This short excerpt from a Bart Ehrman talk tells the fascinating story of Erasmus and how the Trinity verse 1 John 5:7 got added to the Bible, the only verse in the entire Bible mentioning the Trinity:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Categories: Bible, Dr Bart Ehrman, God, Trinity
And yet, Ehrman also says, “the doctrine of the Trinity is not based on a single verse” and the Muslim guys is shocked – “It’s not?!”
Interesting that the Muslim guy interviewing Bart Ehrman did not know about Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 and all the other verses on the Deity of Christ (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2, Colossians 1, Hebrews 1:6, 8, 10-12) and Deity of the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-5; John 14; 16) and that a doctrine is not based solely on one verse.
Blah, blah, blah…and Kenny the broken record plays the same stupid mantra again.
So here we go again. Was the holy spirit considered to be part of the trinity? If it was, then why didn’t Paul greet his followers in the name of all three “persons”?
“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” – 1 Corinthians
“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” – 2 Corinthians
“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” – Ephesians 1
Hmm, is there a pattern emerging here? Why was Paul neglecting the poor holy spirit?
Ehrman always says that christians create their own gospel. The doctrine of Trinity is based neither on one verse nor one gospel. It’s based on false (interpretations) for different books written by different authors. Your religion, which is based on your imaginary, differs with what each gospel teaches.
Also:
Dr. Ehrman in his debate with Dr. Justin Bass.
Ehrman admitted: “Yes, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, in different ways, thought that Jesus was God”. (a little after the 18:50 mark of the Dividing Line program
below.)
https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2015/11/06/bart-ehrman-admits-that-the-gospel-writers-thought-jesus-was-god/
No. He didn’t say that.
Yes he did, got to the 18:50 mark of that video of the DL program and it is proof. at the link above; go to bottom of article for video.
I believe that br Zakir Hussain corrected James White for that misleading reading for Ehrman’s saying. Ehrman says that Jesus is presented as a divine in some sense not that he’s presented as Yahweh. Ehrman was more than clear in his debate withJustin that the whole NT didn’t present Jesus as Yahweh.
No; because it is a video of clip of Ehrman saying it; it is not Dr. White misreading or misconstruing anything. So Zakir Hussain is wrong, if he claimed that.
You obviously have not gone to 18:50 and listened to the clip – it is of Ehrman himself in debate; not a report by Dr. White.
Indeed it’s a (misleading) way to present Ehrman’s thoughts and opinions as you did with the verse of the Trintiy.
Ehrman said in that debate “Paul, btw, didn’t say Jesus is equal with God of Israel. He’s definitely not Yahweh for any author of the NT”
It’s very obvious that you deal with Ehrman’s books as you deal with your scriptures. You put words in their mouths!
Lol
I was not even talking about his books; rather the clips from the debate with Dr. Justin Bass.
You still have not listened to / watched Erhman himself in the clip say, “yes, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, in different ways, thought that Jesus was God.”
Ehrman admitted: “Yes, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, in different ways, thought that Jesus was God”. (a little after the 18:50 mark of the Dividing Line program below.)
Still it’s a misleading presentation of dr. Ehrman. Dr. Ehrman meant that Jesus got exalted in those gospels, and he has explained that in details in his lectures and books. Jesus has not been presented as Yahweh by any authors of the NT. Indeed you deal with Ehrman as you deal with your scriptures. You put words in their mouths.
in his interpretation of who the historical Jesus is. (the liberal view, that He did not say any of the words that are high Christology or John’s Gospel material.)
Ehrman is clear that Jesus did not think he was God. So your own source destroys your idolatry Ken.
Kenny gets crushed again.
Poor Ken. Fundamentalism forces him to be stupid.
Yes indeed.
Yes, I agree that Erhman said that about Jesus himself, in his interpretation of who the historical is. (the liberal view, that He did not say any of the words that are high Christology or John’s Gospel material.)
What I am saying is that Ehrman admitted that the Gospel writers thought Jesus was God, “in different ways”
Please listen to / watch the clips provided.
Like your belief in Islam and Qur’an (4:157) forces you to be stupid and deny established history, that Jesus Al Masih, المسیح the Messiah, died on the cross under Pontius Pilate ?
Islam forces you all to be stupid fundy Muslims, since you are forced to believe Surah 4:157 is true.
Oooh little Kenny is mad!
“Established history” you say? Is it also “established history” that Moses parted the sea, or do historians tend to disregard that story?
The Quran does not deny a crucifixion occurred, stupid. It just says that it was not Jesus who was crucified. It even says that it was believed that he was crucified but that they all believed in conjecture. Even your gospels offer a confusing and contradictory version of events.
If a miracle occurred, one would not expect historians to pay much attention to it. That’s just the way it is.
See? if forces you to be a stupid fundy Muslim.
Lol, so no response from the stupid pagan trinitarian, eh?
anyone can come along 600 years later and say “No!”, لا “La!” it was a trick by allah. makr مکر
But why would they, stupid? Think about it. Wouldn’t it make more sense to just go with the popular story?
That is Revelation. God knows better than you what happened.
Except it is not even revelation. 600 years too late. Many mistakes and contradictions. Harsh aggressive wars. Unjust to women. Proven wrong.
“Harsh aggressive wars. Unjust to women” LOLOL from a guy who worships a book that commands genocide and forces women to be silent and submit to men!
