I’m sorry to announce the Christian bigot, David Wood of Acts 17 Apologetics, is at it again – he is spreading LIES once again. Some folk just don’t know when to quit. Moreover, this bloke seems to be prattling on about sex an awful lot. I guess his ridiculous sex hoax has not shamed him. There’s no shaming the shameless!
Islamophobes out of control
David Wood is simply out of control with his unscholarly and deceptive musings. In this episode we catch old Dave plagiarising a whopper of a distortion from Robert Spencer and we note he deceptively quotes a Tafsir. For good measure we put up an interesting bible verse for Dave to wrap his interesting mindset around.
Lies and Video Tape: David Wood getting caught on video plagiarising LIES about sex from another misinformed bigot
If the video does not play please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlxaGcOYW7M
Robert Spencer's Fabrication
Seen as David is simply parroting from Robert Spencer’s book (p. 173) we might as well present Sheikh Zayed Moustafa’s short sharp shrift directed at Robert Spencer concerning the nutty lie our Christian friend is plagiarising:
On page 173, the author [Robert Spencer] again interprets a famous verse in the Holy Quran in a way that is totally different from all the interpretations of the verse in any Islamic reference. In the Holy Quran (our translation):
“Your women are a tilth for you, so perform your tilth in whichever way you want to...” 2:223
The verse addresses an incident when some of the companions of the Prophet asked him about a Jewish myth that if the intercourse happened in a certain position, the baby would be born cross-eyed. The verse later was revealed to indicate that as long as you’re having natural intercourse with your wife, then you can have that intercourse in any position you want together. The verse never meant by any stretch of the imagination in 1400 years of Islam that a man can do to his wife whatever he wants. Mr. Spencer’s interpretation is just that offensively absurd.
[The Lies about Muhammad – How you were Deceived into Islamophobia by Moustafa Zayed p337]
Why would the Christian bigot, Dave, selectively quote? Deception!
And here is the entire commentary from Tafsir Jalalayn which Deceptive Dave partially quotes in order to miss the context so he can build his latest nutty 'sex position' claim:
Your women are a tillage for you, that is, the place where you sow [the seeds of] your children; so come to your tillage, that is, the specified place, the front part, as, in whichever way, you wish, whether standing up, sitting down, lying down, from the front or the back: this was revealed in response to the Jews saying that if a person had vaginal intercourse with his wife from behind, the child would be born cross-eyed; and offer for your souls, righteous deeds, such as saying, ‘In the Name of God’ (bismillāh) when you commence intercourse; and fear God, in what He commands and prohibits; and know that you shall meet Him, at the Resurrection, where He will requite you according to your deeds; and give good tidings, of Paradise, to the believers, who feared Him.
The bigot missed the highlighted portion out. The most important portion as it offers explanation to scupper his lie. Wow, he is a deceptive piece of work!
Christian bigot’s view on the Bible…
Men are in charge of women and women must obey them according to the BIBLE. If David used the same mindset then he will have to claim men get to have sex with their wives in any position they fancy ACCORDING to the BIBLE.
In fact this argument can be used more vociferously against the Bible, so David the next time you want to talk sex positions please open up your Bible (if you are consistent) rather than throwing it under the bus.
I would ask him to read Ephesians 5:22-24 as wives must submit to their husbands in everything. Yes the word "everything" is used.
So who is allowed to have sex in any sexual position they want? The Christian husband [according to Dave Wood’s mindset]!
David Collecting Cash for Hatred + Deception – ABNSAT
Would you want the down right dishonest and unscholarly collecting cash for your organisation (ABN)? Eh, Bassim Gorial?
Invitation to Islam
Please look beyond the crazy lies that Islamophobes work assiduously and give Islam a chance. May Allah bless you further. Ameen.
Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
61 comments:
Yahya Snow
Congratulations, you finally got something right. In your video you wrote "He's begging to sound really sleazy" or words to that affect.
Yes he was sounding sleazy quoting from your Koran.
With the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
People like David have never fully recovered from the time he spent in a mental institute (true story)...
People like David Woods has never released the material from the London debates where he openly talked about bludgeoning his father with a hammer. (true story).
People like David Wood (who fascinated by things like bdsm, rape, among other things) read his profile are best left alone.
David Wood I got his number and when he is ready to come out of the closet I'll be willing to take him a little more seriously.
