Sunday, February 28, 2021



Allah provided a pretext for “Prostitution” in the Qur’an. It is known as “Nikah Mut’a” in Arabic. “Nikah Mut’a” or “Temporary Marriage” is a fixed-time marriage arrangement where payment is agreed upon in advance between the man and the woman. The “marriage” automatically dissolves once the fixed-time duration expires. It is nothing but a form of prostitution legalized by Allah in the Qur’an.

Prostitution is morally wrong. It is also a great social evil. Unbelievable as it may seem, this debased practice is sanctioned in Islam. We will now discuss the legitimacy of prostitution in Islam. The article may seem extensive as vital points are repeated from different perspectives. It is intentionally written in this way so as to meticulously expose the true nature of this debased religion. An extensive knowledge on this subject is absolutely necessary to see through the lies, deception and denial of those who act as defenders of the Islamic faith. We need to see the true face Islam. Please read this article very carefully and get to know the real Islam.

There is a type of “marriage” in Islam known as “Nikah Mut’a. Also spelled “Mut’ah. This form of marriage is based on a contract between a man and woman with a fixed date of expiry. The man and woman will become strangers after the expiration date. Its format is that the woman says the following to the man after they both agree to the terms of the dower and the period of time: “I married you to myself on such-and-such a dower and for the known period of time” – where the duration of the time is specified. The man’s answer will be: “I accept. Needless to say, this form of marriage provides a legitimizing cover for sex workers. Temporary Marriage, Fixed-Term Marriage or Pleasure Marriage are different names for the Arabic term, Nikah Mut’a. This form of marriage is more commonly referred to simply as Mut’a in Islam.

The dower can be in the form of money or something else. According to the terms of the contract, the woman becomes the wife of the man, and the man becomes her husband till the end of the period specified in the contract. Mut’a can be contracted for a night or a few days, months or years or even for a few hours. As soon as the period is over, the marriage is automatically terminated. Then, the Muslim man could leave her without any further commitments. No divorce is necessary to terminate the marriage.

After Mut’a was revealed in the Qur’an, Muhammad legislated it with all the rules pertaining to it. All the Muslims scholars and chroniclers without exception agree that Muhammad established Mut’a and made it legal after his migration to Medina. All Muslims, in their various sects, are also unanimous in their view that this sort of marriage was legislated during the dawn of Islam.

The Sunni and Shi’a Muslims have no disagreement as to its original permissibility by Allah. They only disagree as to whether it has been abolished later or not. Sunnis believe that, in spite of its original permissibility in Islamic law, it was later abrogated. The Shi’a rejects this view. Even today, the Shi’ite sect practices Mut’a. Shi’ite leaders claim Mut’a is still in force and legitimate in Islam. This view is upheld by millions of Shi’ite Muslims worldwide.

Islamic sources reveals that Muhammad made Mut’a lawful for his followers, then prohibited it, and then made it legal again.  Therefore, even after the passing away of the Prophet, great Muslim scholars such as Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Ibn Mas’ud maintained that the practice of Mut’a was never abrogated and is still in force. The legitimacy of their conclusion is confirmed by the records found in authentic Hadiths. It is also substantiated by the fact that it was still in vogue during the rule of Caliph Abu Bakr and Caliph Umar – long after the death of Muhammad.  Ibn Abbas not only supported the legality of the enjoyment of temporary marriage but he also firmly maintains that the practice of Mut’a was never abolished. He is well known among all the Muslim scholars. He occupied a much esteemed position with Muhammad. The Caliphs also sought his legal opinion and call him the interpreter of the Qur’an.

Only authentic Hadiths that are accepted by Sunni Muslims will be used in this article. The Qur’an and these authentic Hadiths will be used to prove not only the original permissibility of Mut’a in Islam but also the fact that the practice of Mut’a is still in force today. It will also be shown that by reviving the practice when the need arose – after prohibiting it – Muhammad set the pattern for future generations regarding the application of Mut’a.

