East?  Early marriage with the onset of puberty was normal in all Semitic societies - such as the ones that Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad grew up in from thence until now? So where do you draw the line? Do you go on to extend your witchhunt even for Abraham, Moses and Jesus too?

ARI FUZZMAN

Debmey

You are wrong Fuzzy. Jewish culture says nothing abt marriage upon puberty.
Puberty is a time period, not a specific point in time.
Mo and the arbs got it wrong with Aisha.

Even if it was culturally acceptable, it was immoral and a divinely guided person would not have indulged in paedophilia. Therefore Mo was clearly a paedophile and definitely not a godly man.