It is the most used tactic of modern Muslim apologists to deny and change the meaning of the Quranic verses.
- ALL the billions of Muslims of the last 1400 years UNANIMOUSLY agreed that verse 4:24 allows Muslim men to have sex with their captive/slave women even without their consent (i.e. to rape them).
- There are thousands of Ahadith of Muhammad, which witness the same and Sahaba were raping the captive/slave women.
But modern Muslim apologists (also Quranists) change the meaning of verse 4:24 and come up with different lame excuses.
Now the problem is, it is like hitting your head against a brick if you debate with these modern Muslim apologists about the meaning of the Quran. They will always come up with any lame excuse, while the Quran is a vague book, and they are capable of giving dozens of new meanings to Arabic words according to their own wishes.
So, please don't make the mistake of debating the meaning of the Quran. It is useless.
But please change your Tactics.
Counter Tactics: Modern Muslim Apologists/Quranists are themselves blaming their Quran to be a Lair and making false claims
- The Quran claims that its verses are 'clear' and 'easy' to understand.
- But then we have to accept that ALL Sahaba (companions) and ALL Billions of Muslims of the last 1400 years got misguided, according to the modern Muslim apologists/Quranists, while they kept on raping millions of captive/slave women throughout Islamic history.
- Those Sahaba and billions of Muslims believed firmly in this Quran. They read it day and night. They pondered upon it the whole of their lives. But if they still misunderstood it, got misguided, and committed the rape of millions of slave women, then the culprit is this Quran itself.
- Yes, this Quran is the culprit then, while it is a LIAR then. It made the false claim that its verses are clear and easy to understand.
ولقد يسرنا القرآن للذكر فهل من مدكر
We have made the Quran easy to understand, but is there anyone who would pay attention?
And then this same verse has been repeated multiple times in the Quran (Verses 53:22, 53:32, 53:40)
And then the Quran claims that it is a GUIDE for the believers.
وَإِنَّهُ لَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةٌ لِّلْمُؤْمِنِينَ
And it (Quran) certainly is a Guide and a mercy to those who believe.
But according to the modern Muslim apologists/Quranists, then this Quran was neither a guide nor mercy for billions of Muslims of the last 1400 years, as it failed in guiding them that raping slave women was false, and they were fools that they didn't understand the Quran.
And then the Quran claims that its verses are CLEAR.
تِلْكَ آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِ وَكِتَابٍ مُّبِينٍ
These are the verse of the Koran and a Clear/Manifest Book.
So, what kind of CLEAR book is this which is even unable to tell that rape of captive/slave women against their consent is false?
And then the Quran claims that it is a guidance and good tidings for the believers.
هُدًى وَبُشْرَى لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ
(This Quran is a) guidance and good tidings for believers.
But how can it be guidance and good tidings when the modern Muslim apologists/Quranists are telling these billions of believers of the last 1400 years that they got misguided despite reading and pondering upon this Quran the whole of their lives?
And then the Quran claims that it was revealed in Arabic language, so then people can understand it.
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
We have revealed it in the Arabic language so that you would understand it.
But according to the modern Muslim apologists/Quranists, those Sahaba and Muslims of the last 1400 years (who were Arabs themselves) were unable to understand the Quran, despite it being in the Arabic language.
إِنَّ هَ۔ذَا الْقُرْآنَ يَهْدِي لِلَّتِي هِيَ أَقْوَمُ
Indeed, this, the Quran, guides to that path, which is most straight/correct.
But what kind of the most straight and correct path is it, when it put billions of Muslims on the path of raping the captive/slave women?
هُدًى لِّلنَّاسِ وَبَيِّنَٰتٍ مِّنَ ٱلْهُدَىٰ وَٱلْفُرْقَانِ
This Book is a perfect guidance for mankind and consists of clear teachings which show the right way and are a criterion of Truth and falsehood.
But how can it be a criterion of Truth & Falsehood when the modern Muslim apologists/Quranists are claiming that all Sahaba and all billions of Muslims of the last 1400 years were indulged in Falsehood of raping the captive/slave women of the last 14 centuries?
Thus, when the modern Muslim apologists/Quranists try to use the tactics of changing the meaning of the Quran, then they are trapped, as they are then blaming their Quran to be a LIAR and for making false claims.
As wise people had already told, you have to tell hundreds of lies in order to hide a single lie. This same thing is happening with the modern Muslim apologists/Quranists in this case.
How to respond to Islamic apologists: "You have taken things out of context and you must study with a scholar"
Answer: But under which Scholar should we understand the context?
What if different Scholars are themselves taking things in different contexts?
These Scholars are contradicting each other, while there are contradictions present in Quran and Ahadith themselves.
And Contradiction in divine revelation means only one thing, i.e. they are not from any God in the heavens, but it was Muhammad who was making the revelation on his own, and this caused the 'human errors', which ultimately resulted in 'contradictions'.
