At a time when Western people are constantly warned to speak respectfully of Muhammad, or else offended Muslims might respond with violence — to the shame and blame of those who exercise their freedom of expression — consider what Muslims regularly say about the things non-Muslims hold dear.
Recently during his televised Arabic-language program, Dr. Salem Abdul Galil — previously deputy minister of Egypt’s religious endowments for preaching — gleefully declared that, among other Biblical women (Moses’ sister and Pharaoh’s wife), “our prophet Muhammad — prayers and peace be upon him — will be married to Mary the Virgin in paradise.” (Note: the Arabic word for “marriage” denotes “legal sexual relations” and is devoid of Western, “romantic,” or Platonic connotations.)
Where did Galil — this governmental official who also holds that Muslims can wear the hated crucifix to deceive Christians — get this idea? As usual, from Muhammad himself. In a hadith that was deemed reliable enough to be included in the renowned Ibn Kathir’s corpus, Muhammad declared that “Allah will wed me in paradise to Mary, Daughter of Imran”[1] (whom Muslims identify with Jesus’ mother).
Thus, Eulogius of Cordoba, an indigenous Christian of Muslim-occupied Spain, once wrote, “I will not repeat the sacrilege which that impure dog [Muhammad] dared proffer about the Blessed Virgin, Queen of the World, holy mother of our venerable Lord and Savior. He claimed that in the next world he would deflower her.”
As usual, it was Eulogius’ offensive words about Muhammad — and not the latter’s offensive words about Mary — that had dire consequences: he, as well as many other Spanish Christians vociferously critical of Muhammad, were found guilty of speaking against Islam and publicly tortured and executed in “Golden Age” Cordoba in 859.
Not only do many Western academics suppress or whitewash such historical anecdotes of Muslim persecution of Christians, but some — whether intentionally or out of ignorance — warp them in an effort to portray Christian victims of Islam as Christian persecutors of Islam. Thus, after quoting Eulogius’ aforementioned lament against Muhammad, John V. Tolan, a professor and member of Academia Europaea, writes:
This outrageous claim [that Muhammad will marry Mary], it seems, is Eulogius’s invention; I know of no other Christian polemicist who makes this accusation against Muhammad. Eulogius fabricates lies designed to shock his Christian reader. This way, even those elements of Islam that resemble Christianity (such as reverence of Jesus and his virgin mother) are deformed and blackened, so as to prevent the Christian from admiring anything about the Muslim other. The goal is to inspire hatred for the “oppressors” …. Eulogius sets out to show that the Muslim is not a friend but a potential rapist of Christ’s virgins (Saracens: Islam in the Medieval European Imagination, p.93).
As already seen, however, it was Muhammad himself — not any “Christian polemicist” — who claimed that Mary would be his eternal concubine. But facts apparently don’t matter to academics like Tolan, who are more eager to demonize Eulogius in an effort to exonerate the “offended” Muslims who slaughtered him.
Putting real or feigned history aside, let’s return to modern day Egypt and consider why Dr. Galil — a governmental official described as a “moderate,” a bridge-builder between Muslims and Christians — would openly say what he knows millions of Orthodox Christians in Egypt will find repugnant: that Christ’s mother would be given to — and have sex with — what Christians deem a false prophet?
To be sure, many Egyptian Christians did express outrage, including on social media, though none responded with violence. Had a leading Christian cleric, or even a little Coptic boy, claimed that Aisha — Muhammad’s favorite wife, who holds a venerated place in Sunni tradition — will be married to and have sex with a false prophet, he would have been beaten and, if not killed in the process, imprisoned under Egypt’s “anti -defamation of religions” law, which supposedly protects both Islam and Christianity.
But as every Muslim and Christian knows, Egypt’s “anti-defamation of religions” law — which has been responsible for the arrest and punishment of many Copts accused of mocking Islam on social media — is in reality an anti-defamation of Islam law. Things held sacred by Christians are free game — including, apparently, for “moderate” governmental officials.
After all, Islam — beginning with its prophet and all throughout its scriptures — is built on defaming non-Muslims and their religions, Judaism and Christianity in particular. So how can repeating what Islam holds to be true ever be deemed blasphemous by Muslims — sensitivities of infidels be damned?
