Aisha's age at the time of her marriage

[recure]

As for Cesar Borges, he was the illigitimate son of a Pope who had paintings commissioned of him to represent the likeness of Jesus. That is the originating source of many of the blasphemous, racially re-imagined depictions of Jesus which now permeate Christianity throughout the world.

Isn't every painting of Jesus considered blasphemous by Islamic standards, regardless of how historically accurate it is? You seem to be saying that only depicting Jesus as a white man is an abominable practice, which I thought only Black Hebrew Israelite types claimed (they also claim King James was a black man and the "black nobility" were called that on account of the color of their skin).

 

[amaranthine]

Science says otherwise.

I have already presented research evidence on that.

I don't know what drugs you are on, but six year olds have not gone through puberty and are thus prepubescent. Same with nine year olds. Your "science" is for shit. And old creeps marrying early teen kids is still an immoral act, regardless of your feelings on the matter of the injustice (!)rofl of us labeling them as pedophiles. Either you are trolling, or are a a sick sociopath or you are beyond stupid or are the most pigheaded contrarian in the world. There is no other choice here.

 

[floss]

I don't know what drugs you are on, but six year olds have not gone through puberty and are thus prepubescent. Same with nine year olds. Your "science" is for shit. And old creeps marrying early teen kids is still an immoral act, regardless of your feelings on the matter of the injustice (!)rofl of us labeling them as pedophiles. Either you are trolling, or are a a sick sociopath or you are beyond stupid or are the most pigheaded contrarian in the world. There is no other choice here.

These sicko will slap the label of SCIENCE on any immoral act they want to commit. Sound a lot like Dr Fauci today. Science is their god.

 

[recure]

Science says otherwise.

If we look at the article on puberty from Wikipedia, we read:

On average, girls begin puberty at ages 10–11 and complete puberty at ages 15–17… The major landmark of puberty for females is menarche, the onset of menstruation, which occurs on average between ages 12 and 13.

So while puberty begins at 10-11 years old, reproductive capabilities usually begin at 12-13 years old. If it is shown that menarche can occur at 9 years old, then this would be the exception not the rule. Besides, there is no proof that Aisha had reached puberty (specifically menarche) when Muhammad consummated the marriage with her, it is merely an assumption based on post hoc reasoning that Aisha must have reached puberty otherwise Muhammad would not have had sex with her.

You also claimed that "according to the Bible [Mary] was 12 and Joseph was 90". The Bible does not say what age either Mary or Joseph were when they married, but a later tradition recorded in the Protoevangelium of James says that she was 12 when she was given to the care of Joseph by the casting of lots "lest she defile the sanctuary" (i.e. by menstruation). You can see that the Koran copied this story in Sura 3:44. Furthermore, it says "Joseph refused, saying: I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl. I am afraid lest I become a laughing-stock to the sons of Israel." So using this as an example actually refutes the notion that the large age disparity was seen as acceptable at that time. If Muslims don't believe they were married as you claim, that would make the circumstance even more laughable. The text goes on to say that the Virgin Mary was actually 16 while she was pregnant, so try as you may, you won't find any parallel in Christianity to your "customs".

 

[TempestOfTempo]

Again... a wall. And if you want to use Cesare Borgia as your reference at least write his name right. I am not an expert on that figure apart from remembering that he appeared as a pretty vile person in Macchiavelli's Il Principe, a book which I have barely skimmed. But as for the claim that his appearance is somehow the basis for modern depictions of Jesus, that is pretty obviously not true. One only has to look at the myriad of depictions of Jesus predating by centuries the birth of Cesare of Borgia. There he will find plenty of depictions which bear a much closer resemblance to those "modern depictions" of Jesus that were discussed, than Cesare's two portraits. I find it funny that modern USA racial profiling would classify Cesare of Borgia as a "person of color" as well, seeing that he was a spaniard, something which would normally be considered as white, but hey, its the 2020s. As for most jews not being white skinned...can't help you with that, I see what I see. Again I say "most" not all. Seen plenty of darker skinned jews as well. Which is why I have no problem with either depiction of Jesus as we just don't know as his appearance isn't described in the early christian writings. And no I did not come into this thread making assertions about Jewish people being white. I made several comments before towards "F(r)iend" and his pedophilic ilk who have some pretty loathsome ideas about marriage and morality.

