top of page
Writer's pictureVoice Of Beruk aka. Beast

An Act of Deviance and of Defiance - Part VI


In the middle of the night, in Parashat Bo, Pharaoh and his whole court wake up to the horror of the 10th plague: as the firstborn sons are slain, every Egyptian household is suddenly in mourning. Under the weight of this tragedy, the king who fancies himself a god is finally humbled. In desperation, he gives in to Moses' demands of freedom for the Israelite slaves. Pharaoh declares, "Up, depart from among my people, you and the Israelites with you! Go, worship the Eternal as you said!" (Exodus 12:31).

Divinity of the Emperor

Many cultures have attributed divinity or significant spiritual gifts to their rulers. The rulers of ancient Egypt and Rome were treated as gods, and medieval kings (including England's Henry VI) were regarded as having the ability to cure diseases with the royal touch.

The Japanese concept of the divinity of the Emperor is often misunderstood by Westerners. Neither the Emperor nor most of his people ever thought that the Emperor was a God in the sense of being a supernatural supreme being.

From the 6th century onwards it was accepted that the Emperor was descended from the kami (in this context gods), was in contact with them, and often inspired by them.

This didn't make him a god himself, but rather imposed on him the obligation of carrying out certain rituals and devotions in order to ensure that the kami looked after Japan properly and ensured its prosperity.


Status of the Emperor in Japanese history

For most of Japanese history, the Emperor's status as the direct descendant of the founding kami was not reflected in his political power. Until the Meiji restoration the Emperor had little power, and was a largely unknown and ceremonial figure. Japan was actually run by feudal noblemen, and the Emperor lived in seclusion, and sometimes in actual imprisonment.

The Emperor after the Meiji restoration

It's been suggested that the divinity of the Emperor was one of the central tenets of the Meiji restoration but this isn't true; none of the official Meiji documents actually declare that the Emperor was kami or god. The divine status of the Emperor did become a general assumption during World War II, but as a vital element of the Japanese patriotic understanding of themselves as a nation rather than a theological reality. Other teachers referred to the Emperor as being worshipped as a god, without ever saying that he was god.

The Emperor as akitsu mikami

During the 1930s there were some who taught that the Emperor was akitsu mikami ('manifest god') a human being in which the property of kami nature was perfectly revealed, but they qualified this by saying that the Emperor was neither omniscient or omnipotent.

However the Emperor's qualities of kami nature together with his direct descent from Ameratsu, the highest of the kami, made him so superior that the Japanese thought it entirely logical that people should obey the Emperor and worship him – but it did not make him God in the Western sense.

The end of divinity

When the Emperor gave up his divinity on the orders of the USA, in the Imperial rescript of January 1 1946, he in fact gave up nothing that he had ever had, but simply restated an earlier traditional set of beliefs about the Imperial family.

The Emperor continued to claim direct descent from Amaterasu and the priestly status that this inheritance gave him, but his ritual functions ceased being National tasks and became (as they had been through most of Japanese history) private Shinto devotions designed to preserve the good fortune of Japan, and the continuity of the Imperial line.

If God had a face what would it look like? And would you want to see if, seeing meant That you would have to believe in things like heaven And in Jesus and the saints, and all the prophets?

Divinity of the country

A divine country

Yoshiro Mori, 2000-2001 Japanese PM ©

In 2000, the Japanese Prime Minister, Yoshiro Mori, sparked a row by describing Japan as a divine country centred on the emperor. He made the remark during a meeting with pro-Shinto politicians.

For a nation keen to shake off the militaristic image of its past, the remark was especially insensitive. "The whole political set-up after 1945 was meant to deny the whole pre-war system so it was a great surprise and dismay to hear Prime Minister Mori say what he said," Professor Takashi Inoguchi of Tokyo University said.

Mr Mori apologised, saying his reference to the divine emperor was about the importance of tradition and education.

Were Jews Ever Really Slaves in Egypt, or Is Passover a Myth?

Where is the real proof - archaeological evidence, state records and primary sources?

Josh Mintz / Jewish World blogger Apr 11, 2017 9:57 AM

The reality is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Jews were ever enslaved in Egypt. Yes, there's the story contained within the bible itself, but that's not a remotely historically admissible source. I'm talking about real proof; archeological evidence, state records and primary sources. Of these, nothing exists.

It is hard to believe that 600,000 families (which would mean about two million people) crossed the entire Sinai without leaving one shard of pottery (the archeologist's best friend) with Hebrew writing on it. It is remarkable that Egyptian records make no mention of the sudden migration of what would have been nearly a quarter of their population, nor has any evidence been found for any of the expected effects of such an exodus; such as economic downturn or labor shortages. Furthermore, there is no evidence in Israel that shows a sudden influx of people from another culture at that time. No rapid departure from traditional pottery has been seen, no record or story of a surge in population.

Death comes unto us All Be it the Sun, The Star or The Moon...

Be it The Angel or even The Devil... Death comes unto Men too

Death by a mosquito is term as Zika virus. Death due to Ageing... Death due to a Flu it's Bird's flu Death of a matry For the sake of 72 Virgins it's terrorist!!!

Death for a woman it's Death in the lap of pussies!!! The only thing that God Cannot Do is to Kill thyself... Death of the first born son It's Creeping Death!!!

In fact, there's absolutely no more evidence to suggest that the story is true than there is in support of any of the Arab world's conspiracy theories and tall tales about Jews.

So, as we come to Passover 2012 when, thanks to the “Arab Spring,” our relations with Egypt are at a nearly 40 year low, let us enjoy our Seder and read the story by all means, but also remind those at the table who may forget that it is just a metaphor, and that there is no ancient animosity between Israelites and Egyptians. Because, if we want to re-establish that elusive peace with Egypt that so many worked so hard to build, we're all going to have to let go of our prejudices.

Acts OF GOD...

Most religionists or so call, religious scholars included, are saying that the recent Tsunami tragedy is God’s (Allah’s) punishment for those who have sinned and deviated from His teachings. Others are saying the fact the tragedy was primarily in Sri Lanka and Aceh means this is God’s way of solving the problematic civil wars that have been raging for generations in these two regions — those of the same race and religion taking each other’s lives. We of course cannot question God’s logic or question His actions. After all, in the insurance industry, earthquakes, floods, tidal waves (tsunamis), landslides, and such are classified as ‘Acts of God’ — so even those ‘non-religious’ people still do believe in Acts of God. So I suppose passing the recent tsunami tragedy off as an Act of God would not be wrong. But who are we mortals to analyse God’s action and come to this conclusion on behalf of God? Do we really know what God had planned that we are confident enough to pass judgment — that the tsunami tragedy is indeed God’s punishment for sinners and deviants?