Hello. It is great that at least you pour more light on this issue. Thanks.
@Yahya Snow
I know I said I wasnt going to interact with this blog, but I had to share this.
This is what I am talking about by US policy in Iraq. Notice there is no US troop inolvment in this.
Just put Muslims in a room with out Jews or Christians, and let Islam take its course. Its a thing of beauty.
Iraqi News Broad cast
Yahya Snow
One more thing, can you please call into Harold Campings Show The open forum and invite him and his followers to ISLAM. PLEASE PLEASE DO DAWAH ON THEM
800-322-5385
www.familyradio.com
Listin Live 7:30 PM to 9:30 PM Central US TIME
Muslims Discuss the Legacy of Saddam Hussein
Notice that Sam and I never do this on "Jesus or Muhammad
grandjoker sed
People like David have never fully recovered from the time he spent in a mental institute (true story)...
PROOV??
obvious philippians 1:18 lovers
RAdical Moderate:
At Least if Camping would be a Muslim, he would stop making false prophecy about rapture. Have you ever heard a Muslim giving a date for the judgment? Why ?
Bible theological contradictions
@1moreMuslim
You wrote "Have you ever heard a Muslim giving a date for the judgment? Why ?"
Answer: Because Islam is such a false teaching and false doctrine to begin with, it really doesn't matter what lies the devil puts in Muslims hearts and mouths.
It all leads you away from Christ, and straight into Hell.
Yahya,
The Bible says men are in charge of women.
The Qur'an gives men the RIGHTS to a womans BODY.
See the difference?
Ibn Umar commented on this verse:
"It came down regarding approaching women in their ANUSES." [al-Tabari, Abu Ja'far Muhammad Ibn Jarir. Jami al-Bayan an Ta'wil Aay al-Qur'an [AKA. Tafsir al Tabari]. Ed. Abd Allah Ibn Abd al-Mushin al Turki. 26 vols. Cairo: Hajr Center, AH 1422/AD 2001. Print. v. 3 p.751]
Very ambiguous...
More regarding Q. 2.223:
In addition, Ibn al-'Arabi, in his book Ahkam al-Qur'an [The Rulings of the Qur'an], states that a group of scholars supported anal intercourse. He adds that a scholar named Ibn Sha'ban collected opinions supporting this viewpoint in a book titled Jima' al-Niswan wa Ahkam al-Qur'an [Intercourse with Women and the Rulings of the Qur'an]. Ibn al-'Arabi "found support to its permissibility among a noble group of the Companions and the followers of Malik in several stories." [Ibn al-Arabi, Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn 'Abd Allah. Ahkam al-Qur'an. Ed. T. Muhammad 'Abd al-Qadir 'Ata. 4 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, AH 1424/AD 2003. Print. v. 1 p. 238. Trans. by Former Muslim]
YAAAAAA!!!
On the free speech claim, we REVERSE the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants and its denial of summary judgment to the plaintiffs. We thereby invalidate the leafleting restriction within both the inner and outer perimeters of the [Dearborn Arab] Festival.1 The restriction on the sidewalks that are directly adjacent to the Festival attractions does not serve a substantial government interest. The City keeps those same sidewalks open for public traffic and permits sidewalk vendors, whose activity is more obstructive to sidewalk traffic flow than pedestrian leafleting is. Moreover, the prohibition of pedestrian leafleting in the outer perimeter is not narrowly tailored to the goal of isolating inner areas from vehicular traffic. The City can be held liable because the Chief of Police, who instituted the leafleting restriction, created official municipal policy. . . .
The leafleting restriction is not a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction. In the inner perimeter, the restriction does not serve a substantial governmental interest. In the outer perimeter, the restriction is not narrowly tailored. The defendants therefore violated Saieg’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Absent an injunction, Saieg will continue to suffer irreparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law. As a result, on the free-speech claim, we REVERSE both the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants and its denial of summary judgment to the plaintiffs.
WOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2011/05/free-speech-victory-in-dearborn.html
Free Speech Victory in Dearborn, Michigan!
Maybe I shouldn't say "in" Dearborn, since the city only sought to suppress free speech in this case. An outside court (the United States Court of Appeals) had to impose Constitutional law on the city.
