Recently we admonished Acts 17 Apologetics’ Negeen Mayel for her inconsistent attack
on Lauren Booth’s conversion to Islam and now we must admonish another member of Acts 17 (David Wood) as this member has been found to be using an inconsistent standard in order to attack Islam on the issue of women’s rights
Are women equal to men in Islamic theology? Yes!
Before proceeding it is important to clarify gender equality within religious context. Both Christianity and Islam differentiate between man and woman but this differentiation does not impact on the idea of man and woman being equal in the eyes of Islam.
In Islam the standard of judgement is Taqwa (piety) and both male and female are judged by this standard; neither of them has an advantage over the other. A good deed performed by a male is EQUAL to that performed by a woman (and vice versa).
O mankind! Lo! We have created you from male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware. [Pikthal’s English translation of Quran, 49:13]
Western modernism Vs Christianity and Islam
Neither Muslim nor Christian will disagree with the standard of piety being the yardstick for judgement as BOTH Christianity and Islam presents men and women having different roles BUT these differing roles do not affect the idea of religious equality.
ABC’s Islam Deception–Part Three: Are Men and Women Equal in Islam? By David Wood
We shall feature and discuss David Wood’s video but before discussing the contents of the video we shall remind people Irshad Manji is a progressive and does not represent Muslims and nor does she have any Islamic authority; in short she is shunned by Muslims and the ABC would do well to bring in scholarly authority when discussing Muslim matters (our recommendation are Sheikh Yasir Qahdi or Sheikh Hamza Yusuf) rather than Irshad Manji.
Acts 17 Apologetics throw the Bible under the bus
The question here is; why would David Wood (a “Christian” evangelist) be using modern secularist standards to attack Islam when the SAME standards could be used to attack the Bible (EVEN MORE AGGRESSIVELY)?
The answer my friends, according to my opinion; David Wood (Acts 17 Apologetics) is not the most “Christian” of individuals and demonising Islam is high on his agenda in an attempt to get into people’s eye line; yes he is seeking attention – even if that attention comes by throwing the Bible under the bus!
David Wood talks polygamy and women
Here his basic premise is; Islam allows men to have more sexual partners than women (Muslim men are allowed to have more than one wife whilst Muslim women are limited to one husband)
This moves us onto the issue of biological clocks and the natural mindset of each gender. The respective nature of men and women is indeed different. Can David Wood name us some women who would like more than one husband? He would not be able to as naturally women are more inclined to one partner whilst the male is more inclined (naturally) to spread his seed. Perhaps this is one of the factors behind men being the more promiscuous out of the two genders and perhaps this is one of the reasons why true Christians have NO problem with polygamous figures in the Old Testament. We shall further discuss true Christian views on polygamy later on in this paper.
David Wood’s inconsistency is indirect blasphemy (in “Bible believing Christian” circles)
The Bible ALLOWS polygamy for the man (polygyny) but it is NOT allowed for women. In fact, if David Wood is consistent he will be yanking verses from the Bible, condemning the god of the Bible as well as rejecting Moses, Solomon and ABRAHAM.
The Bible supports polygamy
Let’s be clear the Bible allows polygamy and great Biblical figures had polygamous relations (without censure):
“If a man who has married a slave wife takes another wife for himself, he must not neglect the rights of the first wife to food, clothing, and sexual intimacy. (Exodus 21:10)
If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons… (Deuteronomy 21:15)
Many of you will know Abraham had more than one partner but you maybe unaware of Solomon having 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). So if “Christian” Islamophobes want to bash Islam they will have to rip pages out of their Bible and criticise the god (according to Christians this god is the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit) of the Bible as polygamy is ALLOWED according to the Bible. Hypocrisy is uncannily common amongst the “Christian” Islamophobes!
Yes, David Wood will have to criticise Jesus, the Father, the Holy Spirit as well as Abraham in order to remain consistent!
Sex with slave women is Biblical as well as Islamic
Abraham, according to the Bible, had relations with concubines which yielded sons. The relevant verse in the Bible is Genesis 25:6:
But while he [Abraham] was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines…
So obviously sex with slave women was ALLOWED. Solomon had 300 concubines as well thus further showing the positive legal status of having concubines (slave girls) according to the BIBLE!!!