No, it was not genocide; they were to drive them out from the promised land. But Canaanites could live in areas outside of Israel proper. Tyre and Sidon (Lebanon)
Genesis 15:13-18
Deuteronomy 7, 9
Oh so wiping out the Amalekites and Midianites wasn’t genocide? Again we see proof of how Christianity makes people stupid.
the command was only to drive them out from the land and make just war against those who refused to leave the promised land. It was God’s justice; but as the article shows, those peoples survived outside of the land of Israel; and even inside the land of Israel, as the book of Judges shows – when Israel failed to do what God told them to do.
https://bible.org/article/canaanites-genocide-or-judgment
Kenny, you are a lying sack of garbage. Your demonic god ordered the murders of babies, you sick freak! Christianity makes you stupid enough to defend such evil.
You obviously did not read the article. How anti-intellectual of you.
when you run out of arguments, you resort to name calling and sinful anger.
You are a bad witness for Islam and you violate Surah 29:46.
There goes Kenny again, with her whining! I don’t need to read your idiotic excuses moron. I’ve heard it all over the years. Like I said, demonic god ordered the killing of babies and you have the fall that “justice”. Your place in hell must be getting warm in anticipation of your eventual arrival.
Lol, so it should be like the NT, which was thousands of years late? Many mistakes and contradictions. Many idiotic things. Unjust to women. Proven wrong.
You cannot claim that, since the Qur’an itself testified that the Gospel of Jesus Al Masih and the book of the Christians was revelation from God. (Surah 5:47; 10:94) [though the Qur’an was ignorant of the 4-fold gospel, another proof that God did not inspire it; since the 4 gospels were already established for over 500 years.]
Oh but I can. You see Kenny, the Quran does not refer to your corrupted and contradictory books written by anonymous heretics.
Moreover, your silly little “new” testament contradicts the Tanakh on many levels, and that is despite the fact that you idiots believe in both! So Christianity makes you stupid. You see? 🤣
Even I know better than Qur’an, since it proves by its mistakes that it is not from God.
No, see I think you got it wrong. You probably know a lot more than your Canaanite god. He didn’t know the age of the earth. He didn’t know it was round. He didn’t rabbits don’t chew the cud. He didn’t know the end would not come 2000 years ago. Your god didn’t know alot more than maybe a 10 year old!
The God of the Bible knows all things.
Psalm 139
Apparently not, since he made several massive mistakes. 😁
Ken, this makes Muhammad not only a wicked vile antichrist (which he was) but also a homicidal genocidal maniac since he confirmed that the OT wars were sanctioned by his own god.
For instance Ken, the following passage shows that the Quran itself confirms that these OT wars were approved by God himself, especially that of the slaughter of the Canaanite as well as Saul’s war against the Amalekites:
O my people! Remember Allah’s favour unto you, how He placed among you prophets, and He made you kings, and gave you that (which) He gave not to any (other) of (His) creatures. O my people! Go into the holy land which Allah hath ordained for you. Turn not in flight, for surely ye turn back as losers: They said: O Moses! Lo! a giant people (dwell) therein and lo! we go not in till they go forth from thence. When they go forth from thence, then we will enter (not till then). Then out spake two of those who feared (their Lord, men) unto whom Allah had been gracious: Enter in upon them by the gate, for if ye enter by it, lo! ye will be victorious. So put your trust (in Allah) if ye are indeed believers. They said: O Moses! We will never enter (the land) while they are in it. So go thou and thy Lord and fight! We will sit here. He said: My Lord! I have control of none but myself and my brother, so distinguish between us and the wrong-doing folk. (Their Lord) said: For this the land will surely be forbidden them for forty years that they will wander in the earth, bewildered. So grieve not over the wrongdoing folk. S. 5:20-26 Pickthall
Here we have Muhammad relating the story of God commanding the Israelites to enter into the promised land and slaughter its inhabitants, without a negative word about the supposed injustice of God in ordering them to do so. And:
Hast thou not Turned thy vision to the Chiefs of the Children of Israel after (the time of) Moses? They said to a prophet (That was) among them: “Appoint for us a king, that we May fight in the cause of God.” He said: “Is it not possible, if ye were commanded to fight, that that ye will not fight?” They said: “How could we refuse to fight in the cause of God, seeing that we were turned out of our homes and our families?” but when they were commanded to fight, they turned back, except a small band among them. But God Has full knowledge of those who do wrong. Their Prophet said to them: “God hath appointed Talut as king over you.” They said: “How can he exercise authority over us when we are better fitted than he to exercise authority, and he is not even gifted, with wealth in abundance?” He said: “God hath Chosen him above you, and hath gifted him abundantly with knowledge and bodily prowess: God Granteth His authority to whom He pleaseth. God careth for all, and He knoweth all things.” And (further) their Prophet said to them: “A Sign of his authority is that there shall come to you the Ark of the covenant, with (an assurance) therein of security from your Lord, and the relics left by the family of Moses and the family of Aaron, carried by angels. In this is a symbol for you if ye indeed have faith.” When Talut set forth with the armies, he said: “God will test you at the stream: if any drinks of its water, He goes not with my army: Only those who taste not of it go with me: A mere sip out of the hand is excused.” but they all drank of it, except a few. When they crossed the river,- He and the faithful ones with him,- they said: “This day We cannot cope with Goliath and his forces.” but those who were convinced that they must meet God, said: “How oft, by God’s will, Hath a small force vanquished a big one? God is with those who steadfastly persevere. When they advanced to meet Goliath and his forces, they prayed: “Our Lord! Pour out constancy on us and make our steps firm: Help us against those that reject faith.” By God’s will they routed them; and David slew Goliath; and God gave him power and wisdom and taught him whatever (else) He willed. And did not God Check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief: But God is full of bounty to all the worlds. S. 2:246-251 Y. Ali
The Quran recounts the story of the people of Israel asking the prophet Samuel for a king, Saul’s appointment as a king, Saul’s wars, and David killing Goliath (cf. 1 Samuel 8-17). What is interesting about all this is that even though the Quran presupposes the biblical account of God’s commission to wipe out the Amalekites it nowhere condemns this Divine decree. It does not say that Saul killing women and children was an evil thing or that the Israelites tampered with the story since this isn’t how it happened; nor does it deny that these things did happen. Its very mention in the Quran without any qualification presupposes that the author(s) and/or editor(s) of the Quran had absolutely no problem with these wars since s/he/they believed that God sanctioned them. So why do these pseudo-monotheists go against the teachings of their own book of porn (as false as it is) and attack the Holy Bible for something with which the Quran and their immoral profit affirmed?