"But as for the claim that his appearance is somehow the basis for modern depictions of Jesus, that is pretty obviously not true."
"Cesare Borgia" was born sometime during the month of Sept. 1475 in Subiaco, Italy. He was an illegitimate child whos parents were Cardinal Roderic Borgia and his mistress, Vannozza dei Cattanei. In 1492, the infamously nefarious Cardinal Borgia ascended to the Papal tiara, becoming Pope Alexander III until his passing in 1503. Cesare was appointed Bishop at 15 and Cardinal by 18.

Pope Borgia disapproved of the more accurate depictions of Jesus as a Middle Eastern Jewish man and ordered a new standard for Jesus' image. Pope Alexander (Borgia) commissioned artists to re-imagine Jesus with European features and cast Cesare as model. An edict dictating the purge of images depicting Jesus as anything other than the new European standard was intended to shore up the "new history" and its impossible to have an honest discussion regarding the topic without noting that during this time period, the images created of both Cesare and Jesus bear an astonishing, almost "miraculous" resemblance to each other. Even his homie Leonardo da Vinci apparently got in on the act.

"One only has to look at the myriad of depictions of Jesus predating by centuries the birth of Cesare of Borgia."
Except that is the whole point of re-writing history in favor of this Euro-centric bias... the traditional depictions were clipped in favor of Jesus' modern depiction, which the majority of the world is now familiar with.

"I find it funny that modern USA racial profiling would classify Cesare of Borgia as a "person of color"
Perhaps you find this so amusing because its totally not true?

If you want to stick to the topic, your commentary is welcome weather you and I agree or not. Do you have an opinion between the two main camps here (those who feel Aisha was 6-9 when wed and consummating the marriage/those of us who place her age at 17-19)?

 

[TempestOfTempo]

These sicko will slap the label of SCIENCE on any immoral act they want to commit. Sound a lot like Dr Fauci today. Science is their god.

There is no science with his argument. No real scientist would dare make a claim that 6-9 year old kids are ready to be married spouses. That crowd has NOTHING but their own weakness to stand on.

 

[TempestOfTempo]

Science says otherwise.

I have already presented research evidence on that.

You have produced no "evidence" proving 6-9 year old females are ready to enter into full-on womanhood spousal roles with grown, adult men.

 

[amaranthine]

"But as for the claim that his appearance is somehow the basis for modern depictions of Jesus, that is pretty obviously not true."
"Cesare Borgia" was born sometime during the month of Sept. 1475 in Subiaco, Italy. He was an illegitimate child whos parents were Cardinal Roderic Borgia and his mistress, Vannozza dei Cattanei. In 1492, the infamously nefarious Cardinal Borgia ascended to the Papal tiara, becoming Pope Alexander III until his passing in 1503. Cesare was appointed Bishop at 15 and Cardinal by 18.

Pope Borgia disapproved of the more accurate depictions of Jesus as a Middle Eastern Jewish man and ordered a new standard for Jesus' image. Pope Alexander (Borgia) commissioned artists to re-imagine Jesus with European features and cast Cesare as model. An edict dictating the purge of images depicting Jesus as anything other than the new European standard was intended to shore up the "new history" and its impossible to have an honest discussion regarding the topic without noting that during this time period, the images created of both Cesare and Jesus bear an astonishing, almost "miraculous" resemblance to each other. Even his homie Leonardo da Vinci apparently got in on the act.

"One only has to look at the myriad of depictions of Jesus predating by centuries the birth of Cesare of Borgia."
Except that is the whole point of re-writing history in favor of this Euro-centric bias... the traditional depictions were clipped in favor of Jesus' modern depiction, which the majority of the world is now familiar with.