[1] From al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr, an early collection of hadith compiled by Imam Tabarani.
james.mich says
“There, Muslims regularly threw this fantasy in the face of Catholic and Orthodox Christians who venerated Mary as the “Eternal Virgin.””
Not “eternal Virgin” – “Ever-Virgin” would be better, for Our Lady is not eternal. God the Most Holy Trinity is alone Eternal – the virginity of Our Lady is perpetual: before, during, and after the Conception and Birth of her Divine Son, Who Is the Word of God made flesh, ‘God-with-us’. The perpetuity of the virginity of Our Lady is well-expressed by the Greek word *aeiparthenos*, “ever-virgin’.
There is no doubt in Catholic or Orthodox theology and devotion, nor in any other, that Our Lady is a creature of God, and in no way God – an absurdity worth mentioning only because this charge is sometimes made against those who honour her as the ever-virgin Mother of God, by others than Muslims (though this absurd idea appears to have entered the Koran).
Musalmaanmasala says
Could not have put it in a better light.
The Koran and Mohammed exists to vilify Christianity.
Pity that leaders who call themselves “Christians” pander to this evil idealogy which thrives on lies and deceit.
gabi says
Islam = Satan’s world! Quran = Satan’s words! Sharia = Satan’s laws!
There is still time for Muslims to come in their senses and become Christians – or whatever, but not Satan’s sons!
Yousef says
Touche Gabi…
One of the most important strategies in fighting off Islamic infiltration, conquest and supremacy (along with banning it as seditious poltical cult and deporting its adherents to back to the 3rd world) is exposing Islam as a nasty deception of Satan from the pit off darkness and DERAILING as many of its intelligent and honest victims to the light of Jesus as possible.. Satanic Allah and Mo hates this more then anything.
It is not easy, they are indoctrinated into the satanic cult from birth. They would rather lie and con the whole world rather then admit to being conned. But Darkness cannot outshine the light of Christ and the truth should and must prevail. The resources and information is all out there and available, it requires intellectual honesty and bravery but it can be done.
Tjhawk says
Mohammed deserves respect like:
A 9 year old deserves a brutal rape
A nightclub deserves a massacre
An embassy deserves a car bomb
A convicted terrorist deserves a koran
An off duty soldier deserves a throat slashing
An airplane deserves a hijacking
Etc. etc. etc. ……………………………………
1reader says
Tjhawk – Thumbs up!
no_one says
In some eastern countries the biggest offense is to say such things about someones mother. It is like swearing the mother. Muslims swear the Mother of Christian God, Jesus. That is extremely offensive, but muslims and their allies couldn’t care less. They know Christians are not aggressive and that Christian God told them not to kill, so they offend Christians all they want.
Angemon says
Yup, the martyrs of Corboba :
http://libro.uca.edu/martyrs/martyrs.htm
marina says
Blessed Mary and vile Mo should not be uttered in the same sentence. And this is the man that muzlems worship.Despicable
1reader says
Gives a new meaning to Mo Fo, eh?
Anthony says
Okay, now I am confused, didn’t Mary have children normally after Jesus?? James, Joses (or Joseph), Judas, and Simon and some unidentified sisters? How can she still be a virgin?
no_one says
These are children of Joseph from a previous marriage.
somehistory says
If that were true, they would have had to have been older than Jesus, Joseph would have been a whole lot older than Mary, and when they went to Bethlehem for the Roman commanded census, there would have been more than just Joseph and Mary traveling, and more than three in the manger after Jesus was born there.
Mary had other children as women do. She was special, but she did lead the life of a human, and she was married.
mk says
You are right in saying that Mary had other children after Jesus and their legal and biological father was Joseph, Mary’s husband. That is what the scriptures support.
somehistory says
She did, but Catholics (and perhaps others) believe that Mary never had normal marriage relations with Joseph or that she had children.
When Jesus was hanging, and John and His mother, Mary, were there, He told John, “Behold, your mother,” because Jesus’ brothers had not yet put faith in Him as they would later do.
Whether or not Mary ever gave birth to another child, she still deserves respect as the mother of our Lord, the one chosen by God Himself.
This disgusting claim by moslims, mimicking their fake prophet,, will be dealt with by Christ when He throws them into the pit of destruction.
gravenimage says
In some traditions Mary and Joseph did indeed have children together after the birth of Jesus–in other traditions, she remained a virgin.