There is more. Note what this next report says regarding Muhammad’s view of the prophet Joshua’s battles against the enemies of God:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “A prophet amongst the prophets carried out a holy military expedition, so he said to his followers, ‘Anyone who has married a woman and wants to consummate the marriage, and has not done so yet, should not accompany me; nor should a man who has built a house but has not completed its roof; nor a man who has sheep or she camels and is waiting for the birth of their young ones.’ So, the prophet carried out the expedition and when he reached that town at the time or nearly at the time of the ‘Asr prayer, he said to the sun, ‘O sun! You are under Allah’s Order and I am under Allah’s Order. O Allah! Stop it (i.e. the sun) from setting.’ It was stopped till Allah made him victorious. Then he collected the booty and the fire came to burn it, but it did not burn it. He said (to his men), ‘Some of you have stolen something from the booty. So one man from every tribe should give me a pledge of allegiance by shaking hands with me.’ (They did so and) the hand of a man got stuck over the hand of their prophet. Then that prophet said (to the man), ‘The theft has been committed by your people. So all the persons of your tribe should give me the pledge of allegiance by shaking hands with me.’ The hands of two or three men got stuck over the hand of their prophet and he said, “You have committed the theft.’ Then they brought a head of gold like the head of a cow and put it there, and the fire came and consumed the booty. The Prophet added: Then Allah saw our weakness and disability, so he made booty legal for us.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 353)
Here Muhammad conflates several biblical stories, namely, Moses’ instruction in Deuteronomy 20:1-9, and Joshua’s expeditions against Ai and the king of Jerusalem (cf. Joshua 7 and 10). These are the very expeditions where God commanded Joshua and the Israelites to wipe out everything that breathes!
Hence, since the unanimous view of Sunni scholarship is that the hadith collection of al-Bukhari is sound, this means that this is not a narration that Ally can simply brush aside, especially since the Quran itself testifies that part of Muhammad’s mission was to confirm the textual veracity and divine authority of the very scriptures which the Jews and Christians had in their possession during Muhammad’s time. Therefore Ken, these Muhammadans have no choice but come to terms with the fact that their own women raping, child marrying profit had absolutely no problems with God’s orders to the Israelites to annihilate everything that breathes, including women, children and livestock. So then why does a pagan stone smoocher like quranisfilthblog have a problem?
Ken, according to the balck stone licking pagan a.k.a. quranandbibleblog, this means Muhammad’s god is a filthy demon who makes the Canaanite god look like a saint by comparison!
The one who set up the jews to do that great sin is your god according to your religion, Ken.
“But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, ((for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory)).”
God is sovereign; which you also believe.
The sovereignty of God has nothing to do with the fact that your god set up the jews to do that great sin, which by the way became the reason for christians to persecute and torture the jews for centuries literally.
Even Reza Aslan (who claims to be a Sufi Muslim) knows that Jesus was crucified on the cross and died.
Silly Kenny still doesn’t get it!
Aslan was wrong. About many things.
But he was right about that issue.
God knows better than you both.
Apparently not, since “he” made that massive mistake in 4:157.
You are the ones who take from an event a religion and way for salvation.
How could it be the”mistake” of God?
The one who made tricks is your god, and here’s Rabbi Tovia articulated this in a very good way (10:19′)
https://youtu.be/vK2-VlSXrbQ?t=620
William Lane Craig demolished his arguments.
He didn’t, but at least WLC had the courage to admit that the OT has nothing to do with trintiy at all.
Faiz, salaam bro
Could you please chill with the name calling? Our Prophet didn’t go around name calling the pagans of Quraysh.. No need for you for you to keep name calling Ken no matter how ridiculous his arguments are.. its tiring to keep seeing you go around name calling “stupid dog! idiotic! retard! ” seriously man just chill and reply in a decent, non derogatory manner.. You aren’t a 5 year old..
Other than that, I love the material you post on your blog. Please keep up the excellent scholarly refutations of missionaries.
Fi Amaanillah
Thank you “Bro you need to chill”.
I appreciate your exhortation and help to further proper intellectual discussion.
Ken, you associate yourself with the most fanatic & useless missionaries like Sam & David. Many christians go to that “school” presented by those coward clowns as a defense mechanism when they get struck by muslims with the truth.
“intellectual discussion” is definitely not in the dictionaries of those clowns.
I don’t agree with Sam’s anger and name calling; but when he sticks to issues and texts, he does well; and I have seen any Islamic argument that has refuted either of them, David Wood nor Sam, when they are just quoting from Islamic texts and making arguments.
oops. left out a key word:
and I have NOT seen any Islamic argument that has refuted either of them, David Wood nor Sam, when they are just quoting from Islamic texts and making arguments.
Well, that’s because you are from his school. However, I have not seen any Islamic argument myself against David because David has not provided any argument that we really need to refute to begin with. He needs to provide at least one. That clown just presents the Islamic texts with his own psychopathic frames which by most are not lined up with the western culture to say Islam is bad. That’s it. It’s the same game west (christians/atheists) had been playing for long time, yet it keeps failing miserably.
Shabir Ally and others who debate David Wood demonstrate that he is not a “clown”. Personally, I would not have done the series he did “Islamize me” the way he did; but if one can get over some of the shock / graphic nature to make a point, it becomes clear that they made great arguments vs. the more ridiculous and gross stuff in the Hadith. Some of the scenes went too far for shock value; but that is exactly the point – that is what the Hadith demonstrates in itself – how shocking and gross and ridiculous it is.
//but if one can get over some of the shock / graphic nature to make a point, it becomes clear that they made great arguments //
What a hypocrite! Let him be a man and start a series for jews to make “agreat point”. Would he dare?
I think br. Faiz makes very great points agianst christianity.
“Thank you “Bro you need to chill”.
I appreciate your exhortation and help to further proper intellectual discussion.”
LOL!! “Intellectual discussion”…that’s rich! Yes, it’s quite “intellectual” to claim that killing babies was “justice” and that telling women to keep their mouths shut in church and not to teach a man is not “unjust” to women, but then complain about Islam at the same time.
Kenny, there is nothing “intellectual” about anything you say. You are a brainwashed robot, whom most people who know you have long stopped taking seriously.
Brother Abdullah, have you noticed how Kenny and Fatty Shammy have become best friends? I think Kenny is afraid of Shamoun and feels its better to just be a good little bootlicker. He has stopped criticizing Shamoun and has become a pathetic sidekick.
Walaikum as-salaam bro. I appreciate your comments, but I get also get tired of such advice. You aren’t the first to say this. When you engage in these online discussions, 99% of the people you will meet are rabid, anti-Islamic trolls like our friend Kenny. Do you really think you can reason with such people? I mean look at Kenny. This specimen thinks killing babies was “justice” and yet at the same time has the gall to complain about Islam’s alleged “wars”. I see this as an opportunity to put this parasite in his place, by using satirical humor.
Of course, the other 1% who are looking for a civilized discussion, such people should be treated with respect. But like I said, they are very rare, at least in the online community. We shouldn’t be afraid to destroy the trolls with humor. These maggots lie about our religion and talk trash about the Prophet. It’s like they are Connor McGregor and we are Khabib Nurmegedov. We need to smash the trash and not apologize for it!
So, thank you for the advice and I know you mean well. But I have no intention of “chilling” out when our religion is under attack from these viruses. I will continue to mock and degrade these specimens using sound arguments and satirical humor. It’s like the hadith when a Jewish man came to the Prophet and said “death be upon you” and the Prophet said “same to you”. We have to fight fire with fire.
Speaking of fatty, quranisfilthyblog’s filthy women whoring profit dumped one of quranisfilth’s mothers for beign an obese fat porker who no longer aroused him sexually!
Narrated Aisha:
Sauda (the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She was A FAT HUGE LADY, and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, “O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. Sauda returned while Allah’s Apostle was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I went out to answer the call of nature and ‘Umar said to me so-and-so.” Then Allah inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put in down, he said (to Sauda), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 318)
To make matters worse, the quranisfilth’s filthy profit claimed that his demon sent down Q. 4:128-130 to justify mistreating his fatty obese wife!
And if a woman fears ill usage or desertion on the part of her husband, there is no blame on them, if they effect a reconciliation between them, and reconciliation is better, and avarice has been made to be present in the (people’s) minds; and if you do good (to others) and guard (against evil), then surely Allah is aware of what you do. You will not be able to be equitable between your wives, be you ever so eager; yet do not be altogether partial so that you leave her as it were suspended. If you set things right, and are godfearing, God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. But if they separate, God will enrich each of them of His plenty; God is All-embracing, All-wise. S. 4:128-130
In the above text, instead of warning the men against mistreating their spouses, women who fear mistreatment or desertion are told that they can seek a means of reconciliation. What many don’t realize is that Sura 4:128 was actually composed in relation to Muhammad’s mistreatment of his wife Sauda bint Zamah because she had become old and unattractive. The late Sunni scholar and exegete Ibn Kathir wrote:
Making peace is better than separation. An example of such peace can be felt in the story of Sawdah bint Zam’ah who WHEN SHE BECAME AGED, THE PROPHET WANTED TO DIVORCE HER, but she made peace with him by offering the night he used to spend with her to A’isha so that he would keep her. The Prophet accepted such terms and kept her.