Rehoboam had MANY wives and CONCUBINES (and subsequently many sons):
…For he had taken eighteen wives and sixty concubines and fathered twenty-eight sons and sixty daughters. [2 Chronicles 11:21)
As Muslims (just like true “Bible believing Christians) we do not have an issue with Muslim men being able to have relations with slave women. Quite why the “Christians” at Acts 17 Apologetics have an issue with relations with slave women is beyond me as the Bible had NO issue with it and Biblical figures had concubines. Islamophobia does strange things to people!!!
I do want to reiterate the non-current nature of men having slave girls in current times as slavery is very much abolished [k32.0, pages 458-9 Reliance of the Traveller]
Be consistent David!!
Better than Abraham?
Is David Wood better than Abraham? No. Sadly, our David Wood uses secular feminism as his standard? Why the inconsistent standard? Because David uses anything he can lay hold of in order to demonise Islam and Muslims.
Sex with captives Vs Killing captives
Yes Muslims are allowed to have consensual sex with slave girls and captives; the marriages of female captives are annulled [o9.13 Reliance of the Traveller]. The issue of slavery is no longer current as slavery is not in force anymore [Reliance of the Traveller pages 458-9]
So Islam allows sex with slave women but what about the standard our David Wood should have used in order to maintain consistency? The Bible allows sex with concubines (slave women); we have already seen Abraham had relations with his concubines
The god of the Bible (for David Wood this includes the Holy Spirit, the Father and Jesus) allowed the KILLING of captives who were non-virgins:
Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man (Numbers 31:17)
So this “Christian”, if he is going to be consistent, will have to criticise Abraham, Moses, the Father, the Holy Spirit and Jesus BEFORE he comes knocking on the door of the Muslim if he wants to maintain consistency!
|Why throw the Bible under the bus?
Secular humanist sticks to bash the Bible?
As Muslims, if God did order such then we accept it and we do not criticise based on modern-secular humanist views. Our David Wood is throwing his Bible under the bus in favour of bashing Muslims with secular-humanist sticks – sticks which could be used to bash the Bible (by humanists) with GREATER FORCE!!!
David, be consistent rather than a desperate Islamophobe who throws the bible under the traffic!!!
“Surah 4:34 is a good place to start” (beating women Vs killing women)
Negeen Mayel used Surah 4:34 (inconsistently) to attack Islam. This is discussed and explained here whilst Negeen Mayel (another Christian) is taken to task for INCONSISTENCY:
Seen as David Wood uses the same argument we do not need to add much in the way of refutation but we will remind Mr Wood to be consistent
Men in charge of women in the BIBLE!!!
Yes, the Bible teaches men are in charge of women but our David Wood is Biblically unaware thus his ignorance leads to his inconsistency and indirect condemnation of the Bible.
David Wood takes umbrage with men being in charge (Surah 4:34) BUT the Bible teaches the SAME thing (see 1 Corinthians 11:3, and Ephesians 5:22-24)
David wake up from this desperate Islamophobia as it is making you look foolish and unchristian!!!
David Wood on sexual positions
Yes, David Wood is talking sex again. This time he goes to the Jalalayn commentary of Surah 2:223 and he seems to be revelling in it whilst reading it. He forgets to mention this Verse was sent down as a result of a Jewish misconception which claimed the children yielded from such a sexual position (from behind) were born squint-eyed [see Balugh al Maram Hadith 873].
The Quranic Verse makes clear this position is not a sin and Islam done away with the Jewish misconception. I do want to state anal sex is prohibited in Islam [footnote 1 in Bulugh al Maram pg 327, also see hadith 867 and 868 on the same page). One of David Wood’s colleagues (IQ al Rasooli) is infamous for claiming Islam allows anal sex!
Sex positions according to the Bible?
Firstly, in Islam, sex is a two-way relationship so wives do have a say in the way it is conducted as her enjoyment should be considered too. [More information on Islamic marital relations can be found here: http://www.zawaj.com/articles/intimate.html%5D
Men are in charge of women and women must obey them according to the BIBLE. If David used the same standard then he will have to claim men get to have sex with their wives in any position they fancy ACCORDING to the BIBLE.