It is vital to begin our discussion by establishing the evidences to prove that Islam initially allowed this form of illicit marriage to be legislated in its theology in its early history. It is also essential to prove that this shameful act was practiced under the supervision of Muhammad. Having established this, we can then move on to ascertain the fact that this immoral practice is still in force in Islam. If it can be shown that prostitution is authorized in the Qur’an, then this evidence is more than sufficient to prove that Islam cannot be religion of the true God. Carefully consider all the evidences provided here.


The Qur’anic verse that legitimatizes Mut’a:

Surah 5:87: “O ye who believe! Forbid not the good things which Allah hath made lawful for you, and transgress not, Lo! Allah loveth not transgressors.” (Pickthall)

Ibn Mas’ud, considered as one of the greatest Muslim scholars related a well-known event that occurred during the holy wars led by Muhammad. This event is recorded in numerous Islamic sources.  This event provides the historical background for the revealing of Surah 5:87. In the following Hadith, Ibn Mas’ud narrates why Allah revealed this Qur’anic verse to Muhammad.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 13o:

Narrated ‘Abdullah (b. Mas’ud): We used to participate in the holy battles led by Allah’s Apostle and we had nothing (no wives) with us. So we said, “Shall we get ourselves castrated?” He forbade us that and then allowed us to marry women with a temporary contract (2) and recited to us: O you who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.’ (Surah 5:87)

Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3243:

Abdullah (b. Mas’ud) reported: We were on an expedition with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and we had no women with us. We said: Should we not have ourselves castrated? He (the Holy Prophet) forbade us to do so He then granted us permission that we should contract temporary marriage for a stipulated period giving her a garment, and ‘Abdullah then recited this verse: ‘Those who believe do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, and do not transgress. Allah does not like transgressors’ (al-Qur’an 5:87).

The above Hadiths show the circumstances for the revealing of Surah 5:87It reveals the reason for the authorization of Mut’a by Allah. The account in Sahih Muslim verifies that Muhammad permitted his followers to “contract temporary marriage for a stipulated period giving her a garment. The “garment” was the payment for the enjoyment of sex they receive from these womenAlternatively, even “a handful of grain” is sufficient for the exchange.

Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2105:

Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: It has also been transmitted by AbuAsim from Salih ibn Ruman, from AbuzZubayr on the authority of Jabir who said: During the lifetime of the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) we used to contract temporary marriage for a handful of grain.

Muhammad clearly allowed his men to engage in prostitution in the pretext of marriage. He tried to exploit the legitimacy of the marriage union as a means to deceitfully legalize prostitution. Thus, temporary marriage became a legal form of prostitution in Islam.

Imam Fakhruddin Razi was a 12th Century Sunni Islamic theologian. He was an expert in a wide variety of disciplines, including the traditional Islamic fields of Sharia (Islamic Law), Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), Tafsir (Exegesis) and Islamic literature. In his famous works known as “At-tafsir al-Kabir,” he gave his scholarly commentary regarding the validity of Mut’a during the early days of Islam:

“No Muslim disputes that Mut’ah marriage was allowed in early Islam, the difference is whether it has been abrogated or not.”

Imam Fakhruddin Razi also added:

Imran Ibn Husain narrated: “The verse of Mut’a was revealed in Allah’s Book, and there did not came any other verse after that to abrogate it; and the Prophet ordered us to do it, so we did it at the time of Allah’s Apostle.

Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3246:

Jabir b. ‘Abdullah and Salama b. al-Akwa’ said: There came to us the proclaimer of Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and said: Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) has granted you permission to benefit yourselves, i. e. to contract temporary marriage with women.


Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 52:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah and Salama bin Al-Akwa’: While we were in an army, Allah’s Apostle came to us and said“You have been allowed to do the Mut’a (marriage)so do it.” Salama bin Al-Akwa’ said: Allah’s Apostle’s said, “If a man and a woman agree (to marry temporarily), their marriage should last for three nights, and if they like to continue, they can do so; and if they want to separate, they can do so.”

“You have been allowed to do the Mut’aso do it.” Muslim sources clearly reveal that Muhammad commanded his followers to practice Mut’a. The testimony of Sabura al-Juhanni in Sahih Muslim also establishes the fact that Muhammad ordered his men to commit fornication.

Sahih Muslim (Arabic), Kitab al-Nikah, Hadith 3490:

“Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered us to contract temporary marriage.”

And we are further informed of Muhammad’s encouragement to his Companions to do Mut’a in Sahih Muslim (Arabic), Kitab al-Nikah, Hadith 3491:

“Sabra b. Ma’bad reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) ordered his Companions to contract temporary marriage with women.

The above Hadiths and Tafsirs clearly prove the following facts:

(1) Allah sanctioned Mut’a by revealing a verse in the Qur’an.

(2) And Mut’a is considered as among the “good things of Allah.”

(3) Mut’a was practiced during the time of Muhammad under his direction.

(4) Mut’a was sanctioned for the sole purpose to satisfy the sexual urges of Muslims. It was initiated in the Qur’an for this purpose.

(5) Muhammad considered Mut’a as a “benefit” for Muslim men.

(6) He commanded/ordered his followers to do it.

The evidences are undeniably clear. Muhammad permitted, no, “ordered” his followers to practice Mut’a. One must be a complete fool not to recognize the tone of command and encouragement in Muhammad’s words. The issuing of an order is a significant matter. There is a world of difference between tolerating a practice, and ordering a practice to be carried out. All the above authentic Sunni Muslim sources prove that Mut’a was practiced legally under Islamic law with the blessings of Allah and Muhammad. In every instance, it was authorized by Muhammad to delight the sexual cravings of his followers. Thus, Muhammad approved the enjoyment of a practice that is clearly recognized as prostitution by the rest of the civilized world. Islam even regards this sinful immoral practice as something “beneficial” and a “good thing. Only the most debased religion will consider such sinful acts as prostitution as something good or beneficial.

Mut’a was made permissible and sanctioned by Muhammad at the start of Islam. It was practiced during a journey or a raid or when it became necessary. This means at such times when Muslims could not control their sexual urge. If Mut’a is not an excuse for satisfying the lust of Muslim men, then what is it? It seems to be the easiest Islamic solution for adultery.  Imagine, Allah using adultery to solve the sin of adultery. This kind of idiocy only happens in Islam. The purpose for the temporary marriage is made absolutely clear by its very name in Arabic. Mut’a means Pleasure.

If distance and absence from one’s marriage mate legitimizes adultery, why is the wife not given the same “benefit” by Allah? If the wife is expected to wait faithfully for the husband’s return, then why is not the same faithfulness required from the husband? Is this not an act of gross injustice to Muslim wives? Muslim apologists will now claim that this is the nature of man. They will say that this is the way Allah made man. By using this argument, Muslim apologists are actually blaming Allah for the unfaithful acts carried out by Muslim husbands. For Allah to authorize the debased practice of Mut’a proves that he cannot be our Creator. How can he be when he fails to understand the true inner feelings of a faithful wife? Just ask any woman how she feels when her husband even looks passionately at another woman, let alone having sex with her.

Muslim apologists, in their usual habit of deceiving those not familiar with Islam, will say that Muhammad allowed this practice with the intention of gradually outlawing it. This is an absolute lie.  If this is true, why did Allah specifically reveal a Qur’anic verse to sanction this utterly immoral practice? We will now expose this lie.