"I find it funny that modern USA racial profiling would classify Cesare of Borgia as a "person of color"
Perhaps you find this so amusing because its totally not true?

If you want to stick to the topic, your commentary is welcome weather you and I agree or not. Do you have an opinion between the two main camps here (those who feel Aisha was 6-9 when wed and consummating the marriage/those of us who place her age at 17-19)?

My point was that the imagery depicting Jesus as broadly similar in features to Cesare has been around long before he was even alive thus making the story of the edict and him as a model of Jesus' depictions questionable to say the least (could believe him being a model for Da Vinci though). Just look at all the "Christ Pantocrator" works. As far as I know that story of Cesare as a model comes from Dumas' writings and is only meant to be a story, not history. Sorry for being a bit rough yesterday, was a bit tired and already triggered by some p***phile apologists

As for the topic at hand. I am probably leaning towards the 17-19 camp, but truth be told I have no stake in this. Personally what I find important for myself is to not rely on any human figure in regards to faith as that can lead one astray. Putting your trust in a human in such a way that you would have to make excuses for their failings with moral or theological sophistry is not a healthy way to live, at least not to me. So I say to myself - may all my idols fall, even if they are Mohammed, Buddha, or this or that saint and prophet. I believe in god, even if he does give the grace of knowledge to some, they are still human, and thus prone to error. Humility for me entails by necessity the notion that I may not know everything which I find is a maxim worthy to follow as experience has taught me to shed alot of the prejudices I used to have (and may still have). Thus even when I have much respect for several islamic/christian/judaic (even certain "pagan" texts), I do not think they are the literal word of god, perhaps they are filled with divine inspiration, but they are still filtered through a person's personality. So a moral failing of a writer would make me steer away from his works, not from god.

 

[amaranthine]

These sicko will slap the label of SCIENCE on any immoral act they want to commit. Sound a lot like Dr Fauci today. Science is their god.

Agreed. How they think that they can fool anyone is what I am really puzzled by as the rhetoric is really low level effort. "Science says!" Lol, gtfo

 

[recure]

The major landmark of puberty for females is menarche, the onset of menstruation, which occurs on average between ages 12 and 13.
on average means it may occur in younger ages.

No one had or will have sexual engagement with a girl who has not reached the age of puberty. people who have this tradition of marrying their young girls check their daughter's readiness (puberty) before accepting the proposal for marriage or just marry the girl without sending her to husband's house untill she reaches puberty.

You just proved my point that you only assume that Aisha must have achieved menarche at 9 due to your preconception that Muhammad would not have consummated the marriage with her if she had not. And let's not conflate the onset of puberty with menarche; one of the sources you posted says "...the age of first menstruation, generally around 12, has advanced by a matter of months." This does not support your argument since in the case of Aisha it is a matter of years.

Your statement that "Science is better than Assumptions/Feelings" is very ironic because you are misusing science to rationalize your feelings. Also the definition you posted of a pedo is someone who is sexually attracted to a pre-pubescentent child. Since you don't think this applies to your version of Muhammad, what was the purpose of him marrying Aisha at 6 years old (half the age when puberty is usually reached)? If Aisha reached puberty at 9 as you maintain, why not wait until then?

 

[recure]

Aisha's age is not agreed upon matter. scholars differ whether she was 21, 18, 14, 9 etc when she went to Mohammad's house as a bride. thats why i cannot say for sure.

The problem is you did not reject the 9 year old theory but tried to justify it.

could you point to the source please

Yes.

I provided evidence that puberty is sign of physical readiness of the body of a femal human for having sexual interest and engagement and also physical readiness to have children.

It is you who, based on feelings and current culture in the west, define what is science and morality.

In the past when age of consent laws were set at the age of puberty, marriage took place between people of a similar age; it was not common for middle-aged men to marry teenagers. Even now there are "close-in-age" rules whereby people under the legal age of consent but having reached puberty can engage in sexual acts if they are of a similar age. It has always been controversial for an old man to marry a teenager and I showed an example of this from the 2nd c. Protoveangelium of James.