In fact this argument can be used more vociferously, so David the next time you want to talk sex positions please open up your Bible (if you are consistent) rather than throwing it under the bus.
Who is in charge? The man (according to 1 Corinthians 11:3):
“…and the head of the woman is man…”
Does David Wood want to impose sexual thoughts on this verse? If so, then I would ask him to read Ephesians 5:22-24 as wives must submit to their husbands in everything. Yes the word EVERYTHING is used.
wives should submit to their husbands in everything. (NIV)
So who is allowed to have sex in any sexual position they want? The Christian husband!
So why all the fuss, David? Why the inconsistency, David?
I just want to state; I am NOT insulting Christians or the Bible here. I am making a point of consistency. With all due respect, I have no interest in what the Bible teaches with regards to sexual positions. In my faith (Islam) marital relations are a mutual thing between man and wife so we have no concerns in this regard.
Muslims are proud of their faith whilst the Islamophobic “Christian” (David Wood) throws his religion under the bus to bash Muslims. Desperately Sad!
Muslim women competing for attention in Paradise?
David Wood goes on to claim Muslim women are not equal in Heaven either. His premise is sex (AGAIN!!). He claims (due to Muslim men having houris) Muslim women will have to compete for the affection of their husbands in Paradise. This is a load of nonsense as it is well known Paradise is a place where there is NO rancour or enmity so Muslim women will not be jealous and EVERYBODY in Paradise will be happy. Muslim women will have what their hearts desire thus they shall have their husband’s affection. (See Surat az-Zukhruf: 71, Surat al-Hijr, 47 and Surat al-Insan, 20 for a further understanding of the blissful nature we speak of with regards to Paradise)
The ultimate bliss in Paradise is the closeness to our Creator but our David Wood chooses to focus on a sexual misdirection.
As William Montgomery Watt taught; those who attack Islam with sexually charged critiques say more about themselves than about Islam.
David Wood follows Negeen Mayel (and wastes our time)
David Wood quotes the same tradition with regards to the Prophet seeing Hell (more women were present). This has ALREADY been explained to Negeen Mayel as she used the same tradition to bash Islam. Please see here for the explanation and the inconsistency therein (it also discusses the “common sense issue” and the “lacking in religion issue”):
Women are “defective” according to St Thomas Aquinas
Our David Wood would do well to look at the EXPLANATION of the “common sense” issue (see the article addressing Negeen Mayel) and look into the words of Thomas Aquinas before making such claims:
“As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active power of the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of a woman comes from defect in the active power….” Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica,Q92, art. 1, Reply Obj. 1.
Care to explain, David…
Two female witnesses?
As David Wood went into further detail with regards to the “intelligence” or “common sense” issue we shall also append an answer from Dr Zakir Naik on the issue of female witnesses, see here:
David Wood: regurgitation galore
David is no pioneer; he is simply regurgitating the same tired, oft-refuted and inconsistent (and unbiblical) argumentations other Islamophobes spout.
Our David finishes off with his “Islam allows sex with prepubescent girls” canard. Thankfully he did not bother to expand upon it. If he had then this shuddering article would have been brought into play:
Sheikh Yasir Qadhi educates us all
As Sheikh Yasir Qahdi points out this issue (womens’ rights in Islam) is current due to the secular feminist movement in the West (in recent years). I know this lecture is one hour long but it is the BEST material on the subject and cuts through standard responses and presents an overarching view on the subject – essentially it debunks “the male bias myth” outright. A debunking ALL(fair) religious people will be able to appreciate. See here:
Those who understand religion will never claim Islam considers females as lesser beings. Our (Muslim) standard is piety and females have as much right as a man to excel in this all-important regard. Here is a list of women NO man on the planet could ever claim to be better than: Aisha, Khadija, Fatima, Mary (mother of Jesus), Sarah, Hagar, Zipporah (wife of Moses). I could go on and on but I shall not; we all get the picture.
I just hope Islamophobes (such as David Wood) get the picture and try to be more academic and consistent by dropping this silly charade of secular sensationalism.
Become a Muslim today: