In Indianapolis, a billboard was recently put up that has caused quite a stir.
It has been denounced as an “anti-Islam” billboard, because it lists six things about “the Perfect Man” (a clear reference to Muhammad, known in Islam as al-insan al-kamil, the Perfect Man), who (I quote verbatim the billboard): “1) married 6-year old 2) slave owner and dealer 3) rapist 4) 13 wives, 11 at a time 5) beheaded 600 Jews in one day 6) tortured and killed unbelievers.”
The Board of Rabbis of Indiana was outraged by this billboard, and produced a collective letter denouncing it:
The Indiana Board of Rabbis denounces the anonymously posted billboard on Interstate 465, which attacks Islam by denigrating its prophet. We repudiate the billboard’s reference to Jews as a justification for its disparaging message.
Jewish tradition recognizes the vast power of words to create or destroy. The Jewish sages of old likened “the evil tongue” to murder. The right to free speech in America does not give license to the dissemination of hatred.
We call for the billboard’s immediate removal. We stand in solidarity and friendship with our Hoosier sisters and brothers who are Muslim. And we will continue to promote tolerance, understanding and good will among all the faith communities in our state.
So the rabbis, while self-righteously declaring that “We stand in solidarity and friendship with our Hoosier sisters and brothers who are Muslim,” did not address any of the six charges made against Muhammad, nothing about their falsehood or their truth, did not try to refute even one, as if to do so were unnecessary. But they did “call for the billboard’s immediate removal,” a nice demonstration of their commitment to free speech. And there was this bizarre claim: “We repudiate the billboard’s reference to Jews as a justification for its disparaging message.” The reference to Jews was this: Muhammad “beheaded 600 Jews in one day.” That was indeed the case, as everyone who has read the passages about the Banu Qurayza in Ibn Ishaq’s biography, or in the sahih (authentic) hadiths, knows. In Yathrib (Medina), Muhammad had 600 to 900 male members of the Banu Qurayza, a Jewish tribe, bound and then beheaded, all in one day. He was present throughout.
The rabbis interpreted the mention of a massacre of Jews as something it clearly wasn’t intended to be — they described it as being exploited as “justification for its [the billboard’s] disparaging message.” No, it wasn’t meant as “justification” It was an important example of Muhammad at his murderous worst. Why shouldn’t it be mentioned? These rabbis must believe that one should never overlook antisemitic murders — except, it appears, if the murders are ordered by Muhammad, who was surely one of history’s most influential antisemites. What would they have thought if someone listing Muhammad’s deplorable acts had left out any mention of his anti-Jewish atrocities? Would that have pleased them? Wouldn’t such an omission have outraged the rabbis of Indiana? Or are they so far gone that any mention of Muhammad’s anti-Jewish acts would have infuriated them, as “not helpful under the present circumstances of rampant islamophobia”?
What those rabbis did not do is claim that they had carefully looked into the claims on the billboard,, and found them without foundation, nor did they give any indication that they would be interested in finding out whether those charges were true. It was the mere making of them that provoked their outrage. Perhaps they assumed that they all had to be false, for how could Muslims revere as the “Perfect Man” someone who had done the following: married a six-year old; had a total of 13 wives, 11 of them at one time; committed rape; beheaded (or had beheaded) 600 Jews; owned slaves; tortured and killed unbelievers? If those charges were true, what would that lead any sensible person to conclude about Islam? Still, one would like to know why those deeply distressed rabbis thought they had no responsibility, before calling for the billboard to be taken down, to do some research themselves, to see if one or more of those charges were true. Apparently they listen to a Higher Authority — and that Higher Authority is Muslim.
So let’s do what neither the rabbis, nor the reporters for the IndyStar, appear to have thought it necessary to undertake: that is, to find out what evidence, if any, there is for the six charges.
The first charge: did he “marry a 6-year-old”? Most Sunni scriptural sources accept that Aisha, the daughter of Muhammad’s friend Abu Bakr, was married to Muhammad when she was six, but continued to live with her parents until the age of nine, when she went to live with Muhammad and the marriage was consummated — that is, nine-year-old Aisha had sexual intercourse with Muhammad when he was 53. There are many sources in the Hadith for this. The most authoritative of all collections, the Sahih (authentic) Bukhari, states that Aisha was six years old when she married Muhammad, and nine years old when they consummated the marriage (Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64). Do the indignant rabbis even know who Bukhari was, or why his mention of Aisha’s marriage carries such great weight? Does their ignorance make them at all uneasy? Or do they not care?
The second charge is that Muhammad had a total of 13 wives, with eleven of them the most he had at any one time. The main source for this is the Sira (biography of Muhammad) of Ibn Ishaq. All Muslim authorities agree that Muhammad had at least eleven wives. See, for example, Anas bin Malik, who testified that “the Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.” But in total, over his lifetime, he had at least two other wives. Some Islamic sources even claim he had a total of fifteen wives. But the main point has been made. Muhammad took many wives (and in addition to his wives, he had several concubines at any one time), and allowed himself many more wives than he allowed his followers who, while polygamous, had to stop at four. The word “misogyny” comes to mind. And so does the word “hypocrisy.”
The third charge is that Muhammad committed rape. Is there evidence to back this up? It’s hard not to think that the only word for what he did when he forced himself on his slave girls, those women “whom his right hand possessed,” who were always available, is “rape.” But let’s consider just one such case, that of the beautiful Jewish girl, Saafiya, who was part of the booty Muhammad took when he raided the Khaybar Oasis. The same day that her father and uncle had been killed by Muhammad’s men, and her husband tortured to death in front of her, and all of her other male relatives also put to death, Muhammad had sexual intercourse with her. It’s related in the hadith of Muslim (who with Bukhari is considered to be the most trustworthy of hadith scholars): “That [same] day Saafiya’s husband was tortured and beheaded in front of her eyes, her father and brothers were killed, her sisters, cousins, and mother were given away to jihadis as booty and then Mohammed still wearing bloody clothes with the blood of her relatives, had sex with her.”
Would anyone describe what Muhammad did to Saafiya as consensual sex? Of course not. Yes, Muhammad raped Saafiya, and we can find in the hadith and sira other examples of his having non-consensual intercourse with women “whom his right hand possessed.” Muhammad was a rapist many times over. And how should we describe Muhammad’s intercourse with a nine-year-old girl? Was she capable of giving “consent” to that intercourse, or should we describe what he did with little Aisha as “rape”? Did the good rabbis of Indiana bother to look into this charge or did they regard it as so implausible — how could “the Perfect Man” also be a rapist? — that they felt there was no need to do so? What do they make of the story of Saafiyah? Or that of nine-year-old Aisha and 53-year-old Muhammad? Anything? Nothing?
The fourth charge on the billboard is that Muhammad “beheaded 600 Jews in one day.” This is a reference to the killing of all the adult males of the Jewish tribe of the Banu Qurayza in Yathrib (Medina). The Banu Qurayza had taken no side in the fight between Muhammad and the Meccans who besieged his forces in Medina. Nonetheless, once the siege was lifted, with the Meccans having withdrawn — thereby depriving Muhammad of the chance of booty — he ordered that the inoffensive Banu Qurayza be attacked. For 25 days Muhammad’s forces besieged the Jewish tribe until it finally surrendered. Muhammad then ordered that all males who had reached the age of puberty should be seized, bound with rope, and beheaded. Between 600 and 900 were killed. There is some evidence that Muhammad personally engaged in the slaughter. Not only does the earliest narrative bluntly say that the apostle “sent for them” and “made an end of them,” but there is also support for this in the Qur’an. Qur’an 33:26 says of the Qurayza, “some you slew, some you took captive.” The “captives” were the women and girls, taken as sex slaves. The Arabic “you” is in the plural, but the Quran is supposed to be Allah’s conversation with Muhammad, so it makes no sense that he would be excluded. In any case, to make the point again, just as we can say that “Saddam Hussein killed 182,000 Kurds” without meaning that he did so personally, it is perfectly understandable to say that Muhammad “beheaded 600 Jews” (Abu Dawud 4390). And in fact, over his life, Muhammad was responsible for the deaths of far more Jews than just those of the Banu Qurayza.
The fifth charge on the Indianapolis billboard is that Muhammad “tortured and killed unbelievers.” By that is clearly meant that he ordered that certain people be tortured and killed, not that he did it himself. One example of this is from an authoritative hadith collection, the Sahih Muslim:
“They were caught and brought to him (the Holy Prophet). He commanded about them, and (thus) their hands and feet were cut off and their eyes were gouged and then they were thrown in the sun, until they died.” (Sahih Muslim 4131). This account is also confirmed by at least three other narrations.
Another such example is that of Kinana of Khaybar, a Jewish man from whom Muhammad wanted to extract information about hidden treasure. Some of the treasure was given up by Kinana. But Muhammad suspected that more was hidden, and he ordered one of his followers to torture Kwinana until he revealed where the treasure was hidden: “‘Torture him until you extract what he has.’ So he [the follower] kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle [Muhammad] delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud.”
And there are so many other assassinations ordered by Muhammad, particularly of those who had mocked him, such as the poetess Asma bint Marwan, or sown doubt about him, as did the 120-year old Jewish poet Abu ‘Afak, or appeared to be disloyal to him, like still another Jewish poet, Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf — all three of them killed on Muhammad’s orders. The list of those he ordered to be murdered is very long (Bukhari 56:369, 4:241). So it’s true: Muhammad did have men and women killed, and some tortured as well. Would the rabbis of Indiana wish to exculpate Muhammad because he merely ordered people to be tortured and killed, and didn’t do it all himself? Didn’t we hear something of the sort from Adolf Eichmann?
The sixth charge is that Muhammad owned and traded in slaves. Could that possibly be true? Why, yes it could. In one famous hadith, he trades two black slaves he owned for one white slave whom he wanted to free:
There came a slave and pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves [whom Muhammad owned] , and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man) (Sahih Muslim 3901).
He also gave sex slaves to three followers who later succeeded him as caliph: “The apostle gave Ali a girl called Rayta; and he gave Uthman a girl called Zaynab; and he gave Umar a girl whom Umar gave to his son Abdullah.” (The two sources for this are Ibn Ishaq’s biography of Muhammad, and Ibn Kathir, the author of a celebrated commentary to the Qur’an). He encouraged his men to rape enslaved women (Abu Dawood 2150, Quran 4:24) and to take as many sex slaves from captured women as they wanted.
And even when Muslims concede that Muhammad was a slave-owner, in his defense they say that he urged better treatment for slaves, or they “contextualize” the slavery by saying that “it was the common practice of those times.” That may well have been, but it does not refute the charge that he bought, sold, traded, and captured slaves, without the slightest moral qualms.
Muhammad’s life was a succession of warfare, plundering, and killings. In the last ten years of his life, he engaged in 65 military campaigns and raids. He murderously practiced what he murderously preached: “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.” (Ibn Ishaq 992). He ordered the killing of captives taken in battle (Ibn Ishaq 451). He took female captives as sex slaves. He ordered the killing of those who mocked or spoke against him. He ordered the torture, before killing, of Kinana of Khaybar. He was ferociously against the Jews. What do the rabbis make of this history? I don’t think they make anything of it. I think they are deliberately refusing to learn about Muhammad, for fear of what they might find out. It’s an unbearable thought, that they might then have to take issue with, beg to differ from, even question entirely, the received version of Islam fed them by their “Hoosier sisters and brothers who are Muslim.”
Where does this leave us? It leaves us with all six of the charges leveled at Muhammad having textual support in one or more of the Islamic texts — Qur’an, Hadith (especially the “authentic” hadith of Bukhari and Muslim), and the Sira (the biography by Ibn Ishaq, as set down by Ibn Hisham), the history of Al-Tabari, the tafsir (commentary) of Ibn Kathir, and other islamically authoritative sources.
When the rabbis decided to publish their letter, demanding that the billboard be taken down, what did they know, and when did they know it?
ADDENDUM: I just received this email from the Jewish American Affairs Committee of Indiana:
I just wanted to inform you that our group, the Jewish American Affairs Committee of Indiana, did get a letter published in the Indy Star in response to the rabbis’ egregious letter. It was published in print form yesterday (6/18/17) (below):
As officers of the only statewide Jewish advocacy group in Indiana, we feel obligated to respond to the letter signed by 16 rabbis essentially demanding the silencing of any public reference to Islamic hatred of Jews. This message directly contradicts core Jewish traditions as well as fundamental American rights.
The rabbis would be well within reason to recognize historical Christian anti-Semitism, notwithstanding the fact that Christians are today among the very best friends and allies of the Jewish people and Israel. In contrast, Islamic hatred of Jews has not only existed since the founding of Islam but is by far the greatest contemporary global threat to the security of the Jewish people. The world’s most influential Muslim as ranked by a reputable Arab survey is Sheik Ahmed Al-Tayyeb, the grand Sheikh of Al Azhar University, the premier institution of Islamic learning. Sheikh Al-Tayyeb and his predecessors have all publicly professed what could only be described as odious anti-Semitism and argue that the core texts and traditions within Islam support their Jew hatred. These views are ubiquitous in the Muslim world. For example, a recent international poll from the Anti-Defamation League found the top 10 most anti-Semitic nations to be majority Muslim. The European Union reports that Muslims are about 30 times more likely to be responsible for anti-Semitic incidents than their non-Muslim counterparts. By whitewashing traditional and contemporary anti-Semitism, these rabbis reject the central Jewish priority that obligates them to defend Jewish lives.
In addition to spurning Jewish values, the rabbis also deny the fundamental American principle of freedom of speech. They write that “The right to free speech in America does not give license to the dissemination of hatred.” Their statement is patently false and directly contradicts the First Amendment, which allows even Muslim hate groups in the U.S. to disseminate anti-Semitic propaganda.
Elliot Bartky, President
Allon Friedman, Vice PresidentJewish American Affairs Committee of Indiana
Phil says
I wish that I could sincerely say that this is unbelievable in the face of what has been happening all over Europe and the US. But it is all too familiar.
James says
I wish those rabbits – rabbits, being the word – would apply the same reasoning to Adolf Hitler.
Since being nice about bad men is more important than garbage like, y’know, accuracy, truth, facts and honesty, why all this “unhelpful” stuff about 6 million Jews being killed in the Shoah ?
mortimer says
The rabbis are forgetting how badly Jews were treated by Muslims in the last 70 years. Maimonides lived under severe persecution in Islamic Spain. Maimonides had no false praise for Islam:
“… on account of our sins, God has cast us into the midst of this people, the nation of Ishmael [that is, Muslims], who persecute us severely, and who devise ways to harm us and to debase us…. No nation has ever done more harm to Israel. None has matched it in debasing and humiliating us. None has been able to reduce us as they have…. We have borne their imposed degradation, their lies, their absurdities, which are beyond human power to bear…. We have done as our sages of blessed memory have instructed us, bearing the lies and absurdities of Ishmael…. In spite of all this, we are not spared from the ferocity of their wickedness and their outbursts at any time. On the contrary, the more we suffer and choose to conciliate them, the more they choose to act belligerently toward us…”
SweetOlBob says
Maybe the Jews as a whole have been persecuted enough to manifest the “Stockholm Syndrome” on these poor, stupid, suicidal Rabbis.
For me, I’ll stand strong with the Jews that have had enough crap from the filthy muslims !
How can anyone be so ignorant and moronic as to protect people (?) that venerate a murderous pedophile and follow a barbaric book and religion (?) that COMMANDS the death or enslavement of everyone that doesn’t join them ?
Does the Torah do that ? Does the Bible ? These guys need to take a really cold shower and wake up !
Malcolm (South Afric) says
Is this the new form of vigilantes or representation, to form a bulwark against truth, open discussion,
Charli Main says
” we will continue to promote tolerance, understanding and good will among all the faith communities in our state.”
A fine epitaph to engrave on the tombstone of western democracy.
john spielman says
exactly- i believe the Lord God has allowed a veil to be placed over the face of our society because of our rejection of Christ – so that islamic deception is no longer recognized and refuted but embraced.
foolish rabbis, and the world in general – they( Jews) and we ( gentiles) may face another holocaust- this time by islamofascism
Malcolm (South Afric) says
@ Charli Main
I enjoy your posts, a sting in the tail.
Charli Main says
Its an honour to stand with you in the fight against totalitarian Islam and its adherents.
