₦airaland Forum

SIRTee15:
u talk too much
why should Quran be asking prepubescent girls to wait for 3 months b4 being kicked out of their husband house if there was no prior sex.
the iddah was set up to prevent a woman leaving her failed marriage with pregnancy.
can a woman be pregnant without sex?
So obviously the husband has been sleeping with the young girl for Allah to say she must wait 3 months just to r/o pregnancy b4 leaving her husband house

I talk too much when you ask questions and seem not to understand answers given?

Is it wrong to try to explain as much as possible so maybe you can understand?

Is the wait only to ensure absence of pregnancy? Too bad for the limits of your thinking

SIRTee15:
Ok, I have heard U.
I sha know it's impossible for me to ignore evidence and be accepting illogical claims from someone who haven't brought one single evidence since this argument began.

Son of God as divine in the dead sea scrolls text.

you have brought nothing again, you are just deceiving yourself.

The scenario of what happened in John 10 already put all these ur claims of 'son of God' meaning divinity in the bin where it belongs.
Jesus clearly used the title 'son of God' to refute their claim of blasphemy.

Bring screenshot from now till tomorrow, u r just hiding like an ostrich.

SIRTee15
menopausal women can endure rigours of sex, they had it all their life's.
young girl pelvis is still developing and any penetration can lead to injury.

Who told you girls who were not matured to sleep with are forced to it?

Is pregnancy possible without copulation? why is iddah set up by Allah? why is Allah saying wives should wait 3 months b4 divorce is completed.

The reason for the enactment of all laws is not needed here. If you think the law was made to ONLY check pregnancy then that's false. Even a woman who is married and yet to go into the bedroom can be divorced and will still need to go through the waiting period!

SIRTee15:
How is adoption ungodly. who made it ungodly.

You don't understand again.

In Yoruba culture the bride will sit on the father in laws laps.

The husband will bow/prostate before the bride's parents. Does God encourage bowing before other men?

I however didn't limit cultural practice to just marriage. Do you not know of pagan practices called tradition or culture? Do you continue these when you follow the true God?

SIRTee15:
That verse U quoted has nothing to do with Jesus being the Son of God. The verse is about Jesus being God.

Let's see what Jesus himself said about being the Son of God. Directly from his mouth not some illogical or wuruwuru deduction.
Mark 14

Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. 64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”

In case U not aware, Jesus' statement as the Son of Man coming from the clouds is a reference to Daniel 7.13
13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,[a] coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence
That was why the high Priest shouted blasphemy.

It's obvious some of you don't really care about the truth, you just want to win argument at all cost, even if you have to pretend to be dumb.

That incident in John 10 is killing 2 birds with a stone.

-He was refuting the claim that he is God
-We also able to deduce that the term 'son of God' was not understood to mean divinity at the time.

Have I not trashed this your argument about this 'son of man' in book of Daniel in our previous discussion? that I had to soft pedal with you cause I could sensed u wr already choking. But here you are shamelessly bringing it again.

SIRTee15:
Antichristian and honesttalk do U agree with him?
Qasim is calling Ebionites Muslims.
People who believed in the death and resssurection of Jesus can be called Muslims.
I thought the Qur'an is the eternal word of God, So U mean the definition of Muslim was different during the time of Jesus.
So are U saying during the time of Jesus, someone who believed in the death and resssurection of Jesus, who also believed Jesus is the adopted Son of God can be called a Muslim?
what then is the usefulness of the injil that Jesus brought if this heresy abound amongst true Muslims believers who were followers of Isa.
What exactly did Isa taught? If Isa didn't teach that he's the adopted Son of God, where did the ebionites muslims learn it from? Who taught them?

Me I don't understand again, because what Qasim is arguing here is really confusing.
AntiChristian and honesttalk pls clarify.