It is in fact insensitive of the religious scholars to blame those who have died as ‘bringing it upon themselves’. Granted, religion teaches us that nothing befalls us that we do not bring upon ourselves. But if a plane were to crash can we also say that all those who died in the plane crash were sinners whom God wanted to punish? What about all those innocent children who died in the tsunami tragedy? Does not religion also teach us that those who have not reached puberty are not guilty of their actions? Even if they had done wrong they would not have committed any sin yet, until they are of the age where they can be held responsible for their actions? Why would God want to punish innocent children who have not sinned?

It's a Sin!!!

It is a Way, It is a will of God; For God Sake!!! It is God's Law...

Laws are man-made. Sometimes we say that these are God’s laws or this is what God ordained. Invariably, all laws are made by man but blamed on God. Why are the lawyers not telling us this?

Just because it is law does not make it right. Are we talking about rule of law or rule by law? “What’s the difference?” you may ask. A lot of difference! And it is the duty of lawyers to educate us on the difference between the rule of law and rule by law.

Queen Elizabeth I ordered Parliament to appoint her as Governor of the Church. Since she was a woman, she could not be appointed as a proper head of the church like her father and brother before her — which would tantamount to the position of the English Pope. So they made her the governor instead.

Then Elizabeth banned the practise and belief of the wafer as the body of Christ and wine as the blood of Christ. All the Catholic Bishops opposed this and they instigated the citizens to defy this new ‘heretic’ law.

The Bishops were all rounded up and imprisoned and replaced with Protestant Bishops. The Catholics were forced to go underground and to practise their faith in secret and behind closed doors. There were pockets of rebellion all over the Kingdom, even as far as Scotland where they deposed their Catholic Queen (later they chopped off her head as well).

Mary Is prettier than Elizabeth...

Francis II (age 15) with his wife Mary, Queen of Scots (age 17) in 1559.

Mary became Queen of Scots when she was less than a week old, on the death of her father, James in December 1542. Crowned at nine months, she was in the charge first of the Earl of Arran and then of her redoubtable mother, Mary of Guise, who was from one of the most powerful aristocratic families in France. A Roman Catholic and regent from 1554, she had to contend with both the rising tide of Protestantism in Scotland and the machinations of the English who had tried to force a marriage between the baby queen and Edward Tudor, the young heir to the English throne.

It was not a prospect Mary of Guise could tolerate and in 1548 the five-year-old Mary was sent to her grandmother Antoinette of Guise in France, where her Scottish entourage was considered appallingly barbarous and swiftly got rid of, and she was brought up as a Catholic Frenchwoman. French became her first language, she always called herself Marie Stuart and she loved dancing and hunting. She grew up delightfully charming, graceful and attractive, the French fell in love with her and Henry II of France resolved to marry her to his son and heir, the sickly dauphin Francis. A marriage treaty was signed with the Scots, which provided that Scotland and France should eventually be united under Mary and Francis as one kingdom. There were also secret agreements, which the youthful and inexperienced Mary signed, that would have made Scotland a mere adjunct of France.

Of course, this conflict between the Church and the Throne was not new. Even back in the days of Henry II, 400 years earlier, there was already a conflict and the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Becket, was assassinated because of his conflict with the King over the rights and privileges of the Church.

So, was Elizabeth right? Of course, she had the power. But just because she had power and just because a law had been passed does this make it right? Who was Elizabeth to decide that this is what God ordained? Did God speak to her? Or was this merely a political move?

You see: England, then, was only South England. From York onwards, this was Catholic country. So, by getting rid of the Catholic faith, this meant England could unite and Scotland, if it turned Protestant, would become part of English territory.

Scotland was also aligned to France. And France was Catholic and the age-old enemy of England. So, by ‘occupying’ Protestant Scotland, this meant that the danger of a French invasion (through Scotland) would be eliminated.

So there you have it. It was not about what God wanted. It was about what Elizabeth wanted. And Elizabeth wanted Scotland under her control. And she wanted the French Catholic Queen kicked out of Scotland. And she wanted the French army kicked out of Scotland. If not, her throne would be in jeopardy of a ‘Catholic’ invasion with a new Catholic Queen from Scotland installed onto the throne.

In short, Elizabeth had to control and dictate what is and is not acceptable religious beliefs and practises to be able to control England and get rid of the Scottish-French threat to her throne.

Elizabeth used religion to hold on to power.

All through English history many bastard children succeeded the throne of England. There was also the added problem of many of the Kings and Princesses being gay, or at least bisexual. In fact, one King of England was even having a gay relationship with the King of France (any wonder they were expert sword fighters?). And though the Kings never visited their Queen’s bedchamber (they never slept in the same room and always slept in separate rooms) since their honeymoon, the Queen still managed to get pregnant and it was suspected that it was the Queen’s young, handsome advisers who were the real fathers of those children.

We must understand that marriage in those days was not for sex or out of love. It was to seal political alliances. If you married the sister or daughter of the King of another country then that country would not attack your country because you were now related — either brother-in-law or son-in-law. So, after marrying your Queen, you locked her away and spent your time chasing other women — or other men as the case may be.

The most notable ‘bastard’ Ruler of England was probably Elizabeth I, the daughter of Henry VIII from his second wife, Anne Boleyn. The church did not recognise Elizabeth because divorce was not allowed so Henry broke away from the church and formed his own church to legitimise his divorce from the Queen and his marriage to Anne (but Rome still regarded her as a bastard).

Because of this they wanted Mary, Henry’s granddaughter, to inherit the throne. But since she was Catholic (and French), and Catholics were put to death if they confessed to being Catholics, Elizabeth got the throne instead. Mary was later executed for her crime against God — for being a Catholic. Mary was of course known as Mary Queen of Scots but it was the Scots who betrayed her and handed her to Elizabeth to be jailed for many years before she was executed. (The Scots have been betraying their Rulers since time immemorial).

Mary I - Bloody Mary (British Monarchy Documentary) | Timeline

Ancient Egypt Documentary - Complete History - 8000 B.C. to 30 B.C. Part 1

Bloody, Virgin, Mother, Saint Mary...

