Slavery in the Bible, (and Quran)

[sooda]

OK! in the Torah:
What does it mean when God instructed Moses the following
Because Israel was a stranger in Egypt, God instructed them never to oppress the stranger in their land. (Exodus 22: 21[1] / Exodus 23: 9[2])
The stranger, non-Israelite, and the Israelite are both decreed to adhere to the same law. Both will be treated equally under the regulatory law of the Government. (Numbers 15: 16[3])
(Deuteronomy 24:7) If a man be found stealing any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and maketh merchandise of him, or selleth him; then that thief shall die; and thou shalt put evil away from among you.



[1] Exo22:21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

[2] Exo23:9 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

[3] Num15:16One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you.

 

[sooda]

The problem is this only relates to stealing the “children of Israel” not to the taking of captives of war from other nations



There are 2 problems with this passage.
1. It refers to "the law" which in this case is a reference to the Old Testament. According to religious apologist Denny Burk, 'Certainly, the background for Paul’s command is the Old Testament law:
Exodus 21:16 “Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death” (ESV).' (From Seven reasons why you shouldn’t read 1 Timothy 6:1-2 as an endorsement of slavery) The problem here is that Exodus 21 is referring to the rules for Hebrew servants, not to the rules for non-Israelite war captives who worshipped foreign gods.

2. It is implied by the apologist that "contrary to sound doctrine" means contrary to what the post-modernist would consider sound doctrine, but in the context of Old testament law, or even in the Gospel itself, it is clear that slavery is permitted according to what was considered "sound doctrine" back then, for example 1 Timothy 6:1-2 says '1 Let all who are under the yoke as slaves regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine may not be spoken against. 2 And let those who have believers as their masters not be disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but let them serve them all the more, because those who partake of the benefit are believers and beloved. Teach and preach these principles.'


1. Exodus is referring to a specific category of stranger here, it is referring to the foreigner that does not sacrifice to a foreign god (refer to Exodus 22:20 to see how the rules for foreigners who worship foreign gods are different to the one who sacrifices to the Israelite God)
2. Refers to a specific category of foreigner (in context of exodus it is the visiting foreigner who does not worship foreign gods as described in Exodus 22, the proof of which is that in Exodus 23:20-27 different rules are given for engaging in war with foreign nations that worship different gods
3. Refers to a specific category of foreigner for context read Numbers 15:13-16

Numbers ch15:13 “‘Everyone who is native-born must do these things in this way when they present a food offering as an aroma pleasing to the Lord. 14 For the generations to come, whenever a foreigner or anyone else living among you presents a food offering as an aroma pleasing to the Lord, they must do exactly as you do. 15 The community is to have the same rules for you and for the foreigner residing among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the foreigner shall be the same before the Lord: 16 The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the foreigner residing among you.’”

As you can see from the above, it is a specific category of foreigner (ie the one visiting you who prepares sacrifices to and honours the Israelite God, not the one who honours other gods)

My conclusion: The Bible permits slavery

The problem is their lies. First they say they were slaves then the say they weren't, They say they slaughtered the Canaanites .. then they say the didn't.

 

[sooda]

Hoe do you know the sellers were Muslim chieftains?

Not sure, what that have to do with anything?

There weren't many Muslims in West Africa.

 

[SA Huguenot]

I would just like to thank everyone who took the time to discuss this topic with me.
I am going to leave this thread, for a simple reason.
I needed to see if there was any other new evidence concerning slavery in the Bible that I missed out on.
And there were participants who gave highly intellectual discussions.
The info I gathered is priceless, and something I will use in future.
However, I dont think it is advisable to continue with this topic, except if one wants to discuss the islamic viewpoint of slavery.
Then again, perhaps it is better to open another thread on that topic.
Greetings.

 

[blü 2]

Hoe do you know the sellers were Muslim chieftains?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think I said chieftains. I intended to say traders, those who captured, or purchased from capturers or owners, native African tribesfolk for sale as slaves in other parts of Africa, to the Turkish empire, to the British and French colonies, after 1773 to (their formerly British customers in) the US, and as many et ceteras as they could find.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Hoe do you know the sellers were Muslim chieftains?

