Muhammad Did Not Marry A Child

Neopesdom

@DivergentMinister

>>This is plenty of time for such a tradition of extreme youth to develop.

This is really the key statement you have made. Islam is indeed a development, a work under progress, changing, updating etc. It is therefore irrelevant as to what Muhammad did or did not do in regards to anything, it’s all made up stories. Islam has already been thoroughly and completely debunked, Muslims and some others still however have to catch up with the times.

>>We see something similar occur within the Catholic tradition. To preserve the virginity of Mary even while married to Joseph, the age of Joseph became progressively older!

In this make believe Catholic world, the age of Joseph is again irrelevant. Romanism in its attempt to deify Mary to an exulted status, keeping in form with the Babylonian trinity, and reports the perpetual virginity of Mary as a doctrine which teaches that Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, was a virgin ante partum, in partu, et post partum - before, during and after the birth of Christ. This doctrine of theirs directly contradicts what it says in the Bible.

“But he(Joseph) did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.” (Matt. 1:25)

In true Christianity there is no development. Any so called religion that needs to have corrections and developments to their "Holy Book" is obviously fake. 

Jesus says “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” (Matt. 24:35)

Dee

The Sahih al Bukhari clearly states Aisha was 6 when Muhammad married her he waited till she was 9 before consumating the marriage ,you can only deny this by denying the words of the Sahih al Bukhari which is a timeline of Muhammads life and held in the highest esteem beside the Quran

Muhammad even allowed Aisha play with her dolls and take them to his house , you may dress it up any way you want but Muhammad was 56 Aisha 9 when the brute had sex with her.

The Sahih Bukhari collection of Hadiths is considered to be the most authenticcollection of the teachings and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad SAW. These Prophetic traditions, or hadith, were collected by the Uzbek Muslim scholar Muhammad al-Bukhari, after being transmitted orally for generations.

Years ago muslims accepted this as fact it's only recent times it's become an embarrassment and incidentally child marriage is quiet common in muslim countries, religious texts and writings have always being used by the religious to justify the unspeakable Christian's did it with slavery and  used the bible to justify such

MayCaesar

I have always seen this as a fairly irrelevant criticism in the first place. Keep in mind that we are talking about the age nearly 1,500 years ago, on the Middle East, where customs were very different from the norms of the modern world. Muhammad could very well have done a lot of things we see nowadays as unacceptable - and he did; just look at the brutality at which he did his conquest.

Whether Muhammad married someone underage pales in comparison to other brutalities he did, as well as brutalities suggested in Quran. Quran, unlike the Bible, was written with the exact goal, it seems, to justify Muhammad's conquests, so it contains some mean passages that you do not find in other religious texts.

DivergentMinister

@Neopesdom

We are talking about historical critical studies of Islam, not Islamic theological studies. It’s rather clear that ahadith are not historically accurate. The Hadith collection you mentioned comes 200 years after Muhammad, and that age is clearly contradicted by other Hadith which say Aisha was older.

So the real question for historians is: “why did the age of Aisha change in the Hadith?” 

ZeusAres42

From my understanding, Islamic Scholars of recent times have changed the age of this female to what would be more appropriate. The original belief was that she was six, however.

DivergentMinister

@MayCaesar

That is just plainly inaccurate. Much of the Quran was written before Muhammad was even alive, and it was redacted more organically. It was not written with any particular purpose, which is why it is so contradictory.

DivergentMinister

@ZeusAres42

Not quite. The Hadith provide multiple ages for Aisha. Because these ages are contradictory, historians have to ask whether the later or earlier age was historically accurate.

Happy_Killbot

@DivergentMinister This is an interesting read. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the history of Islam to make any kind of claim either way here. However, if indeed the age of Aisha has changed it would do very little to correct the underlying abuses of Islam, such as the fact that even just a casual read of the Quran will reveal that it is very much a war doctrine, having been built on bloodshed, with many of these characteristics being preserved in modern times.

While I respect the right of anyone to have and practice whatever religion they choose, I don't think that anything can be done to correct the misgivings of religious influence. When your doctrine is fundamentally based on the idea of spreading itself to as many people as possible, there will always be a strong motivation for abuse. It is not inconceivable that internal modification would result to better accomplish this task, as you have argued it has.