Islamic Law (i.e. Sharia) is itself full of contradictions.
For example, Islamic Sharia says even a breastfed baby girl can be married and can be used to take all kinds of sexual pleasures like kissing her naked body or rubbing the penis in her thighs in order to ejaculate etc. And if she is 4 or 5 years old, then the husband can make her kiss and masturbate his penis. And when she is even 5 or 6 or 7 and the husband feels that she is strong enough to bear the penetration, then he is allowed to penetrate his penis in her too. And there is an IJMA of Muslim Ulama upon it (i.e. all of them are UNANIMOUS) upon it (at least they were unanimous during the last many centuries).
Please read these 2 related articles:
(1) Islam: Even a breastfed baby Girl can be married and used for sexual pleasure
(2) If got lust for the “minor adopted daughter” due to her beauty, then taking her into Nikah is “Halal Allah” and raping her is also “Halal Allah” for the Muslim Father
Even if some modern Muslims of this century refuse to accept it today, but the question remains why was so-called all-Wise Allah not able to send Sharia Laws in a clear way (without contradictions and the so-called contexts) so that the minor girls of the last 1400 centuries should have not suffered due to it?
The Quran is a big book. Was it difficult for all-Wise Allah to even reveal a single CLEAR verse which could have prohibited the marriage of a minor girl and then put restrictions upon having any kind of driving any sexual services from her?
The Truth is, the so-called all-Wise Allah failed completely when early Ulama of many centuries had unanimously accepted this Ijma of a marriage of a minor girl and then using her as a sex object.
The same is the case with the rape of prisoner/slave women in a "TEMPORARY" Sexual Relationship (like Shia Mut'a).
Allah made it Halal for the Muslim owner that after fulfilling his Lust in a Shia Mut'a type "Temporary Sexual Relationship), if he got bored, then he could hand her over to one of his brothers (or even to any of his slaves). And after all of his brothers (/or slaves) had raped her one by one and fulfilled their lust and got bored, then she could be sold to the 2nd master, who again raped her, and then sold her to the 3rd master .... and thus, this cycle of rape continued for the poor slave-girl.
Sahih Muslim, Kitab-ul-Nikah (link):
0 Abu Sa'id al-Khadri said: We went out with Allah's Messenger on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them (i.e. to have sex with them in temporary sexual relationship), for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired good ransom money for them by selling them to others). So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (i.e. withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception so that they don’t become pregnant). But then we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger, and he said: (Yes, it is allowed, but) it does not matter if you do it or not, while if any soul has to be born up to the Day of Resurrection, then it will be born.
Allah/Muhammad allowed the master to snatch away the wife of his slave, and to start raping her, and thus destroying the whole slave family.
Sahih Bukhari, Book of Marriage (link):
Companion Anas Ibn Malik said: The meaning of the verse (وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ Surah Nisa) is this that if a slave girl of any person is in the marriage of his slave man, then owner could take that woman back for himself (to have sex with her) from his slave man.
Please read the detailed article regarding Slave Women in Islam and you will be surprised if any God can do such injustice to innocent girls/women:
And there is no problem of context here while all Muslim scholars are themselves giving this same fatwa.
Moreover, look at the Fatwa of All Muslim Scholars that slave women are not even allowed to take Hijab, and their breasts should be naked in Public. (Yes, you have read it correctly, all Muslim Ulama are unanimous that the breasts of slave women are naked). Please read it here:
Hijab is not 'modesty', as Islam prohibited the Slave-Women from taking Hijab or even covering their naked breasts in public
It is only a LIE that Quranic Verses are made EASY to understand
If we need a Scholar in name of the context, then this only proves that the Quran is making a false promise, when it claims that its verses are simple and clear to understand.
(Quran 54:17) ولقد يسرنا القرآن للذكر فهل من مدكرWe have made the Quran easy to understand, but is there anyone who would pay attention?
(Quran 27.1) تِلْكَ ءَايَٰتُ ٱلْقُرْءَانِ وَكِتَابٍ مُّبِينٍ
These are verses of the Quran -a book that makes (things) clear;
A challenge to Quranists: Prove to us that Muslims didn't use Ahadith during the first 250 years
Quranists misguide others by claiming that Hadith is a misguidance when it was written only 250 years after the death of the Prophet.
But the issue is, not WRITING Ahadith (in a book form) does not mean that Muslims were not using Ahadith ORALLY during the first 250 years.
So, this is a challenge for Quranists to prove that Muslims were not using Ahadith ORALLY during the first 250 years.
Obviously, Quranists have no answer to this. Even if they try to answer it, then they have to use the same historic traditions, which they claim to be misguidance.
Everything we know about early Islamic history comes from hadiths. What is Quran? How and who wrote it? Who is Muhammed? Without hadiths, we can't answer these simple questions.