David Livingstone made elaborate mentions on the Arab slave trade in Africa explaining how "Black Muslim tribes" attacked and captured their rivals and removed them to the Ivory coast, Dar es Salam etc.
Today you still have the same demography in Nigeria, Etiopia, Mali and even as far south as the DRC where the Northern tribes are predominantly Muslim, and the Southern other religion.
Even in Kenia the capture of slaves are still practiced by Boko Haram.
Any person who think the Africans were caught by Portuguese, English or Dutch, are not aware of the above facts that the western countries puschased these slaves from MUSLIMS!

 

[sooda]

David Livingstone made elaborate mentions on the Arab slave trade in Africa explaining how "Black Muslim tribes" attacked and captured their rivals and removed them to the Ivory coast, Dar es Salam etc.
Today you still have the same demography in Nigeria, Etiopia, Mali and even as far south as the DRC where the Northern tribes are predominantly Muslim, and the Southern other religion.
Even in Kenia the capture of slaves are still practiced by Boko Haram.
Any person who think the Africans were caught by Portuguese, English or Dutch, are not aware of the above facts that the western countries puschased these slaves from MUSLIMS!

When did Livingston die? Wasn't is 1873?

 

[Wasp]

My dear Muslim friend.
Please go and read my attachment on my post, and you will see that your own quran says:

• If you break an oath you have three choices to pay for that offence. One of them is to free a slave. Q 5: 89 [1]Note:
  • Therefore, the Islamic god never knew the prescribed term of a slave was 6 years

• What 6 years are you talking about?

• If a man rejected his wife, he should free a “captive” before they “touch” each other again. Q 4: 3[2]
  • A slave is equal to having sex with your estranged wife?
• If one kills someone by mistake, you can free a Muslim slave as payment of guilt. Q 4: 92[3].
  • What, a murderer can pay with a slave, his way out of killing someone?

• Before Islam they could leave and take back their wives as they wished. This set limits so that men would consider more carefully before verbally divorcing their wives.

For killing another one would also have to pay blood money unless there is active war between the parties.

• Muhammad was allowed to marry as many as “those your right hand possesses” (female slaves carried away as booty after war). All other Muslims were also allowed to marry these female slaves.
  • Please note that Allah was the one who gave these female slaves to them in the first instance! (Q 33: 50[4]) and (Q 23: 6[5]) And the Muslim scholar has the audacity to accuse Jehovah as a slave monger!

• What is wrong with marrying the slaves? It would be ideal. It had to be with consent of course and the woman had to be a believer.

• There is a bit of compassion in the Quran for the female slave where the Muslims are not allowed to force the female slave in prostitution if she wants to remain chaste, but it is very vague. Q 24: 33[6].
  • However, look closely to what Allah says; don’t force a female slave into prostitution to gain a nice living if she wants to remain chaste, but if you do force her into prostitution to receive worldly gain for a comfortable life, Allah is all forgiving!

• Forgiving to the slave who otherwise would be committing sin. This comes clear from the Arabic text.

• Muslims are not allowed to marry any women that are already married. Except of course, female slaves can be taken as a wife even if they are married! Q 4: 25[7].
  • How nice, we can go and capture women when we make war, take them as a wife even if they were married! It seems as if any marriage not blessed by Allah, is no marriage at all. Muslim men therefore can take any non-Muslim women as a slave and rape her under the pretence that she is his wife! He can even force her into prostitution and Allah will be forgiving! What about the woman? Does she not possess a living spirit?

• They can't marry a woman who is married if her marriage is still valid. They also can't marry a woman against her will and they cannot rape her in any situation.

• Allah gave some Muslims more possessions than the rest. Those who were favoured by Allah would never hand their possessions over to the slaves. That would mean the slave never became equal to the Muslim master. Q 16: 71[8]
  • Wow, Allah ensures that the slave stays a slave!