-The Ebionites believed Jesus is a mere man, a Prophet and the Messiah
-They rejected his divinity or pre-existence
-Even though they believed Jesus was crucified and he resurrected after 3 days, they did not see his death as vicarious atonement, because they continue to follow the law.
-They believed Paul was a false apostle and apostate
-They used a different Gospel of Matthew different from the one they used today. Their version of gospel did not survive for reasons we don't know.
-They believed Jesus became son of God at his baptismal (obviously in metaphorical sense because they rejected his divinity)
-Scholars believe they held a view closer to what the Original apostles of Jesus would have held.

My brothers in Islam AntiChristian honesttalk21 are they not Muslims of their time??

U probably thought what we are rejecting is the fact that Jesus was called the son of God. No bro. It is the present day Christian understanding of the term we are rejecting.

A lot of people were called the son of God in the Bible. and Qur'an also make that known to us.
Q 21:26 And they say, “The Most Merciful has taken a son.” Exalted is He! Rather, they are [but] honored servants.

Qasim6:
-The Ebionites believed Jesus is a mere man, a Prophet and the Messiah
-They rejected his divinity or pre-existence
-Even though they believed Jesus was crucified and he resurrected after 3 days, they did not see his death as vicarious atonement, because they continue to follow the law.
-They believed Paul was a false apostle and apostate
-They used a different Gospel of Matthew different from the one they used today. Their version of gospel did not survive for reasons we don't know.
-They believed Jesus became son of God at his baptismal (obviously in metaphorical sense because they rejected his divinity)
-Scholars believe they held a view closer to what the Original apostles of Jesus would have held.

My brothers in Islam AntiChristian honesttalk21 are they not Muslims of their time??

U probably thought what we are rejecting is the fact that Jesus was called the son of God. No bro. It is the present day Christian understanding of the term we are rejecting.

A lot of people were called the son of God in the Bible. and Qur'an also make that known to us.
Q 21:26 And they say, “The Most Merciful has taken a son.” Exalted is He! Rather, they are [but] honored servants.

The matter of Jesus dying and ressurecting is really a matter as Allah made it a mystery so some would understand it and many won't.

What makes them Muslims is actually following Allah and the son of Mary sent to them just as we follow Allah and Muhammad sent to us. And just as the people of Moses followed Allah and Moses sent to them.

This is why they are Muslims!

Qasim6:
-The Ebionites believed Jesus is a mere man, a Prophet and the Messiah
-They rejected his divinity or pre-existence
-Even though they believed Jesus was crucified and he resurrected after 3 days, they did not see his death as vicarious atonement, because they continue to follow the law.
-They believed Paul was a false apostle and apostate
-They used a different Gospel of Matthew different from the one they used today. Their version of gospel did not survive for reasons we don't know.
-They believed Jesus became son of God at his baptismal (obviously in metaphorical sense because they rejected his divinity)
-Scholars believe they held a view closer to what the Original apostles of Jesus would have held.

My brothers in Islam AntiChristian honesttalk21 are they not Muslims of their time??

U probably thought what we are rejecting is the fact that Jesus was called the son of God. No bro. It is the present day Christian understanding of the term we are rejecting.

A lot of people were called the son of God in the Bible. and Qur'an also make that known to us.
Q 21:26 And they say, “The Most Merciful has taken a son.” Exalted is He! Rather, they are [but] honored servants.

Indeed people often misinterprete the word Muslim without understanding that this word means believer in God and so much attached to it.

The Ebionites viewed Jesus as a mere man, born naturally to Joseph and Mary, who was adopted as God’s son due to his righteousness in perfectly following the Law. This perspective stands in stark contrast to Pauline Christianity, which emphasizes Jesus’ divinity, pre-existence, and virgin birth.

There is no explicitly stating document about the Seven sleepers thoughts on Jesus’ resurrection, it can be inferred from the context and implications of their story that the Seven Sleepers believed in Jesus’ ability to resurrect the dead. The miracles he performed before his disappearance or alleged crucifixion.

