返回新站                                                                                                                                                                      返回总目录 Suffer the little Children, help the Women

Suffer the little Children, help the Women!

 

Quennel Gale

 

Here we will focus on an ongoing debate between Sam Shamoun of www.answering-islam.org and Sami Zaatari of www.answering-christianity.com dealing with the issue of violence in both the Bible in the Quran. Zaatari’s article can be found here:

 

http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/counter_rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_1.htm      

 

Before we begin we must start by saying that we, unlike others, don’t have a problem with God bringing judgment upon unbelieving civilizations that refuse to adhere to his commands and his servants. We understand the clear fact that the Lord God is the all-merciful God who loves all of his creation but we also understand that this same God of mercy is also a God of justice. Modern civilization tries to impose its current thinking upon God in trying to say that he is vicious to unbelievers without failing to take in the context and scope of the particular situation.

 

Even in today’s modern society, many of those who accuse God of such vile actions, would themselves find certain actions justified. For example:

 

  1. If a country is attacked by another country, retaliation is considered justified and usually necessary if possible.
  2. One is usually not held accountable if they take someone’s life, out of the fear of being killed by that person.
  3. In war, the killing of women and children, although unacceptable, is usually tolerated if kept to a minimum since collateral damage is impossible to avoid every time.

 

There are many more examples we can give but these will suffice for now. One issue we want to look at during this on going debate between both Mr. Shamoun and Mr. Zaatari is the issue of children being killed. We begin with Mr. Zaatari’s comments here:

 

My Response

To begin with, we cannot even compare the OT and the Quran when it comes down to wars. The OT commands you to go kill women and children, and also to show no mercy on them whatsoever. The Quran however never commands us to go kill women and children in war, in fact it tells us to fight for the oppressed women and children, the prophet Muhammad also forbade the killing of women and children.

Here is a slight example of why we cannot compare the OT with the Quran when it comes down to wars:

Deuteronomy
Chapter 2

32-37

And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land. 32 Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz. 33 And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. 34 And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain. 36 From Aroer, which is by the brink of the river of Arnon, and from the city that is by the river, even unto Gilead, there was not one city too strong for us: the LORD our God delivered all unto us

Now let us see what the Quran says:

004.075



YUSUFALI: And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!"

So does anyone else see the difference? The Bible commanded people to kill women and children, the Quran commands people to fight for women and children. Big difference between the two.

Also from my standpoint, I never feel that I have to justify the Islamic wars fought during the time of Muhammad by bringing up the OT; the reason to this is because I do not feel there is anything slightly wrong with what Muhammad did during the wars. The same cannot be said for the OT, the Christians must have to justify every war in the Bible as it allowed the killing of women and children.

As I said, the prophet Muhammad forbade the killing of women and children:

Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 257.

Narrated By 'Abdullah : During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.

Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 258.

Narrated By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children.

From reading these hadiths, what exactly do I have to justify or defend? The prophet Muhammad said DO NOT KILL women and kids. - http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_47.htm          

 

Again, please see our position above at the beginning of this paper. Our focus is to deal with the fact of whether killing children is allowed in Islam. According to Mr. Zaatari, such actions are wrong and contrary to Islam, even though we find many instances of children being killed in bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan which are predominately Muslim countries. The perpetrators even find ways to justify these actions and show no sympathy at all. Mr. Zaatari resorts to using these hadiths, which he feels is enough to prove his case:

 

Narrated 'Abdullah:

During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 257)

 

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 258)

 

However he seems to be ignorant of the fact that Sam Shamoun already discussed this very same issue and refutes these hadith:

 

As a side note, this statement is a third party report. We do not have the exact words of Muhammad to evaluate them at this point. Yet there is a narration in Sunan Abu Dawud where Muhammad is directly quoted:

 

Narrated Rabah ibn Rabi':

When we were with the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) on an expedition, he saw some people collected together over something and sent a man and said: See, what are these people collected around? He then came and said: They are round a woman who has been killed. He said: This is not one with whom fighting should have taken place. Khalid ibn al-Walid was in charge of the van; so he sent a man and said: Tell Khalid not to kill a woman or a hired servant. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2663) - http://wwww.answering-islam.org/Responses/Abualrub/terrorism2.htm

 