Dearborn hosts an annual Arab Festival on Warren Avenue. During the festival, the street is reserved, but the adjacent sidewalks are not reserved and therefore remain public property. Hence, prior to 2009, many people would distribute pamphlets, DVDs, CDs, etc., on the public sidewalks. However, when Ronald Haddad took over as Chief of Police, he announced that no one would be allowed to distribute materials on the public sidewalks. Indeed, he insisted that no one would be allowed to distribute materials within five blocks of the festival. (He justified his decision by claiming that he needed to keep the area clear for pedestrian traffic.)
From a Constitutional perspective, this was quite disturbing, as the government was officially limiting free speech on public sidewalks. Moreover, those of us who attended the festival noticed that security only enforced the policy on Christians. Muslims remained free to distribute their materials.
Pastor George Saieg, an Arab Christian from the Sudan (who has observed the effects of Islamic law in his home country and therefore understands the importance of free speech better than many of us) decided to take the case to court. The freedom fighters at the Thomas More Law Center (praise God for them) took the case free of charge, and they won.
Lower courts had ruled in favor of Dearborn (i.e. that Dearborn police could stop people from exercising their freedom of speech on the public sidewalks adjacent to the festival). The appeals court reversed the decision on Constitutional grounds.
//The Qur'an gives men the RIGHTS to a womans BODY//
hmm well I guess that cancels out this verse:
"It is lawful for you to go in unto your wives during the night preceding the (day's) fast: they are as a garment for you, and YOU ARE AS A GARMENT TO THEM. (Qur’an 2:187
This anonymous coward even mis-interprets his own bible:
Submission to her Husband
Ephesians 5:24- Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Ephesians 5:22-Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.
And lets look at some commentary by John Wesley, one of the greatest Christian scholars to ever live on this verse:
In the following directions concerning relative duties, the inferiors are all along placed before the superiors, because the general proposition is concerning submission; and inferiors ought to do their duty, whatever their superiors do. Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands - Unless where God forbids. Otherwise, in all indifferent things, the will of the husband is a law to the wife. As unto the Lord - The obedience a wife pays to her husband is at the same time paid to Christ himself; he being head of the wife, as Christ is head of the church.
Colossians 3:18- Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
1 Timothy 2:11- A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
1 Corinthians 11:3 "Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God."
1 Corinthians 11:7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man."
1 Peter 3:6- Just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.
Leadership, Freedom of Expression and House Arrest
1 Timothy 2:12- I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.
1 Corinthians 7:1 - "Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry.
Yeah just in case his wife doesn't worship or silently obey him like a dog.
1 Corinthians 7:1- Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman
Titus 2:3-5 - The aged women likewise, that [they be] in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands,
to love their children, [To be] discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient (hupotasso) to their own
husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
Rebelling against your husband is an insult to god?
Mental Deficiency
1 Peter 3:7-Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker (asthenes) partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.
See here for more info on this verse: http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/deficiency_of_woman_s_mind_according_to_the_bible
Marriage, Adultery and Divorce
Romans 7:2-3- For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress.
Even if the husband is abusive, she can't get away.
1 Corinthians 7:39- A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord
Of course so she can obey and submit to his ever wish as well.
Matthew 5:32- But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery
Honor/Honour Killing
Mathew 15:4 For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.
Mark 7:10 For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'
To Anonymous
" Ibn Umar commented on this verse:
"It came down regarding approaching women in their ANUSES." "
What a deceiver! Yes , the verse is about NOT to do exactly that, there are 10 pages in Tabari about this verse, and all narrators unanymously said not to appraoch women from anuses.
1MoreMuslim Blog
he being head of the wife, as Christ is head of the church.
Even to the point of sacrificing yourself for her and family.
1MM, What about:
Ibn al-'Arabi "found support to its permissibility among a noble group of the Companions and the followers of Malik in several stories." [Ibn al-Arabi, Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn 'Abd Allah. Ahkam al-Qur'an. Ed. T. Muhammad 'Abd al-Qadir 'Ata. 4 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, AH 1424/AD 2003. Print. v. 1 p. 238. Trans. by Former Muslim]
//Even to the point of sacrificing yourself for her and family//
sacrifice? no thats not what the verse says. it says women are inferior. it speaks nothing about making sure the wife and family are safe, it just flat out says women are second class.
To Anonymous
Who are " the noble group of companions"? And who is the Former Muslim who translated the text. Al Tabari mentions companions by name, why can't you do the same?
Many of those verses about Women in the Church are explained in the article:
http://www.avraidire.com/2010/06/can-women-preach-and-be-ministers-in-a-church/
While Jesus talking about Mosaic Law and death for offending parents he at the same time approved of the Pharisee position of cooperation with the Romans.
The PHARISEES said to obey the Romans and NOT APPLY the 12 or more capital punishments of Mosaic Law.Jesus was not saying to apply it but that his MAIN POINT was on helping ones parents in:
Mathew 15:4 For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.
Mark 7:10 For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'
SINCE 6 AD
That law utterly inapplicable since 6 AD way before Jesus began his career around 28 AD and after his resurrection it was no longer applicable ever.
Now if that is honor killing then I would say it is but as I said so many times before.and this the Meccans never had:
The Jews had the OPTION of rejecting or accepting the 613 laws,including death for slavetraders,adultery,blasphemy,apostasy,etc.
They accepted to become the CHOSEN PEOPLE,God would protect them if they obeyed him.
They accepted because God made MANY ASTONISHING MIRACLES in Egypt and afterwards.It was based on EVIDENCE
If the had said NO they could still go to heaven with the 7 NOAHIDE LAWS,which say nothing about capital punishment.
I looked at 1moremuslims blog and he said there is a contradiction between ACTS 17:29 and ROMANS 2:20.
THE GOLDEN RULE
The citations are in:
http://www.avraidire.com/2010/04/le-coeur-ethique-de-jesuspaul-et-le-nt/
ROMANS 2:14-15
It comes before ROM 2:20 and says:"When the pagans who do NOT HAVE the LAW(Note:meaning the Golden Rule=Law of God being SUPERNATURALLY revealed to them) NATURALLY do what the LAW is"
The law,the way Paul is using it here and in other places,and also as used by Jesus and James,means the GOLDEN RULE.
It means people in CHINA,INDIA,Buddhists,Hindus,Taoists,animists,etc can all by themselves DISCOVER,with no SUPERNATURAL help,the Golden Rule.ANd they APPLY it,follow it.
That was what Paul was referring to in Romans 2:20,he talks of KNOWLEDGE OF A DIVINE BEING.
For PAUL the GOLDEN RULE=LAW OF GOD,it is in his writings.That was what he referred to in:
"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
What had been seen was:
1.That there is a SPIRITUAL BEING "his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature"
2.Who has a LAW,which is the Golden Rule.
More than that impossible without revelation.So that is why ACTS 17:29 says:
"Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill.
In the past God overlooked such ignorance"
But NATURALLY one could discover the GOLDEN RULE and even the idea of DIVINE BEING.
To add a bit more:
"They are without excuse"
Because the Golden Rule can be naturally discovered by anybody,by atheists,polytheists,etc.No supernatural help needed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p__qffobdE&feature=player_embedded#at=13
Ali,
To help you understand, Christ was a sacrifice for His people, he went to the cross willingly.
This is exactly what the verse says. To sacrifice yourself even to the point of death, for your family and wife.
1MM
I do not speak Arabic and I am using secondary sources. But what you say about Tabari is not true. Tabari does not spend ten pages speaking about how this verse does not allow anal sex, he presents a variety of divergent opinions. Its not my fault Ibn Kathir came along 8 hundred years after your prophet and threw out anything that disagreed with his opinion.
Besides,
Just from reading over Kathir again it is clear that the practice of anal sex was in fact going on with the Muslims during the time of Muhammad since some of them are asking if they can keep doing it.
Its no wonder why the Shiite's and the Sunnis have such divergent opinions about sexual matters with ambiguous verses like this. Wonder what the Muslims did before Kathir wrote his Tafsir.
To Anonymous;
No matter what sources you use, primary or secondary, I am still waiting for those companions or Muslim commentator who support Robert Spencer.
To Minoria:
The last thing I want , is that you answer my questions in my Blog. I don`t want spam in there.
Bismillah
Salamualaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.
All praise is due to Allah and may the peace and blessings of Allah be on His last profet and slave Muhammad.
Somewhere in this blog I read comments about Allah being in need of our help and that we should help Allah. Glory be to Allah, the Lord of All that exists and King of Kings, free from all imperfections and weaknesses. The problem is that Christians has an idea of God being beaten and killed which makes them think that Allah the Allmighty is in need of help. Jesus was in need of help and support from humans and from his Lord The Allmighty and had human weaknesses which has led to a very wrong understanding of Allah by the christians.
