If a person you are having a
dialogue with lacks basic knowledge of the subject in question, then you know
it’s not worth the time or energy. This isn’t to say that you are losing the
discussion; it means you’re wasting precious time that could be more productive
in other ways.
Take, for example, the topic of
child marriage. For some bizarre reason Christians keep bringing this up
obsessively, as if it’s central to their faith, and staying silent on it would
somehow make them lose that faith.
Now, discussing certain matters
can open the door to meaningful conversation and a better understanding of one
another’s views. However, when the same topic is repeatedly used as a weapon
against Muslims, it becomes patronising, unproductive, and intellectually
dishonest and ultimately leads nowhere.
Let’s make one thing clear, the
marriage of Prophet Muhammed Pbuh to our Mother Aisha RA was ordained by Allah Swt.
Yet some Christians obsess over her young age, elevating this one point as if
it invalidates everything else. why the Prophet Muhammed Pbuh married our
Mother Aisha RA at a young age. It is treated as the centre of attention, as if
no other human being in history ever married someone young. Labelling the
Messenger Pbuh as a “paedophile” is a blatant lie and a deliberate attack on
his character. This grotesque, vile, and offensive language crosses the line
into blasphemy and is utterly unacceptable.
Let’s be clear this fallacious
and nonsensical Christian polemic is easily dismantled. What age of consent does
the Bible actually set for marriage? Where does it explicitly forbid marrying a
male or female at the age of six? If Christians claim their morality comes from
the Bible, then what does it truly say on this issue? The answer is simple: it
doesn’t which makes this nothing more than an argument from silence.
Furthermore, according to which
historical, academic, or medical sources is it stated that marrying a
six-year-old fifteen hundred years ago without consummation was considered
pedophilia? Please cite the relevant scholarship. As a matter of fact,
reputable scholarship argues that, “People 1,500 years ago considered such a
marriage to be pedophilia”
This brings us back to the
original point engaging in discussion with individuals who lack even basic
historical knowledge and argue dishonestly is a waste of time.
If you reject Prophet Muhammad Pbuh
on the basis of his marriage to our Mother Aisha RA, then consistency demands
that you also reject Isaac, the bearer of the everlasting covenant, and King
David, the forefather of your Messiah, Jesus. If not, then this is nothing more
than selective outrage and outright hypocrisy.
You can’t condemn one person
while excusing another in identical circumstances. That’s not debate that’s
hypocrisy. It turns your argument into nothing more than a personal attack,
fueled by agenda and dressed up as criticism, which is nothing but slander.
Nevertheless, let’s test how
consistent Christians really are by approaching the same subject from a more
historical perspective.
What does history tell us about
the marriages of Isaac and King David? This matter was discussed by the rabbis
and was never considered an issue affecting the character of either individual.
This also highlights a crucial question: how did early Jewish society
understand and accept marriages at a young age?
There’s no need to hunt for
hidden texts Jewish sources are readily accessible to anyone willing to read.
Open their books and see for yourself. Discussions about the appropriate age of
marriage, whether for males or females, were never taboo. The scholars of the
Hebrew Bible explicitly mention these ages, claiming they were taught directly
by Moses, as revealed to him by God at Mount Sinai.
“A
Jew can marry a girl three years and day old” (Talmud Sanhedrin 55b)
“the
halakha with regard to the intercourse of a girl aged three years and one day
is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai” (Talmud Niddah 32)
“The
intercourse of a [girl] less than three years old is not intercourse, is a 'law
of Moshe from Sinai.'” (Rambam Introduction to the Mishnah 8:32)
“A
girl who is three years and one day old whose father arranged her betrothal can
be betrothed with intercourse, as, despite her age, the legal status of
intercourse with her is that of full-fledged intercourse.” (Talmud Sanhedrin
69a)
“Ravina
said: Therefore, with regard to a female gentile child who is three years and
one day old, since she is fit to engage in intercourse at that age, she also
imparts impurity as one who experienced” (Talmud Avodah Zarah 37a:1)
“A girl of the age of three years and one day
may be betrothed by intercourse” (Talmud Niddah 44b)
“He
who loves his wife as himself & honours her more than himself, & leads
his children in the right path, & marries them just before they attain
puberty” (Talmud Sanhedrin 76b)
"It
is known that marriage of a minor girl is by rabbinic law, and therefore no one
would confuse this type of marriage with an adult marriage." (Talmud
Yevamot 107a)
“Rava
said that this is what the mishna is saying: An adult man who engaged in
intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old has done nothing, as
intercourse with a girl less than three years old is tantamount to poking a
finger into the eye.” (Talmud Ketubot 11b)
These are only a handful of
references from Jewish Talmudic sources that explicitly state the age of a
female, while other sources address the age of a male. Notice how the rabbis
confidently refer to the age of “three years and one day” without hesitation.