Mr. Shamoun is correct in claiming that there is no exact word of Muhammad prohibiting killing of women and children, so the issue isn’t as clear-cut as Mr. Zaatari would have you to believe. Shamoun proves this case from the very same Islamic sources, added emphasis ours:

 

HOWEVER, there are certain other narrations that permit the killing of women and children, specifically during Muslim raids where they attack unsuspecting victims at night:

 

Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama:
The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256)

 

I.e., they are all the same—both the women and children are nothing more than pagans! The above narration is repeated in several, different hadith collections:

 

Chapter 9: PERMISSIBILITY OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE NIGHT RAIDS, PROVIDED IT IS NOT DELIBERATE

 

It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4321)

 

Keep in mind that the subheading is not part of the narration, it is added by the collector of the hadiths. In other words, the statement regarding the killing of women and children being permissible as long as it isn’t deliberate is not part of the narration. The hadiths do not explicitly say this, and yet the compiler assumed that this was the clear implication and meaning of these narrations.

 

It is narrated by Sa'b b. Jaththama that he said (to the Holy Prophet): Messenger of Allah, we kill the children of the polytheists during the night raids. He said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4322)

 

Sa'b b. Jaththama has narrated that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) asked: What about the children of polytheists killed by the cavalry during the night raid? He said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4323)

 

Narrated Samurah ibn Jundub:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Kill the old men who are polytheists, but spare their children. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2664) (Ibid)

 

As you can clearly see, killing children and women is permissible in Islam. Mr. Zaatari is wrong because he is arguing from the belief that this prohibition is absolute when Islamic sources clearly show that there were certain cases in which it can be done and is actually encouraged. If you look at Muhammad’s response, he wasn’t overly concerned that women and children died among the pagan population, he only claimed, “oh well, they are apart of them”, in other words, guilty by association. Taking the hadiths Mr. Zaatari used in his defense along with these hadiths, logically we must conclude that killing of children is permissible in special circumstances.

 

Apparently Mr. Zaatari has never seen this article or purposely overlooked it. Whatever the case, by virtue of his own words, he has condemned Islam and Muhammad. Notice how he argued against Mr. Shamoun about this same issue in the OT:

 

My Response

First two responses are in order. Firstly, whether these commands that God gave to the Israelites, to go kill women and children, whether these commands are allowed or not allowed today is irrelevant. The fact that your God did at one time allow the killing of women and children is itself bad enough, it seems Shamoun wants us to forget about the dark history that his Bible contains. The fact is Shamoun’s God did at one time allow the killing of women and kids, how can we just forget about this?

Secondly, how do you know these commands are no longer to be followed? Your NT doesn’t even agree with you:

1- 1- 2 Timothy 3:16 states:

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

So the NT says ALL scripture is God breathed, and this includes the OT. The NT tells us that we should look to the whole Bible for instruction, doctrine, correction and reproof. So hence these commands of killing women and kids can still be applied by Christians today, they could be followed under the category of instruction.

As for the rules of warfare being binding upon all Muslims in all times, there is nothing wrong with that, because to start off there is nothing wrong with the rules of war in the Quran. -http://www..answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_47.htm

 

From reading his response we clearly find that he considers this a dark side of God’s character, which is bad enough. Next he argues that there is nothing wrong with the rules of war in the Quran and Islam in general. Again, it is very apparent that Mr. Zaatari isn’t as knowledgeable about his own Islamic history for if he considers what the OT teaches to be wrong, then Muhammad and Allah would also be condemned as being bad as well! The hadiths that deal with the night raids and the pagans are a death blow to Mr. Zaatari’s argument. So if he is worried about Christians killing kids today, then why doesn’t he have a problem with Muslims doing the same thing also! What’s good for the goose is also good for the gander! Mr. Shamoun elaborates on this further:

 

One Muslim apparently was so troubled by this concession on the part of Muhammad that he claimed that the killing of women and children was abrogated!

 

Al-Sa‘b b. Jaththamah said that he asked the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) about the polytheists whose settlements were attacked at night when some of their offspring and women were smitten. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: They are of them. ‘Amr b. Dinar used to say: They are regarded in the same way as their parents.