The birth of Mary is mentioned in the Quran in various chapters. Her father Joachim (Arabic: يواكيم‎; Imran) and her mother Anne (آن; Hannah) are also mentioned in the Quran. The Quran says that Joachim and Anne were old and had no children for years. One day Anne saw a bird feeding her young. Seeing this made Anne want a child for herself. She prayed to Allah for a child. She promised that if her prayers were answered, her child's life would be dedicated to the service of Allah. Anne also prayed for her child to be protected from the "touch" of Satan (إبليس; Iblīs).

Mary Had a little LAMB...

She said, “How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?” He said, “Thus [it will be]; your Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me…”

Quran 19:20-21

When the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worlds.

Quran 3:42

Mary Had a Little Lamb...

At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: "O Mary! truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! "O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!" [Qur'an 19:27-28]

Perhaps one of the most widely known alleged historical contradictions in the Qur'an recorded in Christian literature, the honorary epithet of Mary, mother of Jesus, as “sister of Aaron” has proven controversial from the earliest period of Muslim-Christian dialogue. Nicetas of Byzantium, a 9th century Christian theologian famous for his anti-Islamic polemical works, noted that in the Qur'an Mary is greeted as “sister of Aaron” [Qur'an 19:28].

He concluded that Mary, whose name in Greek and Arabic is Maryam, has been confused with Miriam the sister of Aaron and Moses found in the Old Testament.[1] This argument was developed by subsequent authors, as we shall soon see, by indicating that ‘Imran, the name which the Qur'an gives to Mary's father, sounds similar to Amram, the Old Testament name of the father of Moses, Aaron and Miriam (Numbers 26:59). For example, Abraham Geiger says in his book Was hat Mohammed aus dem Judenthume aufgenommen?:

According to Muhammad Miriam is the mother of Jesus. Although Miriam's name is not mentioned in the passage where she is alluded to in the history of Moses, yet there is not the slightest doubt that Muhammad took both Marys for one and the same person;...[2]

Who Is The Real Mary, Miriam, Mariam?

About 700 years BEFORE Mary, the mother of Jesus, was born, Isaiah the prophet, miraculously predicted this: “The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel (which means ‘God is with us’).”

You can read it for yourself in Isaiah 7:14 (By the way, Immanuel is a prophetic title that reveals Jesus’ deeper purpose and mission.)

At no time in history past, since the world began, has a virgin given birth to a child nor is it humanly possible. Either Isaiah was a crazy liar or he was speaking the words of God. As it turned out, Isaiah’s prophecy was fulfilled when Jesus was born of the virgin Mary. It is confirmed in the Gospels. In fact, Matthew quotes Isaiah’s prophecy WORD FOR WORD in Matthew 1:23 to make sure that no one gets it wrong or misses it.

The Quran which came 1400 years after Isaiah, and 600 years after Matthew, repeats what was prophesied and written more than a thousand years earlier in the Bible, about the virgin birth. God had already planned this birth thousands of years before it happened. The Bible reveals the prophecy as well as the fulfillment of the prophecy. And the purpose for it.

The Quran has a whole sura dedicated to Mariam but gives no reason for the purpose of the virgin birth. Mariam is said to be the sister of Harun and the daughter of Imran.

However, this raises some questions because according to Bible scholars, Mary’s father’s name is Heli (drawn from Luke’s genealogical record.) Mary has a sister (John 19:25) and a cousin, Elizabeth but there is no mention of any brother and her father’s name was definitely not Imran. There is no record anywhere for a thousand years to back up what the Quran claims in the 7th century AD.

So who is this Imran & Harun that the Quran claims are the father and brother of Mariam?

Muslims scholars have tried to explain it away for decades in claiming that Mary-Imran-Aaron was not a physical relationship, but in doing so they contradict the Quran as you can see if you carefully follow the following verses which connect Mary and Imran and his wife, Aaron and the virgin birth.

When the wife of Imran said, ‘Lord, I have vowed to Thee, in dedication, what is within my womb. Receive Thou this from me; Thou hearest, and knowest.’ And when she gave birth to her she said, ‘Lord, I have given birth to her, a female.’ (And God knew very well what she had given birth to; the male is not as the female.) ‘And I have named her Mary, and commend her to Thee with her seed, to protect them from the accursed Satan.’ S. 3:35-36 Arberry

Then she brought the child to her folk carrying him; and they said, ‘Mary, thou hast surely committed a monstrous thing! Sister of Aaron, thy father was not a wicked man, nor was thy mother a woman unchaste.’ S. 19:27-28

And Mary, Imran’s daughter, who guarded her virginity, so We breathed into her of Our Spirit, and she confirmed the Words of her Lord and His Books, and became one of the obedient. S. 66:12

Was there confusion because Mariam, the mother of Jesus, had the same name as another Mariam?

That Mariam (Miriam in the Bible) was the daughter of Amram (Imran in Arabic) and the sister of Aaron (Harun in Arabic) & Moses (I Chronicles 6:3). So te Quran got that absolutely correct! BUT…that Mariam lived 1500 years before Mariam, the mother of Jesus!

Was Muhammad aware this huge As he was illiterate, he did not have the opportunity to read the Torah or Zabur or Injeel and make a comparison.

Could he have listened to Jews reading their scriptures and heard the name Maryam (Miriam) – Imran’s (Amram) daughter and Harun’s (Aaron) sister, mentioned in the Torah? And could he have heard Christians reading the Injeel where Mariam (Mary), the mother of Jesus is mentioned? Can you really blame Muhammad if he thought that both the Mariams were the same person!? It’s a mistake anyone can make.

Muhammad’s fascination with Mariam does not end there.

1.) Muhammad said, “In heaven, Mary mother of Jesus, will be one of my wives.” — al-Siyuti (6/395) and

2.) “The Messenger of God … said, ‘God married me in paradise to Mary the daughter of ‘Imran and to the wife of Pharaoh and the sister of Moses.’” — Tabarani (Ibn Kathir, Qisas al-Anbiya [Cairo: Dar al-Kutub, 1968/1388]

So which is the Mariam that Muhammad said will be his wife in heaven? Mariam, the mother of Jesus or Mariam, the daughter of Imran and sister of Moses? Or was it just all a colossal divine mix-up?

In A Tale that wasn't Right

“Sister Of Aaron”: A Genealogical, Historical And Lexical Enquiry

When Mary reached the age of maturity, she was divinely informed that she would give birth to a prodigious child Jesus [Qur'an 3:45]. When Mary conceived Jesus, she withdrew with him to a far place [Qur'an 19:22]. The nativity of Jesus and pangs of Mary's labour can be read in the Qur'an 19:23-26. After she gave birth to Jesus, they both came to her people. The people were amazed to see Mary with a child. They said: "O Mary! Thou hast come with an amazing thing. "O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!"