Sahih Muslim, Volume 3, pp. 553-554:

“The contractual marriage was lawful before the campaign of Khaybar; then it became unlawful in the day of the campaign. Then it was made lawful again in the day of Mecca’s conquest. After three days, it was prohibited. The episodes concerning the lawfulness (of the contractual marriage) in the day of the conquest are not ambiguous and it is not permissible to forfeit it. There is nothing that may inhibit the repetition of practicing the contractual marriage again, and God is the omniscient, and the scholars have agreed to regard the contractual marriage as a temporary legal marriage, which does not entail any inheritance. The separation occurs as soon as the date of the agreement expires, and it does not require any legal divorce. Ibn’Abbas used to preach its lawfulness.

The above Hadith shows how Mut’a was implemented during the lifetime of the Prophet. The Hadith clearly reveals a pattern. It was implemented in the following manner: Mut’a On – Mut’a Off – Mut’a On – Mut’a Off. What can we logically conclude from this? Either Allah and Muhammad are two mentally deranged lunatics suffering from schizophrenic or it is their way of telling Muslims that this practice can be turned “On” whenever it becomes necessary. Well-known Muslim scholars support the view that this practice can be observed whenever it becomes necessary. Well, does this give you the impression that Allah and Muhammad are having in mind to gradually do away with this sinful practice?

In his Tafsir on Surah 4:24, Ibn Kathir stated the following:

“Ibn Abbas and other Sahaba said that Mut’ah can be utilised when needed, Ibn Hanbal also narrated the same.”(Page 3)

And in the esteemed work known as “The Prophetic Biography,” Ibn Kathir also stated the following:

“The prohibition of the contractual marriage took place in the day of the Khaybar campaign. Yet it had been established in Sahih of Muslim that Muhammad allowed them again to (sign) a contractual marriage in the Day of Mecca’s conquest. Then he prohibited it. The Shafi’i said: ‘I do not know any other thing which was made lawful, then prohibited, then made lawful again, then unlawful except the contractual marriage, which was prohibited in the year in which Mecca was conquered, then after that it became lawful.” (Part 3pages 365 and 366)

And in “The Prophetic Biography,” renowned Sunni Islamic jurist, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, also testified to the above statement of al-Shafi’i. And on page 345 he stated the following fact regarding the implementation of Mut’a:

“After the death of Muhammad, Ibn’Abbas made it lawful when there was a need for it. He used to say that the apostle prohibited it when it was dispensable, but it was made lawful when it became a necessity.” (p.345)

Imam al-Baydawi also supported the above statements regarding the implementation of Mut’a. His testimony can be read in his renowned book, “The Interpretation of Al-Baydawi. And on page 108 he added:

“The purpose of the contractual marriage is the mere pleasure of intercourse with a woman, and her own enjoyment in what she has given” (p.108).

Since Muhammad authorized his men to perform Mut’a when they were unable to control their sexual urges, this practice was revived whenever it became necessary. Contrary to the claims made by Muslim apologists, Muhammad did nothing to discourage this sinful practice. If Muhammad really wanted to discourage Mut’a, he would have sought to evidence his disagreement by either maintaining silence or by refraining to pass comments that encourage Muslims to continue this practice. This would show his personal non-commitment on the matter. Any concession by Muhammad would then be understood merely as a conciliatory gesture on his part.

However, the situation is entirely different when instead of discouraging the practice, Muhammad orders his followers to do Mut’a. Since an order is something that the followers must do, this shows that Muhammad supported the practice of Mut’a. In effect, this means that Muslims are now implementing a directive that their Prophet had issued. Therefore, this is no longer a matter of option but something that must be done. This is the expressed will of Muhammad and Allah. Moreover, it must be remembered Allah revealed a Qur’anic verse that included Mut’a among the “good things of Allah. So how can Muhammad then condemn or progressively censure the “good things of Allah”?

It is essential to note that no Qur’anic verse was revealed later to cancel the initial Qur’anic verse that made Mut’a legitimate. In other words, Allah did not inspire any Qur’anic verses later on to abolish Mut’a. Allah revealed its legitimacy in the Qur’an, and it was practiced to the end of Muhammad’s lifetime. Since Muhammad is the sole recipient of the Qur’an, the end of Muhammad’s life would automatically mean the end of the Qur’an’s revelation. As such, the claim that Muhammad wanted to eradicate Mut’a progressively is a total lie by Muslim apologist.