 

Al-Zuhri said: Thereafter the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) prohibited to kill women and children. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2666)

 

Not all Muslims share al-Zuhri’s conviction. The English translator makes the following comments regarding the above narration:

 

2018. This tradition allows to kill women and children of the infidels IN THE BATTLE. The other traditions indicate that it is prohibited to kill women and children in the battle. These CONTRADICTORY traditions have been reconciled by saying that the tradition of al-Sa‘b b. Jaththamah has been abrogated. The other interpretation is that it is allowable to kill women and children when the settlements of the infidels are attacked AT NIGHT, as they cannot be distinguished from the fighting men in the dark. (Sunan Abu Dawud, English translation with explanatory notes by Prof. Ahmad Hasan [Sh. Muhammad Ashraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters; Lahore, Pakistan, 1984], Volume II, p. 739; capital emphasis ours)

 

Ahmad Hasan’s explanation is no excuse and provides absolute no comfort for the women and children who were killed, or for their surviving families. A true God-inspired prophet would be more cautious and not allow such night raids so as to prevent the unnecessary killing of women and children. http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Abualrub/terrorism2.htm

 

Mr. Shamoun is totally correct, and using Mr. Zaatari’s logic we must conclude that it is even worse for women and children to be killed at night, as opposed to the OT when most wars among the Israelites and their enemies were fought during the day! It is much more difficult to be careful and avoid collateral damage at night. However this is the same tactical offensive that Muhammad, the so-called prophet of Allah, instituted! Since the Quran and Hadith are binding on Muslims I guess we should deem it okay for Muslims to attack at night and kill women and children. Mr. Shamoun continues:

 

Furthermore, Islamic sources provide many examples where Muslims deliberately and brutally killed women and children. Noted Islamic commentator and historian Al-Tabari mentioned one:

 

In this year a raiding party led by Zayd b. Harithah set out against Umm Qirfah in the month of Ramadan. During it, Umm Qirfah (Fatimah bt. Rabi‘ah b. Badr) suffered a cruel death. He tied her legs with rope and then tied her between two camels until they split her in two. She was a very old woman.

 

Her story is as follows. According to Ibn Humayd – Salamah – Ibn Ishaq – ‘Abdallah b. Abi Bakr, who said: The Messenger of God sent Zayd b. Harithah to Wadi al-Qura, where he encountered the Banu Fazarah. Some of his companions were killed there, and Zayd was carried away wounded from among the slain. One of those killed was Ward b. ‘Amr, one of the Banu Sa‘d b. Hudhaym: he was killed by one of the Banu Badr [b. Fazarah]. When Zayd returned, he vowed that no washing [to cleanse him] from impurity should touch his head until he had raided the Fazarah. After he recovered from his wounds, the Messenger of God sent him with an army against the Banu Fazarah. He met them in Wadi al-Qura and inflicted causalities on them. Qays b. al-Musahhar al-Ya‘muri killed Mas‘adah b. Hakamah b. Malik b. Badr and took Umm Qirfah prisoner. (Her name was Fatimah bt. Rabi‘ah b. Badr. She was married to Malik b. Hudhayfah b. Badr. She was a very old woman.) He also took one of Umm Qirfah’ daughters and ‘Abdallah b. Mas‘adah prisoner. Zayd b. Harithah ordered Qays to kill Umm Qirfah, and he killed her cruelly. He tied each of her legs with a rope and tied the ropes to two camels, and they split her in two. Then they brought Umm Qirfah’s daughter and ‘Abdallah b. Mas‘adah to the Messenger of God. Umm Qirfah’s daughter belonged to Salamah b. ‘Amr b. al-Akwa‘, who had taken her - she was a member of a distinguished family among her people: the Arabs used to say, "Had you been more powerful than Umm Qirfah, you could have done no more." The Messenger of God asked Salamah for her, and Salamah gave her to him. He then gave her to his maternal uncle, Hazn b. Abi Wahb and she bore him ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Hazn. (The History of Al-Tabari: The Victory of Islam, translated b Michael Fishbein [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1997], Volume VIII, pp. 95-97)

 

Al-Tabari also mentioned that Muhammad had the young boys of the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayzah beheaded:

 

The Messenger of God had commanded that all of them who had reached puberty should be killed. (The History of Al-Tabari, Volume VIII, p. 38)