I can not see any positives here, either Aisha's age was modified, in which case the entire doctrine must be brought into question having been deliberately changed thus we can not verify the accuracy of any of it, or she was young in which case the moral compass of the prophet Muhammad must be brought into question, and with it the moral principals of all subsequent teachings. No matter what, something is wrong here.

Dee

@DivergentMinister

***** Not quite. The Hadith provide multiple ages for Aisha. Because these ages are contradictory, historians have to ask whether the later or earlier age was historically accurate.

You’re totally incorrect again and never addressed what I previous said , so read below the Sahih -Al Bukhari is the source Muslims respect and revere as the go to source for the timeline of Muhammad’s life do you wish to deny this?


The Sahih al Bukhari clearly states Aisha was 6 when Muhammad married her he waited till she was 9 before consumating the marriage ,you can only deny this by denying the words of the Sahih al Bukhari which is a timeline of Muhammads life and held in the highest esteem beside the Quran

Dee

@DivergentMinister

I already gave you the highest regarded and most sacred Hadiths The Sahih -Al Bukhari  as accepted by Muslims but you will persist in your quest of denialism 

DivergentMinister

@Dee

We’re discussing history here. Even if Muslims regard that ahadith collection as accurate, that doesn’t mean it is, historically. In fact, I’d argue almost all Hadith are plainly ahistorical.

Historians don’t find texts “holy” or sacred. They just use the text as historians. And historians regard ahadith as largely ahistorical. As such, we can only use the data we have. And the data we have is incomplete. Some sources say 16-17. Other sources say 6-7. The historian has to decide which direction is more likely, as far as changes go. And becoming younger when married makes much more sense considerations accusations of infidelity.

Dee

@DivergentMinister

***** We’re discussing history here. Even if Muslims regard that ahadith collection as accurate, that doesn’t mean it is, historically. In fact, I’d argue almost all Hadith are plainly ahistorical.

If you argue such you need to back your claims up with solid evidence can you do that?

****Historians don’t find texts “holy” or sacred. 

Muslim Historians do in fact believe such 

*****They just use the text as historians. And historians regard ahadith as largely ahistorical. 

Really what Historians? Also wher3 have they claimed they are “ahistorical “?

****As such, we can only use the data we have. And the data we have is incomplete. 

Yet you’re speculating using what data?

****Some sources say 16-17. Other sources say 6-7. The historian has to decide which direction is more likely, as far as changes go. And becoming younger when married makes much more sense considerations accusations of infidelity.

All merely your subjective opinion nothing else 

digitalphotosolution

UNHRC Should Ensure That OIC Members Implement Provisions Of Human Rights Charter, Founder-Editor, New Age Islam, Sultan Shahin Addresses Its 43rd Session In Geneva

https://www.newageislam.com/islam-and-human-rights/sultan-shahin,-founder-editor,-new-age-islam/unhrc-should-ensure-that-oic-members-implement-provisions-of-human-rights-charter,-founder-editor,-new-age-islam,-sultan-shahin-addresses-its-43rd-session-in-geneva/d/121242

digitalphotosolution

@Dee Good Opinion. Please read our article also in interest of the Muslims.
 UNHRC Should Ensure That OIC Members Implement Provisions Of Human Rights Charter, Founder-Editor, New Age Islam, Sultan Shahin Addresses Its 43rd Session In Geneva

https://www.newageislam.com/islam-and-human-rights/sultan-shahin,-founder-editor,-new-age-islam/unhrc-should-ensure-that-oic-members-implement-provisions-of-human-rights-charter,-founder-editor,-new-age-islam,-sultan-shahin-addresses-its-43rd-session-in-geneva/d/121242

DivergentMinister

@Dee

You are conflating religious historians with academic historians.

The earliest hadith collections are still 200 years after Muhammad, and even supporters of ahadith historicity accept that it was almost exclusively preserved by word of mouth. That is quite literally a telephone game.

Neopesdom

@DivergentMinister

>>We are talking about historical critical studies of Islam, not Islamic theological studies.