Mut’a was upheld and continued to be practiced among the faithful Muslims even after the passing away of Muhammad. We will now look at the further evidences that prove Mut’a was never abolished by Muhammad during his lifetime.

Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3248:

Ibn Uraij reported: ‘Ati’ reported that jibir b. Abdullah came to perform ‘Umra, and we came to his abode, and the people asked him about different things, and then they made a mention of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Yes, we had been benefiting ourselves by this temporary marriage during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) and during the time of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar

Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3249:

Jabir b. ‘Abdullah reported: We contracted temporary marriage giving a handful of tales or flour as a dower during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) and during the time of Abu Bakr until ‘Umar forbade it in the case of ‘Amr b. Huraith.

Sahih Bukhari (Arabic), Kitab al Tafseer, Tradition 4559:    

Narrated ‘Imran bin Hussain: “The Verse of Mut’a was revealed in Allah’s Book, so we did it at the time of Allah’s Apostle, and nothing was revealed in Qur’an to make it illegal, nor did the Prophet prohibit it till he died. But a man (who regarded it illegal) expressed what his own mind suggested.”

The English translator of the above Hadith by Sahih Bukhari namely Mohsin Khan changed the word “Mut’a” to “Hajj-at-Tamatu. This deceit is easily discernable because in the Arabic text of Sahih Bukhari, the word “Mut’a” has been used alone. Sunni Commentators of the Qur’an are unanimous in their decision that this Hadith refers to Mut’a-ul-Nisa (Temporary Marriage) and not Mut’a-ul-Haj. The English translation can be found at Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 43

The reason for this deceit in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari is because deep down, Muslims know that Mut’a is nothing more than a form of prostitution legalized by Allah and his Prophet. Muslim scholars are clearly embarrassed to reveal this ugly truth about the legality of prostitution in Islam to the western world. Otherwise, why should they resort to deception? Why should they deliberately mistranslate the Arabic text? Is this not, in reality, an admission that they are ashamed of Allah and his teachings?


Imam Jalaluddin Suyutrecorded the testimony of Imam Ali in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Volume 2 page 140:

Narrated Abdulrazaq and Abu Dawoud in (book) Nasikh and narrated ibn Jareer from al-Hakam that he was asked whether the verse on Mut’ah has been abrogated, he said: “No, Ali (RA) said that if it were not Umar forbidding it, no one would commit the sin of fornication except the wretched (Shaqian utmost wrongdoer).

The above Tafsir shows that it was not Muhammad but Caliph Umar, Islam’s second Caliph, who took it upon himself to prohibit this disgraceful practice. This proves that Mut’a existed long after the time of Muhammad’s death. It was still in vogue at the time of Caliph Umar’s rule. This fact corroborates with the authoritative statement of Ibn Abbas that Mut’a was not banned by the Prophet. It must be remembered that the Messenger of Allah permitted his followers to do Mut’a at a time of “necessity.”  Self-control is not a virtue in Islam. The fact that Muhammad revived Mut’a after he himself prohibited it shows that one can resort to Mut’a whenever it becomes “necessary. Thus the Prophet set the pattern for the implementation of Mut’a for all successive Muslim leaders.

Now, pay careful attention to Imam Ali’s words in the above Tafsir. He implied that prior to the banning of Mut’a by Umar, Muslims avoided the sin of fornication because of the availability of Mut’a. In other words, he is saying that Muslims avoided the sin of fornication by engaging in fornication through Mut’a marriages. To all rational people, Mut’a is nothing more than legal prostitution. Thus, according to Islamic logic, the way to prevent sin is to indulge in sin. It is like telling an alcoholic that it is not a problem to indulge in alcohol as long you simply call it by a different name.