Every JW voice is a rock in the wall of FORTRESS ANTI-JIHAD. A wall that the likes of Sharia May. Merkel and Macron et al are determined to pull down, thereby allowing the Muslim invaders to achieve their 1400 year old objective.
gravenimage says
I stand with you both, as well.
DFD says
Yup, thew western democracies will die, cause of death: Upholding our common values (as relentlessly preached by Merkel, Sharia May, Sarkozy, Hollande, Macron, at al)
Rather strangely, the common value of fighting back seems to have disappeared…
gravenimage says
Suicide is not a value of the West, not matter how these fools believe it is.
James says
I don’t recall much Jewish tolerance of Nazism and Nazis. Now why is that ? “We may never know.”
billybob says
I think we should write to our Jewish brethren in Indianapolis with a link to Hugh Fitzgerald’s informative article that they may find other more worthy causes of concern.
WPM says
The Rabbis are like the Roman Catholic Pope and many other main stream Christian, and Jewish leaders they think if we play nice they the” Islamics” they will start being nice to us. It has not work once in 1400 years ,the true is out there in every country in the world, under every kind of government ,culture, language ,race Islam when if it is a presents in the land in any great number is a problem .I am sorry 1 am ignorant on the Buddhist and Hindu religious leaders take is on the “Islamic” problem. I do no think the leaders of Christian and Jewish faiths should push for any violence but at least state there is a problem with a faith that wants to wipe you off the face of the earth!
b.a. freeman says
if i’m not mistaken, islam’s assault on the indian subcontinent was the first time that a civilization that had very few, if any, christians, jews, or zoroastrians. from what i have read, archaeological evidence indicates that the population declined dramatically, especially during the initial attacks, but continuing as long as muslims parasitized civilization there. overall, the estimates of the total number of victims murdered by devout muslims since islam first crawled out of hell range from 180 million on the low side to about 220 million (with some going as high as 300 million).
and these fools are offended by the truth.
Dr. W says
I wrote this to the the head of IBOR. If I get a response, I will post it:
Dear Mr. Spiegel,
I am writing to you trying to come to a fair and complete understanding (not as a “hater,” nor even as a political activist (at least not at this moment)). That is, I am coming to you in the humble position of seeking education and correction (if necessary: Proverbs 15:32).
Because I am always seeking to reconfirm (or disconfirm) my positions and beliefs, I read a broad diversity of opinions on the Internet (not the most reliable source of information, but at least it represents a democratization of information flow). I ran across the following statement by IBOR (Indiana Board of Rabbis), which gave me pause:
—-
The Indiana Board of Rabbis denounces the anonymously posted billboard on Interstate 465, which attacks Islam by denigrating its prophet. We repudiate the billboard’s reference to Jews as a justification for its disparaging message.
Jewish tradition recognizes the vast power of words to create or destroy. The Jewish sages of old likened “the evil tongue” to murder. The right to free speech in America does not give license to the dissemination of hatred.
We call for the billboard’s immediate removal. We stand in solidarity and friendship with our Hoosier sisters and brothers who are Muslim. And we will continue to promote tolerance, understanding and good will among all the faith communities in our state.
—–
I am somewhat confused by this. When I first saw billboard, I thought of it as a stark-but-necessary unmasking of an evil that we must be aware of in order to guard against. (Thinking of Isaiah 5:20.) While I feel a personal obligation to love and care for all peoples, I find it equally important to guard against the darkness of error by emphasizing truth. I assume that you feel the same way. Hence I am confused by the (reported) IBOR response.
Am I incorrect in my belief that the billboard is factually correct? Or is the billboard somehow misleading because the statements are out of context? Or is it that it is important to guard people from some truths that are more than they can bear, lest, exposed to distasteful truths, they might end up hateful. Am I wrong in thinking that Proverbs 27:5 is the correct principle: “Open Rebuke is better than secret love”? When does a dispassionate statement of truth (if indeed the billboard is true) constitute “hatred”? Does a statement of truth constitute “intolerance” of error (or falsehood), and should “tolerance” be considered a higher principle than truth (that is, is Proverbs 12:23 more important that Proverbs 12:22 when the two seem to be in conflict)?
At any rate, though a Christian myself, I typically have deep respect for the writings and positions of most rabbis, so I am quite confused by the IBOR repudiation of what seems like a sad-but-necessary repudiation of the character of Mohammed, and by extension any belief system that calls him the perfect man and the perfect exemplar for correct behavior.
Please understand that I am writing as an attempt to understand the IBOR position, and not as an desire for contention or debate – What am I misunderstanding here?
Thanks in advance,
ItsReallyQuiteClear says
Dr. W,
Thank you for taking the time to write and send this very thoughtful letter, and also for taking the time to share it here. I do look forward to seeing any response, and I thank you in advance for your sharing that here, as well.
StacyGirl says
Well done even if it fell on deaf ears. Unanimous? The actual number of Jews slaughtered exceeds the billboard quote. Who are these religious scholars that they intercede to defend their prosecutors?
gravenimage says
Thanks for writing the Rabbis, Dr. W.
Ethel Red says
I hope they give you a reply, but it is going to be a tough one for them.
Lon Spector says
Hitler was a Nazi. That’s short for National Socalist. No doubt the Jews of his time thought
that the socalism aspect meant Hitler couldn’t be THAT bad. They found out otherwise.
Now, ignoring all history, the Jews believe that if they make nice with the Muslims their lives
would be spared. After all, it’s mostly Christians who are being butchered. They will find out
otherwise.
WPM says
True Islamics are like Nazism on steroids. Older stronger more deeply root in the souls of the people taught from birth to death in there holy books of hate. Only truth will set the Moslems free of the faith that cripples the soul of true believers. The other religions of the world should put that truth out there not hid it that light under a bushel basket. Islam is the only religion in the world you have a death sentence if you leave it. If it was a religion of peace and love that would not be needed.
aDhimmiSaysWhat? says
Yup. Islam is very much like Nazism. It also bears a strong resemblance to the Manson Family
carol says
WPM…your words put me in mind of these statements by a fine ex-Muslim named Alex:
An Interview With A Former Muslim And True Canadian Patriot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAZsM26aRrk
gravenimage says
Lon, your idea that Muslims are not targeting Jews is *entirely* mistaken. Not only are they waging an unending Jihad against Israel, but they are attacking Jews all over the West, especially in Europe.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
“That [same] day Saafiya’s husband was tortured and beheaded in front of her eyes, her father and brothers were killed, her sisters, cousins, and mother were given away to jihadis as booty and then Mohammed[,] still wearing bloody clothes with the blood of her relatives, had sex with her.”
This quotation is attributed to the hadith compiler sahih Muslim, but no chapter-and-verse are cited. Let’s have the citation, to verify it online. Who prepared this English translation, and when? The wording “had sex with her” sounds modern, and unscriptural.
Jack Diamond says
I don’t have the sahih muslim handy but, for one, it is in Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah “the Life of Muhammad”, 515-517 (tr. A. Guillaume):
“the apostle passed the night with her in a tent of his (after she had been beautified and combed for him)
…Abu Ayyub passed the night girt with his sword, guarding the Apostle and going around the tent until morning. The Apostle saw him and asked what he meant by his action. He replied ‘I was afraid for you with this woman, for you have killed her father and husband and her people.”
The other details are there as well.
from Tabari:
Ibn ‘Umar [al-Waqidi] – Kathir b. Zayd – al-Walid b. Rabah – Abu Hurayrah: While the Prophet was lying with Safiyyah Abu Ayyub stayed the night at his door. When he saw the Prophet in the morning he said “God is the Greatest.” He had a sword with him; he said to the Prophet, “O Messenger of God, this young woman had just been married, and you killed her father, her brother and her husband, so I did not trust her (not to harm) you.” The Prophet laughed and said “Good”. (The History of al-Tabari, Volume XXXIX (39), p. 185
Sahih Bukhari : In-book reference / Book 64, Hadith 253
Narrated Anas:
The Prophet stayed for three rights between Khaibar and Medina and was married to Safiya. I invited the Muslim to his marriage banquet and there was neither meat nor bread in that banquet but the Prophet ordered Bilal to spread the leather mats on which dates, dried yogurt and butter were put. The Muslims said amongst themselves, “Will she (i.e. Safiya) be one of the mothers of the believers, (i.e. one of the wives of the Prophet or just (a lady captive) of what his right-hand possesses” Some of them said, “If the Prophet makes her observe the veil, then she will be one of the mothers of the believers (i.e. one of the Prophet’s wives), and if he does not make her observe the veil, then she will be his lady slave.” So when he departed, he made a place for her behind him (on his and made her observe the veil.
gravenimage says
Thank you, Jack.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Thank you, Jack Diamond, for finding this. But these passages do not use the unscriptural-sounding wording “had sex with her”, nor even explicitly say that Mo had sex with Safiya. Nor do these passages say that while having sex with her, Mo was “still wearing bloody clothes with the blood of her relatives.” Where does this “had sex with her” English translation come from? From Hugh Fitzgerald? It is the one quotation in this article that conspicuously lacks a source citation (other than just “Muslim”).
gravenimage says
How about this, Mark:
“…when it was night, he entered a tent and she entered with him. Abu Ayyub came there and passed the nigh by the tent by the tent with a sword keeping his head at the tent. When it was morning and the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, perceived (some body) moving, he asked: Who is there? He replied: I am Abu Ayub. He asked: Why are you here? He replied: O Apostle of Allah! There is a young lass newly wedded (to you) with whose late husband you have done what you have done. I was not sure of safety, so I wanted to be close to you. Thereupon the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, said twice: O Abu Ayyub! May Allah show you mercy.
–Ibn Sad-Tabaqat: Vol.2 p.145
Muhammed’s “Companion” was concerned about him having sex with Safiyya right after he had just murdered her husband and other male relatives.
He might not technically have still been wearing the bloody clothes he murdered them in, but this is not far off.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Thank you, gravenimage, for finding this, but this still does not respond to what Hugh Fitzgerald wrote, namely,
==QUOTE==
It’s related in the hadith of Muslim (who with Bukhari is considered to be the most trustworthy of hadith scholars): “That [same] day Saafiya’s husband was tortured and beheaded in front of her eyes, her father and brothers were killed, her sisters, cousins, and mother were given away to jihadis as booty and then Mohammed still wearing bloody clothes with the blood of her relatives, had sex with her.”
==UNQUOTE==
Putting these words inside quotation marks, as Hugh F. does, means that this is a verbatim quote from (someone’s English-language translation of) a passage in the Sahih Muslim hadith, but unlike elsewhere in this essay — e.g., “(Sahih Muslim 4131)” — no specific citation is given. The wording “had sex with” sounds too colloquial for a hadith translation, which raises the suspicion that this is not a quotation but a paraphrase.
Another oddity is that Mo has sex not while naked but while wearing dirty clothing. If Muhammad (pbuh) is uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil — the perfect man whose example we must all follow — then we must give up naked sex-having and adopt his kinky habit of having sex while wearing soiled work-clothes, like we follow his example of not urinating while standing up.
Hugh, if you’re reading these words, please resolve this.
Carolyne says
Mark Spahn seems to be saying that Muslim men do not urinate while standing up because they are emulating Mohammed. (May pigshit be upon him.). I never heard this before but if true it only makes Mohammed (May pig blood be upon him) more of a sissy than I thought.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Hi Carolyne. To check out something like this, just do an online search on “muhammad urination”. That will produce answers like
https://www.quora.com/Are-Muslim-men-commanded-to-urinate-while-squatting-after-Muhammads-example
http://www.virtualmosque.com/ummah/men/standing-and-urinating-in-islam/
carol says
Some Muslima in Mark’s link just spoke of how “perfect” the daily neuroticisms are. The simpler truth, I’m sure, is that they peed in mud-bogs and laid low because they had no fender guards.
Emilie Green says
The billboard wasn’t disparaging Mohammad.
It was describing him.
David M says
Either the Muslims protesting are outraged by Muhammad himself, or outraged the person who put it up knows about all these things.
gravenimage says
Musims are outraged that anyone would speak critically of these things.
If they had said that the “Prophet” was a stud, a wily strategist, and a great warrior–referring to the same savageries–Muslims would be fine with it.
Irene Brekelmans says
The Board of Rabbis complained about the billboard in Indiana.
Jewish tradition recognizes the vast power of words to create or destroy. I am not Jewish, but I recognize that too. As we have our Abra Cadabra, In aramic they pronounce it as Avra Cadavra which means: “You create while you speak.” And you do, it is almost what the Jews are saying. And then too, you can speak
good or bad, doing that with many people together, it creates the energy of what was spoken. Now my question to the Rabbis is: How can you be upset about that billboard, while you know that 100.000 sends of Muslims pray every day on the streets in Mosques, everywhere and pray for conquering the world and kill us all? They create while they speak too, but that does not seem to matter to you. Luckily there are more and more groups who are meditating and praying for the opposite , otherwise all would be lost already and I am very grateful to those people who have taken the time to do that.
Because when you pray so hard for the bad things, you are going to get it back from the opposite side,
If every non violent man and woman would take one day all together to pray for the good side without anything bad or violence, the muslims would not have a chance. You create while you speak, it is a cosmic law. And traditions have to look upon every time if they are still apply for today.
The musical “Fiddler on the roof ” showed it to us “. It was just a musical, but it had something in it where we could learn from. The world is changing at such a rapid speed, we have to look at everything. It just does not mean, that you can sit back, and relax. In my own country, I can not get groups to do that, there are some, but they do it in silence, I do it myself, but I can’t bring all the energy by myself
Everything is and has to change, but you can’t sit back yourself and think, the rest will change it, you need to speak out( the JW excluded and the ones who are commenting and keep it up), but the rest keep silence and they are all waiting, because they feel holier then us, they are the people of peace (sarc), and if they will not help us by only speaking out already, then all will be lost and we will have devastating consequences. If we don’t unite in this…., we all, I think will know what happens. In the really end, the muslims will lose, because of the violent crimes, deeds and praying, but before that a lot of bad things will come our way. And to the Jewish Rabbis I have one advise, you better start your own praying and know that you create while you speak. Peace is a noble thing, if every one lives by it, but if not, it is the most dangerous thing going on. Every religion has to be respected as long as you don’t bother other people with it and pray in your own home and for the good of the whole mankind .And there is not one superieur to the other. Nobody, no matter your qur’ans, bibles torah’s mahabarata’s, etc.
And for sure not the elite either. and thank you Robert Spencer, Mortimer, Gravenimage and all the others for your research work and comments and your respect and that you keep going. God Bless.
carol says
Nice post Irene, but I disagree with the common platitude/wishful thinking: “Every religion has to be respected…not one superior to the other.” This just plays into fanciful pretense by “authorities”.
To put it simply you can’t have a black heart and promote yourself as one of God’s little helpers (at least not OUR “God”). Islam isn’t a religion as it doesn’t really strive to cultivate valid “spirituality” (good works for your gang of cut-throats doesn’t cut it – shallow apologies to Mo). Muslims are promoting a world “made in their image” and doing so by means of brutality and terror. They are slaves to their own narcissistic identity. Poison is inferior and not healthy for plant or human growth. All the fancy, convoluted, wordage in the world put out by Islam won’t create a smoke screen around the simple facts of life and love and nature.
Irene Brekelmans says
Sorry for the English in my comment, I hope you will get my point anyway. I am learning from your comments about the points and the fluent writing.
Mark Swan says
Irene Brekelmans, I read your comment, you did quite well, thank you.
gravenimage says
Irene, you have nothing to apologize for–your comments were very clear. Good post. 🙂
marina says
Muslim and their apologists are in an uproar over this billboard but nobody has the courage to refute the statements.
Benedict says
A “prophet” like Mohammad would be an embarrassment to all other religions except Islam. For the Rabbis to acknowledge this fact would probably devastate their Weltanschauung, and it is therefore obstinately resisted.
I wonder if the hilariousity by Gad Saad – https://youtu.be/ktyg9i-tqIU – could help them get the sand out of their eyes?
TL says
The rabbis of the Board of Rabbis of Indiana are surely aware of Numbers 31, and it would not be surprising to learn that they have been concerned that criticism of Muhammad is a gateway drug which leads to criticism of Moses, too. Then they would reason that it’s better to smother all criticism of Muhammad before people start asserting in the streets a claim like this:
Both Moses and Muhammad were detestible villains.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses#Thomas_Paine_and_Numbers_31:13-18
Benedict says
A cogent comment, TL.
Moses was aware, unlike the deluded Muhammad, that his were not the final words and divine revelation to his kinsmen:
“Moses said, ‘THE LORD GOD WILL RAISE UP FOR YOU A PROPHET LIKE ME FROM YOUR BRETHREN; TO HIM YOU SHALL GIVE HEED to everything He says to you.”
(‘And it shall be that every soul that does not heed that prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’)
When the Midianites are chosen for such a severe divine judgment IN TIME and historical setting would it be unlikely, that they will belong to God, who judges the world, in eternity? Whereas a people who spurn the Gospel of the atoning Christ in time will be irredeemable rejected in eternity.
The Old Testament alone can not exhaustively depict the righteousness of God; a new covenant that includes all people and gentile nations is presupposed.
Surak says
An ignorant comment, Maldict. The Torah commands that every future prophet must obey the given law, and that any future “prophet” who attempts to undermine any commandment is a false prophet who must be put to death.
God also describes His covenant with Israel as “everlasting” 16 times in the Hebrew Bible. I understand how disappointing this must be for you.
We Jews reject Muslim jihad. We also reject the Christian jihad, reflected in your comment, which inspired the Muslim jihad.
Surak says
No, you are a detestable villain. God Himself describes Moses, at the end of the book of Deuteronomy, as the greatest prophet who ever lived. Feel free to blaspheme all you want, of course, just understand the consequences.
Benedict says
Apparently you didn’t notice that my comment was about Muhammad in relation to HF’s article? –
Please consider this:
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” and “Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?” –
“For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.
4 For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.
5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;
6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.
7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice,
8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:
9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.
10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.
11 So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)
Mark Swan says
Benedict, You did good here, thank you.
Surak—
Throughout much of professing Christianity, there is virtually no emphasis on the Old Testament, the preexistence of Christ, His life as a young Jew growing up in Judaism or any reference indicating that Christ was the “God of the Old Testament” long before He came into the human flesh.
If you, personally, are willing to prove it to yourself, you can easily confirm that the “mainstream” Jesus most people hear about is indeed “another Jesus” Paul warned against. Christ warned explicitly: “Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’” (Matthew 7:22–23). Think!
So if we are sincerely interested in the Truth, let us honestly “check this out” by studying what the Bible actually says about Christ’s origins and why He came into this world. So what is the “Truth”? Jesus Himself stated: “Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth” (John 17:17).
Your Bible tells us clearly that the “Personality” who became Jesus of Nazareth had been with the Father through eternity! Please study the inspired verses on this in your own Bible! First, notice John 1:1–3And later, Many times in the Old Testament, God is called the “Rock.” Who was that God, that “Rock” of Israel? He was the One who spoke with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, spoke with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and later spoke the Ten Commandments and many other instructions through His prophet Moses. Who was He?
So if you want to truly understand the great Personality who became the true Jesus Christ and who will come again as King of kings, you need to study and believe the entire Bible—from Genesis to Revelation. Remember, Jesus constantly referred to the Old Testament as “Scripture.” When this was the only Scripture written, Jesus commanded, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God” (Luke 4:4). So we are to live by every word of the inspired Bible—not just what we call the New Testament taken out of context and apart from the Old Testament of which it is simply a magnification!
Jesus Christ of the Bible. He is to be worshiped. For He is the One who will judge us, and the One who will give us life in the resurrection: “For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him” (John 5:21–23).
That very Christ whose sacrifice washes away our sins also tells us, over and over, to obey the commandments of God—not to disobey them! When a young man asked about the way to eternal life, Jesus stated: “But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments(Matthew 5:19).
So we are commanded by Christ Himself not to “break” even one of the “least” of God’s commandments. That is why near the end of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gave the warning—cited earlier—to those who think they have taught the Truth or preached in Jesus’ name: “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!” (Matthew 7:23).
But, some will say, “Aren’t we just to have ‘love’ instead of an old law?” So we need to ask about the Bible definition of what kind of “love” God requires. Here is the Bible’s answer: “This is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3).
In carefully reading and studying all the related scriptures, we come to understand that there is a basic unity in the way which God intended human beings to live even from the beginning. For, as the Bible says: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8).
All the way from the “Father of the faithful,” the patriarch Abraham, until the very end of the book of Revelation, the basic way of life God intended is clearly revealed. For the Bible reveals that our father Abraham was blessed: “because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws” (Genesis 26:5). Again and again, as we have seen, Jesus Christ Himself taught obedience to the Ten Commandments (Luke 16:17–18). Even the Apostle Paul—whom some in their wild imaginations suppose “did away” with God’s commandments—stated clearly: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters” (1 Corinthians 7:19). How clear!
So James defined God’s Ten Commandments as the “law of liberty.” If obeyed, this law would truly “free” all humanity from the scourge upon our modern society—a society which refuses to obey the spiritual law of our Creator! Why? Again, because they are truly deceived by Satan the Devil into somehow thinking God Himself has “done away” with His own basic spiritual law!
Jesus’ beloved apostle, John, stated emphatically: “Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:3–4). For a person may “know about” God. But no one can actually “know” God—truly understand and “walk” with God—unless he keeps His commandments! He must let Christ live in Him (Galatians 2:20) and literally obey God’s constant instruction to do this. A true Christian will come to be aware of the true nature and character of God because he will experience the very life of God within him through the Holy Spirit as he “walks with God” through the power of God’s Spirit.
John constantly made clear which commandments he was talking about. For, with “God” as the antecedent, John stated: “And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight” (1 John 3:22).
Finally, John was inspired to tell us at the very end of the entire Bible: “Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city” (Revelation 22:14).
The true Christ of the Bible is the One who “reveals” God the Father. “All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him” (Matthew 11:27). We need to recognize the fact that Jesus Christ was the One through Whom God created the heavens and the earth, the One who created you and gave you life and breath, the One who revealed Himself and spoke to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses and many other prophets. He was the One who actually gave the Ten Commandments. Then He came in human flesh and “magnified” the Ten Commandments and showed us how to keep them in the “spirit,” not just in the letter—though the Bible makes very clear this does not “do away” with keeping the letter of the Law! This Jesus Christ revealed that obedience to God’s Law is an entire way of life on which God’s wonderful plan for humanity is centered.
This Jesus Christ grew up as a young Jew in Israel and always kept the seventh-day Sabbath “as His custom was” (Luke 4:16). Again, He did not obey God just because He was a Jew, but because He came to “reveal the Father” and to set us an example that we should follow in His steps (1 Peter 2:21).
Christ always taught His servants all the way from Abraham, to Moses, to David, to James, to Peter, to John and to the Apostle Paul to obey the Ten Commandments. Then, Christ exemplified that obedient way of life by keeping God’s Commandments (John 15:10). For this is the true faith—the genuine “way” into eternal life.
For your own good and for your eternal life, please remember the Apostle James’ powerful warning: “But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves” (James 1:22).
May God help you, personally, to act on the Truth and surrender to the true Christ as your Savior, your living Head, your High Priest and your coming King. If He is truly your “Lord,” you will obey Him and not try to “reason around” the clear statements of His inspired Word.
If you will sincerely “seek” God and His Truth as never before, if you will earnestly study His inspired Word for true answers, if you will pray fervently and ask God to help you understand Him and His will, He will hear you and answer! For the true God of the Bible—describing what our people should do in these “latter days”—tells His people: “But from there you will seek the Lord your God, and you will find Him if you seek Him with all your heart and with all your soul. When you are in distress, and all these things come upon you in the latter days, when you turn to the Lord your God and obey His voice” (Deuteronomy 4:29–30).
James says
That utterance is presented as a Divine command. That does not mean it was one. Assuming that the incident ever happened. Tom Paine is not exactly up to date in his Biblical scholarship.
Jim says
This is a reply to the lengthy sermon of Mark Swan. Just a few points: the commandments were more than 10. Abraham, and all his followers were commanded to circumcise. Someone comes along and says circumcision is neither here nor there. By what authority? It remains an eternal command for Jews. Kosher is another command that was done away with by Christians, but of course remains an eternal command for Jews. Now if someone could please explain the big one, because it is one of the Ten Commandments, how did you move the Sabbath from the 7th day of creation to the first?