Abu Dawud At-Tayalisi recorded that Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Sawdah feared that the Messenger of Allah might divorce her and she said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Do not divorce me; give my day to ‘A’ishah.’ And he did …
In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that ‘A’ishah said that when Sawdah bint Zam’ah BECAME OLD, she forfeited her day to ‘A’ishah and the Prophet used to spend Sawdah’s night with ‘A’ishah …
. IT REFERS TO THE WIFE RELINQUISHING SOME OF HER MARITAL RIGHTS and his acceptance of the offer. Such compromise is better than total divorce, as the Prophet did when retained Sawdah bint Zam’ah. By doing so, the Prophet set an example for his Ummah to follow as it is a lawful act … (the preceding citation taken and adapted from Tafsir Ibn Kathir – Abridged, Volume 2, Parts 3, 4 & 5, Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147 [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; first edition March 2000], pp. 599-601, and Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Part 5, Sura An-Nisa, ayat 24-147, abridged by Sheikh Muhammad Nasib Ar-Rafa’i [Al-Firdous Ltd., London, 2000 first edition], pp. 193-194; capital emphasis ours)
Renowned Sunni historian and commentator Al-Tabari stated that:
Umra bin Ali & Zaid bin Ahram said: second by Abu Dawud, said: second by Sulaiman bin Mu’ath, from Simak bin Harb, from Ikrimah, from Ibn Abbas, said: Saudah feared divorce by the messenger of Allah, so she said: Do not divorce me, and do not share with me! And he did, and this verse was revealed: And if a woman fears ill usage or desertion on the part of her husband.
Muhammad bin Husain said: He claimed that this verse came down in reference to the messenger of Allah, and Saudah bint Zama’h who became old, then the messenger of Allah wanted to divorce her, but they agreed that he will keep her but give her day to Ai’sha. (Translated by Mutee’a Al-Fadi)
Another exegete named Al-Qurtubi said that:
In this verse there are four issues: the first, Al-Tirmidhi told that Ibn Abbas said: Saudah feared that the messenger of Allah will divorce her so she said, “Do not divorce me and keep me, and give my day with you to Ai’sha.” He did and this verse came down: “there is no blame on them, if they effect a reconciliation between them, and reconciliation is better.” He said: this is a good and strange hadith. (Translated by Mutee’a Al-Fadi)
The Muslim scholar Ibn al-’Arabi stated:
… when Sauda bint Zam’ah became old, the Prophet of Allah wanted to divorce her. However, she preferred to remain amongst his wives, so she said, ‘Keep me, and my day shall belong to ‘Aisha’, and he did, and thus she died as one of his wives. Ibn Abi Malikah declared that this verse was revealed regarding ‘Aisha. And in this verse is the answer to those light headed fools who say that if a man took the youth of a woman and she became old he cannot replace her. So praise be to Allah who lifted such burden and made an escape from such dilemma. (Abi Bakr Ibn ‘Abd Allah, Ahkam al-Qur’an [Dar al-Kotob al-‘Elmeyah], commenting on Sura 4:128)
Ar-Razi, in his tafsir on this verse, noted:
This verse was revealed first in Ibn Abi as-Sa’ib who had a wife and children from her and she became old so he was about to divorce her, but she said: Do not divorce me, and let me look after my children and apportion a few nights for me every month. The husband said: If this is so, it is better for me. The second was that the Prophet wanted to divorce Sauda bint Zam’ah but she besought him to keep her on the condition that she would give up her day to ‘Aisha, and he allowed that and did not divorce her. The third is reported on ‘Aisha that it concerns the man who has a wife but he wants to replace her, so she says: Keep me and marry someone else and you are free from supporting me and apportioning your nights to me. (Fakhr Ad-Din Ar-Razi, At-Tafsir Al-Kabir (The Grand Exegesis) on Sura 4:128)
And here are two additional sources which confirm that Q. 4:128 was “revealed” in connection with Sauda giving up her day to Aishah:
… When Sawdah began to feel that she was getting old and that she was no longer able to undertake the marital duties of a wife, she feared that the Messenger of Allah would divorce her and she was keen to remain close to him, seeing him every day, hearing his words and acquiring knowledge from him. At the same time, she was keen to die while married to the Prophet, so that on the Day of Resurrection, she would be brought forth as his wife. For these reasons, she requested him not to divorce her and that her night with him be given to ‘Aishah.