No wonder, Allah is known as “the best of the deceivers.” (Surah 3:54). In all honesty, is there any difference between the practice of Mut’a and hiring the service of a prostitute? That is why it is not surprising for us to find that just as in the case of Mut’a, evil deeds such as robbery, rape, pedophilia, incest, slavery and murder are all sanctioned by Allah in the Qur’an. And Prophet Muhammad is guilty of committing every single act of these evil deeds. For Muslims who disagree and are shocked by these accusations leveled against their beloved Prophet, we advise them to do their homework. Check your own authentic Islamic sources.

The Qur’an itself bears witness that Mut’a is permissible in Islam. And we also have the testimonies of the Sahaba (Companions) of Muhammad to further support this fact. Imam Ibn Hajr Asqalani provided a list of the names of the Companions of Muhammad who testified to the validity of Mut’a during the reign of Caliph Abu Bakr and some part of Caliph Umar’s reign:

After the death of Holy Propheta group of Salaf deemed it HalalAmongst the Sahaba they were Asma bint Abi Bakr, Jabir bin Abdullah, Ibn Masood, Ibn Abbas, Mu’awiya, Amro bin Huraith, Abo Saeed, Salama and Mu’abed-the sons of Umaya bin Khalaf. He said that Jabir reported from the companions that (it was valid) during the reign of the Prophet, Abubakr and some part of Umar’s reign. He said that it is reported from Umar that he forbade it only if there were not two just witnesses. Some of Tab’een deemed (it halal) such as Tawous, Atta, Saeed bin Jubair and the majority of the jurists of Makka. (“Talkhees al Habeer fi Takhreej al Hadeeth al Rafa al Kabeer,” Volume 3, page 159)

And in Sharh Sahih Muslim by Imam an-Nawawi, we are informed in no uncertain terms as to was the first person to ban Mut’a:

“Hadhrath Umar was the first person to prohibit Mut’ah.”

If Mut’a was indeed prohibited during the lifetime of the Prophet, how can Caliph Umar be the first person to outlaw Mut’a? This clearly proves that the practice of Mut’a was not only lawful during the entire lifetime of Muhammad but also long after that. Otherwise, it will be impossible for Caliph Umar to be the first person to ban it. For sure, he had no authority to do such a thing. Therefore, if Muslims were to claim that Muhammad abolished the practice of Mut’a, then it means that those Companions of Muhammad who were still practicing Mut’a until the reign of Caliph Umar were, in fact, indulging in illegal prostitution. In actual fact, does it make any difference if one is fornicating illegally or fornicating legally through Mut’a? It is one and the same. Only in Islam, we can find such a thing as illegal and legal fornication.

As testified by Islamic sources, it was Caliph Umar who banned Mut’a many years later during his reign. Therefore, the claim by Sunni Muslims that Mut’a was finally prohibited by Muhammad on the day of the conquest of Mecca cannot simply be true. A very important factor for Muslims to consider is the fact that the foundation for the permissibility of Mut’a is inscribed in the Qur’an. This leaves Muslims with the possibility of its prohibition only if it were prohibited by another verse in the Qur’an. In other words, a prohibitory verse must be  revealed after the verse in which its original permissibility was indicated. Such a verse does not exist.  Thus, Mut’a continued to be practiced long after the death of Muhammad until Caliph Umar banned it on his own accord. But why did Umar make a decision to ban Mut’a?

Caliph Umar prohibited Mut’a during the later half of his caliphate. Imam Badruddin al-Aini recorded the following testimony of Abu Saeed Khudri who was a well-known Companion of Muhammad:

“Abu Saeed Khudri and Jabir bin Abdullah narrated: ‘We contracted temporary marriage till the half of the Umar’s caliphate until he forbade it in the case of Amr Bin Harith.’” (Umada tul Qari Sharah Sahih Bukhari, Volume 17 page 246. In some versions, the tradition can be found in Volume 8 page 310 of the book.)