Allah The Most High says (as we can understand in english):
Then when Iesa (Jesus) came to know of their disbelief, he said: "Who will be my helpers in Allahs Cause?" Al-Hawarioon (the disciples) said: "We are the helpers of Allah; we believe in Allah, and bear witness that we are Muslims (i.e. we submit to Allah).
So to be a Helper of Allah simply means that you are helping the muslims in Allahs cause. And Allah is free from all imperfections and doesn’t need us but it is we who need Him.
I also read an ignorant claim that Allah is sleeping or that he should wake up. Subhanallah, the Christians know these are not the attributes of Allah the Allmighty and that it goes against ther own selves to believe in this. Still they say that Allah slept and woke up, got tierd and became refreshed, was born and died. Allah is greater than everything that the unbeliever wish to accociate with Him.
We know the true believers of God want to believe in the Quran when Allah says “Neither slumber, nor sleep overtake Him.”
O Christians! Believe in Allah and worship Him alone, The ever Living, Most Merciful. Pray for His forgiveness and He is The All Forgiving which doesn’t die for anyone or anything. Come to the belief in the Oneness of Allah and stop say that Allah is three in some “holy trinity”! Know that you soon will die and answer for you own sins and “(It will be) the Day when no person shall have power (to do) anything for another, and the Decision, that Day, will be (wholly) with Allah.”
Thank you Yahya and may Allah give you patience in you struggle with these people, amin
May Allah reward you for your efforts and give you ikhlas in everything you do, amin
All praise is due to Allah alone, without any partners and may Allahs peace and blessings be on our beloved profet, Muhammad.
Peace be upon those who follow the guidance.
The U. S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that Sudanese Christian Pastor George Saieg has a free speech right to distribute religious literature on public sidewalks and evangelize Muslims during the Annual Arab International Festival held each year in Dearborn, Michigan.
For five years Saieg, who specifically ministers to Muslims, had been discussing his Christian faith and passing out literature on Dearborn’s sidewalks during the Festival without encountering any problems. Nevertheless, in 2009 police officials informed him he had to remain in a booth, prohibiting him from distributing his literature on the nearby sidewalks and public streets.
Dearborn is one of the most densely populated Muslim communities in the United States. It has the largest Mosque in North America. In the past few years Dearborn has gained national attention for taking a pro-Muslim stance and for the arrest and intimidation of Christian evangelists for engaging in protected speech activity.
The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national conservative Christian public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed the federal lawsuit on behalf of Pastor Saieg in 2009, naming the City of Dearborn and its police chief, Ronald Haddad, as defendants. The case was handled by TMLC Senior Trial Counsel Rob Muise.
In ruling for Saieg, the court recognized the problem Saieg had with booth-based evangelizing: “the penalty of leaving Islam according to Islamic books is death,” which makes Muslims reluctant to approach a booth that is publically “labeled as … Christian.”
that pastor saieg is a known liar. on his site he miquoted a verse about women being dirty and unlcean. he purposely took out SEVERAL sentences to preach his lie.
has there ever been an evagelist that doesn't lie and hate?
//To help you understand, Christ was a sacrifice for His people, he went to the cross willingly.
This is exactly what the verse says. To sacrifice yourself even to the point of death, for your family and wife//
uhhhh no thats not really a relation. if you say jesus is god and he's head of the church (its an object) and men are the heads of women, that means they're an object?
read the other verses on how they all connect. silent submission, obedience etc
To Anonymous:
You wonder what Muslims think before Ibn Kathir wrote his tafsir? Ibn Katheer didn`t invent Tafseer, he collected what people says about this verse in a book. So before Ibn Katheer's tafseer, Muslims have them all in oral tradition. Contrary to Christian theology , where you cannot know what the lay Christians believe before councils. You owe your belief solely to Councils.
To 1MM
He said:
"To Minoria:
The last thing I want , is that you answer my questions in my Blog. I don`t want spam in there."