The Messenger of Allah agreed to the request of this virtuous woman, who was possessed of noble sensibility. It is narrated by At-Tirmidhi, on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas that he said: “Sawdah feared that she would be divorced by the Messenger of Allah and so she said: ‘Do not divorce me; keep me with you and give my day with you to ‘Aishah.’” Then Allah revealed in the Qur’an [Q. 4:128]: (The Honorable Wives of the Prophet, edited by Abdul Ahad [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Jeddah, Sharjah, Lahore, London, Houston, New York, First Edition: October 2004], pp. 64-65; statements within brackets ours)
When Saudah bint Zam’ah became old she feared that Muhammad would divorce her and a settlement be made. Her desire was to be raised on the Day of Judgment with the other members of the Prophet’s wives, so she said she would entrust ‘Aishah the time allotted to her. It was at this point that Ayat of Surat An-Nisa’ was revealed to the Prophet:
“And if a woman who fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part, there is no sin on them both if they make terms of peace between themselves; and making peace is better.” (4:128)
‘Aisha was very touched by her gesture and they became even closer than before. Her heart was so pure that it was totally free of jealousy or malice. (Great Women of Islam Who Were Given Good News of Paradise, by Mahmood Ahmad Ghadanfar, revised by Sheikh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, edited by Muhammad Ayub Sapra & Muhammad Farooq [Darussalam, First Edition: January 2001], p. 36)
The late Muslim biographer Muhammad Husayn Haykal wrote:
… One day, while the Prophet was staying with ‘A’ishah, his other wives delegated Zaynab, daughter of Jahsh, to go in and, in their name, to accuse him of injustice and unfairness to them, and to plead that his love for `A’ishah was a violation of the code which he himself had set down of a day and night for each of his wives. On the other hand, realizing that the Prophet did not care very much for her charms, and being no longer anxious to please him, Sawdah had given up her day and night to `A’ishah… (Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, tran. Isma’il Raji al-Faruqi [American Trust Publications, USA 1976; Malaysian edition by Islamic Book Trust], Chapter 26: Ibrahim and the Wives of the Prophet, “The Rebellion”, p. 437)
One recent Muslim author says in a caption that:
Muhammad’s personal and family life were not always smooth. His wives sometimes bickered amongst themselves and even once engaged in a petty plot against him. A’ishah, for example, disliked her Jewish co-wife, Safiyah, and insulted her periodically. Muhammad had to defend her status and honor a number of times and scold the youthful A’ishah. Hafsah became jealous of her co-wife, Maria, when she found her and Muhammad resting[sic] in her apartment one day. Sawdah gave up her allotted day with the Prophet WHEN SHE REALIZED HE WAS NOT REALLY ATTRACTED TO HER. As for the conspiracy, A’ishah agreed with two other co-wives to convince the Prophet that eating honey made him unpleasant to be around. When Muhammad vowed to never eat honey again, she privately repented to her co-conspirators. Though these incidents were not the norm, they demonstrate that the women in Muhammad’s life were as human as the rest of us. (Yahiya Emerick, Critical Lives: Muhammad [Alpha Books, A Member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc., 2002], p. 263; capital emphasis ours)
No water this filthy demon hates fat people! I wonder what his profit would have done to his mother if he had attacked his own village in order for he and his men to rape the women there. Hpefully, his mommy is a fat porker like Sauda since then she would be safe from quranisfilth’s filthy women whoring profit.
No water= No wonder
Ken, this makes Muhammad not only a wicked vile antichrist (which he was) but also a homicidal genocidal maniac since he confirmed that the OT wars were sanctioned by his own god.
For instance Ken, the following passage shows that the Quran itself confirms that these OT wars were approved by God himself, especially that of the slaughter of the Canaanite as well as Saul’s war against the Amalekites:
O my people! Remember Allah’s favour unto you, how He placed among you prophets, and He made you kings, and gave you that (which) He gave not to any (other) of (His) creatures. O my people! Go into the holy land which Allah hath ordained for you. Turn not in flight, for surely ye turn back as losers: They said: O Moses! Lo! a giant people (dwell) therein and lo! we go not in till they go forth from thence. When they go forth from thence, then we will enter (not till then). Then out spake two of those who feared (their Lord, men) unto whom Allah had been gracious: Enter in upon them by the gate, for if ye enter by it, lo! ye will be victorious. So put your trust (in Allah) if ye are indeed believers. They said: O Moses! We will never enter (the land) while they are in it. So go thou and thy Lord and fight! We will sit here. He said: My Lord! I have control of none but myself and my brother, so distinguish between us and the wrong-doing folk. (Their Lord) said: For this the land will surely be forbidden them for forty years that they will wander in the earth, bewildered. So grieve not over the wrongdoing folk. S. 5:20-26 Pickthall
Here we have Muhammad relating the story of God commanding the Israelites to enter into the promised land and slaughter its inhabitants, without a negative word about the supposed injustice of God in ordering them to do so. And:
Hast thou not Turned thy vision to the Chiefs of the Children of Israel after (the time of) Moses? They said to a prophet (That was) among them: “Appoint for us a king, that we May fight in the cause of God.” He said: “Is it not possible, if ye were commanded to fight, that that ye will not fight?” They said: “How could we refuse to fight in the cause of God, seeing that we were turned out of our homes and our families?” but when they were commanded to fight, they turned back, except a small band among them. But God Has full knowledge of those who do wrong. Their Prophet said to them: “God hath appointed Talut as king over you.” They said: “How can he exercise authority over us when we are better fitted than he to exercise authority, and he is not even gifted, with wealth in abundance?” He said: “God hath Chosen him above you, and hath gifted him abundantly with knowledge and bodily prowess: God Granteth His authority to whom He pleaseth. God careth for all, and He knoweth all things.” And (further) their Prophet said to them: “A Sign of his authority is that there shall come to you the Ark of the covenant, with (an assurance) therein of security from your Lord, and the relics left by the family of Moses and the family of Aaron, carried by angels. In this is a symbol for you if ye indeed have faith.” When Talut set forth with the armies, he said: “God will test you at the stream: if any drinks of its water, He goes not with my army: Only those who taste not of it go with me: A mere sip out of the hand is excused.” but they all drank of it, except a few. When they crossed the river,- He and the faithful ones with him,- they said: “This day We cannot cope with Goliath and his forces.” but those who were convinced that they must meet God, said: “How oft, by God’s will, Hath a small force vanquished a big one? God is with those who steadfastly persevere. When they advanced to meet Goliath and his forces, they prayed: “Our Lord! Pour out constancy on us and make our steps firm: Help us against those that reject faith.” By God’s will they routed them; and David slew Goliath; and God gave him power and wisdom and taught him whatever (else) He willed. And did not God Check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief: But God is full of bounty to all the worlds. S. 2:246-251 Y. Ali
The Quran recounts the story of the people of Israel asking the prophet Samuel for a king, Saul’s appointment as a king, Saul’s wars, and David killing Goliath (cf. 1 Samuel 8-17). What is interesting about all this is that even though the Quran presupposes the biblical account of God’s commission to wipe out the Amalekites it nowhere condemns this Divine decree. It does not say that Saul killing women and children was an evil thing or that the Israelites tampered with the story since this isn’t how it happened; nor does it deny that these things did happen. Its very mention in the Quran without any qualification presupposes that the author(s) and/or editor(s) of the Quran had absolutely no problem with these wars since s/he/they believed that God sanctioned them. So why do these pseudo-monotheists go against the teachings of their own book of porn (as false as it is) and attack the Holy Bible for something with which the Quran and their immoral profit affirmed?
There is more. Note what this next report says regarding Muhammad’s view of the prophet Joshua’s battles against the enemies of God:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “A prophet amongst the prophets carried out a holy military expedition, so he said to his followers, ‘Anyone who has married a woman and wants to consummate the marriage, and has not done so yet, should not accompany me; nor should a man who has built a house but has not completed its roof; nor a man who has sheep or she camels and is waiting for the birth of their young ones.’ So, the prophet carried out the expedition and when he reached that town at the time or nearly at the time of the ‘Asr prayer, he said to the sun, ‘O sun! You are under Allah’s Order and I am under Allah’s Order. O Allah! Stop it (i.e. the sun) from setting.’ It was stopped till Allah made him victorious. Then he collected the booty and the fire came to burn it, but it did not burn it. He said (to his men), ‘Some of you have stolen something from the booty. So one man from every tribe should give me a pledge of allegiance by shaking hands with me.’ (They did so and) the hand of a man got stuck over the hand of their prophet. Then that prophet said (to the man), ‘The theft has been committed by your people. So all the persons of your tribe should give me the pledge of allegiance by shaking hands with me.’ The hands of two or three men got stuck over the hand of their prophet and he said, “You have committed the theft.’ Then they brought a head of gold like the head of a cow and put it there, and the fire came and consumed the booty. The Prophet added: Then Allah saw our weakness and disability, so he made booty legal for us.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 353)
Here Muhammad conflates several biblical stories, namely, Moses’ instruction in Deuteronomy 20:1-9, and Joshua’s expeditions against Ai and the king of Jerusalem (cf. Joshua 7 and 10). These are the very expeditions where God commanded Joshua and the Israelites to wipe out everything that breathes!
Hence, since the unanimous view of Sunni scholarship is that the hadith collection of al-Bukhari is sound, this means that this is not a narration that Ally can simply brush aside, especially since the Quran itself testifies that part of Muhammad’s mission was to confirm the textual veracity and divine authority of the very scriptures which the Jews and Christians had in their possession during Muhammad’s time. Therefore Ken, these Muhammadans have no choice but come to terms with the fact that their own women raping, child marrying profit had absolutely no problems with God’s orders to the Israelites to annihilate everything that breathes, including women, children and livestock. So then why does a pagan stone smoocher like quranisfilthblog have a problem?
Ken, according to the black stone licking pagan a.k.a. quranandbibleblog, this means Muhammad’s god is a filthy demon who makes the Canaanite god look like a saint by comparison!
The same old bullshit from the same old fat, ugly burritto.
NOWHERE does it mention the filth contained in your pornbook you sick piece of trash. Keep your grabage from your prequel of fifty shades of gray out of the Word of the All-Mighty (ie. Qur’an). Your idiotic attempt to bring it down to your pornbook is sickening. No the Qur’an does not affirm the trash in your comicbook. You have been HUMILIATED on this topic over abn over again. But that head of yours seems to have more fat than actual braincells to understand such a simple fact. You cannot defend that filth so you try DEDPERATLY to make others believe that the Quran or hadiths confirm that shit. They don’t. Get over it fatass!!!
LOL brother, Fatty Shamy is back for more beatings! Hey Fatty, are your previous wounds all healed up?
Here is some more about the influence of Canaanite mythology on the Bible. Enjoy!
“Throughout the Ugaritic texts, Baal is repeatedly called “the one who rides the clouds,” or “the one who mounts the clouds.” The description is recognized as an official title of Baal. No angel or lesser being bore the title. As such, everyone in Israel who heard this title associated it with a deity, not a man or an angel.
Part of the literary strategy of the Israelite prophets was to take this well-known title and attribute it to Yahweh in some way. Consequently, Yahweh, the God of Israel, bears this descriptive title in several places in the Old Testament (Isaiah 19:1; Deuteronomy 33:26; Psalm 68:33; 104:3). For a faithful Israelite, then, there was only one god who “rode” on the clouds: Yahweh.
Until we hit Daniel 7, that is. You know the scene, but you likely don’t know the full context, since Ugaritic provides that for us:
9 As I looked on, the thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took His seat. His garment was like white snow, and the hair of His head was like lamb’s wool. His throne was fiery flames; its wheels were blazing fire. 10 A river of fire streamed forth before Him; thousands upon thousands served Him; myriads upon myriads attended Him; the court sat and the books were opened . . . 13 As I looked on, in the night vision, One like a son of man came with the clouds of heaven; he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented to Him. 14 Dominion, glory, and kingship were given to him; all peoples and nations of every language must serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship, one that shall not be destroyed.