Qasim6:
-The Ebionites believed Jesus is a mere man, a Prophet and the Messiah
-They rejected his divinity or pre-existence
-Even though they believed Jesus was crucified and he resurrected after 3 days, they did not see his death as vicarious atonement, because they continue to follow the law.
-They believed Paul was a false apostle and apostate
-They used a different Gospel of Matthew different from the one they used today. Their version of gospel did not survive for reasons we don't know.
-They believed Jesus became son of God at his baptismal (obviously in metaphorical sense because they rejected his divinity)
-Scholars believe they held a view closer to what the Original apostles of Jesus would have held.

My brothers in Islam AntiChristian honesttalk21 are they not Muslims of their time??

U probably thought what we are rejecting is the fact that Jesus was called the son of God. No bro. It is the present day Christian understanding of the term we are rejecting.

A lot of people were called the son of God in the Bible. and Qur'an also make that known to us.
Q 21:26 And they say, “The Most Merciful has taken a son.” Exalted is He! Rather, they are [but] honored servants.

Qasim wait until you write your own Quran then U can misinterpret it the way U want.

Your Allah is against anyone saying he has a son be it Jews or Christian.
Be it metaphorical or begotten

The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allah "; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah ." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?

So if the problem with Son of God is the divine way Christians use it, why did God condemned Jews for calling one of their prophets Son of God?
It even said Allah will destroy anyone that says he has a Son.

Your hadith even said Jews will be thrown into hell because they called Ezra Son of God.
I'm not even going to enter the absurdity of such claim but it shows how God equally rejected any sonship ascribed to prophets by the Jews.

Your Allah also condemned Israelites for calling themselves children of Allah and said they hold no such status.

The Jews and the Christians each say, “We are the children of Allah and His most beloved!” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Why then does He punish you for your sins? No! You are only humans like others of His Own making. He forgives whoever He wills and punishes whoever He wills. To Allah ˹alone˺ belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and everything in between. And to Him is the final return.”

Surah 21.26 was correcting the erroneous impression the people had that Allah has a Son, he told them whoever they wererefereing to as Son is just a slave to him and NOT a Son.
Or u want me to bring the tafsir?

Modern enlightened Muslims like Qasim will deny and lie against their own Quran just to prove a point against Christianity.

Qasim if U don't have a problem with the way Jews use the phrase Son of God, it's very unfortunate because your Qur'an definitely has a problem with it.
And that makes U a disbeliever.

The latest one they doing now is to say there's nothing wrong in saying Son of God or God is Father so long as it's metaphorical.

ITS A BIG LIE, CHRISTIANS NO GREE FOR THEM O...
THEY ARE LYING AGAINST THEIR OWN QURAN.
SHOW THEM THESE VERSES AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR FALAEHOOD.

Qasim6:
It's obvious some of you don't really care about the truth, you just want to win argument at all cost, even if you have to pretend to be dumb.

That incident in John 10 is killing 2 birds with a stone.

-He was refuting the claim that he is God
-We also able to deduce that the term 'son of God' was not understood to mean divinity at the time.

Have I not trashed this your argument about this 'son of man' in book of Daniel in our previous discussion? that I had to soft pedal with you cause I could sensed u wr already choking. But here you are shamelessly bringing it again.

Hahaha....
I brought tons of evidence on how ancient Jews interpreted Daniel 7.
U brought none. All U did was reject evidence upon evidence until U went mute.

Initially u wanted to run to ancient Jews to argue your case, when U saw evidence against U...U quickly changed gear and said ancient Jews cannot be trusted in the way they interpreted their text.
Then I brought evidence from academic bible scholars, U said they are anti Islam and cannot be
trusted
I brought dead sea scrolls as evidence, U claimed it's corrupted and cannot be trusted.
Them I asked U, who should I trust? Up till today no answer.
If U think U won that argument, U must be living in delulu land.
I successfully dislocated your ability to appeal to ancient Judaism to argue Islam is true.
I will bring some of the evidence here again for all to see.....
Did ancient Judaism see Son of Man in Daniel 7.13 as divine.....

AntiChristian:
Who told you girls who were not matured to sleep with are forced to it?



