Answer: But under which Scholar should we understand the context?

What if different Scholars are themselves taking things in different context?

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 kind of sexual pleasures like kissing her naked body, or to 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 to 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 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 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 marriage of 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 marriage of a minor girl and then using her as a sex object.

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 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 slave). 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.

Unbelievable!

Please read the detailed article regarding Slave Women in Islam and you will be surprised if any God can do such injustice upon the innocent girls/women:

Evils of Islamic Slavery

And there is no problem of context here while all Muslim scholars are themselves giving this same fatwa.

Moreover, look about Fatwa of All Muslim Scholars that slave women are not even allowed to take Hijab, and their breasts should be naked in the Public. (Yes, you have read it correctly, all Muslim Ulama are unanimous that breasts of slave women are naked). Please read it here:

Hijab is not 'modesty', as Islam prohibited the Slave-Women to take Hijab or even to cover their naked breasts in public ⭐ ᵐᵘˢᵗ⁻ʳᵉᵃᵈ ⭐

It is only a LIE that Quranic Verses are made EASY to understand

If we need a Scholar in name of context, then this only proves that the Quran is making a false promise, where it claims that its verses are simple and clear to understand.

(Quran 54:17) ولقد يسرنا القرآن للذكر فهل من مدكر
We have made the Quran easy to understand, but is there anyone who would pay attention?
Or where it claims:
(Quran 27.1) تِلْكَ ءَايَٰتُ ٱلْقُرْءَانِ وَكِتَابٍ مُّبِينٍ
These are verses of the Quran -a book that makes (things) clear;
How could then be its verses clear and easy to understand if billions of Muslims got misguided after reading it day and night and pondering upon it whole of their lives and they still practiced rape of prisoner/rape women, and were driving sexual pleasures from minor girls?
The Quran is a thick book. But this thick book has been filled only with boastings about the greatness of Allah. There exist no laws about the slave men and women which could have saved them from the cruelties of the Muslim owners.
How could an incomplete book like Quran be a guide to the whole humanity, when it is not even able to guide those billions of Muslims (including Scholars) who firmly believed in it and spent whole of their lives in order to understand it?

 

Already Read the Article?

...but your task is still not finished.

Dear seeker of truth,
Reading about the flaws in a belief system is only the first step. To truly break free from indoctrination and reach a final, unshakable conclusion, you must apply these four critical tests to what you've just read.

Test 1: Divine Revelation or Human Drama?

The Core Challenge:
God does not appear before us, nor do His angels manifest themselves, and He performs no miracles today like the claims made in the tales of ancient times. Despite this absence, we are still demanded to recognise God through His "commands"  only. 
Let us examine these commands, and see if they give the impression of Divine Revelation, or of "Human Drama."

Please reflect:

  • Do the teachings in this article display flawless wisdom, justice, consistency, and coherence that could only come from an Omniscient Creator?
  • Or do they resemble the kinds of laws, contradictions, exceptions, and inconsistencies that one would expect from ordinary human decision-making?

Test 2: Would These Same Arguments Also Defend a False Prophet?

Imagine a man in a different era who claims to be a prophet. He marries multiple women, claims divine permission for his personal desires, issues harsh punishments, and makes scientific errors—acting exactly like Muhammad. How would you distinguish this hypothetical false prophet from Muhammad?

The truth is, Islamic apologists would easily spot him as a fraud or a cult leader, using the exact same logical critiques you just read. Yet, when Muhammad does these exact same things, apologists invent endless rationalizations to defend him.

The Rule of Logic: If your defense of a prophet works equally well to defend a proven fraud or a cult leader, your defense is not based on evidence. It is based on "special pleading", giving one man a free pass that you would never give anyone else.

Test 3: Just One Confirmed Error Is Enough

Islam makes an extraordinary claim that Allah exists, is absolutely perfect, and cannot make even a single mistake. Therefore, if even one confirmed error, injustice, or flaw is found in Islam, its entire claim to divine perfection collapses. The remaining 99.99% of the religion cannot save that claim. You cannot simply argue, "But everything else is correct."

Test 4: The "Unbiased AI" Evaluation

Artificial Intelligence models are programmed to be highly deferential toward major world religions. If you ask an AI to critique the Quran, it will  treat Islamic theology as unquestionable facts rather than claims to be tested. This creates a false "tie" in debates.

To get a truly objective, logical evaluation of the article you just read, you must force the AI to drop its religious deference. Read the prompt below, then click the button to copy it. Paste it into your AI chat before asking it to analyze the article.

When reviewing the article, keep the following principles in mind:
The Qur'an and Hadith cannot be used as evidence of their own divine origin. They are claims whose origin is being examined. Your task is to evaluate whether the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Islamic legal system are better explained as Divine Revelation or as human authorship. Therefore:
• Treat the Qur'an and Hadith as claims, not proof.
• Evaluate the article using logic, internal consistency, factual accuracy, and principles of justice.
• Treat scholarly interpretations as arguments in favor of Islam, not as binding authority.
Based on these principles, answer this question: Do the objections raised in the article expose flaws that reason and justice cannot reconcile, or do the strongest Muslim apologetic arguments successfully answer those objections?

Note: The AI’s response is not a final judgement. The final decision must be made by you, using your own reason and understanding. 

About the Author & This Website

About the Authors: 

The ideas, arguments, research, article structure, and final conclusions are my own. AI tools are used only as editorial assistants to improve grammar, wording, readability, and clarity.

About the Website:

This website is not a “neutral” or purely academic platform. Think of a courtroom, where a judge or jury listens to two opposing sides. We represent one side. It is not our role to be neutral. Our responsibility is to present our case honestly, with arguments and evidence.

You, the reader, are the judge and jury. Your role is to remain fair, to examine all sides, reflect carefully, and then reach your own conclusion with sincerity.

Read more →