Boazy: << The only thing of importance here is..'TRUTH'..... >>

Seeing Boazy feigning indignation over being truthful is nearly as droll as when he criticises other posters on the basis of their spelling.

The bible says in the book of Numbers:

31:17-Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
31:18-But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
31:32-And the booty, being the rest of the prey which the men of war had caught, was six hundred thousand and seventy thousand and five thousand sheep,
31:33-And threescore and twelve thousand beeves,
31:34-And threescore and one thousand asses,
31:35-And THIRTY AND TWO THOUSAND PERSONS IN ALL, OF WOMEN THAT HAD NOT KNOWN MAN BY LYING WITH HIM.

What did they do with these 32,000 young virgin slaves?

BOAZ, Maududi and Ibn Kathir are not primary sources of Qur`an or Hadith, they were commentators.

Objective readers know that actions are compared to prevalent social standards in their own time. Yesterday’s norms and social mores are not today’s and vice versa. The fair person would compare historical actions with their historical era.

People resist sudden change, gradual change is longer-lasting. Islamic teachings brought gradual change that eliminated slavery and reinforced the finer institutions, when Muslims lived through the golden-age, the sciences triumphed, refer:

http://www.1001inventions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.viewSection&intSectionID=309

Later, we went through a process of technological stagnation, however, on the spiritual and human level, the vast majority of Muslims continued to develop great love and respect for humanity. As to the handful of Muslims that have been involved in heretical terror, the vast body of Muslims have condemned their actions, and yet, those who claim a “superior” Christian heritage, rather than showing us the love they claim to have, sent in the troops to what has become the quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan and they gave us Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. I do not blame Christianity for that, I blame the individuals responsible.

Islam has made me appreciate that it is people like you who give a great deal of purpose to my life and work, because through lovingly and patiently educating you, I grow spiritually and march closer to my Creator.

Love and best wishes.

It is when I view threads like this that I repeat my little prayer. I say:

"Thank you God for making me an atheist and keeping me away from this madness."

Keysar,

thanks for the informative article.
Most importantly I appreciate your patience in moderating your own thread on a wide spectrum of questions raised.

Boaz,

We started intearcting on OLO May 05.
Looking at the thread is like reliving our last 3 years of discussions. I have to say I am surprised that years later many of us developed new learnings about each other while you are still at the point you started.

I feel sorry for you isolating urself. Seems in your belief system you can't survive and be happy without an imaginary enemy.

Peace,

Dear FH.. :) who_I_miss! Who's company I enjoyed, and still fondly reflect on....who's heart I treasure, and who's sincerity I don't question.

One difficulty in understanding a debate like this is 'where each person stands'...

Now..you for example have a strong Sufi inclination.

Kaysar on the other hand, appears to be a Sunni. And that means his approach is different from yours. (he can correct me on this if he wishes.)

1/ He did not refute my claim, he simply denied it. He then attacked the Bible.

2/ His denial of the assertion of 'permission to marry, consumate, divorce pre-pubescent female children, was a simple blanket counter assertion “Islam”....does not allow such.

I'm wondering where his sources for 'Islam' are? I pointed to the Quran, and the Hadith, and 2 major scholars of Islam, all which support that assertion. (can you deny this?)

You see, 65:4 mentions 3 classes of females.

1/Those who have despaired of menstruation. (past the age or have never had it to maturity)
2/ Those who are pregnant.
3/ and of those too “who have not had” their courses; (Shakir translation)

The key phrase here is 'not had'... the question is, does this mean 'because they are too young' or.. 'because for some medical reason they just don't have menstruation?. Contextually it cannot be those who have 'despaired' of it, and doubtful that it's medically related which is covered by point 1 because they have been mentioned. Thus, it leaves . 'age/maturity related'.

For the answer to this, we should look not to Kaysar's propaganda machine, (or your sincere heart) but to Bukhari's hadith.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.063

<<The Prophet said, "Go, I have agreed to marry her to you with what you know of the Qur'an (as her Mahr)." 'And for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature). (65.4) And the 'Iddat for the girl before puberty is three months (in the above Verse)>>

That's straight from the search results, so, based on the evidence, it appears quite conclusive.

Continued...

First..Biblical material. I pre-empted that little spray by Kaysar in an earlier post. Law of Moses prevails.

A QUESTION OF AUTHORITY.

I used the Quran and Hadith..then Scholars (not_lightweights_either)

Kaysar says "Mohammad_2 disbanded slavery"

Presumably we are talking here of this bloke:

<< (Mehmed the Conqueror) (1432–81), Ottoman sultan, born in Adrianople (now Edirne); during rule (1444–46 and 1451–81), captured Constantinople and thus completed the Ottoman destruction of the Byzantine Empire; fourth son of Murad II; restored and repopulated Constantinople after capture in 1453;>>

Hmmmm that means according to Kaysar it took from the 7th century to the 15th to eliminate slavery. But did it ?
A quick look at the Barbary wars shows it did not. (White American Sailors enslaved)

BUT... more importantly.. the issue is not what "Some sultan did" 700 years after Mohammad, the REAL issue is did that person have the authority to countermand the clear instructions of the QURAN?

Answer...NO...he did not.

Kaysar cannot have it both ways. He says I cannot use Ibn Kathir or Maududi as scholarly opinions because "They are not the final authority for Islam"...duh.. but then I am supposed to believe a 14th century SultaN IS?

Now...boys..that defies logic reason and common sense.

There is only one way to deflect the assertion I made..and that would be by showing that the Quran and Hadith themselves did NOT mean what I have conclusively shown they DO mean.

In order to achieve this, you would need to bring scholarly opinion which takes the clear meaning of the text into account and does not simply 'construct' an interpretation which knows it will have a western audience.

I rather feel that both Maududi and Ibn Kathir knew Arabic and the background to the hadith 'quite well' :)

FINAL WORD.
24To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— 25to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.Jude 24-25