When Islam says that those outside of Islam must conform to its rules, we don’t accept the supremacy. Likewise, Swan, you are free to believe what you want and to follow what you choose. The commandments (3 examples of which I have given) were given to the Jews. We don’t impose supremacy over anyone else. Please extend the same respect and courtesy to Jews, thank you. God’s law for the Jews is eternal. He never changed it.
Mark Swan says
Jim, ask your Rabi, only the Sabbath was a spiritual commandment, and by no authority can it be changed. It is the seventh day. Do you keep it?
It is obvious that you do not realize that all Jews are Israel, but most of Israel are not Jews.
Israel and Judah were separated after Solomon died, remember.
The vast majority of Israel followed Jeroboam, there were none that followed the house
of David, but the tribe of Judah (1Kings12:20).
Simply put, it is that most Old Testament prophecies are directed at the House of Israel. As a result, if you confuse the House of Israel (all twelve tribes, or after the nation’s division the northern ten tribes) with the House of Judah (the southern kingdom, or the tribe of Judah), you will not correctly understand end-time prophecy as it applies today to the nations descended from the tribes of Israel.
While the modern Jewish state and the city of Jerusalem do certainly play an important role in end-time prophecies, not all Israelites are Jews. The ancient patriarch Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel, was the father of twelve sons. One of those sons, Judah, was the progenitor of the Jewish people. But what happened to the descendants of the other sons?
When the twelve tribes returned to the Promised Land after their Egyptian captivity, each settled in a different region. Eventually the tribes split into two kingdoms. The southern kingdom, called Judah, consisted of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin and most of the Levites. The remaining ten tribes formed the northern kingdom, called Israel.
In 721BC, after a three-year siege, the Assyrians conquered Samaria, Israel’s capital. They began a systematic deportation of the Israelites to the area north of the Euphrates River, in the area between the Black and Caspian Seas (2 Kings 17).
After swallowing Israel, the Assyrians later invaded Judah, the southern kingdom. King Hezekiah, on the throne in Jerusalem at the time, cried out to God in a heartfelt way, and God intervened by sending an angel to destroy the Assyrian army of King Sennacherib in 701BC. Judah, thus spared, continued on for about a century before her independence was again threatened.
Then, in 604BC, the Babylonians under King Nebuchadnezzar invaded Judah and advanced on Jerusalem. Judah was made a tributary state within the Babylonian Empire. Returning again in 597BC, Nebuchadnezzar took Judah’s King Jehoiakim into captivity and placed Zedekiah upon the throne. Dissatisfied with Zedekiah’s behavior, King Nebuchadnezzar returned approximately ten years later and completely destroyed Jerusalem, burning the temple and taking most of the Jewish population into captivity in Babylon.
Decades passed. Finally, in the fall of 539BC, Babylon fell to the Persian armies of Cyrus the Great. Within a short time, Cyrus issued a decree allowing the Jews to return from Babylon and to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem under the leadership of Zerubbabel.
However, and here is the crucial point that most seem to overlook: The northern ten tribes never returned from their captivity! Settled in an area hundreds of miles from where the Jews were taken more than a century later, the ten tribes of Israel remained completely separate and distinct from the Jews.
What happened to the ten tribes of Israel? History has called them the “lost ten tribes.” Where did they go? The answer to that question is one of history’s most fascinating stories. In fact, the answer to that mystery is the actual key that unlocks most of the Old Testament prophecies!
As you may guess, the identity and location of these ancient peoples reveals who we are in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand and among the British-descended peoples of South Africa. It explains why we have achieved such national greatness, and what will happen to us near the end of this present age!
The knowledge of the identity of the descendants of ancient Israel is revealed by a close examination of Scripture together with the record of secular history. The most highly educated leaders of our modern world are blind to the true facts of this matter. They are blinded by the theory of evolution into completely discounting the Bible as relevant for today. As a result, they fail to see the amazing story laid out in Scripture and its relevance for our future.
Most religious leaders are in the same category. Even those who claim to acknowledge the Bible as their authority are blinded by the prejudices of denominational tradition.
But it is not just a question of ancient history! Your future, your family’s future, as well as the future of your nation hangs on the answer! Where are the “lost ten tribes” of Israel today?
The promises to Abraham include both spiritual and physical components. They point toward Jesus the Messiah, but they also point toward the birthright blessings that would be bestowed upon a multitude of his descendants who would become a great nation and a great company of nations. This does not mean that the recipients of these blessings are any better or more special than those who did not receive the blessings. In fact, we see that those who received the physical blessings have, for the most part, squandered them and turned from God, for which they will have to face His judgment.
However, let us notice the birthright blessings that Isaac conferred to Jacob. “Therefore may God give you of the dew of heaven, of the fatness of the earth, and plenty of grain and wine. Let peoples serve you, and nations bow down to you. Be master over your brethren, and let your mother’s sons bow down to you. Cursed be everyone who curses you, and blessed be those who bless you!” (27:28–29). Here two details are mentioned for the first time. The first is that Jacob’s descendants would possess great agricultural wealth. The second is that they would obtain rulership over other peoples and nationalities.
Here, for the first time, we learn that the inheritance God promised to Abraham encompassed more than just the land in the Middle East. Jacob’s descendants were to spread abroad from that inheritance and affect the entire world. Their inheritance would bring them into contact with peoples all over the earth.
Notice the clear delineation given in 1 Chronicles 5:1–2: “Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel—he was indeed the firstborn, but because he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, the son of Israel, so that the genealogy is not listed according to the birthright; yet Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came a ruler, although the birthright was Joseph’s.”
Judah was clearly given the scepter promise of a line of kings culminating in the Messiah who would be King of kings. But take note! The birthright promises of national greatness went not to the Jews, but to the descendants of Joseph.
In Genesis 48:5, Israel informed Joseph that he was adopting Ephraim and Manasseh—that they would be counted as his and therefore be counted among the tribes of Israel. Thus Joseph was given a double portion. After Joseph brought his sons close, Israel embraced them, laid hands upon them and set them apart for special blessing.
At this time a remarkable event occurred. Joseph had purposely arranged the boys so that the older, Manasseh, was standing on Israel’s right side and the younger, Ephraim, was standing on his left side. This was so that he would place his right hand, signifying the greater blessing, on Manasseh and the left on Ephraim. Israel, however, crossed his hands and put the right hand on Ephraim and the left on Manasseh. When Joseph saw this he tried to correct what he perceived as a mistake on the part of his nearly blind father. Israel resisted, however, and explained that this crossing of his hands was purposeful.
Israel told Joseph that his older son Manasseh was to become a great people, but that Ephraim was to become a multitude or company of nations (v. 19). Here we find that a great nation and also a great company of nations were to spring from the descendants of Joseph. They were the ones who receive the birthright blessings of national greatness. This included possession of strategic check points through which their enemies would have to pass, vast agricultural and mineral wealth, and status as world powers that would exercise dominance over other nations. Since God had promised that they would be a blessing to other nations, we know that their dominance as world powers would be exercised in a benign way overall.
If you were born in a Jewish family, and are of the Jewish faith, that is wonderful.
But when someone like Surak mentions Christian Jihad, well then I did respond,
to try and demonstrate that there is no such thing.
If you however side with him, then why respond to what I wrote.
The best friends in this world that the Jewish people have are Christians.
Let God sort out the facts.
gravenimage says
Of course, TL–who has voiced his admiration for Fascism here before–would not miss a chance at getting in a dig at the Joooooooooos.
The fact is that this sort of “interfaith” thing is not just found among some clueless Jewish people. but with some clueless Christians, as well.
Mark Swan says
Absolutely gravenimage, thank you.
Jim says
Mark Swan, if you read this, the seventh day of creation is Saturday. This is the day you keep? Yes, I keep it. I note you have nothing to say about releasing Jews from our commandments. They were given to Jews by God as eternal commandments. You are under no obligation to keep them, but no one has the authority to release Jews from them.
Mark Swan says
Jim, you seem to be a sincere and honest Man. As messed-up as both religions
have become I have no doubt some may assert that the health laws are done away
with, I do not. I live by them myself. I guess we had better all ask ourselves, just,
how big is our God, does he rule us, or do we. We certainly need all the help available.