Are you confusing systematic theology with historical theology? Corrections made to the Quran is most definitely a study in historical theology. The twofold function of historical theology is to show the origin and development of beliefs held in the present day.

>>It’s rather clear that ahadith are not historically accurate.

It's is clear that not only are they historically, but also scientifically inaccurate as well, not to mention the numerous contradictions within its pages. From Adam being a 90 foot giant, alien space goats, to camel urine as medicine.

Above the seventh heaven there is a sea, the distance between whose surface and bottom is like that between one heaven and the next. Above that there are eight mountain goats the distance between whose hoofs and haunches is like the distance between one heaven and the next. -Sunan Abu Dawud 40:4705

>>So the real question for historians is: “why did the age of Aisha change in the Hadith?”

Embarrassment and shame

>>Note that I am a Baptist minister, not a Muslim, so I don’t have much of a dog in this fight personally.

As long as it's not a black dog.   

Abu Dharr reported: The Messenger of 'Allah (may peace be upon him) said: When any one of you stands for prayer and there is a thing before him equal to the back of the saddle that covers him and in case there is not before him (a thing) equal to the back of the saddle, his prayer would be cut off by (passing of an) , woman, and black Dog. I said: O Abu Dharr, what feature is there in a black dog which distinguish it from the red dog and the yellow dog? He said: O, son of my brother, I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as you are asking me, and he said: The black dog is a devil. Sahih Muslim 4:1032

Dee

@DivergentMinister

***** You are conflating religious historians with academic historians.

I don’t know if you know this, but for those who don't: an isnad is a list that comes before each and every hadith that is supposed to list the chain by which that hadith was transmitted. It essentially says, "I heard this from Khalid who heard it from 'Umar who heard it from Abbas who heard it from the prophet, peace be upon him." Early Muslims developed this system because they were already becoming quite concerned about authenticity in the oral tradition immediately after Muhammad and his companions died - they wanted to be able to trust their received wisdom, now that they couldn't just ask a direct witness. By citing how you received the information, you give your audience a means of judging how correct it's likely to be. It's still hearsay, but it's no longer urban legend.

So now that you have your standardized citation system, the next problem arises: when looking at a specific isnad, how do you decide if it's reliable or not?

First, you want to check if more than one chain of transmitters have reported the same thing - that's a good sign, both to hadith scholars and to modern scholars. Second, you want to check if the chain of transmission is even possible - this would also be exactly what modern scholars do. "This guy died before the guy he supposedly passed the tradition down to was born, so that makes no sense and the hadith is unreliable," is good scholarship both then and now. It's actually pretty unique as far as I know, too - I'm not aware of any other religions with this strong an interest in logically testing out the way that something claims to have been passed down.

In this way, early hadith scholars are far more similar to modern historians than ancient historians are to modern historians. Herodotus does not cite his sources. Muhammad al-Bukhari does.

Bukharis each and every source is listed back to the first 

Yet one would think that religious historians would eradicate Aishas age from the Hadiths which they don’t as no shame or embarrassment was felt at such by Muslims , you are making a case for Muhammad based solely on your view from the year 2020  

You accuse me of doing what Christians do when they talk about the life and times of Jesus , no credible academic Historian believes in a miracle working messiah only religious historians do so. What Academic sources are you appealing to to make your case?

So in the case of Islam you are claiming actual academic historians accounts are more reliant  is the same true regards the life and times of Jesus?

What are the sources of your claims regards Aishas age?

My point was and remains that the most sacred source of the life and times of Muhammad was and is still the Sahih -Al Bukhara , Muslims in the past readily accepted the age of Aisha as a given , the defence of such is only a modern phenomenon.

I also note you claimed that Islam did not call for the slaughter of infidels do you use the same defence regards this as you’ve offered none so far?

*****The earliest hadith collections are still 200 years after Muhammad, and even supporters of ahadith historicity accept that it was almost exclusively preserved by word of mouth. That is quite literally a telephone game. 

Muslims place huge trust in the oral tradition you do know this don’t you? So your point seems to be that because the Hadiths were written 200 years later they are not reliable of the life and times of Muhammad , what are your more reliable sources you’re appealing to?