The reason for the enactment of all laws is not needed here. If you think the law was made to ONLY check pregnancy then that's false. Even a woman who is married and yet to go into the bedroom can be divorced and will still need to go through the waiting period!

Waiting for what! What is she waiting for ?

May we not follow a book that will eventually make a fool out of us!!!
May we not be forced to defend a religion that will make us argue against common sense.

AntiChristian say Amen!!!!


Below is from islamic source....b4 Qasim will say I'm doing bogus screenshot

https://www.google.com/amp/s/islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/12667

Qasim6:
you have brought nothing again, you are just deceiving yourself.

The scenario of what happened in John 10 already put all these ur claims of 'son of God' meaning divinity in the bin where it belongs.
Jesus clearly used the title 'son of God' to refute their claim of blasphemy.

Bring screenshot from now till tomorrow, u r just hiding like an ostrich.

I can give U the link if U want to...
If I bring the link, will U read it?

I will continue to ignore your John 10 argument because it makes no sense.
If U want to die in top the chapter that's up to U.

honesttalk21:
I talk too much when you ask questions and seem not to understand answers given?

Is it wrong to try to explain as much as possible so maybe you can understand?

Is the wait only to ensure absence of pregnancy? Too bad for the limits of your thinking

Common man, U are way too intelligent for this nonsense U bringing up here.
If U don't have something valid to say, just ignore and move all.

We all know most educated modern Muslims have better moral standards than what's written in the Quran.
I know U will never support paedophilia, so chill.
U don't need to make a mockery of your brain here....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/12667

Qasim6:
-The Ebionites believed Jesus is a mere man, a Prophet and the Messiah
-They rejected his divinity or pre-existence
-Even though they believed Jesus was crucified and he resurrected after 3 days, they did not see his death as vicarious atonement, because they continue to follow the law.
-They believed Paul was a false apostle and apostate
-They used a different Gospel of Matthew different from the one they used today. Their version of gospel did not survive for reasons we don't know.
-They believed Jesus became son of God at his baptismal (obviously in metaphorical sense because they rejected his divinity)
-Scholars believe they held a view closer to what the Original apostles of Jesus would have held.

If Ebionites were the true Muslim in the first century, that means they were the followers of Isa teaching.

So who told them Jesus was crucified and resurrected on the 3rd day.
Who told them there was a time Jesus wasn't the Son of God, then after a while became Son of God by adoption.
Where did they get this teaching from? Was it from ISA or from the injil.

Did Isa tell them he was adopted son of God.

Stop making this about Paul. This isn't Paul but evidence of true Muslims.

because what I'm getting from U is U are a true Muslim in the first pre Islam if U are against the teaching of Paul.

That can't be correct because your Qur'an didn't even mention Paul at all. And equally rejected death and resssurection of Christ.

SIRTee15:
If Ebionites were the true Muslim in the first century, that means they were the followers of Isa teaching.

So who told them Jesus was crucified and resurrected on the 3rd day.
Who told them there was a time Jesus wasn't the Son of God, then after a while became Son of God by adoption.
Where did they get this teaching from? Was it from ISA or from the injil.

Did Isa tell them he was adopted son of God.

Stop making this about Paul. This isn't Paul but evidence of true Muslims.

because what I'm getting from U is U are a true Muslim in the first pre Islam if U are against the teaching of Paul.

That can't be correct because your Qur'an didn't even mention Paul at all. And equally rejected death and resssurection of Christ.

Keep running helter skelter like a headless chicken.

You yourself look at what the Ebionites believed then compare their beliefs to present day Christianity and Islam and tell me which of the two religions is in sync with the Ebionites.

That is only if you can be truthful with yourself for some few seconds sha.

SIRTee15:
I can give U the link if U want to...
If I bring the link, will U read it?

I will continue to ignore your John 10 argument because it makes no sense.
If U want to die in top the chapter that's up to U.

You seems not to be getting it

We don't do blind faith here, I don't just believe things like a zombie.

What you are going to share, is it a Bible prophecy or is it in line with a prophecy and it doesn't need any wuru-wuru to the answer? If not you can keep it. Don't bring me writings of People that have no authority from God.

SIRTee15:
Hahaha....
I brought tons of evidence on how ancient Jews interpreted Daniel 7.
U brought none. All U did was reject evidence upon evidence until U went mute.

Initially u wanted to run to ancient Jews to argue your case, when U saw evidence against U...U quickly changed gear and said ancient Jews cannot be trusted in the way they interpreted their text.
Then I brought evidence from academic bible scholars, U said they are anti Islam and cannot be
trusted
I brought dead sea scrolls as evidence, U claimed it's corrupted and cannot be trusted.
Them I asked U, who should I trust? Up till today no answer.
If U think U won that argument, U must be living in delulu land.
I successfully dislocated your ability to appeal to ancient Judaism to argue Islam is true.
I will bring some of the evidence here again for all to see.....
Did ancient Judaism see Son of Man in Daniel 7.13 as divine.....

Alright, no problem.

I want you to bring back those ancient Jewish writings and demonstrate how the Messiah fulfilled or is going to fulfill the Daniel prophecy and I will also demonstrate how prophet Muhammad fulfilled the prophecy.

And we will see if you won't run into problem of a failed prophecy.

Shey u talk say u get agidi ni

Qasim6:
You seems not to be getting it

We don't do blind faith here, I don't just believe things like a zombie.

What you are going to share, is it a Bible prophecy or is it in line with a prophecy and it doesn't need any wuru-wuru to the answer? If not you can keep it. Don't bring me writings of People that have no authority from God.

Who are the Essenes?
Read about them, come back and we will talk about their believes.
I actually took time to explain who the Essenes were in the previous thread.
But of course u didn't read.

Go and read about them yourself, then come back and we will discuss their believes.

SIRTee15:
Who are the Essenes?
Read about them, come back and we will talk about their believes.
I actually took time to explain who the Essenes were in the previous thread.
But of course u didn't read.

Go and read about them yourself, then come back and we will discuss their believes.

I know who the Essenes were.

And don't even think about coming here with John the Baptist have something to do with them. Because I saw you pushing the narrative the last time, I just decided to ignore your erroneous assumption.

Qasim6:
Keep running helter skelter like a headless chicken.

You yourself look at what the Ebionites believed then compare their beliefs to present day Christianity and Islam and tell me which of the two religions is in sync with the Ebionites.

That is only if you can be truthful with yourself for some few seconds sha.

Guy defend your Qur'an. Even if Christianity is false doesn't make Islam true.
I started this conversation bocs I wanted to prove to U that Qur'an can't be from God.
This isnt about validity of Christianity.

Where did the ebionites get the message that Jesus died and resurrected on the 3rd day?
Did Allah convey the message to ISA companions that Jews didn't crucify ISA but he rescued him?
Did he tell Muslims in the first century that ISA didn't die or he waited for 600 yrs to tell Muslims.
Did ISA tell any of his companions that he is the son of GOD- metaphorical, begotten or adopted.
That's what I want to know. If Ebionites or seven sleepers are believers according to Qur'an where did they got their erroneous believe from?

If U don't have the answer, just say so and end the discussion.
Bringing Christianity to defend Islam makes no sense because U guys already said it's a false religion.
I will never use another religion to defend validity of Christianity. Straight up the bible and nothing else.

Qasim6:
I know who the Essenes were.

And don't even think about coming here with John the Baptist have something to do with them. Because I saw you pushing the narrative the last time, I just decided to ignore your erroneous assumption.

Some Scholars believe John the baptist was Essene. He has similar believe with them- water baptism, believe in divine Messiah, apocalyptic message, ascetic lifestyle, his ministry near river Jordan is close to Qumran the main base of Essene.
According to scholars, Essene beliefs within the group is quite diverse and he could have been a sect within the sect.
Is that not what U doing here with Ebionites and being true Muslims. U admit some of their beliefs contradict Islam but regard them as Muslims because some align with the Qur'an.
So why can't it be the same for John the baptist and Essene?
U see the double hypocrisy here....

Qasim6:
Alright, no problem.

I want you to bring back those ancient Jewish writings and demonstrate how the Messiah fulfilled or is going to fulfill the Daniel prophecy and I will also demonstrate how prophet Muhammad fulfilled the prophecy.

And we will see if you won't run into problem of a failed prophecy.

Shey u talk say u get agidi ni

Start with the one with one I posted.
Did the ancient Jews believed in a divine Messiah Yes or No.
They don't know either Jesus or Muhammed. So doing wurururu to the answer won't help U like U did with Daniel 7 and 8.

The question is did they believe in a divine Messiah?

SIRTee15:
Common man, U are way too intelligent for this nonsense U bringing up here.
If U don't have something valid to say, just ignore and move all.

We all know most educated modern Muslims have better moral standards than what's written in the Quran.
I know U will never support paedophilia, so chill.
U don't need to make a mockery of your brain here....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/12667

On the contrary I am too stupid to be in any way associated with intelligence.

You provided a screenshot of the summary of divorce by Talaq (pronouncements of the husband).

It presents description of iddah after divorce.

You however did not consider that even in unconsumated marriages for however short or long the couples will have seen some degree of one another's aura.
Even if the marriage was not consummated didn't the couple have even the most limited physical contact that should ideally not be except for marital couples?

Islam considers divorce a last resort after all attempts at reconciliation have been exhausted.

The iddah provides another period for possible reconciliation not just certainty of pregnancy.

This isn't compulsory for an unconsumated marriage. Patience is a great virtue in addressing our affairs.

Now; amongst other things the iddah is one of the means to reconciliation.

Despite what you think you know or see sometimes wrongly practiced Islam neither encourages prepubescent sex or marriage.

SIRTee15:
Guy defend your Qur'an. Even if Christianity is false doesn't make Islam true.
I started this conversation bocs I wanted to prove to U that Qur'an can't be from God.
This isnt about validity of Christianity.

Where did the ebionites get the message that Jesus died and resurrected on the 3rd day?
Did Allah convey the message to ISA companions that Jews didn't crucify ISA but he rescued him?
Did he tell Muslims in the first century that ISA didn't die or he waited for 600 yrs to tell Muslims.
Did ISA tell any of his companions that he is the son of GOD- metaphorical, begotten or adopted.
That's what I want to know. If Ebionites or seven sleepers are believers according to Qur'an where did they got their erroneous believe from?

If U don't have the answer, just say so and end the discussion.
Bringing Christianity to defend Islam makes no sense because U guys already said it's a false religion.
I will never use another religion to defend validity of Christianity. Straight up the bible and nothing else.

Where did u get the Idea that I am using their beliefs to validate Islam from?

I'm just showing you these are first century Christians that scholars believed held a view about Jesus that would have been closer to what the Original apostles that walk with him during his ministries held

They literally believed your God is a mere man. That is your problem not mine.

Qasim6:
Where did u get the Idea that I am using their beliefs to validate Islam from?

I'm just showing you these are first century Christians that scholars believed held a view about Jesus that would have been closer to what the Original apostles that walk with him during his ministries held

They literally believed your God is a mere man. That is your problem not mine.

You are not answering my question.
Just forget it.

I also noticed U carefully avoided the prepubertal question.
That's fine by me.
Better be silent than open your mouth and make an embarrassment of yourself.
Your colleagues have started redefining iddah here....
I find that very dishonest.

U will never see a Christian redefine 1 Samuel 15 even if we deem it very uncomfortable.

honesttalk21:
On the contrary I am too stupid to be in any way associated with intelligence.

You provided a screenshot of the summary of divorce by Talaq (pronouncements of the husband).

It presents description of iddah after divorce.

You however did not consider that even in unconsumated marriages for however short or long the couples will have seen some degree of one another's aura.
Even if the marriage was not consummated didn't the couple have even the most limited physical contact that should ideally not be except for marital couples?

Islam considers divorce a last resort after all attempts at reconciliation have been exhausted.

The iddah provides another period for possible reconciliation not just certainty of pregnancy.

This isn't compulsory for an unconsumated marriage. Patience is a great virtue in addressing our affairs.

Now; amongst other things the iddah is one of the means to reconciliation.

Despite what you think you know or see sometimes wrongly practiced Islam neither encourages prepubescent sex or marriage.

So iddah is for reconciliation...hmmm
Tell me, then why do widows practice iddah?

SIRTee15:
You are not answering my question.
Just forget it.

I also noticed U carefully avoided the prepubertal question.
That's fine by me.
Better be silent than open your mouth and make an embarrassment of yourself.
Your colleagues have started redefining iddah here....
I find that very dishonest.

U will never see a Christian redefine 1 Samuel 15 even if we deem it very uncomfortable.

Your problem is you are thinking you are having a got ya moment with Q 64:5 but you have nothing.
Sexual intercourse is not permissible with prepubescent girls in Islam. So rest!

The word used in the verse is Nisa which means women and not girls, so that verse is referring to women that have matured in age and physicality but for some reason are not seeing their periods

If we are to take your meaning that the verse is referring to prepubescent girls what that would mean is there won't be minimum age of marriage/intercourse. But we know from Qur'an 4:6 that there is minimum age of marriage/intercourse

Q4:6 Test the orphans until they reach a marriageable age. Then if you feel they are capable of sound judgment, return their wealth to them. And do not consume it wastefully and hastily before they grow up. If the guardian is well-off, they should not take compensation; but if the guardian is poor, let them take a reasonable provision. When you give orphans back their property, call in witnesses. And sufficient is Allah as a Reckoner.

This verse is literarily telling us there is a marriageable age/intercourse age and that age is when one is capable of sound judgement and that age also coincide with when one is able to some extent manage wealth.

SIRTee15:
Marriage is for adult women.
read proverbs 31. 10-31. That's the expectation for a wife in the bible.
If u think a prepubescent girl can meet those expectation, then I dont think we should be having this discussion in the first place.

I checked proverbs 31. It doesn't seems to answer my question. I can only find therein quality of a good wife.

My question is what is the Objective morality of God in Christainity concerning marriageable age for girls? and what has it been over the centuries?

Qasim6:
I checked proverbs 31. It doesn't seems to answer my question. I can only find therein quality of a good wife.

My question is what is the Objective morality of God in Christainity concerning marriageable age for girls? and what has it been over the centuries?

Guy, girls don't get married in the bible. U have to be a woman to be married.

Woman means someone who has completed puberty.

Qasim6:
Your problem is you are thinking you are having a got ya moment with Q 64:5 but you have nothing.
Sexual intercourse is not permissible with prepubescent girls in Islam. So rest!

Yinmu🥱🥱🥱
Be lying to yourself.
As if U better than Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas's and Jalalayn who all confirmed the verse is about prepubertal girls who are yet to menstruate.
If U like, reject the writings in your tafsir, it's your cup of tea.
Ancient Jews cannot be trusted.
Bible scholars cannot be trusted
Dead sea scrolls cannot be trusted.
Now it's your tafsir that's corrupted and should be rejected.
Your case is irredeemable.

Qasim6:
The word used in the verse is Nisa which means women and not girls, so that verse is referring to women that have matured in age and physicality but for some reason are not seeing their periods

Now this is getting more confusing...
This is not I will never understand about islam.
The Qur'an says Allah has brought a clear book for guidance but if anything I've learnt today is that the Qur'an is not clear even to Muslims.

According to Qasim, the verse is talking about matured girls who are yet to menstruate
According to honesttalk and antiChristian the verse is talking about young girls but they haven't had sex and iddah mean reconciliation.
According to the Tafsir, the verse is about young girls who are yet to menstruate and waiting for 3 months to be sure they are not pregnant.

So the question is who should I believe. Qasim who amongst U 3 is correct ?