As we have mentioned, earlier scholarly critics of the Qur’anic account (of which Muḥammad is the implied author), have made the simple assertion that Muḥammad has conflated the lives of two Mary's, namely Mary, mother of Jesus, with Mary, sister of Aaron and Moses. Put another way, Muḥammad believed Mary - whose father was Amram - had two brothers Moses and Aaron.

Crucially the Qur’an informs us that Mary was also the mother of Jesus. By focussing on the immediate lineage and neglecting the full spectrum of familial relations given in the Qur’an, including mention of other historical personalities (such as Zakariyyah), the resulting genealogy becomes untenable in that it cannot be derived from information provided in the Qur’an. If this relation is included in the genealogy asserted by earlier scholars, this can be graphically represented as follows:

One could counter that the verses examined mention only Aaron being the sister of Mary so perhaps Muḥammad did not know Aaron had a brother called Moses. This can be answered by reading the Qur’an where Moses and Aaron are clearly depicted as brothers. The question posed is thus: Did Muḥammad and/or the Qur’an really understand Moses to be Jesus uncle? Were Jesus and Moses separated by only a single generation? The Qur’an mentions that Jesus and Moses both reached maturity and adulthood. Consequently, applying the confused genealogy of the critics would have the Qur’anic Jesus and Moses both alive at the same time. Surprising though it may seem, as far as we are aware, none of earlier scholars delved any further into their proposed genealogies other than to suggest that Muḥammad thought Jesus son of Mary was the brother of Aaron and Moses. Are there any statements present in the Qur’an which suggest that Jesus and Moses lived at the same time? No. In fact, Moses and his brother Aaron are placed in an ancient Egyptian setting during the time of the Pharaoh, far removed in place and time from first century Palestine.

If the Qur’an's use of the terms wife, daughter and sister in this particular context cannot be understood in a literal sense, as we have shown above, is there another way to understand these terms and what historical circumstances could warrant such an explanation?

A HISTORICAL ENQUIRY

The question now is why the epithet “O sister of Aaron”? Upon seeing Mary with a child, and having no knowledge of her having married anyone or being unchaste, her people exclaimed using the epithet yā ukhta harūn or “O sister of Aaron”. From the immediate context it is obvious this epithet was used to draw Mary's attention, which could mean the following things.

Firstly, it was to remind her of her similarity to Aaron in her piety and worship of God. Thus the statement becomes a reprimand to her having borne a child without being married, a shocking sin given her piety and the known righteousness of her immediate family and her ancestors.[13]

Secondly, the epithet yā ukhta harūn was also to remind Mary of her pious ancestor Miriam, the sister of Aaron (and Moses), who was given the title "prophetess" (Exodus 15:20) and is highly regarded in the Hebrew Bible and rabbinical literature. She is mentioned in Micah 6:4 with Moses and Aaron as one of the three who led Israel out of Egypt. The rabbinical literature elaborates the biblical account where Miriam is portrayed as a person for whom God intervened. God honoured her by Himself officiating as the cohen to declare her definitely a leper and subsequently to declare her cleansed (Zebahim 102a).[14] Because she had waited for Moses by the river, the Israelites waited for her to recover (Sotah 11a).[15] A miraculous well, created during the twilight on the eve of the first Sabbath (Avot. 5:6), accompanied the Children of Israel in the desert due to her merits (Ta’an. 9a).[16] Like Moses and Aaron, she too died by the kiss of God since the angel of death had no power over her (Baba Bathra 17a).[17]

Both these explanations have a support from a ḥadīth of Prophet Muḥammad. The Christians of Najran during the time of the Prophet raised a similar objection and it was answered by the Prophet. In Ṣaḥiḥ Muslim, a ḥadīth related by Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah [5326] says:

Mughira b. Shu‘ba reported: When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "O sister of Harun" in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born much before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) I asked him about that, whereupon he said: "The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostles and pious persons who had gone before them."

It is clear from this ḥadīth that the Prophet did not "confuse" between the two Marys.[18] He pointed out that people from earlier times gave names after the pious people who had gone before them.

Furthermore, the Muslim exegetes have already disproved the alleged confusion of the two Marys using the above ḥadīth and the Qur'an itself. For example, Barbara Freyer Stowasser points out:

Mary's designation as "sister of Aaron" (and also "daughter of Amram") has led some non-Muslims to allege a Qur'anic "confusion" of Miriam (Maryam) the sister of Aaron and Moses with Mary (Maryam) the mother of Jesus. This controversy is very old..., and refutation of the allegation by Muslim authorities is well-documented. According to the tafsir, Mary was addressed as "sister of Aaron" because the Qur'an is drawing a comparison, or because she did have a brother by that name.[19]

Elsewhere, concerning the alleged contradiction of the two Mary's, Stowasser, quoting Ibn Kathir, and says:

This controversy is as old as the Muslim-Christian dialogue. The Prophet is said to have refuted similar arguments made by the Christians of Najran during his lifetime; "to confuse Mary the mother of Jesus with Mary the sister of Moses and Aaron in Torah is completely wrong and in contradiction to the sound Hadith and the Qur'anic text as we have established it in the Tafsir" (Isma'il ibn Umar Abu l-Fida Ibn Kathir, Qisas al-anbiya', ed. Mustafa Abd al-Wahid, vol. II [Dar al-kutub al-haditha, 1968] pp. 393-394;[20]

Therefore, the epithet "O sister of Aaron" used by Mary's people when they saw a baby in her arms, was simply a reminder to her of the people like her who had gone before and were pious and chaste. Furthermore, the Qur'an, just like the New Testament, associates Mary, mother of Jesus, during the time of Zakariyya. This makes the case for "confusion" between the two Marys untenable.

The words "sister", "brother", "son" and "daughter" in Arabic usage have very wide connotations. On this basis itself, modern day Western scholarship has rejected the claim of "confusion" between the two Marys, i.e., Mary, mother of Jesus, and Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron. For example, A. J. Wensinck writing in the Encyclopaedia Of Islam says:

Maryam is called a sister of Hārūn (sūra XIX, 29), and the use of these three names ‘Imrān, Hārūn and Maryam, has lead to the supposition that the Kur'ān does not clearly distinguished between the two Maryams, of the Old and the New Testaments. The Kur'ān names two families as being especially chosen: those of Ibrāhim and of ‘Imrān (sūra III, 32). It is the family of ‘Imrān, important because of Moses and Aaron, to which Maryam belongs. It is not necessary to assume that these kinship links are to interpreted in modern terms. The words "sister" and "daughter", like their male counterparts, in Arabic usage can indicate extended kinship, descendance or spiritual affinity. This second ‘Imrān, together with Harun, can be taken as purely Kur'ānic... Muslim tradition is clear that there are eighteen centuries between the Biblical ‘Amram and the father of Maryam.[21]

Similarly, the wide usage of the Hebrew word ’achôwth, the equivalent of Arabic ukhtun, meaning "sister", is also attested in the Hebrew Bible. The material below is taken from Gesenius's Hebrew And Chaldee Lexicon To The Old Testament Scripture.

Similarly, the online Blue Letter Bible, under ’achôwth, lists the following usages in the Bible:

  • sister (same parents)

  • half-sister (same father)

  • relative

  • (metaph) of Israel's and Judah's relationship

  • beloved

  • bride

  • (fig.) of intimate connection

  • another

Similar statements can also be seen in The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew And English Lexicon.[23] The New Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Of The Bible very briefly describes the word ’achôwth, "sister", and says that it is widely used both literally and figuratively in the Hebrew Bible.[24]

According to the Christian missionaries, the phrase "brother of" (and consequently the phrase "sister of" in the Qur'an) "refers not to descendants but to two contemporaries". No such limited definition exists. Checking "’Achôwth" in various Hebrew lexicons such as Gesenius's Hebrew And Chaldee Lexicon To The Old Testament Scripture,[25] The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew And English Lexicon,[26] The Hebrew And Aramaic Lexicon Of The Old Testament,[27] Theological Dictionary Of The Old Testament,[28] A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary Of The Hebrew Language For Readers Of English[29] and The Dictionary Of Classical Hebrew[30] reveals no support for the claims of Christian missionaries that the phrase "sister of" can only "refer not to descendants but to two contemporaries". On the other hand, all the Hebrew lexicons give an unqualified support that the word ’achôwth can be used both literally and figuratively. This word is used to denote a sister, half sister, relatives, members of the same tribe, to someone who is beloved and even one’s wife. Interestingly Judah is called a "sister" of Israel (Jeremiah 3:7-10) not because they were contemporary with each other, but because they were the descendants of a common ancestor, i.e., Israel's united monarchy (as well as Prophet Jacob!).[31] Hence the word "sister" describes the close relationship between Judah (southern kingdom) and Israel (northern kingdom) after the split. Moreover, "sister" can mean "beloved" or someone who is close and thus it could refer to any number of people or group of people, past or present.

Similarly, in the New Testament the use of the word adelphe, meaning "sister", is used to imply a blood sister and someone connected by the tie of the Christian religion (Figure 2). Again there is no qualification mentioned that this word can only "refer not to descendants but to two contemporaries".

It is not surprising that the alleged "confusion" between the two Marys does not even appear in the Encyclopaedia Of The Qur'an published in 2003.[33] This alleged "confusion" disregards both the Arabic idiom and the context of the verse. In Arabic, the word akhun or ukhtun (underlined with red colour in the images) carries two meanings.

1. Blood brother or sister and

2. Brotherhood/sisterhood in clan and faith.​

Life has a funny way of sneaking up on you Life has a funny, funny way of helping you out Helping you out #funny #help

The Son Of...

If a married man died childless, his brother was required to marry his wife to provide a son to continue the dead man's line.

Why Was Jesus Called the Son of David?

Matthew 1 New International Version (NIV)

On a number of occasions in the gospels Jesus is called the, "Son of David." Matthew calls Jesus the, son of David in the very first sentence of his gospel.

The Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah

1 This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah[b] the son of David, the son of Abraham:

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac,

Isaac the father of Jacob,

Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,

3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,

Perez the father of Hezron,

Hezron the father of Ram,

4 Ram the father of Amminadab,

Amminadab the father of Nahshon,

Nahshon the father of Salmon,

5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,

Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,

Obed the father of Jesse,

6 and Jesse the father of King David.

David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,

7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam,

Rehoboam the father of Abijah,

Abijah the father of Asa,

8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,

Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,

Jehoram the father of Uzziah,

9 Uzziah the father of Jotham,

Jotham the father of Ahaz,

Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,

10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,

Manasseh the father of Amon,

Amon the father of Josiah,

11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[c] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.

12 After the exile to Babylon:

Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,

Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,

13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,

Abihud the father of Eliakim,

Eliakim the father of Azor,

14 Azor the father of Zadok,

Zadok the father of Akim,

Akim the father of Elihud,

15 Elihud the father of Eleazar,

Eleazar the father of Matthan,

Matthan the father of Jacob,

16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.

17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.

When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever (2 Samuel 7:12-13).

People Called Jesus The Son Of David

Six times in the gospel of Matthew it records people calling Jesus the, "Son of David."

There were two blind men who needed healing who addressed him this way.

As Jesus went on from there, two blind men followed him, crying out, "Have mercy on us, Son of David!" (Matthew 9:27).

After Jesus performed a miraculous healing the crowd wondered if Jesus could be David's son.

All the crowds were amazed, and were saying, "This man cannot be the Son of David, can he?" (Matthew 12:23).

A Canaanite woman who wanted her daughter healed used this title of Jesus.

And a Canaanite woman from that region came out and began to cry out, saying, "Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is cruelly demon-possessed" (Matthew 15:22).

In Jericho, two blind men called out to Jesus.

And two blind men sitting by the road, hearing that Jesus was passing by, cried out, "Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!" (Matthew 20:30).

Jesus Was Called The Son Of David During The Triumphal Entry

When Jesus entered Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, the people acknowledged Him as the "Son of David."

The crowds going ahead of him, and those who followed, were shouting, "Hosanna to the Son of David; Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest!" (Matthew 21:9).

In the temple in Jerusalem the people addressed Jesus as David's son.

But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that he had done, and the children who were shouting in the temple, "Hosanna to the Son of David," they became indignant (Matthew 21:5).

Jesus The Son Of Joseph

Joseph Accepts Jesus as His Son

18 This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about[d]: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. 19 Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet[e] did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[f] because he will save his people from their sins.”

22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:

23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”[g] (which means “God with us”).

24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.

25 But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

Why do Matthew and Luke have different genealogies of Jesus?

The Gospels give two completely different genealogies for Jesus. In Matthew 1:1-16, the list begins with Abraham, goes down to David in verse 6, then Solomon, Rehoboam, and on through the kings of Judah until the Babylonian exile. The lineage ends with Matthan, Jacob, and Joseph the husband of Mary. Luke 3:23-38 starts with Jesus and goes backward in time. The difference is immediate. Joseph's father is given as Eli (also spelled Heli), then Matthat, Levi, and Melchi. The son of David in this line is not Solomon, nor are any of the kings of Judah mentioned. Instead, Nathan is the link to David. Nathan was the third son of David and Bathsheba and the older brother of Solomon (1 Chronicles 3:5). The genealogy then continues on, ending in Adam and God. Why the discrepancy? It is too large a difference to blame a copyist, and genealogy was important enough to the Jews that they would know who their ancestors were. There are several different possibilities. Matthew's genealogy is direct while Luke's included "levirate" marriages. If a married man died childless, his brother was required to marry his wife to provide a son to continue the dead man's line. While it is entirely possible that Solomon would have been willing to add his brother Nathan's widow to his long list of wives and concubines, it is highly unlikely that every single marriage after was a levirate marriage as well.

There I was completely wasted, out of work and down

All inside it's so frustrating as I drift from town to town

Feel as though nobody cares if I live or die

So I might as well begin to put some action in my life

Breaking the law, breaking the law Breaking the law, breaking the law

The two accounts merge within the last three generations. In this theory, Joseph's grandmother first married Matthan and gave birth to Jacob (Matthew 1:15). Matthan died, and she married Matthat and gave birth to Eli (Luke 3:24). Jacob and Eli were half-brothers on their mother's side. Joseph's mother married Jacob, but Jacob died childless. Eli married Jacob's widow, and she had Joseph. If this is the case, Joseph was biologically Eli's son and Matthat's grandson. Legally he was Jacob's son and Matthan's grandson. Thus, legally Joseph would be descended from David via Solomon and the kings of Judah, but biologically he would be descended through David's son Nathan. There is nothing in the Bible to indicate this is true. It was contrived as a possible explanation for Joseph to have two different genealogies. Luke lied for political reasons. Luke needed to acknowledge that Jesus was a direct descendent of David to fulfill prophecy. But because he wrote to a Greek audience that had had to endure several Jewish revolts, he needed to de-emphasize that Jesus was related to David through the line of legitimate Jewish kings. Matthew's genealogy, written for the Jews, threatened Herod's tenuous hold as king of Israel and was too dangerous for Luke to use. There is no evidence to suggest this viewpoint is correct. For one, if Luke's genealogy is made up, where did he get it from? For another, if Jesus' genealogy was so dangerous, why bring it up at all? Mark and John didn't. Luke traces Joseph's genealogy through his father, but Matthew traces Joseph's genealogy through his mother. In this view, Jacob would be Joseph's mother's father. Matthew gives the royal line, while Luke gives Joseph's direct line. This is possible, and since Matthew is written to the Jews, the lineage of Jesus as heir to David's throne is important. But if this other direct royal line existed, it diverged from Joseph's early on, and although Jesus was directly descended from David, it was rather obliquely to the royal line. Matthew gave Joseph's line, while Luke gave Mary's line. There was no word for "son-in-law" for Luke to use in Luke 3:23, and tradition was that the wife's father would consider his sons-in-law as sons. Matthew, writing to the Jews, would have emphasized Jesus' legal right to David's throne. Joseph would have been directly descended from the royal line of David, but since Jesus was adopted by Joseph, He would have avoided the curse in Jeremiah 22:30 that said none of the descendents of Jeconiah (the last of the direct royal line to rule before the exile to Babylon—see 2 Kings 24) would sit on David's throne. Luke, writing to Gentiles, gave Jesus' biological connection to David through Mary. In addition, Luke 1-2 suggests to Bible scholars that much of Luke's information about Jesus' early life came from Mary. She would have been able to give him her genealogy, and he may have been inclined to honor her by including it.

“How old was Mary (the mother of Jesus) when she became pregnant?” & “How old was Mary when she gave birth to our Lord Jesus, the Christ?”

Thousands of paintings, drawings, statues, and even “living manger scenes” portray Mary, Jesus’ mother, at the time of Jesus’ birth. However, most of them portray her as a young woman in her 20’s. To be sure, Mary was a remarkable woman. For one thing, she truly understood what it meant to sacrifice for the sake of doing God’s will, an example her son, Jesus, noted and would later follow. For example, apparently no one at that time, including she herself, was expecting the Messiah to be born of a virgin. This is why she asked the angel Gabriel how she was going to bear the Messiah when she was not married and sexually active (Luke 1:34), why Joseph decided to divorce her, and why, years later, the religious leaders still thought that Jesus was a bastard child, born of fornication (John 8:41 – KJV). She knew that accepting pregnancy from God would cause turmoil and pain to her and her loved ones, but she accepted God’s plan for her life, saying, “…Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word…”(Luke 1:38 – ESV [1]).

In ancient Israel, girls married in their teens, even early teens. [2] For Mary to be betrothed (engaged) but not yet formally married, yet old enough to have and nurse the Messiah, she would have been 12-14. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible points out, “It appears that both boys and girls were married very young. Later [after the New Testament period] the rabbis fixed the minimum age for marriage at twelve for girls and thirteen for boys.”

Some customs of biblical Palestine continued through the centuries, and after her trip to the Near East around 1910, Alma White commented on the age of marriage in Palestine, “A girl is usually married in her twelfth or thirteenth year, and sometimes as early as her tenth year.” [4] W. M. Thompson, a missionary in the Middle East for some 30 years, attests to the same thing. [5] James Neil points out that everyone married, because they felt obligated to fulfill God’s command to be fruitful and multiply, and that, “Girls are ‘given in marriage’ at eleven or twelve years of age, though this is not the limit. They are frequently married as young as nine….” [6]

Marrying young was the custom in many ancient cultures. Two cultures that had particular influence on the biblical world were the Greeks and Romans. Isomachus, a character in the Greek writer Xenophon’s Oeconomics, mentions that when he married his wife, she was not yet fifteen. [7] Roman girls also married very young, sometimes even before puberty. [8]

Women married early because it was they who bore the children who continued the family line and provided economic strength and physical protection for the family, and it was generally desirable to have many children. Furthermore, lots of children died young, and many women died in childbirth. We know from Matthew and Luke that Mary was a virgin, and had never been married before, so her marriage age would have been set by common custom. Also, as was common, Mary had a large family, with at least seven children. Her male children were Jesus, James, Joseph, Simon and Judas (Matt. 13:55), and she had at least two daughters, for Jesus had “sisters” as well as brothers (Matt. 13:55 and 56). [9]

Boys also married early, but somewhat later than girls. Jewish boys were expected to marry at sixteen or seventeen. [10] Similarly, in the Roman world, the age at which a Roman boy discarded the white toga with a red border, the symbol of youth, and wore the pure white toga of a Roman man and citizen, was generally between 14 and 17. [11] Just how old Joseph was when he married Mary is not as easily determined as Mary’s age, because although men customarily married in their mid to late teens, for a number of reasons they sometimes married later.

It is often assumed that Joseph married late in his life, because it is almost certain that he had died by the time Jesus started his ministry. We draw this conclusion from a number of biblical records in which Joseph was conspicuously absent, culturally speaking. One is when Jesus moved his headquarters to Capernaum his mother and brothers came, but not his father (John 2:12). Even more significant is that while on the Cross, Jesus instructed the Apostle John to take care of his mother and told Mary to treat John as a son, which would never have occurred had Joseph been alive (John 19:26 and 27). However, the fact that Joseph was dead by the time Jesus was 30 does not necessarily mean that Joseph was a much older man when he married Mary, because many people died young from accidents or disease.

Bible Says Mary 12 & Joseph 90 Years Old When Married

It is believed on the authority of some Hadith reports that the marriage ceremony (known as nikah, amounting to betrothal) of Aisha with the Holy Prophet Muhammad took place when she was six years of age, and that she joined the Holy Prophet as his wife three years later at the age of nine. We quote below from two such reports in Bukhari.

“It is reported from Aisha that she said: The Prophet entered into marriage with me when I was a girl of six … and at the time [of joining his household] I was a girl of nine years of age.”

“Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina.

He stayed [alone] for two years or so. He married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.”

The depiction of St. Joseph as an elderly man arises from a “speculation” in the Eastern churches that he was an elderly widower who had other children before he married Mary. This speculation sought to solve two issues:

First, Mary is the ever-virgin mother of our Savior, and therefore, she and St. Joseph did not have other children. Unlike a virile young man, an old man past his prime would not be tempted to have conjugal relations with a much younger woman. Surely his libido would have quelled long ago. In this sense, an old St. Joseph is “a safe St. Joseph.”

Second, the elderly widower St. Joseph who had other children would explain the Gospel references to “the brothers and sisters of the Lord.” These brothers and sisters would really then be Jesus’ half-brothers and half-sisters, but only by law, not by blood since Joseph was not the natural father of Our Lord. For example, in the Gospel of St. Mark, we read, “Isn’t this the carpenter, the son of Mary, a brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters our neighbors here?” (Mk 6:3).

The “elderly widower” argument is not needed if one understands the meaning of brother.

In the original text of the Gospel, the Greek word “adelphos”, meaning “brother,” is used. However, adelphos does not just mean a blood brother born of the same parents but also a half-brother, a step-brother or even another male relationship, like a cousin or a nephew. Note also that in Hebrew and Aramaic, no special word existed for cousin, nephew, half-brother or step-brother; so they used the word “brother” or a circumlocution, such as in the case of a cousin, “the son of the brother of my father.”

Joseph, Mary's husband, was "90 years old" when he married 12 to 14-year old Mary!

Not only was it a custom in the Arab society to Engage/Marry a young girl it was also common in the Jewish society. The case of Mary the mother of Jesus comes to mind, in non biblical sources she was between 11-14 years old when she conceived Jesus. Mary had already been "BETROTHED" to Joseph before conceiving Jesus. Joseph was a much older man. therefore Mary was younger than 11-14 years of age when she was "BETHROED" to Joseph. We Muslims would never call Joseph a Child Molester, nor would we refer to the "Holy Ghost" of the Bible, that "Impregnated" Mary as a "Rapist" or "Adulterer". "....it is possible that Mary gave birth to her Son when she was about thirteen or fourteen years of age...." (Source) [2] Also, this paragraph was sent to me by brother Mike, who embraced Islam recently; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him: According to the Priest of Saint Mary's Catholic Church: "Mary was approximately 14 years old when she got pregnant with Jesus. Joseph, Mary's Husband is believed to be around 36. Mary was only 13 when she married Joseph. When she first was arranged with Joseph she was between 7 to 9 years old." According to the "Oxford Dictionary Bible" commentary, Mary (peace be upon her) was was 12 years old when she became impregnated. So if I want to be as silly and ridiculous as many of the Christians, I would respond to them by saying that Mary was psychologically and emotionally devastated for getting pregnant at a very young age. And speaking of "child molesting", since most Christians believe that Jesus is the Creator of this universe, then why did GOD allow himself to enter life through a 12-year old young girl's vagina?

OMG... My Oh My OHH MINE!!!

It is quite hypocritical of Jews and Christian to criticize the marriage of Aisha. Talmud (Jewish scripture) says: "Marrying off one's daughter as soon after she reaches adulthood as possible, even to one's Slave. (From the Talmud, Pesachim 113a)" As we discussed, in biblical times adulthood could refer to the age of Puberty or even younger age.

"When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother"). A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age, Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice God had made of Joseph, and two years later the Annunciation took place."

It is probably at Nazareth that Joseph betrothed and married her who was to become the Mother of God. When the marriage took place, whether before or after the Incarnation, is no easy matter to settle, and on this point the masters of exegesis have at all times been at variance. Most modern commentators, following the footsteps of St. Thomas, understand that, at the epoch of the Annunciation, the Blessed Virgin was only affianced to Joseph; as St. Thomas notices, this interpretation suits better all the evangelical data.

It will not be without interest to recall here, unreliable though they are, the lengthy stories concerning St. Joseph's marriage contained in the apocryphal writings. When forty years of age, Joseph married a woman called Melcha or Escha by some, Salome by others; they lived forty-nine years together and had six children, two daughters and four sons, the youngest of whom was James (the Less, "the Lord's brother"). A year after his wife's death, as the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in the tribe of Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age.

Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice God had made of Joseph, and two years later the Annunciation took place.

These dreams, as St. Jerome styles them, from which many a Christian artist has drawn his inspiration (see, for instance, Raphael's "Espousals of the Virgin"), are void of authority; they nevertheless acquired in the course of ages some popularity; in them some ecclesiastical writers sought the answer to the well-known difficulty arising from the mention in the Gospel of "the Lord's brothers"; from them also popular credulity has, contrary to all probability, as well as to the tradition witnessed by old works of art, retained the belief that St. Joseph was an old man at the time of marriage with the Mother of God.

To some people Prophet Muhammad was a paedophile because he married Aisha when she was still a six-year-old child and had not even got her period yet (while he was in his 50s). Furthermore, Islam says marriage is only legal between consenting adults and you are allowed only four wives while Muhammad had more than four, which also makes him a hypocrite for not following his own teachings.

Now, while many say this is the truth, will Muslims agree and also say that this is the truth or will they defend, justify and explain Muhammad’s actions with all sorts of reasons and excuses?

Completely unlike Jesus Christ who never had sex with a woman, Muhammad's was sexually involved with at least 22 women. Although in the Quran he would limit his followers to having four wives, he himself took more than four wives and many concubines. The question of the number of women with whom Muhammad was sexually involved either as wives, concubines or devotees was made a point of contention by the Jews in Muhammad's day. Ali Dashti comments:

"All the commentaries agree that verse 57 of Sura 4 (on-Nesa) was sent down after the Jews criticized Mohammad's appetite for women, alleging that he had nothing to do except to take wives" (Ali Dashti, 23 Years, pp. 120-138).

Now polygamy was practiced in the Old Testament by Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David and Solomon. In fact when David committed adultery with Bathsheeba, God said, "Did I not give you your many wives, why have you done this thing with Bathsheeba", (2 Samuel 12:7-9 paraphrased).

But the Koran claims to be a new revelation from God to man and specifically limited the number of wives to four. In Sura 4:3. This means that Muhammad sinned against the very Koran he claimed to reveal.

Although Arabs gave us Algebra, modern Muslims are quite illogical regarding most aspect of their religion. If history contradicts the Koran, history is wrong! In order to keep Muhammad sinless, Muslims will actually deny the fact that Muhammad had more than four wives. Their circular reasoning is well documented by James A. Beverly, in his book "Understanding Islam". A typical private conversation with a Muslim regarding Muhammad's many wives will go as follows:

  1. The Quran condemns more than 4 wives in Q4:3.

  2. Muhammad was sinless.

  3. Therefore Muhammad did not have more than four wives, (Because Muhammad was sinless.)

However, the facts of history cannot be changed. Informed Muslims like Muslim scholar and statesman Ali Dashti gives the following list of the women in Muhammad's life:

Muhammad's 22 Women:

Muhammad's 16 Wives:

1. Khadija

2. Sawda

3. Aesha

4. Omm Salama

5. Halsa

6. Zaynab (of Jahsh)

7. Jowayriyi

8. Omm Habiba

9. Safiya

10. Maymuna (of Hareth)

11. Fatema

12. Hend

13. Asma (of Saba)

14. Zaynab (of Khozayma)

15. Habla

16. Asma (of Noman)

Muhammad's 2 concubines/slaves:

  1. Mary (the Christian)

  2. Rayhana

Muhammad's 4 devoted followers who who "gave" themselves to satisfy Muhammad's sexual desires.

  1. Omm Sharik

  2. Maymuna

  3. Zaynab (a third one)

  4. Khawla

BE FRUITFUL & MULTIPLY!!!

Zaynab of Jahsh was originally Muhammad's adopted son Zaid's wife. The fact that Muhammad took her for himself has been problematic to many people, Muslims included. (God does not break His Own Word and He never changes His mind. Now read Sura 33:36-38).

(The vindicated prophet Moses taught under the Old Testament, that a minister could only marry a virgin or the widow of a minister (Leviticus 21:13-15).

The vindicated prophet Jesus taught under the New Testament that an apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor or teacher can marry only a virgin in the faith -- because he is a type of Christ Who is uniting only with virgins to the Word.

Every prophet from Adam taught that any woman who has more than one living husband is an adulteress, and her subsequent husband is in adultery with her first husband as polygamy was legal only for the man -- Genesis 3:16; Romans 7:1-3).

Aesha was only eight or nine years old when Muhammad took her to his bed. According to Hadith, she was still playing with her dolls. This facet of Muhammad's sexual appetite is particularly distressing to Westerners.

While in Islamic countries an eight-or-nine-year-old girl can be given in marriage to an adult male, in the West, most people would shudder to think of an eight-or-nine-year-old girl being given in marriage to anyone. (Although it is condoned by the Jew's Talmud).

This aspect of Muhammad's personal life is something that many scholars pass over once again because they do not want to hurt the feelings of Muslims. Yet, history cannot be rewritten to avoid confronting the facts that Muhammad had unnatural desires for little girls.

Finally, Mary, the Coptic Christian, refused to marry Muhammad because she would not renounce Christianity and embrace Islam. She bravely chose to remain a slave rather than convert.

The documentation for all the women in Muhammad's harem is so vast and has been presented so many times by able scholars that only the blind reject it.

So you see, be very careful when you argue about ‘truth’ because one person’s truth can be another person’s lie.

The Christians will argue that the Bible is the truth. Those who do not believe in the Bible will argue that the Bible is a lie. The Bible was not written during the lifetime of Jesus, like the Qur’an was recorded during the lifetime of Muhammad. While Muslims believe the Qur’an came from God through the angel Gabriel, the Bible was written by so many different people many years after the time of Jesus. And even the names of the authors are fake and were not the disciples of Jesus (who had all died by the time the Bible was written).

In fact, half the Bible comes from Paul, who was not one of the disciples and had never met Jesus and who claims that Jesus talks to him from heaven. Make that claim today (that Jesus is talking to you from heaven) and they will arrest you and lock you away for the rest of your life.

From our lives' beginning on

We are pushed in little forms

No-one asks us how we'd like to be In school they teach us what to think

But everyone says different things

But they're all convinced that

They're the ones to see

So they keep talking and they never stop

At a certain point you give it up

So the only thing that's left to think is this

I want out

To live my life alone

I want out Leave me be

I want out

To do things on my own

I want out

To live my life and to be free

The Return Of The Messiah... In accordance to the teachings of "The People Of The Book... Come Again!!!"

I wasn't lookin' when you pulled me in

Whoa oh oh oh Yeah-- Lord, here I come again

Come again Come again I said Lord

I wasn't lookin' when you pulled me in

Whoa oh oh oh Yeah-- Lord, here I come again

21 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page