• This verse is completely out of context and has nothing to do with slavery.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Forgiving to the slave who otherwise would be committing sin. This comes clear from the Arabic text.

Dear friend.
Please read the verse again.
It speaks to the Muslim master who will be forgiven if they compell a female slave into prostetution.

They can't marry a woman who is married if her marriage is still valid. They also can't marry a woman against her will and they cannot rape her in any situation.

Except if she was a captive and her husband was a non Muslim.
Dear wasp.
Go back and read the Hadith and Quran where I quoted and you will have to admit that Allah told Muhammad to commit atrocities in attacking Jewish tribes without any reason, to attack without warning, to capture all the women, to to divide them up and rape them there and then on the battlefield, to have the blessing from Allah not to prevent pregnancies on these rapes, to behead all the men, to sell the children into slavery.
Allah knows best, and is all wize.
Beware for the nice whitewash explanations of your Imaams and read for yourself what Muhammad did.
I attach a document where you can see that Muhammad took slavecaptives, raped some, was married to at least 13 women at one time etc.
Enjoy the Truth.

 

[sooda]

Dear friend.
Please read the verse again.
It speaks to the Muslim master who will be forgiven if they compell a female slave into prostetution.



Except if she was a captive and her husband was a non Muslim.
Dear wasp.
Go back and read the Hadith and Quran where I quoted and you will have to admit that Allah told Muhammad to commit atrocities in attacking Jewish tribes without any reason, to attack without warning, to capture all the women, to to divide them up and rape them there and then on the battlefield, to have the blessing from Allah not to prevent pregnancies on these rapes, to behead all the men, to sell the children into slavery.
Allah knows best, and is all wize.
Beware for the nice whitewash explanations of your Imaams and read for yourself what Muhammad did.
I attach a document where you can see that Muhammad took slavecaptives, raped some, was married to at least 13 women at one time etc.
Enjoy the Truth.

You don't know anything about Islam.

 

[SA Huguenot]

You don't know anything about Islam.

Dont make such accusations Sooda.
I never quoted anything but the Quran and Hadith.
I studied Islam for 12 years, summarised the Quran and hadith, and you simply make an accusation without showing me where I am wrong.
Are you blind, dont you know what Muslims are doing in their countries and no go zones in the West?
Wake up!

 

[sooda]

Dont make such accusations Sooda.
I never quoted anything but the Quran and Hadith.
I studied Islam for 12 years, summarised the Quran and hadith, and you simply make an accusation without showing me where I am wrong.
Are you blind, dont you know what Muslims are doing in their countries and no go zones in the West?
Wake up!

Get back to me when you have studied Islam for 50 years and lived in an Arab country. I haven't been back to the ME recently, but I have dozens of American classmates who live in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Qatar and Bahrain.

 

[Wasp]

Dear friend.
Please read the verse again.
It speaks to the Muslim master who will be forgiven if they compell a female slave into prostetution.

The pronoun their in their compulsion is third person feminine plural possessive.

Except if she was a captive and her husband was a non Muslim.

There is disagreement on whether this is permissable if the husband is also captured. Probably not.

• No prophet is allowed to take captives if he did not first inflict a massacre in the country he attacked. Q 8: 67 -70[9].
  • Ok, so according to the Quran and Allah, the European countries were correct in colonizing Africa to obtain slaves! War booty came from Allah as a gift to the Muslims that participated in war! All you have to do is to tell the war captives that Allah placed you in Muslim hands because Allah knows it is better for you! What a nice way to sooth your conscience dear Muslim slave owner and female kidnapper!

• When Muslims go to war they go to conquer the enemy - not to collect their possessions or family members and neighbours.

• 
  
• If a slave girl married to a Muslim is caught committing adultery, she gets half the punishment than what a free Muslim woman gets for that offence. Q 4: 25[10].
  • The punishment for the Muslim woman that committed adultery is also a confusing revelation. In Q 24: 2[11] it says she should receive 100 lashes, but in Q 4: 15[12] the punishment is confinement for life!
  • So what should the punishment for adultery be? This is exceptionally confusing since Muslims in the Islamic countries stone women found guilty of adultery. Such a law is not to be found in the Quran at all because after Muhammad died, a goat ate the Quran manuscript containing the verses of stoning! Even more confusing is the fact that the men don’t get stoned to death as well! Will we confine this slave woman up for half her life, or give her 50 lashes, or stone her half dead?