Ginger says
Islam, the cult of priapism.
1reader says
Wow, this is a new low. Ya learn something new everyday!
mortimer says
Mohammed’s wet dream about the Virgin Mary is one of the SICKEST, REVOLTING stories of Islam.
Mohammed’s wet dream about the Virgin Mary proves Islam is the work of depraved sex addict.
mortimer says
John V. Tolan, a professor and member of Academia Europaea was intellectually dishonest or unscholarly or both.
readers may be wondering what does this have to do with Mary, the mother of our risen Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? Here is a quotation from Ibn Kathir which helps to put things in perspective:
“The Messenger of God … said, ‘God MARRIED ME IN PARADISE TO MARY THE DAUGHTER OF ‘IMRAN and to the wife of Pharaoh and the sister of Moses.’ (Tabarani)” (Ibn Kathir, Qisas al-Anbiya [Cairo: Dar al-Kutub, 1968/1388], p. 381- as cited in Aliah Schleifer’s Mary The Blessed Virgin of Islam [Fons Vitae; ISBN: 1887752021; July 1, 1998], p. 64)
The late Iranian Islamic scholar, Ali Dashti, wrote:
… According to the Cambridge Tafsir, the word thayyebat (widows or divorcees) refers to Pharaoh’s wife Asiya, and the word virgins (abkar) refers to Jesus’ mother Mary, both of whom are waiting to be married to the Prophet Mohammad in heaven. (Dashti, 23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad [Mazda Publishers, Costa Mesa, CA 1994], p. 138)
Sibila says
What does the Holy Father Frances say on that?
Jenny H says
He doesn’t seem to have any idea of the theological and specific physical threats against Christianity and the Vatican (symbol to Islam of all remaining unconquered parts of Christianity), nor any knowledge of or interest in the historical cruelties of Islam against non-muslims He doesn’t seem to have any interest in protecting and defending persecuted Christians of any type.
I’m not sure how good his knowledge of Catholic Doctrine is. He’s probably fine with this disgusting idea..
james.mich says
The CC has for over 50 years had a much more benign notion of Islam than the facts warrant. Why ? I would guess as part of the re-action to the former, “negative”, approach to non-Catholic beliefs. Basically, Rome has over-compensated, and gone from being severely critical of Islam, to being nowhere no critical enough. Weariness may have sonething to do with it too.
And this overly benign, uncritical attitude is reflected in the utterances of Popes and other bishops; and it is official. So it is not going to be easy – simply as a matter of bureaucracy – for the official mind of the CC to change. The good news is, that there are hints of change – if not yet in Rome, where the need for change is greatest.
mortimer says
Muhammad said, “In heaven, Mary mother of Jesus, will be one of my wives.” – al-Siyuti (6/395)
“The Messenger of God … said, ‘God married me in paradise to Mary the daughter of ‘Imran and to the wife of Pharaoh and the sister of Moses.’” – Tabarani
somehistory says
moslms will say and do anything to insult those who worship the True God and put faith in His Son.
They are like gun fighters who want the hero to face them in a gun fight, and when the hero refuses their taunts, they trying slapping in the face, or grabbing an innocent woman or child to bring to harm, knowing that sooner or later, they will provoke him.
moslims are following their fake god, satan the devil. The devil tried intimidating Christ, made false claims about God, and then went after Christ’s disciples.
The devil is still busy today, busier than ever before, trying to cause God’s people to react and bring dishonor upon themselves and upon God Whom they are supposed to imitate in how they treat others.
This is a sick and evil ploy. Never would God give the one He specially chose to give birth to His Son on earth, to such as the evil, demonic, parasite of the desert, no matter how much that scum slug lusted for it.
That scum is dead…dead forever. he is not feeling anything, much less pleasure, and never will again. he is toast.
LilyDarcey says
Interesting that moslems envision Mo-ham-mud marrying the virgin Mary, and yet so many of them desecrate and destroy any pictures, painting and statuary of her.
james.mich says
If they regard her as a Muslimah, presumably it would follow from her being a (very pious) Muslimah that she would disapprove of any form of shirk – and since, if the Koran is to be be believed, some of the People of the Book go overboard in committing shirk in honouring her, she would – supposing her to be a Muslimah – presumably be horrified by being honoured with shirk. All the more when it involves making images of her. Therefore, Muslims are in fact honouring her by destroying images of her. And destroying images of anyone “associated” with Allah makes sense.