 

[floss]

Science is better than Assumptions/Feelings.

If Muhamad were in prison, he'd get r*pe, torture and killed for claiming it was SCIENCE. Inmates have higher standard than Muhamad.

 

[TempestOfTempo]

If Muhamad were in prison, he'd get r*pe, torture and killed for claiming it was SCIENCE. Inmates have higher standard than Muhamad.

Muhammed didnt claim this... its these fools who are trying to justify their own desires. The science says Aisha was not 6-9 and these people know it. Look at the ridiculous lengths they go through to try to excuse this behavior... yet look at how much of themselves they expose while doing so.

 

[amaranthine]

I guess the only problem Friend would have with all the "elite" pedophiles one associates with the decadent west, is the fact that they did not make it into an open tradition. If only they had written laws to legalise sex with children (through marriage), then there would be nothing wrong with it.

Seriously Friend. Pedophiles do not roam freely in the west, they have to do it in hiding as p***philia is against the law, even if corruption keeps them from being prosecuted (when it comes to well connected pedophiles), contrary to what you describe in your examples of third world countries. Normal people also consider teenagers (12+, not your 6-9 idea of a teen) as kids too. Sure their bodies may have begun (notice, beginning of a process as something different than its completion) to mature, but actual maturity is not something that comes over night. It takes years even for the body to mature, let alone the mind. What a depressing and hateful attitude one has to have towards children to be ok with how they are treated in your examples. Children should develop themselves as persons, as individuals, before they should even start to think about providing for a family and pleasing their (disgustingly older) spouse.

 

[lightseeker]

You live in a society where pedophiles roam freely (Western countries) but in thirld world Muslim countries p***philia is not rampant rather a very dangerous, risky and life threatening act to commit for a man. You think same thing is happening in third world countries which is just an assumption, not reality. It is a custom to marry young girls who have reached puberty and they face no major problems whatsoever.

It is in fact you who express their feelings which makes no difference to local customs.

Not true

Bacha bazi - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[TempestOfTempo]

Not true

Bacha bazi - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

We brought that up... and grooming gangs/taharrush/honor killings/forced marriages... I guess we didnt cover female genital mutilation yet smh. ALL of which (along with the ped-activity masquerading as normal matrimonial matters which posters here are advocating for) are forbidden in actual Islam. Yet so many "Muslims" cant wait to engage in it.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Since when are jews not white? I live in a slavic country and have never met anyone who thought that jews are not white. Different culture yes, but they are as white as any mediterranean people I know. So yeah, Jesus (if you would think of him as a historical jew) was white.

Modern jews that you're familiar with, are ashkenazi jews. Ashkenazi's are decendants of Gomer, from the Ezekiel 38 Gog & Magog prophecy ie they are the antagonists to the authentic jewish bloodline.
According to Zechariah 13, the real jews who are chosen/selected from God (as in the Remnant in the prophecies) were the camp who never left the holy land during/after the roman destruction of jerusalem. The camp who survived and remained there.
The ashkenazis are the camp who left..and hence they are 'cut off' from any future redemption. only the camp who remained will experience the redemption that's promised.
So who are the real jews? for one, they don't need to hold a jewish identity to be jewish. jewish by bloodline is enough. The apostles were christian in identity but authentic jewish. So where did their decendants go (that is the ones who had kids), likewise the same goes for all the jewish converts to christianity.
Remember, the true jews are the ones who never left...and the only people who have jewish blood in them and never left, are walking around with a palestinian identity. obv they're mixed with arab blood...but at least arabs are semites or from the arab levant. the ashkenazis are some other shit which is why they're lactose intolerant (land of MILK and honey isnt for them clearly).