I have Jewish blood, King David was a living example of how we all had better see
God, the Psalms tell us all we need to know.
I wrote what I did above for you, to let you understand how I see the bigger picture of who we all are. Life on this Earth has been quite a party for us all…time to meet the
guest of honor.
You take care Jim, and when you see me going overboard, you let me know.
Anthony Jagers says
I was wondering when Robert was going to report on this.
Westman says
The Indiana Board of Rabbis should be concerned that by treating the murdering of Jews by Muhammad as as of little importance(not to mention Allah’s Quranic hatred of Jews) they also undermined the importance of the Holocaust.
They could have said this was an ancient event that no longer represented Islam – a bold-faced lie that would readily be accepted by both the media and Muslims – when, in fact, Islam’s eschatology calls for the murdering of all Jews.
The Indiana Rabbis have, essentially, unlike Israel, thrown out an invitation of tolerance that will be tested by some fundamentalist Muslims to find the limit of that tolerance. Silence might have been the better response.
They are now mired in the media game of being asked for comments on any Muslim-unbeliever incidents in Indiana and any major world jihad travesty. Good luck with that dance, Rabbis.
Jan Aage Jeppesen says
“When the rabbis decided to publish their letter, demanding that the billboard be taken down, what did they know, and when did they know it?”
As good dhimmis the rabbis knew that they are not allowed to express any opinions about The Perfect Man, not even allowed to say bless him, thats blasphemy coming from a dhimmy. They are only allowed to feel subdued and show it in the presence of a Muslim.
gravenimage says
I doubt that these Rabbis know much about Islam at all.
Jan Aage Jeppesen says
You are probably right gravenimahe. All they know is that islamophobia is worse than racism and jihadist terror. Thats all they need to know to keep them in power and deserve respect from the main stream population.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
When the rabbis decided to publish their letter, demanding that the billboard be taken down, what did they know, and when did they know it?
They rabbis didn’t know it, don’t know it, and never will know it. Willful ignorance is central to the whole socialist scam.
I remember being in a Plymouth muscle car going 155 MPH down I-465 on a Friday night. There were five of us in the car plus a case of beer on the back floor, but it had a 440 engine. I mention this because back then in Indy everybody knew you take your chances, whether dying or being maimed in a terrible crash (tire failures were a big threat for such stunts, or you get busted by the IPD or Indiana State Police and do the time for the crime. I was only maybe 14 at the time, so they’d of gone easy on me.
But the great Holy Prophet Mohammed never suffered any consequences, and that would’ve been for far worse crimes than underage drinking or street racing. And it is so that Moslems in general don’t either. And the cherry on top of the whole cultural scam is that the Jews ardently defend them. I wonder what the women at Banu Qurayza would think of this episode.
mgoldberg says
These are all reform rabbi’s. None are observant, I think half are women. Look… as a jew, I there’s room for all- but I reject personally the notions and nostrums of the ‘reformed’ sect of judaism. We don’t throw jews out for blasphemy, but non observant jews, all, were a creation of the modern world since about 1790 or so. This bowing to multiculturalism, diversity, rather than the principles of the ten commandments the principles of right and wrong and understanding what that means, is paramount to honoring the truth behind the facts. Hugh Fitzgerald using common sense, simply notes that none of the assertions of the Ad were even addressed. That is the tragedy that must be prevented, by demanding common sense. And how is that done? It is done by allowing the free speech, the critiquing and evaluating that all religions, ideas, ideologies must be subjected too, to drill down into what they may or may not be worth and what they may or may not be advocating and performing.
I reject The Indiana board of ‘Rabbi’s’ as they are not observant jews, but then that is their right to practice whatever they want. It is my right to reject them and especially their gossamer, utopian, denial of the harm done to Jews, and all others, for 1400 yrs. It is not muslims under attack, but Jihadism.
It is not muslms under attack… it is all others, jews,chrisitans, buddhists, hindhus, atheists… all others.
That is what those non observant Jews cannot see. And all the other would be utopians who would erase all differences, so we can’t see what is right in front of us.
One of the principles of observant Judaism, of the Toran, is …. Remembering. And remembering means to think, and to recapitulate events and history so that a sober, intelligent recollection can be obtained.
It’s not just for brilliant people but for ordinary people, and the reason is that a sober recollection allows for understanding those commandments, those ten commandments, and the rights and wrongs attached to them. That is the key point. and Islam, only recognizes what Mohammed did and said is good as good, and what that one said was bad as bad. So…. evaluating what is on that AD is critical to assessing it’s worth or lack thereof.
It is not muslims under attack… it is all others, and right and wrong, itself
Keys says
mgoldberg, thanks for an insightful post.
Your comment on “remembering” as a principal of observant Judaism and the Torah is applicable for some Christians, as well.
davej says
When documented facts are redefined as “disseminating hatred” and few object to it we are truly lost.
That billboard is brilliant and accurate – I’d like to see a thousand more like it. Islam is a huge pile of shit and Muslims need to have their faces rubbed in it. Maybe it would awaken their brainwashed intelligence.
Mark Swan says
Alarmed Pig Farmer, mgoldberg and davej, thank you all, good comments.
Guest says
Funny. I don’t see the name Muhammad on the board, or the words ‘Muslim’ or ‘Islam.’
Jack Diamond says
If the billboard is to come down for “the disseminating of hatred” by an “evil tongue” the Board of Rabbis must at least be consistent and call for the banning of the true source of that wicked billboard, the Qur’an (and sunnah). Or do they dispute that: Islam calls for obligatory hate and enmity (wal-baraa) for unbelievers, with special attention given the Jews as the very worst enemies of Allah and Muslims, forever. Pious Muslims curse these Jews five times daily. True or false?
At least the Jewish American Affairs Committee of Indiana understands where the Sheikh of Al-Azhar’s venomous Jew-hate originates. Just a sample:
Qur’an 5:82 “you will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity (enmity) towards the believers (to be) the Jews and those who associate others with Allah (who commit shirk, i.e. Christians).”
Tasfir ibn Kathir: “This describes the Jews, since their disbelief is that of rebellion, defiance, opposing the truth, belittling other people and degrading the scholars. This is why the Jews, may Allah’s continued curses descend upon them until the Day of Resurrection, killed many of their Prophets and tried to kill the Messenger of Allah several times, as well as performing magic spells against him and poisoning him.”
5:64 “the Jews say Allah’s hand is fettered. Their (the Jews) hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so…amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection. Every time they kindled the fire of war, Allah extinguished it, but they strive to do mischief on earth (corruption in the land) and God does not love those who do mischief.”
{and the penalties for mischief are outlined in 5:33–“that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned or exiled”}
Tafsir ibn Kathir: “be their hands (the Jews) tied up and be they accursed, Allah said. What Allah said occurred, for the Jews are indeed miserly, envious, cowards and tremendously humiliated…Allah said, verily the revelation that has come to you (Muslims) from your Lord, makes many of them increase in rebellion and disbelief, meaning the bounty that comes to you, O Muhammad, is a calamity for your enemies, the Jews and their kind.”
2:61 “and they were covered with humiliation and misery (the Jews) and they drew upon themselves the wrath of Allah. That was because they disbelieved in Allah’s Proofs, signs and ayats, and killed the Prophets. That was because they disobeyed and rebelled.”
Tafsir ibn Kathir “this Ayah indicates that the Children of Israel were plagued with humiliation and that this will continue, meaning it will never cease. Al-Hasan commented, ‘Allah humiliated them and they shall have no protector.'”
98:6 “Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scriptures and the polytheists will be in the Fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. They are the worst of creatures.”
Tafsir ibn Kathir: “they are the worst of creation that Allah has fashioned and created.”
5:51: {Allegiance and Rejection} “Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya’ to one another. And if any amongst you takes them as Auliya’, then surely he is one of them.”
Disparaging Jews, a little? Showing Muslim solidarity and friendship with Hoosier sisters and brothers who are Jews, or the exact opposite? Should we look at how this translated into action, the treatment of Jews under the sword of Islam, from the end of Jewish life in Arabia at the hands of the Muslims, all the way to the jihad against Israel today? To the treatment of Jews in Europe today at the hands of Europe’s new Muslim guests? These Rabbis must truly suffer from Truthophobia.
gravenimage says
Hugh Fitzgerald: Rabbis Stand Up For Their “Hoosier Sisters and Brothers Who Are Muslim” (Part One)
………………………..