That, I suspect, is the thinking.
plaintruth says
I don’t know which is worse – muslims making this claim about Mary…or catholics worshiping her as co-redemptrix…
james.mich says
We don’t worship her – if by “worship” you mean, “honour as God”. In no way does the CC regard her as a female Christ, or as God, or as God’s equal. The title “Co-Redemptrix” is debatable and debated in the CC – it does not imply parity with Christ. but co-operation in the Redemption. Not in the same way as Christ, Who Is at once the Source and Mediator of all redemptiion, but in complete dependence on Him.
The fact that one has to make these distinctions is I think a sign that the idea, though it indicates a truth – that Christians are not purely passive in the application of the Redemption, and that Our Lady was not passive in this either – is, presently at least, too liable to distortion and misunderstanding to be officially taught as Catholic teaching. One cannot always avoid ruffling feathers when expressing what one holds as true – but neither should upset or unsettle people needlessly.
In a world where belief in God as revealed in Christ is so widely rejected, it may well be more important to emphasise Who Christ Is, rather than on who and what His mother is. Without Jesus Christ there is no redemption – so refinements like specifying the exact relation and manner of Our Lady to that work of redemption can probably be best left for calmer times.
Carolyne says
When Mary supposedly appears it is usually seen only by a young girl and in some sort of grotto with running water. She is also usually wearing a blue outfit of some kind.
And it seems to me that Catholics worship her in those places, but since I don’t believe in any of it, it doesn’t make any difference to me.
Let us consider that maybe Aisha, after Mohammed’s death (May pig sh*t be upon him) became a prostitute at a local oasis. She was, after all still a young woman since she was “Married” at six years old.
Dacritic says
Calling Muhammad a dog is an insult to dogs.
Carolyne says
You are absolutely right and I have asked my dog, “Charlie,” to ignore it.
Traveler says
I regularly follow this paper. I am just wondering how widely circulated this website is as it seems like the masses just don’t get it. This site need to be out front and center for the world to see..a wake up call…
gravenimage says
Many more people read than post here. Jihad Watch is regularly cited as one of the top ‘conservative’ sites.
BC says
The fact that Islam was invented by Mohammad, an ignorant camel driver who did not have enough knowledge to create his own religion and so plagiarised the religion of the Jews and Christians. The Quranic writings are nothing more than the bible tweaked to make Moh. look like a great prophet. The Night Ride is a clear example. He probably also thought a ‘religion’ crafted to be similar to the earlier ones and inclusive of many parts might get a favourable hearing. Unfortunately for him the Christians and Jews stuck firmly to their faiths, in spite of everything the Muslims did. So now they are back to physical conquest as in the days of the Islamic empire.
We can discount the visitations of Gabriel and the ‘conversations’ with ‘god’. ‘god; never talks to anyone
as there is no god!
BC says
Missed out is after fact
stan-in-usa says
Actually, the Koran has stories about people in the Bible derived from Gnostic writings which no sane person would have accepted as fact. Mohamed picked and choose what he wanted to be in the Koran, adding his excuses for murder, rape, & plundering to be justified. No wonder Muslims behave the way they do in countries they settle in. Mohamed and the Koran instructs Muslims to behave that way because Mohammed did the exact same things.
Carolyne says
I believe that today when people say they talk to God, they are usually sent away for mental treatment.
stan-in-usa says
These Muslims are on the same level of stupidity as the Catholics. They both claim that Mary was always a virgin during her life on earth, while the Bible clearly indicates that Jesus had (half) brothers and sisters, due to Joseph knowing (sexual relations with) Mary after Jesus was born. You can’t talk horse sense to donkeys.
Believer_in_Christ says
It is truly disheartening to hear (i.e., read) such demeaning diatribe towards fellow believers of our Lord and Savior – Jesus Christ. Please try to remember what holy scripture states about ‘Our’ Lady, Mary, mother of Jesus….