 

Another source tells us how they determined whether a person had reached puberty:

 

Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:

I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4390)

 

Not only were the young boys of the tribe beheaded, but the Muslims also beheaded one of their women:

 

According to Ibn Ishaq, the conquest of the Banu Qurayzah took place in the month of Dhu al-Qa‘dah or in the beginning of Dhu al-Hijjah. Al-Waqidi, however, said that the Messenger of God attacked them a few days before the end of Dhu al-Qa‘dah. He asserted that the Messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the Banu Qurayzah. Then he sat down, and ‘Ali and al-Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence. He asserts that the woman whom the Prophet killed that day was named Bunanah, the wife of al-Hakam al-Qurazi- it was she who had killed Khallad b. Suwayd by throwing a milestone on him. The Messenger of God called for her and beheaded her in retaliation for Khallad b. Suwayd. (The History of Al-Tabari, Volume VIII, pp. 40-41)

 

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:


No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I. I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2665) (Ibid)

 

As you can see here, Muhammad beheaded women, children and whoever he could get his hands on. And Mr. Zaatari has the audacity to be angry with the OT! This information comes from the Hadith and authentic Sirah literature in Islam and is known by scholars of Islam worldwide. Even if Mr. Zaatari tries to find a way to wiggle out of it by saying it isn’t necessarily true then the onus is on him to show us different traditions of the same event that have been proven to be correct and not just give us the same old, “I don’t believe this hadith or narration” jive. This amuses us when Muslims try to criticize other religions when they don’t even believe the authentic sources of their very own religion! How laughable!

 

Mr. Zaatari is dead wrong, emphasis on dead, about Islam and the killing of women and children. Apparently he hasn’t studied his religion real well. Even outside of night raids, we find this about killing children in Islam:

 

This tradition has been narrated by the game authority (Yazid b. Hurmus) through a different chain of transmitters with the following difference in the elucidation of one of the points raised by Najda in his letter to Ibn Abas: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used not to kill the children, so thou shouldst not kill them UNLESS YOU COULD KNOW WHAT KHADIR HAD KNOWN ABOUT THE CHILD HE KILLED, OR YOU COULD DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A CHILD WHO WOULD GROW UP TO BE A BELIEVER (AND A CHILD WHO WOULD GROW UP TO BE A NON-BELIEVER), SO THAT YOU KILLED THE (PROSPECTIVE) NON-BELIEVER AND LEFT THE (PROSPECTIVE) BELIEVER ASIDE. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4457)

 

This is simply amazing! In Islam you are allowed to kill children if you believe that they will grow up and become unbelievers! This leaves the entire discretion to the person who is deciding to kill the child in question! An unbeliever is one who doesn't want to follow Islam! What if the Muslim made a mistake killing a child who may look like a disbeliever but may actually grow up to be a believer in Muhammad? It would be too late to try to then bring the child back from the dead.

 

Hence, in orthodox Islam, not the so-called radical or fanatical Islam, a Muslim can kill an innocent child if it is deemed as being necessary for the betterment of Allah's society! Now we know why the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center and the Pentagon had no ill feelings about the acts they committed, which in turn took the lives of innocent children. They were just being obedient to the laws and regulations of Islam! Here is an example from a loving Muslim family and their child:

 

In Nov., 1989, a Palestinian Muslim and his wife, murdered their own 14 daughter. Their daughter HAD NOT LIVED ACCORDING TO THEIR VIEW OF ISLAM. Finally, the father and mother assaulted the girl. The mother held the girl down while the father stabbed her to death. Unknown to this Muslim family, this man was under investigation by the FBI, and a bug had legally been planted in the house. The entire murder was called on tape. As the girl struggled and begged her mother to help her, the father said in Arabic, "DIE, DIE QUICKLY, DIE QUICKLY”. (People magazine, 1/20/92)

 

What is even more disturbing about this is the fact that this family murdered this girl not in a war but in regular civil life. Hence, according to Islam killing children who are deemed as prospective disbelievers can be done anywhere! Isn’t this great? Not if you are the child who suffered cruelly at the hands of his/her parents.