Did any of these Rabbis stop and check to see if the claims that the “Prophet” Muhammed married a six-year-old, was a rapist, slaver, and murderer of Infidels–especially Jews–*were true*?
The fact is that everything on that bill board is completely accurate.
Do they further not care to know that the vast majority of their “Hoosier sisters and brothers who are Muslim” are not only for all of these horrors, but are actively acting to bring them to the civilized West–including oppression and murder of these Rabbis’ Jewish sisters and brothers?
Wellington says
These rabbis erred many times over, gravenimage, as I know you know, but one way in which they erred is to think that any Muslim should be accorded the honor of being called a “Hoosier.”
Just because one lives in Indiana does not make one a Hoosier. Might as well have called some Nazi sympathizer in Indiana back in the Thirties a Hoosier or KKK members who reside in Indiana such. Geographical location and residency are not alone sufficient. Mindset, common sense, ideology and where one’s ultimate loyalty lies are the key factors. Hell, I’m a life-long Pennsylvanian yet I’m more of a Hoosier than any Muslim living in Indiana will ever be.
gravenimage says
True, Wellington–these Mohammedans are not Hoosiers any more than they are Canadians, Swedish, or French when they live there. Muslims who have inveigled themselves into the West do not actually embrace any of the values of their host states.
Carolyne says
How can it be that while no one was named on the billboard, these Rabbis immediately knew to whom it referred? Could it because the billboard held truths these Rabbis were too cowardly to acknowledge?
endislam says
Rabbis sucking up to islam is NOT going to save their sorry heads from the chopping block. Was this some sort of “show” or are they that stupid?
gravenimage says
This is not ordinary stupidity–this is willful ignorance, which is all too rife in the West today.
mortimer says
The following is for the foolish RABBIS from the official biography of Mohammed, the Sira:
Mohammed put the Jews under siege. They surrendered and submitted to the judgment of Saed, an old ally. (p.688) The Jews decided to leat a Muslim they thought was their friend, Saed, deliver judgment if they surrendered to Mohammed. Saed’s judgement was simple. Kill all the men. Take their property and take the women and children as slaves. Mohammed said, ‘You have given the judgment of Allah. (p690) The captives were taken into Medina. They dug trenches in the market place of Medina. It was a long day, but 800 Jews were beheaded that day. Mohammed and his twelve-year-old wife, Aisha, sat and watched the slaughter the entire day and into the night. The apostle of Allah had every male Jew killed.
mgoldberg says
It Is a warm wind to hear the jewish american affairs group of Indiana appropriatedly respond to the absurdity that is this postion of that 16 member reform rabbi’s group.
That their position is essentialy indefensible, and objectionable from both a Jewish and an American legal ethical viewpoint is refreshingly blunt… and to hear a group respond to Jihadwatch, is frankly long overdue.
Mark Swan says
Yes mgoldberg, I agree.
newUser says
Again, the billboard doesn’t mention Mohammad. How do they know it is about the muzzies. Or they say their “prophet” did all this things and this is why he is perfect, but saying it aloud is offensive.
flo says
Even the rabbis have gone mad.
Historian says
In response to Surak who writes in response to Benedict:
“An ignorant comment, Maldict. The Torah commands that every future prophet must obey the given law, and that any future “prophet” who attempts to undermine any commandment is a false prophet who must be put to death.
God also describes His covenant with Israel as “everlasting” 16 times in the Hebrew Bible. I understand how disappointing this must be for you.
We Jews reject Muslim jihad. We also reject the Christian jihad, reflected in your comment, which inspired the Muslim jihad.”
Truly false equivalence to claim Benedict’s comments reflect “Christian jihad.” The problem facing all non-Muslims since the 630s is that jihad is not just religious ideas that you disagree with but actual violence even killing with intent to weaken and eventually subjugate all non-Muslims to Islamic rule.
And Muslim jihad was certainly NOT inspired by “Christain jihad” since there was no Christian practice or theology of jihad in the the 7th century i.e. there was no theology in the 7th century promoting OPEN-ENDED OFFENSIVE conquest by Christians of all territories ruled by non-Christians in perpetuity. There was the idea that it was Christian to DEFEND and restore the historic borders of the Christian Roman Empire (vs Persia inter alia) but that is very, very different from perpetual OFFENSIVE war that traditional Muslim teaching on jihad enjoins.
Finally your comment that appears to condone the idea that Jews who contravene Jewish law should be killed is worrying. The right not to be killed for contravening religious law is fundamental to the West and has come under threat here since at least the 1980s (see Rushdie) by immoral attempts to import Islamic norms regarding blasphemy here
Carolyne says
You are perhaps a historian, Historian, but your history is founded on mythology.
Historian says
Prove it.
I repeat as a specialist in this very period and region and topic: there was no such thing as “Christian jihad” in the 7th century that could have inspired “the Muslim jihad” as Surak wrongly claimed. Christians in that time certainly did NOT have a belief that God commanded open-ended OFFENSIVE warfare against all non-Christians until all are brought under Christian rule, while Muslims had certainly developed such an explicit theology (mutatis mutandis) –by the eighth century, if not earlier, and were acting on this ideal by launching offensive warfare as long as they were able well before then (634-650s onward).
George Kadlec says
Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. – George Santayana
Frank Verderber says
Dear Elliot Bartky, President
Allon Friedman, Vice President,
Well that was quite an almost favorable message for the sign owner and Christians. What ever happened to the Semitic rationale: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend!”
Still – after 2,000 years – Christians have the same problem with the Followers of the LAW, as did Jesus your Christ – “you strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. ”
Firstly, the the sign has nothing but facts written on it. By your Law, how can the Indiana Rabbis Association determine the intent of the sign? Jesus said, “what ever you hear in secret, shout from the roof tops. ”
The Jewish people – God bless their souls – have this Jewish guilt thing that is manifested every time something is said in reference to the Jewish People. You are not the only ones on the Planet to be persecuted! Is it lawful for the Jewish to remember the holocaust, but a sin for a gentile Christian to remember it publicly in solidarity with you?
Mohammad kill 600 Jews, and after that he killed all the Nestorian Christians he could find. His horde invaded peaceful and Christian Yemen and reduced it to the sand pit that it is today.
The Rabbis complained about the sign for their love of truth? I think not – it was to distance themselves from possible persecution, here in the USA. I have news for you. There will be a persecution for anyone who follows Yehovah!
Rather than split a hair over the finer points of the road sign, instead take a positive approach; “So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him” [Is.59:19].
Be thankful that those in the West fear the name of the LORD! Be thankful that there are more followers of the LORD than there are of you, to overcome the enemies of our Great God – the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. See American Christians as the “mensch” of Israel.
Peter says
Rabbis supporting islam ? This is literally suicidal thinking !
“Make war on those who have received the Scriptures [Jews and Christians] but do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day. They do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden. The Christians and Jews do not follow the religion of truth until they submit and pay the poll tax [jizya], and they are humiliated.” Quran (Words of Muhammad) Verse 9:29
Please TELL ME how anyone can call this a “religion of peace” ?! OR support Islam in ANY way ?
Peebo says
“We repudiate the billboard’s reference to Jews as a justification for its disparaging message.”
But is the reference true or not. That is what’s important.
solange silverman says
Unfortunately, what these rabbis are doing is not all that surprising any more. It is sad and infuriating, especially when the Jewish community needs their support against our age old enemies, founded and fostered by the very one they are defending. It makes me wonder how they can truly reconcile that which would seem to me to go so completely against the principles of Judaism, and, by that, I mean the behavior and teachings of Muhammad. This is one of my favorite quotes about him and his koran; “Koran is not even third grade literature. You can see this man (Muhammad) seems to be not normal. In koran, there is nothing elevating. It is so full of rubbish. It is not a religious book at all. It has come out of a feverish mind and very mediocre. Muhammad’s life was just fighting, killing. On his sword, he has written, ‘My message is peace.” ~ OSHO, an Indian mystic, guru, spiritual teacher and religious scholar. After intense study of Islam and after being asked for its outstanding qualities, OSHO said he searched intently for them but regrettably had only this to report.