Catholics do not worship Mary, but do venerate her accordingly. With regard to her ever virgin status, please take the time to read the information at the following url:
https://www.catholic.com/tract/mary-ever-virgin
Carolyne says
I don’t understand this insistence on Mary’s virginity. After all, sexual intercourse is a perfectly normal human activity and there is nothing sinful about it so long as the participants are consenting to it. What difference could it possibly make if Mary was a perpetual virgin?
There exists an ossuary with the inscription “James, the brother of Jesus.” Some scholars believe it to be authentic and some don’t so this belief in Mary being a virgin forever is not a universal Christian belief.
james.mich says
Theologically, it’s important. Doctrines about her – and this cannot be emphasised enough – are (to use a Jewish term) like “a fence around the Torah”; except they are “a fence around Christ”: that is, they witness to Him. The doctrine of her Perpetual Virginity is no exception. Everything about her points to Him. FWIW, Catholic teaching is not based on Scripture – it is believed as true because the Apostolic Church holding the Apostolic Faith holds and teaches the teaching: the Scriptures witness to the teaching, but are not the foundation of the teaching.
There is no implication that either marriage, or procreation within marriage, is sinful. If either of them were sinful, her perpetual virginity would lose much of its value – virginity ‘for the sake of the Kingdom’, and as a sign of the Kingdom, is valuable precisely because it is the giving up, for the sake of the Kingdom of God, of something that is itself a good thing. There is nothing special in giving up something bad – for that, is something all of us must do. Only giving up what is good is praiseworthy – to give up what is evil is a duty to God. If the CC thought marriage or procreation within marriage were bad, why would the CC hold that Matrimony is a sacrament, and that procreation is one of its ends ?
The texts about the brothers and sisters of Christ can be taken as referring to uterine brothers and sisters, or to half-brothers and sisters, or to remoter relatives. It is true that not all Christians believe that in the perpetual virginity of Our Lady. However, the Churches representing the oldest and largest Christian bodies do – as did several of the first Reformers. These last cannot be accused of any undue bias in favour of Catholicism, so if they believed in the perpetual virginity of Our Lady, Catholics are not being adventurous in doing so.
The texts about the brothers and sisters of Our Lord are very important – one of the truths they underline is that even ties of blood and family cannot be allowed to come before the Kingdom of God, and that the true family of Jesus is the community of those who do His Father’s Will.
Carolyne says
I understand what you are saying and respect your belief, but didn’t St Paul say that it is better to remain unmarried? Doesn’t that indicate that there is something wrong with sex? Anyway, he was a misognist . “Women must be silent church.”. Really? I once walked out of a service at St Paul’s in London because the minister was approving of this. And I wasn’t silent. My heels were clicking on that beautiful black and white marble floor.
Carolyne says
“Silent IN church” I meant to say as did St Paul who, by the way never met a living Christ and wasn’t a disciple.
gravenimage says
With respect, I don’t think this is the place for Christians to argue–this story is about Muslims humiliating and appropriating Christian figures, and this is important to every Christian–indeed, to every free person.
Susette says
Goofy muhammed proves that his revelations were auditory hallucinations when he professes heaven to contain “rewards” that are of an earthly nature, …wine, women and song… mansions and gardens, and my personal favorite, endless food and no need to urinate and defecate. Also, no menstruating females and all will have unbroken hymens. No wonder he fantasizes about the Blessed Virgin…he couldn’t have her and since he professes to the the first to enter the highest gate in Paradise, he will certainly lust after her. Nothing in islam is of a Spiritual Nature…this life or the afterlife. What a disgusting, sex-obsessed creature mohammed was.
ninetyninepct says
Sorry Ibrahim – Mohamed is happy raping goats and pigs. He doesn’t like women. Why are Muslim’s entire lives concentrated on sex and violence? Could it be Islam is a so called “religion” of ripping off a piece? Do all Muslim men want to have sex with anything that moves?
This pig lover has insulted Christianity and now i have to go out and drive over a herd of Muslims?
Carolyne says
Islam does seem to be obsessed with sex. Almost every precept has something to do with sexually possessing women, sometimes as slaves. These people are extremely ill.
Brad says
This guy is a nutcase, just like the pervert mohammed that he worships. Religions don’t destroy like this one, its nothing more than a brainwashing cult.
Noel says
I’m not surprised that Muslims are preoccupied with sex. They are not allowed to dance, listen to or create music, drink alcohol, make jokes or enjoy themselves or have any fun – except for sex.