 

Now Zaatari may call into question the above narration regarding killing children on the assumption that they may turn out to be unbelievers. In case he does we only need to remind him of what Mr. Shamoun had quoted from the Quran:

 

"So they journeyed on till when they met a young boy; he slew him. Moses said, ‘What! hast thou slain an innocent person without his having slain anyone! Surely, thou hast done a hideous thing’ ... ‘And as for the youth, his parents were believers, and we feared lest on growing up he should involve them into trouble through rebellion and disbelief;’" S. 18:74, 80 Sher Ali

 

As Mr. Shamoun stated regarding this text:

 

Moses' companion justifies the killing of a young innocent boy on the grounds that the boy may have grown up to be a rebellious unbeliever. Hence, if Zaatri has issues with the Holy Bible he needs to take issue with his own book which condones the killing of a young boy who may have, or may have not, grown up to be a disbeliever. Since Allah had a man kill a boy, which obviously included some kind of violence and pain, would Zaatri now say that his god is cruel and a bloody murderer?

 

Thus, these Quranic texts substantiate the hadith that Muslims can kill children on the mere suspicion that such children may grow up to be unbelievers! In fact, this very hadith mentions the name Khadir which is the name given to this very same person in Surah 18 who killed the innocent child!

 

Finally, Mr. Zaatari complained about the doctrine of original sin, saying that it is not fair that others are blamed for the sins of Adam and Eve in the garden. It is beyond the scope of this paper to defend such a doctrine, but what we would like to do instead is to further expose Mr. Zaatari’s complete ignorance of what even his own false prophet and false religion teach about this issue.

 

But the Satan made them both fall from it, and caused them to depart from that (state) in which they were; and We said: Get forth, some of YOU being the enemies of others, and there is for you in the earth an abode and a provision for a time. Then Adam received from his Lord words (of revelation), and He relented toward him. Lo! He is the relenting, the Merciful. We said: Go down, ALL OF YOU, from hence; but verily there cometh unto you from Me a guidance; and whoso followeth My guidance, there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve. S. 2:36-38

 

We see from the above text that Adam’s sin clearly impacted all future generations of mankind since in Arabic the YOU in both 2:36 and 38 is plural (more than two), as opposed to the dual. We know that at least in Sura 2:38 the plural cannot be a reference to Satan since he stands condemned to hell and will not follow the guidance which will come from Allah. Therefore, it is quite obvious that the plural is addressed to all of mankind, that humanity suffered expulsion due to their federal head, Adam, a point reiterated elsewhere:

 

God said, `Go forth, some of you will be enemies of others. And for you there is an abode on the earth and a provision for a time.' S. 7:24

 

Ibn Kathir stated regarding 2:38-39:

 

Allah informs of His warning to Adam, his wife and Satan, THEIR OFFSPRING, when he ordered THEM to descend from Paradise. He says he will send messengers with Scriptures, signs and proofs… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Part 1, Surah Al-Fatiah Surah Al-Baqarah, ayat 1 to 141, Abridged by Sheikh Nasib Ar-Rafa‘i [Al-Firdous Ltd., London: Second Edition 1998], pp. 109-110; capital emphasis ours)

 

Here also are the late Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s comments on Sura 2:36:

 

… Note the transition in Arabic from the singular number in ii. 33, to the dual in ii. 35, and the plural here [2:36], which I have indicated in English by "All ye people." Evidently Adam is the type of all mankind, and the sexes go together in all spiritual matters. Moreover, the expulsion applied to Adam, Eve, and Satan, and the Arabic plural is appropriate for any number greater than two. (Bold and underline emphasis ours)

 

The Quran is essentially agreeing with the Holy Bible that Adam caused all his offspring to be expelled from the Garden, a fact that is further confirmed by the following narrations:

 

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Adam and Moses argued with each other. Moses said to Adam. 'O Adam! You are our father WHO DISAPPOINTED US AND TURNED US OUT OF PARADISE.' Then Adam said to him, 'O Moses! Allah favored you with His talk (talked to you directly) and He wrote (the Torah) for you with His Own Hand. Do you blame me for action which Allah had written in my fate forty years before my creation?' So Adam confuted Moses, Adam confuted Moses," the Prophet added, repeating the Statement three times. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 77, Number 611: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/077.sbt.html#008.077.611)

 