Consider this carefully, within Judaism, the Torah is understood as divinely
inspired law given to Moses, alongside the Oral Law preserved in the Mishnah.
All rulings whether concerning marriage, dietary practice, civil matters,
finance, or criminal law are derived from both the written and oral traditions.
Here’s the real question: why
didn’t Jesus explicitly condemn the teaching or practice of such young ages for
marriage? He had no hesitation calling out the rabbis on numerous issues rebuking
the Pharisees for their hypocrisy (Matthew 23:24), criticizing their
performative fasting (Matthew 6:16–18), and even correcting their teachings by
commanding people to love their enemies (Matthew 5:43–44).
So why the silence here? If this were truly a
moral outrage, why didn’t Jesus address it directly? How could something so
significant be ignored while lesser matters were openly challenged? The reality
is simple: the Bible does not speak on it yet it is now being used as a
standard of judgment.
Was it something Jesus recognised
as part of the cultural norms of his society and therefore left unchallenged?
Or was it because he stated that he did not come to abolish the Law, but to
fulfil it thus remaining silent on matters the Law itself did not explicitly
address? How could a man who stood firmly for truth remain silent on an issue
now claimed to be so morally significant?
Let us now move on to another
issue one that Christians should address using their own claimed moral
standards. Let’s see whether they remain consistent in their argument, or
attempt to evade it when the same standard is applied. With all due respect, I
generally find many Christian apologists to be dishonest in their arguments,
but it would be unfair to paint everyone with the same brush.
“…Bathsheba gave birth to Solomon when she was six, because a
woman is stronger and can conceive at an earlier age. Know that this is true
that women conceive at an earlier age, as Bathsheba had already given birth to
a child from David before giving birth to Solomon…” (Talmud Sanhedrin 69b)
"Bathsheba gave birth to Solomon
when she was six"
Let’s draw attention to a
statement found in the Babylonian Talmud, a text highly revered by Orthodox
rabbis. The Talmud records the sayings and rulings of rabbis, derived from the
Mishnah the Oral Law they claim traces back to Moses at Sinai. This effectively
elevates it to divinely inspired status, forming what they consider a single
Torah expressed in two forms: written and oral.
Notice how the rabbis appear to
justify the idea of a six-year-old giving birth. This is not presented as an
isolated case, but rather as something reflective of a broader social reality
of that time. In other words, it was treated as a norm. The discussion itself
is framed around the notion that “a woman is stronger and can conceive at an
earlier age.” Rabbi Rashi addresses this point in this commentary to this Talmudic
writing. In fact, the Talmud even references that a female reaching the age of
nine could be regarded as having reached maturity.
The
Gemara asks: And how old must a child be to be considered grown up for the
purposes of this halakha? Rav Adda bar Rav Azza says that Rav Asi says: A girl
must reach the age of nine years and one day; a boy must reach the age of
twelve years and one day. (Talmud Kiddushin 81b)
The Talmud also
speak of a non-important girl marrying age six and giving birth.
Yusteni further inquired: And at what age is she fit to become pregnant?
Rabbi YehHuda aNasi said to her: When
she is at least twelve years and one day old. She said to him: I married when I
was six, and gave birth a year later, when I was seven. Woe for those three
years, between the age of three, when I was fit for intercourse, and the age of
six, when I married, as I wasted those years in my father’s house by not
engaging in intercourse. (Talmuld Nidda 45a)
If Bathsheba gave birth to
Solomon at the age of six, then that would imply that King David consummated
the relationship with her when she was around five years old. It is also worth
noting that, prior to the birth of Solomon, Bathsheba had another child with
King David conceived outside of marriage. You can draw your own conclusions
about how old she may have been at the time they committed adultery.
Jesus is considered by Christians
to be the seed of David the Messiah from the Davidic line. But would it be fair
to claim that the Christian Messiah is descended from a paedophile? If King
David married and consummated a relationship with a five year old, wouldn’t
that, by default, make him a paedophile. Whys is Jesus linked to such a man?
Are Christians willing to be consistent and acknowledge this reality? If they
reject Prophet Muhammad Pbuh for marrying our Mother Aisha RA solely because of
her age, shouldn’t they also reject King David entirely and question the
glorification of his lineage? Why glorify a line that stems from someone guilty
of such acts?
Despite the rejection of rabbinic
teachings by Christians, it is well attested by Orthodox rabbis that Isaac
married Rebecca when she was three years old. Christians may react strongly to
this, but the fact remains that Jesus explicitly glorified the Pharisees; Orthodox
rabbis by instructing his followers to observe and obey everything they taught
[Matthew 23:1–3]. Theologically, this undermines the Christian dismissal of
rabbinic teachings and sayings. By default, Christians must accept the sayings
and teaching of the Orthodox rabbis.
Rashi’s commentary on Genesis 25:20 says:
forty years old: For when Abraham came from Mount Moriah, he
was informed that Rebecca had been born. Isaac was then thirty-seven years old,
for at that time Sarah died, and from the time that Isaac was born until the
“Binding” [of Isaac], when Sarah died, were thirty-seven years, for she was
ninety years old when Isaac was born, and one hundred and twenty-seven when she
died, as it is stated (above 23:1): “The life of Sarah was [a hundred and
twenty-seven years.”] This makes Isaac thirty-seven years old, and at that time,
Rebecca was born. HE WAITED FOR HER UNTIL SHE WOULD BE FIT FOR MARITAL
RELATIONS-THREE YEARS-AND THEN MARRIED HER.— [From Gen. Rabbah 57:1]
Rashi’s calculation
goes as follows: Rivkah was married at 3 years, and was 23 years old when she
gave birth to Esau and Yaakov. (Daat Zkenim on Genesis 25:20:1)
“Isaac was thirty-seven-years old at his binding… When
Abraham returned from Mount Moriah, at that very moment Sarah died, and Isaac
was then thirty-seven; and at that very time Abraham was told of Rebekah’s
birth; THUS WE FIND THAT REBECCA WAS THREE YEARS OLD WHEN SHE
MARRIED ISAAC.” (Pesikta Zutrata (Lekah Tov), Gen. 24., Midrashic
commentary on the Pentateuch, by Rabbi Tobiah Ben Eliezer)
The maiden was very beautiful, a
virgin whom no man had known. She went down to the spring, filled her jar, and
came up. Genesis 24:16)
בתולה, “a
virgin;” according to the view that Rivkah was only three years old, the Torah hardly needed to add this detail; the
Talmud Niddah 44, explains this by saying that even if she had been violated by
someone, her hymen had grown together again, (something that was known to
people in those days).
(Commentary Chizkuni, Genesis 24:16:1)
The Torah itself
testifies that Yitzchak was 40 years old when he married Rivkah , which makes
Rivkah 3 years old when she was married. (Rabbeinu Bahya, Bereshit 24:67:1)
Rabbis unanimously agree that
Isaac married Rebecca when she was three years old. This makes it all the more
remarkable that the very covenant-bearer, whose promise is fulfilled by Jesus
as the Messiah, married a child. Isn’t that something? And yet, Christians constantly celebrate the
“everlasting” covenant to Isaac, presenting it as a profound foreshadowing of
the Messiah while conveniently ignoring the ethical implications. Ignoring the fact that he married
a three year old girl what kind of double standard is this?
Critiquing the 7th century using
21st-century standards falls squarely under the fallacy of presentism.
Christians don’t need this explained it’s common sense. Just because a modern
country sets a legal age for marriage, work, or drinking doesn’t mean that age
should have applied universally across time. Consider this, Noah lived 950
years. If we insist that 18 is the legal age for marriage, would it have been
wrong for Noah, at 600 years old, to marry an 18 year old woman? Or would we
then claim that women had to be at least 400 years old to marry him? Where does
such reasoning end?
Ignorance
can be corrected, and we are happy to provide education. But if, after being
educated, you still insist on the same position, it proves your intention is
not dialogue or understanding it is to push an agenda, provoke, and obstruct
meaningful discussion. And this is where we draw the line and move on.
Rabbinic sources reveal that both
King David and Isaac had child brides. Using the very standards Christians
apply to condemn Prophet Muhammad Pbuh, the conclusion is inescapable: “WITHOUT
PAEDOPHILES THERE IS NO MESSIAH.” By Christian logic where marrying a
six-year-old is enough to earn that label both Isaac and King David qualify.
And they didn’t stop there, Isaac married Rebecca at three, and King David
married Bathsheba at the same age. If Christian moral criteria are applied
consistently, the implications are undeniable.
Christians have to accept PAEDOPHILES
HAVE MADE WAY FOR THEIR MESSIAH.