No problem but your argument about ACTS 17:29 and ROM 2:20 is wrong because you believe Paul never read ACTS.ACTS 17:22-31 has a speech by Paul and he knew it because in 1 TIM 5:17-18 he CITES the Gospel of LUKE and says it is SCRIPTURE.
http://www.avraidire.com/2010/04/about-the-dating-of-the-synoptics-and-2-letters/
One of the reasons 1 TIM is considered a forgery is because prophecies are impossible,Jesus never said the Temple would be destroyed so Paul could never have read Acts-Luke since he died in 64 and it was written in 80-85.
But if Jesus did say it,and I believe he did,then he read ACTS 17:22-31 and my explanation is the best one,there is no contradiction.
I know the tehcnical reasons scholars date the NT books as being at X date or being "forgeries".But if it were not for the Temple prophecy no scholar would date ACTS-LUKE more than 61 and JOHN at more than 71 AD.
More info:
The author of Luke-Acts himself says he was a traveling companion of Paul,saying "us" and "we" repeatedly in:
Acts 16:10-17
Acts 20:5-15
Acts 21:1-18
Acts 27:1-28:16
1MM, Here is the source:
Al Baqara 2:223 Errors
Alexander,You say of Christian theology. The problem is that Christians has an idea of God being beaten and killed which makes them think that Allah the Allmighty is in need of help. God did not get beaten, the man Christ Jesus did. Although the Son did take on all of our sin, something only a perfect sacrifice could do, he did it willingly for his bride. You do not make the distinction between the eternal Son of God na d the historical person with two natures, divine and human.
Jesus was in need of help, Jesus was not in need of any help, he went up willingly and could raise the dead.
Ali, Men are head of women when it comes to some things, yes. But their bodies are not as tilth for the man, men do not hold right over the woman body. Men are in charge of producing, planning, safety, etc etc. Women and men have their roles, they are defined in the Bible.
1MM, But Ibn Kathir, like you say, collected what people says about this verse. Therefore, he collected what he thought was right, what he wanted to include, what he wanted to convey. Not the other side. Im not saying that bad, but what if there are earlier sayings Kathir glosses over.
anonymous ,
Its really bizarre christians keep on insisting Quran2:223 is about anal sex. You should read / understand verse 222 to understand verse 223. Lets look at the 2 verses :
222. They ask thee concerning women's courses. Say: They are a hurt and a pollution: So keep away from women in their courses, and do not approach them until they are clean. But when they have purified themselves, ye may approach them in any manner, time, or place ordained for you by Allah. For Allah loves those who turn to Him constantly and He loves those who keep themselves pure and clean.
223. Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.
Its very clear , approach her in any way when she is free of her menses. Which anatomy of the woman discharges menstrual blood?
The conclusions we can make of christians insisting anal sex in Quran2:223 are
(1) the said christians are sex perverts
(2) the said christians don't understand what they read
(3) the said christians are sex perverts and don't understand what they read.
mesage from david wood
Some friends and I will be traveling to Dearborn, Michigan, for an outreach at the Arab International Festival. We're printing pamphlets on Christianity and Islam (including my recent posts "Who Corrupted the Gospel?" and "Who Was Muhammad?"), and we have a team of believers to distribute and explain them. However, costs are high, especially for printing (not to mention travel, etc.). We know someone who can print pamphlets at a cost of $299 for 5,000, or $499 for 10,000. Please contribute as much as possible to support our trip to the festival, as this is a phenomenal opportunity to reach Muslims with the Gospel. (In case anyone is wondering, no one on our end will be profiting financially from the trip. We'll be thrilled if we break even.)
Note: If anyone would like to cover an entire batch of tracts, either 5,000 or 10,000, let me know and I will put you in contact with the printer. You can pay directly via credit card, which means that PayPal and ChipIn won't get a percentage. If anyone covers 10,000 tracts, I will write an entirely new tract (that is, new material will go out to thousands of Muslims).
sam1528, I gave a former Muslim site with the sources from Tabari where Muslims hold divergent opinions regarding the meaning of this verse and anal sex. You also say we need to look at 222 for clarification. How can this be? Were these verses revealed one after another to Muhammad in the same context? Or were they revealed on two different separate occasions?
(1) the said christians are sex perverts
(2) the said christians don't understand what they read
(3) the said christians are sex perverts and don't understand what they read.
woooooow i should have kept reading before making a reply to see that you are not serious...
To Anonymous:
I gave a former Muslim site with the sources from Tabari where Muslims hold divergent opinions regarding the meaning of this verse and anal sex.
You are an unrepentant liar, you didn't give any source for Al Tabari. I thought you conceded that point, and changed your argument. you have such a short memory, why do you go back to your previously conceded point? All what Tabari says regarding this verse is saying that you lie. Repent.
sam1527, and does sura 5.5 abrogate 2.222 at all?
1MM, here are the sources from Al Tabari
Al Baqara 2:223 Errors
Here are the sources again, 1MM:
Concerning the above viewpoint, several stories are told about why this verse was handed down (revealed). One story relates “that a man approached a woman in her anus and was not settled in his soul about it.” Therefore, this verse was revealed.[iv]
Another story tells of “a man who had anal intercourse with his wife…but the people considered it munkar (meaning “abhorable, abominable”)…so Allah sent down” this verse.[v]
The legal scholars of Medina felt that anal intercourse should be allowed.[vi] Purportedly, in one of Malik’s books, Kitab al-Sir: The Book of the Secret, he is said to have agreed as well. There are other reports that indicate several of Muhammad’s companions also supported this view.[vii]
In addition, Ibn al-‘Arabi, in his book Ahkam al-Qur’an: The Rulings of the Qur’an, says that a group of scholars supported anal intercourse. He adds that a scholar named Ibn Sha‘ban collected opinions supporting this viewpoint in a book titled Jma‘ al-Niswan wa Ahkam al-Qur’an: Intercourse with Women and the Rulings of the Qur’an. Ibn al-‘Arabi “found support to its permissibility among a noble group of the companions and the followers of Malik, in several stories.”[viii]
[v] al-Tabari 3: 754.
[vi] Ibn Kathir 2: 312.
[vii] al-Qurtubi 4: 8.
[viii] Ibn al-‘Arabi 1: 238.
As i have said this is a secondary source but it gives you primary documentation.
Here are the sources, all translated by Arabic speaking former Muslim, for 1MM:
[v] al-Tabari 3: 754.
al Tabari, Abu Ja'far Muhammad Ibn Jarir. Jami al-Bayan an Tawil Aay al-Quran [a.k.a. Tafsir al Tabari]. Ed. Abd Allah Ibn Abd al Muhsin al-Turki. 26 vols. Cairo: Hajr Center, AH 1422/AD 2001. Print. V. 3, P. 754.
[vi] Ibn Kathir 2: 312.
Ibn Kathir, al Hafiz Imad al-Din Abu al-Fida. Tafsir al-Quran al-Azim. Ed. Mustafa al-Saiyd Muhammad, et al. 15 vols. Giza: Qurtuba Est., AH 1420/AD 2000. Print. V. 2 P. 312.
[vii] al-Qurtubi 4: 8.
al-Qurtubi, Abu Abd Allah Muhammad Ibn Ahmad. al-Jami li-Ahkam al-Quran wa al-Mubayin li-ma Tadammanahu min al-Sunna wa Aay al-Furqan. Ed. Abd Allah Ibn Abd al-Muhsin al-Turki. 24 vols. Beirut: al-Risala Est., AH 1427/AD 2006. Print. V. 4 P. 8.
[viii] Ibn al-‘Arabi 1: 238.
Ibn al-Arabi, Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn Abd Allah. Ahkam al-Quran. Ed. T. Muhammad Abd al-Qadir Ata. 4 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiya, AH 1424/AD 2003. Print. V. 1. P. 238
To Anonymous:
You have no capacity of grasping, Verse 223 does not contradict 222, why are speaking of abrogation? Contradictions are something you find in the Bible... Oh I forgot, you see no contradictions in the Bible!
1MM, are you going to deal with the Muslim sources I provided (Tabari, Arabi) or will you throw red herrings and say I said something I never said? I asked (not you) if S 5.5 abrogates 2.222. And I think you just admitted that S. 2.222 and 2.223 are completely different contextually, hence making your use of 2.222 as some sort of support for whatever 2.223 says faulty. They talk about two different things, revealed in two different contexts.
Anonymous:
Are you saying that we cannot Interpret 222, using 223? You give yourself the right to interpret a Gospel with another Gospel from different time different author different theology. You give yourself the right to see the letters of Paul in light of an unknown book named Hebrews and so on. Come back when you are willing to be consistent.
Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will a tilth is where you put seeds to get fruit, what kind of fruit you get in Anal sex?
I am eager to know how would you prove anal sex forbidden in Christianity!
Anonymous ,
From you '..sam1527, and does sura 5.5 abrogate 2.222 at all?..'
Huh?? Care to explain how Quran5:5 abrogate Quran2:222? You sure you know what you are talking about?
Can you explain why we cannot refer to Quran2:222 with respect to the prohibition of anal intercourse? Its is clear (Quran2:222-223) that intercourse involve only the anatomy of the woman that discharges menstrual blood. Can you tell us which anatomy is that? What is the issue if the verses (Quran2:222 / Quran2:223) were revealed on separate occasion? The bottom line is that anal intercourse is prohibited.
The list you provided ;
[v] al-Tabari 3: 754.
[vi] Ibn Kathir 2: 312.
[vii] al-Qurtubi 4: 8.
[viii] Ibn al-‘Arabi 1: 238 ;
refutes your argument. [v] and [vi] confirm that anal intercourse is prohibited. [vii] and [viii] is purely speculation. It states 'the companions of Prophet Muhammad(saw)' / 'legal scholars of medina'. Who were these people? As usual - no answers.
Which category are you?
(a) a sex pervert
(b) don't understand what you read
(c) a sex pervert and don't understand what you read
anonymous ,
To be fair , we need to compare the issue of anal intercourse within the christian values.
As bro yahya pointed out , according to the bible , anal intercourse is permitted.
eph5:22 '..Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord..'
Can I conclude that if the husband demand anal intercourse , the wife according to eph5:22 need to submit to such demand.
Any verses in the bible that prohibit anal intercourse?
Lets see how you defend christianity against such claim.
I vote for the answer (b) Anonymous is sex pervert, which implies the answer (c), because if one is a sex pervert that prevent him from proper understanding. since all intellectual capacity is directed to the lower half of the Body. He refuses to believe all companions, but he insists on 1 companion Ibn Umar, about whom the other companions said that he was mistaken.
Anonymous, I am still waiting for proof from the Bible that anal sex is not allowed. We know already that we cannot sit with, a woman in menstruation, or even touch her.
When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening
Hello Ali:
You cited:
"Ephesians 5:24- Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Ephesians 5:22-Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.
And lets look at some commentary by John Wesley, one of the greatest Christian scholars to ever live on this verse:
In the following directions concerning relative duties, the inferiors are all along placed before the superiors, because the general proposition is concerning submission; and inferiors ought to do their duty, whatever their superiors do. Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands - Unless where God forbids. Otherwise, in all indifferent things, the will of the husband is a law to the wife. As unto the Lord - The obedience a wife pays to her husband is at the same time paid to Christ himself; he being head of the wife, as Christ is head of the church.
Colossians 3:18- Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. "
THE PROBLEM WITH THAT INTERPRETATION
I am almost sure,but I could be wrong,that that same argument was used by TABASSUM HUSSAIN of the MUSLIM DEBATE INITIATIVE in her debate with MARY JO SHARP.
You have overlooked,and I have said this before like 2X,that EPHE 5:21 JUST ONE VERSE BEFORE says:
" SUBMIT YOURSELVES TO ONE ANOTHER for fear of Christ".
So the HUSBAND ALSO has to SUBMIT himself to the WIFE,it is a RECIPROCAL SUBMISSION.
Hello Ali:
REGARDING DIVORCE
Jesus in MATT 19:9 says:
"And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity/infidelity, and marries another, commits adultery."
THAT IS THE EXCEPTION
The Greek word porneia, does not automatically mean adultery.If Matthew had wanted to say that there is an exception for adultery, he would have used the word adultery (mocheuo).
So DIVORCE is allowed for something LESS than outright ADULTERY.
WHAT IS ADULTERY?
Jesus said in MATT 5:28(in the SAME GOSPEL OF MATT):
"But I say, ANYONE(THAT WOULD BE BACHELORS AND MARRIED MEN) who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
So if THAT was ADULTERY even that was cause for divorce.SHE,the WIFE,could also divorce her husband for infidelity and viceversa.
I say it applies to the wife because Jesus said:"Do to others as you would have done to you" and so his ideas were to apply to both men and women,both would have the right to put into practice his ideas,his teachings.
I believe Jesus used these metaphors to leave it to us to decide what would be just cause for divorce,to allow all to act according to their conscience and for their best state of mind.
Post a Comment