First of Al the comparison is not between a married slave woman and a married free woman but a married slave woman and an unmarried free woman.

The punishment of 100 lashes is for fornication. Men have also been stoned to death if that is the prescribed punishment - it applies to both men and women.

Yes, 50 lashes has been prescribed as a punishment for slave women before.

 

[Shia Islam]

My dear fellow brother.
If I were to tell a lie in quoting the Quran, I will be the first to apologise.
Lets see what you are using as an example where I am misquoting the Quran.
"if you do force her into prostitution to receive worldly gain for a comfortable life, Allah is all forgiving (for her)"
But why do you allow yourself to add words to the Quran?
That is not in the Quran at all!
Go to Corpus Quran to get the correct translation, and forget your Tafseer that are a whitewash of the Quran my friend.
Here is the link so you can see I am not somehow "Misunderstanding" what Allah is "clearly" telling Muhammad how to treat his sex slaves.

The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran
The verse say: And Whoever compels them, then indeed, Allah after their compulsion is oft forgiving, Most Mercyfull.
Now, you can Tafseer as much as you want to, the verse in Arabic does not say Allah will forgive the female slaves in posession of a Muslim.
it says "CLEARLY" Whoever compells them, Allah is oft forgiving!

Secondly, If you read the whole verse, you will see that Allah says, do not compel your female slaves into prostitution so you can gain money...But if they were compeled, Allah is all mercyfull and forgiving.
Allah speaks to Muhammad and the men who owns female captiveshere, not to the girls who were pimped!
Only if you insert the words "To Them" does the meaning change from the Slave keeper to the girl who were forced into prostitution.
Anyhow, if you say I am Anti- Islam, you are correct.
The Quran is the most hatefull book on earth, and as you yourself witness, a book where Allah told Muhammad to decimate countries, take female captives, and in your hadith Muslims were instructed to rape these women.

Anyhow, I dont care about the Quran at all, but proved that the Bible condemns slavery, contrary to what Muslims and Atheists teaches.

Dear brother in humanity,
You admitted that you are anti Islam..
This is your choice..
What I am talking about is you can't free yourself from this sentiment when discussing Islam related topic..

You quoted a verse that all Muslims are in agreement about its meaning..
There are authentic hadiths talking about its meaning..
The companions of the prophet agreed about its meaning..
Even Sahih Muslim, the second most authentic book in Sunni Islam is quoting some of the companions of the prophet about its meaning..
The Shiates also have hadiths about its meaning..
And you insist to ignore what Muslims think about the meaning of their Quran and want to enforce you own understanding..
Here is one hadith talking about the meaning of the verse:

Jabir reported: Abdullah ibn Ubayy would say to his servant girl, “Go earn us something from prostitution.” Then, Allah Almighty revealed, “Do not compel your slave girls to prostitution if they desire chastity, seeking thereby the interests of worldly life. If someone compels them, Allah is forgiving and merciful to them after their compulsion.” (24:33)

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.

Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Muslim

عَنْ جَابِرٍ قَالَ كَانَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أُبَيٍّ ابْنُ سَلُولَ يَقُولُ لِجَارِيَةٍ لَهُ اذْهَبِي فَابْغِينَا شَيْئًا فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَلَا تُكْرِهُوا فَتَيَاتِكُمْ عَلَى الْبِغَاءِ إِنْ أَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِتَبْتَغُوا عَرَضَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَمَنْ يُكْرِهْهُنَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِكْرَاهِهِنَّ لَهُنَّ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

3029 صحيح مسلم كتاب التفسير باب في قوله تعالى ولا تكرهوا فتياتكم على البغاء

Keep in mind that the arabic pronoun لهن was used in the Hadith, which is used when referring to females exclusively.

Then your post shows that you pointed out to another topic that you did not research
Can any reasonable person think that the small number of Arab bedouins who were ill equipped can end the Persian empire and defeat the Byzantines?!

One needs to do his or her homework before making such claims!

In few words.. the people of these two empires were stuck in never-ending wars between them..and were under great pressure because of the hefty taxes they were paying to their regimes and the wars have taken their toll from them..

Then islam came and called the people of these two empires, the people of the book..
Where they were given the option of having their lands and their own religion under the comditin of paying affordable Jizya tax..

So making a long story short, the people of the two empires have even welcomed the new arrivals and supported them..

Then you look at Mecca and Medina during that era..no construction were noticed there..

I don't want to write much..
But these wars presented the biggest chance for the emancipation of the slaves..as the two empires were based in an inhumane system of slavery..and the slaves can have their freedom at that time by leaving the two empires and converting to islam.

In addition, you insist to ignore that slavery was the practice of the world long before the advent of Islam..

And the teachings of Islam of encouraging freeing the slaves means the eventual end of slavery.

One may ask why didn't Islam directly issue a law ending slavery?!

The answer is that the problem is not that simple..it was enrooted culture where the systems were depening on slavery..
Such a declaration would cause unimagined atrocities..
And the slaves would become the biggest victims.

Finally it must be emphasized that in Islam there is also the system of al-Mukatabah, which enabled slaves to work and pay their masters to gain their freedom.

With the first installment that a slave pays to his master, the slave becomes partially free!

That's it. And sorry for the late reply..

 

[SA Huguenot]

Dear brother in humanity,
You admitted that you are anti Islam..
This is your choice..
What I am talking about is you can't free yourself from this sentiment when discussing Islam related topic..

You quoted a verse that all Muslims are in agreement about its meaning..
There are authentic hadiths talking about its meaning..
The companions of the prophet agreed about its meaning..
Even Sahih Muslim, the second most authentic book in Sunni Islam is quoting some of the companions of the prophet about its meaning..
The Shiates also have hadiths about its meaning..
And you insist to ignore what Muslims think about the meaning of their Quran and want to enforce you own understanding..
Here is one hadith talking about the meaning of the verse:

Jabir reported: Abdullah ibn Ubayy would say to his servant girl, “Go earn us something from prostitution.” Then, Allah Almighty revealed, “Do not compel your slave girls to prostitution if they desire chastity, seeking thereby the interests of worldly life. If someone compels them, Allah is forgiving and merciful to them after their compulsion.” (24:33)

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.

Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Muslim

عَنْ جَابِرٍ قَالَ كَانَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أُبَيٍّ ابْنُ سَلُولَ يَقُولُ لِجَارِيَةٍ لَهُ اذْهَبِي فَابْغِينَا شَيْئًا فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَلَا تُكْرِهُوا فَتَيَاتِكُمْ عَلَى الْبِغَاءِ إِنْ أَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِتَبْتَغُوا عَرَضَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَمَنْ يُكْرِهْهُنَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِكْرَاهِهِنَّ لَهُنَّ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

3029 صحيح مسلم كتاب التفسير باب في قوله تعالى ولا تكرهوا فتياتكم على البغاء

Keep in mind that the arabic pronoun لهن was used in the Hadith, which is used when referring to females exclusively.

Then your post shows that you pointed out to another topic that you did not research
Can any reasonable person think that the small number of Arab bedouins who were ill equipped can end the Persian empire and defeat the Byzantines?!

One needs to do his or her homework before making such claims!

In few words.. the people of these two empires were stuck in never-ending wars between them..and were under great pressure because of the hefty taxes they were paying to their regimes and the wars have taken their toll from them..

Then islam came and called the people of these two empires, the people of the book..
Where they were given the option of having their lands and their own religion under the comditin of paying affordable Jizya tax..

So making a long story short, the people of the two empires have even welcomed the new arrivals and supported them..

Then you look at Mecca and Medina during that era..no construction were noticed there..

I don't want to write much..
But these wars presented the biggest chance for the emancipation of the slaves..as the two empires were based in an inhumane system of slavery..and the slaves can have their freedom at that time by leaving the two empires and converting to islam.

In addition, you insist to ignore that slavery was the practice of the world long before the advent of Islam..

And the teachings of Islam of encouraging freeing the slaves means the eventual end of slavery.

One may ask why didn't Islam directly issue a law ending slavery?!

The answer is that the problem is not that simple..it was enrooted culture where the systems were depening on slavery..
Such a declaration would cause unimagined atrocities..
And the slaves would become the biggest victims.

Finally it must be emphasized that in Islam there is also the system of al-Mukatabah, which enabled slaves to work and pay their masters to gain their freedom.

With the first installment that a slave pays to his master, the slave becomes partially free!

That's it. And sorry for the late reply..

OK, so sahee Islam is your source?
200 years after Muhammad?
Well, this was when the Muslims started to whitewash the terrible things the Quran says!

 

[Shia Islam]

OK, so sahee Islam is your source?
200 years after Muhammad?
Well, this was when the Muslims started to whitewash the terrible things the Quran says!

Hi,
As a shia Muslim, I would say that the prohibition of writing the prophet's sayings by the first two caliphs is among our arguments against the Sunnis.

With respect to all our Sunni brothers and sisters, we believe that it played a major role in hijacking Islam.

However, the Shiites have the Imams who they believe to have been appointed by God in the same way that the prophets are appointed, where prophets have their successors.

On the other hand, this doesn't mean that all the Sunni Hadith are wrong and can't be proven. As of the Shiite's hadith, we accept the Hadith narrated by our imams.

Finally, it is clear that you haven't read the Quran. And based on your own confessed anti Islam sentiment, it doesn't look that you can read the Quran and have an unbiased opinion regarding it.

Best regards

 

[sooda]

David Livingstone made elaborate mentions on the Arab slave trade in Africa explaining how "Black Muslim tribes" attacked and captured their rivals and removed them to the Ivory coast, Dar es Salam etc.
Today you still have the same demography in Nigeria, Etiopia, Mali and even as far south as the DRC where the Northern tribes are predominantly Muslim, and the Southern other religion.
Even in Kenia the capture of slaves are still practiced by Boko Haram.

Any person who think the Africans were caught by Portuguese, English or Dutch, are not aware of the above facts that the western countries puschased these slaves from MUSLIMS!

Slavery in South Africa | South African History Online
https://www.sahistory.org.za/topic/slavery-south-africa

The abolition of slavery in South Africa. The Abolition of Slavery Act ended slavery in the Cape officially in 1834.

The more than 35 000 slaves that had been imported into South Africa from India, Ceylon, Malaysia and elsewhere were officially freed, although they were still bonded to their old masters for four years through a feudal system of "apprenticeship".

 

[sooda]

Dear brother in humanity,
You admitted that you are anti Islam..
This is your choice..
What I am talking about is you can't free yourself from this sentiment when discussing Islam related topic..

You quoted a verse that all Muslims are in agreement about its meaning..
There are authentic hadiths talking about its meaning..
The companions of the prophet agreed about its meaning..
Even Sahih Muslim, the second most authentic book in Sunni Islam is quoting some of the companions of the prophet about its meaning..
The Shiates also have hadiths about its meaning..
And you insist to ignore what Muslims think about the meaning of their Quran and want to enforce you own understanding..
Here is one hadith talking about the meaning of the verse:

Jabir reported: Abdullah ibn Ubayy would say to his servant girl, “Go earn us something from prostitution.” Then, Allah Almighty revealed, “Do not compel your slave girls to prostitution if they desire chastity, seeking thereby the interests of worldly life. If someone compels them, Allah is forgiving and merciful to them after their compulsion.” (24:33)

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.

Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Muslim

عَنْ جَابِرٍ قَالَ كَانَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أُبَيٍّ ابْنُ سَلُولَ يَقُولُ لِجَارِيَةٍ لَهُ اذْهَبِي فَابْغِينَا شَيْئًا فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَلَا تُكْرِهُوا فَتَيَاتِكُمْ عَلَى الْبِغَاءِ إِنْ أَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِتَبْتَغُوا عَرَضَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَمَنْ يُكْرِهْهُنَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِكْرَاهِهِنَّ لَهُنَّ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

3029 صحيح مسلم كتاب التفسير باب في قوله تعالى ولا تكرهوا فتياتكم على البغاء

Keep in mind that the arabic pronoun لهن was used in the Hadith, which is used when referring to females exclusively.

Then your post shows that you pointed out to another topic that you did not research
Can any reasonable person think that the small number of Arab bedouins who were ill equipped can end the Persian empire and defeat the Byzantines?!

One needs to do his or her homework before making such claims!

In few words.. the people of these two empires were stuck in never-ending wars between them..and were under great pressure because of the hefty taxes they were paying to their regimes and the wars have taken their toll from them..

Then islam came and called the people of these two empires, the people of the book..
Where they were given the option of having their lands and their own religion under the comditin of paying affordable Jizya tax..

So making a long story short, the people of the two empires have even welcomed the new arrivals and supported them..

Then you look at Mecca and Medina during that era..no construction were noticed there..

I don't want to write much..
But these wars presented the biggest chance for the emancipation of the slaves..as the two empires were based in an inhumane system of slavery..and the slaves can have their freedom at that time by leaving the two empires and converting to islam.

In addition, you insist to ignore that slavery was the practice of the world long before the advent of Islam..

And the teachings of Islam of encouraging freeing the slaves means the eventual end of slavery.

One may ask why didn't Islam directly issue a law ending slavery?!

The answer is that the problem is not that simple..it was enrooted culture where the systems were depening on slavery..
Such a declaration would cause unimagined atrocities..
And the slaves would become the biggest victims.

Finally it must be emphasized that in Islam there is also the system of al-Mukatabah, which enabled slaves to work and pay their masters to gain their freedom.

With the first installment that a slave pays to his master, the slave becomes partially free!

That's it. And sorry for the late reply..

What period are you talking about in Mecca and Medina?

 

[SA Huguenot]

Dear brother in humanity,
You admitted that you are anti Islam..
This is your choice..
What I am talking about is you can't free yourself from this sentiment when discussing Islam related topic..

You quoted a verse that all Muslims are in agreement about its meaning..
There are authentic hadiths talking about its meaning..
The companions of the prophet agreed about its meaning..
Even Sahih Muslim, the second most authentic book in Sunni Islam is quoting some of the companions of the prophet about its meaning..
The Shiates also have hadiths about its meaning..
And you insist to ignore what Muslims think about the meaning of their Quran and want to enforce you own understanding..
Here is one hadith talking about the meaning of the verse:

Jabir reported: Abdullah ibn Ubayy would say to his servant girl, “Go earn us something from prostitution.” Then, Allah Almighty revealed, “Do not compel your slave girls to prostitution if they desire chastity, seeking thereby the interests of worldly life. If someone compels them, Allah is forgiving and merciful to them after their compulsion.” (24:33)

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.

Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Muslim

عَنْ جَابِرٍ قَالَ كَانَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أُبَيٍّ ابْنُ سَلُولَ يَقُولُ لِجَارِيَةٍ لَهُ اذْهَبِي فَابْغِينَا شَيْئًا فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَلَا تُكْرِهُوا فَتَيَاتِكُمْ عَلَى الْبِغَاءِ إِنْ أَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِتَبْتَغُوا عَرَضَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَمَنْ يُكْرِهْهُنَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِكْرَاهِهِنَّ لَهُنَّ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

3029 صحيح مسلم كتاب التفسير باب في قوله تعالى ولا تكرهوا فتياتكم على البغاء

Keep in mind that the arabic pronoun لهن was used in the Hadith, which is used when referring to females exclusively.

Then your post shows that you pointed out to another topic that you did not research
Can any reasonable person think that the small number of Arab bedouins who were ill equipped can end the Persian empire and defeat the Byzantines?!

One needs to do his or her homework before making such claims!

In few words.. the people of these two empires were stuck in never-ending wars between them..and were under great pressure because of the hefty taxes they were paying to their regimes and the wars have taken their toll from them..

Then islam came and called the people of these two empires, the people of the book..
Where they were given the option of having their lands and their own religion under the comditin of paying affordable Jizya tax..

So making a long story short, the people of the two empires have even welcomed the new arrivals and supported them..

Then you look at Mecca and Medina during that era..no construction were noticed there..

I don't want to write much..
But these wars presented the biggest chance for the emancipation of the slaves..as the two empires were based in an inhumane system of slavery..and the slaves can have their freedom at that time by leaving the two empires and converting to islam.

In addition, you insist to ignore that slavery was the practice of the world long before the advent of Islam..

And the teachings of Islam of encouraging freeing the slaves means the eventual end of slavery.

One may ask why didn't Islam directly issue a law ending slavery?!

The answer is that the problem is not that simple..it was enrooted culture where the systems were depening on slavery..
Such a declaration would cause unimagined atrocities..
And the slaves would become the biggest victims.

Finally it must be emphasized that in Islam there is also the system of al-Mukatabah, which enabled slaves to work and pay their masters to gain their freedom.

With the first installment that a slave pays to his master, the slave becomes partially free!

That's it. And sorry for the late reply..

OK, so lets conclude on my statement.
The Quran condoned slavery, the Bible never!
Thanks for your your above reply that actually proves the fact that the Quran was instructing slavery!
Greetings

 

[Shia Islam]

OK, so lets conclude on my statement.
The Quran condoned slavery, the Bible never!
Thanks for your your above reply that actually proves the fact that the Quran was instructing slavery!
Greetings

You have chosen for Yourself to conclude with a false claim about a book that you admitted that you have not read. Any reasonable person can tell you that this is not a logical decision.

As the other side, and especially if he has read that book many times, can easily pick a part from it and post it here so that everybody could see how wrong your claim was. And this is what I am going to conclude with here.

However I would like first to say that as of your claim regarding the bible, although I have studied the bible, I did not find myself interested in replying to your claim regarding its stance from slavery. Nevertheless, most of our honorable members here in RF have reads the bile and can reply to your claim.

Then, I would like to say that we as Muslims don’t think of those who show anti Islam positions equally, as their stance my be traced to different drives, where some of them may do so because of their lack of knowledge about Islam, or they may have been influenced by false propaganda, or even by the acts of the deviant terrorist groups for instance, who claim to represent Islam. Thant is why I think that it is your right that I give you a small advice. And don’t feel arrogant to take an advice from anybody.

We all need to hear the advice of other people in some situations. So please accept my advice with an open heart, as we are all nothing more than poor humans!

And here is my advice:

Never decide to be against a religion without being absolutely certain that it is a false religion!

Good luck.

And here is the Quranic part (small Surah) that I talked about above:

"I swear by this city (Makkah) [..] Verily, We have created man in toil. Thinks he that none can overcome him? He says (boastfully): "I have wasted wealth in abundance!" Thinks he that none sees him? Have We not made for him a pair of eyes? And a tongue and a pair of lips? And shown him the two ways (good and evil)? But he has made no effort to pass on the path that is steep. And what will make you know the path that is steep? It is the freeing of a slave. Or giving food in a day of hunger (famine), To an orphan near of kin. Or to a Miskin (poor) afflicted with misery. Then he became one of those who believed, and recommended one another to perseverance and patience, and (also) recommended one another to pity and compassion. They are those on the Right Hand (the dwellers of Paradise), But those who disbelieved in Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.), they are those on the Left Hand (the dwellers of Hell). The Fire will be shut over them (i.e. they will be enveloped by the Fire without any opening or window or outlet." Quran: 90, Surah Al-Balad (The City).