The plurality of thrones in the passage tell us plainly that we have here what scholars of the Hebrew Bible call a divine council scene — the high sovereign in his throne room, meeting with the heavenly host. The literature of Ugarit has many such scenes, and the biblical divine council and the council at Ugarit are very similar. In point of fact, the flow of Daniel 7 actually follows the flow of a divine council scene in the Baal Cycle:
Ugarit / Baal Cycle Daniel 7
(A) El, the aged high God, is the ultimate sovereign in the council. (A) The Ancient of Days, the God of Israel is seated on the fiery, wheeled throne (cf. Ezekiel 1). Like Ugaritic El, he is white haired and aged (“ancient”).
(B) El bestows kingship upon the god Baal, the Cloud-Rider, after Baal defeats the god Yamm in battle. (B) Yahweh-El, the Ancient of Days, bestows kingship upon the Son of Man who rides the clouds after the beast from the sea (yamma) is destroyed.
(C) Baal is king of the gods and El’s vizier. His rule is everlasting. (C) The Son of Man is given everlasting dominion over the nations. He rules at the right hand of God.
The striking parallels are especially noteworthy given that this is the only time in the Old Testament where a second personage other than Yahweh is described as “coming with/upon the clouds” (the preposition in Aramaic can be translated either way). The intent of the author to describe this “son of man” with a title reserved only for Yahweh was clear by virtue of how the scene followed the Baal literature — the literary cycle whose central character, Baal, held the Cloud-Rider title!”
https://www.logos.com/ugaritic
You would have to be an idiot to deny the clear influence. The ancient Jews were borrowing these myths and applying them to their own myths. This is why the “son of man” in Daniel is shown as receiving authority from God.
Fatty Shamy gets schooled again!
Yep, this filth stone smoocher sure schooled me since he just proved his filthy profit was stupid enough to affirm the God of the Bible even though he is nothing more than a canaanite deity:
So the stone licker has now helped me bury his profit further down the rabbit hole since his profit was stupid enough to confirm that Allah rides the clouds like the good lil pagan canaanite he was!
Do they then wait for anything other than that Allah should come to them IN THE SHADOW OF THE CLOUDS AND THE ANGELS? (Then) the case would be already judged. And to Allah return all matters (for decision).S. 2:210 Hilali-Khan
OUCH!
Because your profit was stupid enough to affirm that Allah, his demon god, was going to show up on the clouds with his angels, the Muslims were left with the embarrassing fact of explaining this in a way where they don’t have your wicked jinn riding on the cloud:
(Do they then wait for anything other than that Allah should come to them over the shadows of the clouds and the angels) ON THE DAY OF RESURRECTION to judge the early and the latter creations. Allah shall then reward each according to his or her deeds; and whoever does good shall see it, and whoever does evil shall see it. This is why Allah said…
((Then) the case would be already judged. And to Allah return all matters (for decision).)…
(Nay! When the earth is ground to powder. And your Lord comes with the angels in rows. And Hell will be brought near that Day. On that Day will man remember, but how will that remembrance (then) avail him) (89:21-23) and…
(Do they then wait for anything other than that the angels should come to them, or that your Lord (Allah) should come, or that some of the signs of your Lord should come (i. e., portents of the Hour, e.g., rising of the sun from the west)!) (6:158)
Abu Ja`far Razi reported that Abu Al-`Aliyah narrated that…
(Do they then wait for anything other than that Allah should come to them over the shadows of the clouds and the angels) means, the angels will descend on the shadows of clouds, while Allah comes as He wills. Some of the reciters read it…
Do they then wait for anything other than that Allah should come to them and also the angels over the shadows of the clouds. This is similar to Allah’s other statement…
(And (remember) the Day when the heaven shall be rent asunder with clouds, and the angels will be sent down, with a grand descending.) (25:25) (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)
What a stupid pagan Muhammad was! He didn’t know he was merely parroting the pagan canaanite view and tried to pass that off as revelation!
And this stone licker still has no defense of why his women raping, pedophile profit dumped his mommy, his fatty obese lard wife Sauda, because he knows his profit was a filthy slime for mistreating his whale of a wife just because she became an unattractive fat porker who no loner aroused his wicked lustful desires.
NOW THAT IS OUCH TO THE MAX!
Keep barking as I keep muzzling you and your god.
Still no response from Shammy? Still eating those rabbits turds? When will you stop Shammy?
Why does Daniel use Canaanite mythology to describe a heavenly court in his so-called “vision”? Why is Yahweh the same as El? Why is the son of man the same as Baal? Answer the questions Shammy. Your long rants do not impress anyone.
Btw none of the quotes he gave say Allah will come on the clouds. They say that “Do THEY wait …”. Q&B said that no man or ANGEL had that statis among the Israelites while the Quran DOED say they (ie angels) will come on the clouds. This is exactly the opposite you idiot.
As for your idiotic attempt to deflect to the Sauda subject (which is COMPLETLY irrelevant to you being a fatass cus your argument is not against Sauda but against the Prophet (saw) who was not fat) this has been already answered.
There is no evidence that the prophet wanted to divorce her for her looks. She wasn’t even pretty to begin with:
” There was great surprise in Mecca that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would choose to marry a widow who was NEITHER YOUNG NOR BEAUTIFUL. (Ibn Kathir, Wives of the Prophet Muhammad)”
Sauda gave her day up from her own self. Not because the Prophet treathened her with divorce.