 

[AspiringSoul]

Not true

Bacha bazi - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

completely haram in islam, it is practiced in a certain region and goes as far back as the greek empire. mainly the tajiks in modern day afghanistan, though the rest of em also engage in it when the opportunity is there...as in a lawless society.

if it's existed, it's existed outside of the authority and watchful eye of islam....and when islam came via the taliban, they were basically just brutally murdering bacha bazi pimps and rapists...bet you didnt know that.

one thing the yanks did was, they gave power back to the northern alliance which emboldened tajik warlords..and it's even said that the americans rewarded them

U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Sexual Abuse of Boys by Afghan Allies (Published 2015)

The American military’s policy has been to look the other way on “boy play” by Afghan commanders. One Marine’s father believes it was a factor in his son’s death.

www.nytimes.com

 

[recure]

In some parts of the world, the rule is that those who reach puberty are ready for marriage. while in developed countries it is against man made law to marry a very young girl even if Menarch occur as early as 10 years old.

About Mohammad (pbuh) and Aisha It is not final that Aisha was 9 years old, so I cannot say anything. Some scholars say she was 21, some say 18, some say 14, some say 9. So it is merely an assumption on your part that she was 9, not otherwise.

Menarche occurs between the ages of 10 and 16 years in most girls in developed countries.
Source:

The age of menarche - PubMed

The age of menarche

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Having menarche occur between the ages of 9–16 is considered normal.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menarche

It is not merely my assumption that she was 9 if it’s a belief held by Islamic scholars that is based on a clear-cut narration found several times in the Hadiths. I would even posit that it’s the majority view. Besides, you “cannot say for sure” what your stance is on the matter, but isn’t the purpose of the evidence you presented to provide a scientific justification for the 9 year old theory? Because if we concede for argument's sake that puberty qualifies as a determiner for marriageability and menarche can occur as early as 9 or 10, that still does not mean that it is objectively acceptable for a much older man to marry a young girl. Neither does it mean that Aisha reached puberty at 9 years old, but even if she had, it does not explain why Muhammad married her when she was 6 according to this view (something you did not not address from my earlier post).

It does not make any difference if the groom is older than the bride as long as both are physically ready for having a family.

as far as feelings are concerned, in parts of the world where it is normal for an older man to marry a very young girl who has reached puberty, those girls are mentally ready as it is their custom.

although, It is better to wait a bit so the girl becomes older but that does not change those customs.

There is a hadith in a section titled “a woman marrying someone of a similar age” which says that Abu Bakr (Aisha’s father) and Umar both proposed to marry Muhammad’s daughter Fatima but Muhammad said “she is young”. Then Ali proposed and Muhammad allowed them to be married. If it is normal for an old man to marry a young girl (assuming she reaches puberty), why did Muhammad not give his daughter to the older men who proposed first but to someone who was closer to her age?

 

[TempestOfTempo]

It is not merely my assumption that she was 9 if it’s a belief held by Islamic scholars that is based on a clear-cut narration found several times in the Hadiths. I would even posit that it’s the majority view. Besides, you “cannot say for sure” what your stance is on the matter, but isn’t the purpose of the evidence you presented to provide a scientific justification for the 9 year old theory? Because if we concede for argument's sake that puberty qualifies as a determiner for marriageability and menarche can occur as early as 9 or 10, that still does not mean that it is objectively acceptable for a much older man to marry a young girl. Neither does it mean that Aisha reached puberty at 9 years old, but even if she had, it does not explain why Muhammad married her when she was 6 according to this view (something you did not not address from my earlier post).

There is a hadith in a section titled “a woman marrying someone of a similar age” which says that Abu Bakr (Aisha’s father) and Umar both proposed to marry Muhammad’s daughter Fatima but Muhammad said “she is young”. Then Ali proposed and Muhammad allowed them to be married. If it is normal for an old man to marry a young girl (assuming she reaches puberty), why did Muhammad not give his daughter to the older men who proposed first but to someone who was closer to her age?

View attachment 72662

I never knew about that hadeeth... its a powerful refutation of the pro 6-9 crowd here, thank you.