Qasim6:
If we are to take your meaning that the verse is referring to prepubescent girls what that would mean is there won't be minimum age of marriage/intercourse. But we know from Qur'an 4:6 that there is minimum age of marriage/intercourse

Q4:6 Test the orphans until they reach a marriageable age. Then if you feel they are capable of sound judgment, return their wealth to them. And do not consume it wastefully and hastily before they grow up. If the guardian is well-off, they should not take compensation; but if the guardian is poor, let them take a reasonable provision. When you give orphans back their property, call in witnesses. And sufficient is Allah as a Reckoner.

This verse is literarily telling us there is a marriageable age/intercourse age and that age is when one is capable of sound judgement and that age also coincide with when one is able to some extent manage wealth.[/quote]What U quote up there is talking about mental competence. It has nothing to do with sexual intercourse in prepubertal age.

Test the intelligence of all orphans until they reach marriageable age( which we don't know).
Then if they are competent- give them their wealth.
This has nothing to do with prepubertal sex and divorce.
U could reach the age of marriage and not be competent enough to manage your wealth- and this can be at any age anyway.
And above is what my question is all about. Are there females who had reached the age of marriage according to the Qur'an but are not mentally and physically competent enough to handle the responsibility. That's what we are trying to investiagte in surah 65.4

I can bring the Tafsir of surah 4.6 if U want me to.....provided U don't reject it like you have done for Tafsir on divorce.

SIRTee15:
Yinmu🥱🥱🥱
Be lying to yourself.
As if U better than Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas's and Jalalayn who all confirmed the verse is about prepubertal girls who are yet to menstruate.
If U like, reject the writings in your tafsir, it's your cup of tea.
Ancient Jews cannot be trusted.
Bible scholars cannot be trusted
Dead sea scrolls cannot be trusted.
Now it's your tafsir that's corrupted and should be rejected.
Your case is irredeemable.


Now this is getting more confusing...
This is not I will never understand about islam.
The Qur'an says Allah has brought a clear book for guidance but if anything I've learnt today is that the Qur'an is not clear even to Muslims.

According to Qasim, the verse is talking about matured girls who are yet to menstruate
According to honesttalk and antiChristian the verse is talking about young girls but they haven't had sex and iddah mean reconciliation.
According to the Tafsir, the verse is about young girls who are yet to menstruate and waiting for 3 months to be sure they are not pregnant.

So the question is who should I believe. Qasim who amongst U 3 is correct ?

Q4:6 Test the orphans until they reach a marriageable age. Then if you feel they are capable of sound judgment, return their wealth to them. And do not consume it wastefully and hastily before they grow up. If the guardian is well-off, they should not take compensation; but if the guardian is poor, let them take a reasonable provision. When you give orphans back their property, call in witnesses. And sufficient is Allah as a Reckoner.

This verse is literarily telling us there is a marriageable age/intercourse age and that age is when one is capable of sound judgement and that age also coincide with when one is able to some extent manage wealth.



What U quote up there is talking about mental competence. It has nothing to do with sexual intercourse in prepubertal age.

Test the intelligence of all orphans until they reach marriageable age( which we don't know).
Then if they are competent- give them their wealth.
This has nothing to do with prepubertal sex and divorce.
U could reach the age of marriage and not be competent enough to manage your wealth- and this can be at any age anyway.
And above is what my question is all about. Are there females who had reached the age of marriage according to the Qur'an but are not mentally and physically competent enough to handle the responsibility. That's what we are trying to investiagte in surah 65.4

I can bring the Tafsir of surah 4.6 if U want me to.....provided U don't reject it like you have done for Tafsir on divorce.

What do you even think Tafsir is? Maybe we should start from there.

SIRTee15:
Guy, girls don't get married in the bible. U have to be a woman to be married.

Woman means someone who has completed puberty.

Then tell us the age of these women or what we should look for na with Bible passage you are using as reference

If a woman completed puberty lets say at age 10, are they ready for marriage?

And do you think what they were doing giving out "matured women" in marriage before age 15 at the start of their puberty in ancient Israel was wrong