Abu Huraira reported that God’s messenger told of Adam and Moses holding a disputation in their Lord’s presence and of Adam getting the better of Moses in argument. Moses said, "You are Adam whom God created with His hand, into whom He breathed of His spirit, to whom He made the angels do obeisance, and whom He caused to dwell in his garden; then BECAUSE OF YOUR SIN caused MANKIND to come down to the earth." Adam replied, "And you are Moses whom God chose to deliver His messages and to address, to whom He gave the tablets on which everything was explained, and whom He brought near as a confidant. How long before I was created did you find that God has written the Torah? Moses said, "Forty years." Adam asked, "Did you find in it, ‘And Adam disobeyed his Lord and erred’?" On being told that he did, he said, "Do you then blame me for doing a deed which God had decreed that I should do forty years before He created me?" God’s messenger said, "So Adam got the better of Moses n the argument." Muslim transmitted it. (Mishkat Al-Masabih English Translation With Explanatory Notes by Dr. James Robson, Volume I [Sh. Muhammad Ahsraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore-Pakistan, Reprint 1990], p. 23; bold and capital emphasis ours)

 

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Adam and Musa argued and Adam got the better of Musa. Musa rebuked Adam, 'You are Adam WHO LED PEOPLE ASTRAY and brought them out of the Garden.' Adam said to him, 'You are Musa to whom Allah gave knowledge of everything and whom he chose above people with His message.' He said, 'Yes.' He said, 'Do you then censure me for a matter which was decreed for me before I was created?'" (Malik's Muwatta, Book 46, Number 46.1.1: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muwatta/046.mmt.html#046.46.1.1)

 

This Ayah mentions the great honor that Allah granted Adam, and Allah reminded Adam's offspring of this fact. Allah commanded the angels to prostrate before Adam, as this Ayah and many Hadiths testify, such as the Hadith about the intercession that we discussed. There is a Hadith about the supplication of Musa, "O my Lord! Show me Adam who caused us and himself to be thrown out of Paradise.'' When Musa met Adam, he said to him, "Are you Adam whom Allah created with His Own Hands, blew life into and commanded the angels to prostrate before?'' Iblis was among those ordered to prostrate before Adam, although He was not an Angel. (Ibn Kathir on surah 2:34; http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=2&tid=1629; bold and italic emphasis ours)

 

These narrations further complicate matters. It blames Adam’s sin and subsequent expulsion on Allah’s predetermined decree, that Allah had already predestined that Adam would fall from favor. Here again is Ibn Kathir’s commentary, this time regarding 2:37:

 

… Narrated Sufyan At-Thawri quoting ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Ibn Rafi‘ that someone heard Mujahid quoting ‘Ubayd Ibn ‘Umayr as saying that Adam said: "My Lord, is the sin I committed one that was destined for me before You created me or is it something I brought upon myself?" Allah replied: "I preordained it upon you before I created you." Adam said: "Lord forgive me it as You have preordained it upon me". The narrator said, hence the verse <Then Adam received words from his Lord, and his Lord relented towards him.>. Narrated al-‘Awfi, Sa’id Ibn Jubayr, Sa’id Ibn Ma‘bad and al-Hakim quoting Ibn ‘Abbas: Adam said to Allah: "Have You not created me with Your own hands?" The answer was yes. Then he asked: "And You have breathed into me of Your spirit?" The answer again was yes. He added: "And You decreed for me to do this?" Yes was the answer he received. He said: "If I repent, will You send me back to Paradise?" Allah said: "Yes." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged by Sheikh Muhammad Nasib Ar-Rafa’i, p. 106; underline emphasis ours)

 

Thus, if Zaatari has a problem with the Bible’s teaching on original sin then he must surely have problems with the Quran and the hadiths of his false prophet since they both taught something similar!

 

In light of the above, we have sufficiently shown that Mr. Zaatari is entirely wrong on Islam and the killing of children and, in particular, women. We will continue to watch closely the ongoing debate between Mr. Zaatari and Mr. Shamoun. Mr. Zaatari stated:

 

So Shamoun has clearly failed to answer anything. He only further strengthens our arguments!

 

In turn we can state:

 

So Zaatari has clearly failed to answer anything on child and women killing. He only further weakened his argument!

 

  1. Home Back Home
  2. New Articles Back to New Section