Now for the moment of truth. Why did Caliph Umar forbid Mut’aThe reason is revealed for us in Kanz al Ummal, Dhikr Mut’ah, Volume 7, p. 94:

Um Abdullah bint Abi Khuthaima stated that a man came from Syria and said: ‘Celibacy has become difficult for me, arrange a woman for me with whom I can perform Mut’ah’. She replied by directing him to a woman, with whom he entered into an agreement, and brought forward just witnesses. He stayed with the woman for as long as Allah (swt) wanted him to stay and then left.

Umar received information and summoned me and asked: ‘Is what happened true? I replied: ‘Yes’. Umar said: ‘If he returns let me know’. Upon his return, I informed Umar. Umar summoned him, when he (the man) went to him, Umar asked him: ‘Why you did that?’ The man replied: ‘I performed it during the lifetime of Rasulullah and he never prohibited it until the time of his death. Then I practised it during the time of Abu Bakr and he never prohibited it until the time of his death, I also practised Mut’ah during your reign and you didn’t narrate any evidence of its prohibition.’ Umar replied: ‘By whom my soul in his hand! If I had forbade this before today, I would have stoned you, declare it (to the public) so that they can distinguish nikah from adultery’.

The reason for Caliph Umar to prohibit Mut’a is made very clear by his reply. It was to “distinguish nikah (marriage) from adultery.” In other words, it was to distinguish marriage from adultery in the guise of marriage. At least Caliph Umar understood what the practice of Mut’a really meant – ADULTERY. That is why he said he will punish the one practicing Mut’a with the same punishment that Allah has reserved for those committing adultery – stoning. It is one of the strongest admissions by a Muslim leader that Mut’a is nothing more than Adultery (Zina). However, this also means that the second Caliph of Islam is now forced to acknowledge that Allah sanctioned ProstitutionFornication and Adultery in the Qur’an.

It does not in the least matter to us if the majority of the Muslims try to salvage some dignity for Islam by falsely claiming that Muhammad prohibited this practice later on. The fact that Allah and Muhammad sanctioned this practice – even once – is sufficient to prove that Islam is false. It is sufficient to confirm that Allah can never be the Holy God that he deceitfully claims to be.

It must also be noted that according to authoritative Sunni texts, Umar never attributed the prohibition of Mut’a to the Prophet. In fact, Umar himself clearly stated: “Mut’a was permitted at the time of the Prophet and I prohibit it!”

We will now look at some evidences to further validate this fact regarding the prohibition of Mut’a. Just to clarify: Halal means permissible. Haram means forbidden.

Sharh Tajeed, Dhikr Muthaeen Umar, page 408:

Umar climbed the pulpit and said during the lifetime of Rasulullah three things were halal and now I deem them haram and shall punish those that practise them. Mut’ah of Nisa, Mut’ah of Hajj and declaring “Hayya ala khayril Ammal”.

Tafseer al-Kabeer:

Umar said: “Two Mut’ah’s existed during Rasulullah’s lifetime and I now prohibit both of them.” (Tafseer al Kabeer, by Imam Fakhr ul-Radhi, Page 42 & 43)

If Mut’a was really prohibited by Muhammad, Caliph Umar would have quoted the Prophet’s prohibition to strengthen his own prohibition of Mut’a. Since it was only Umar who forbade this sinful practice on his own accord, he took the responsibility for declaring the prohibition. Both the Hadiths and the Tafsirs makes it clear that Caliph Umar acted on his own.

In his esteemed work, prominent Sunni Muslim Imam, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyah, recorded the statement of Caliph Umar’s son.

Zaad al-Maad, Volume 2, p. 176:

Someone asked Abdullah bin Umar (about Mut’ah) saying: ‘Your father prohibited it.’ (Ibn Umar replied): ‘Is the order of the Messenger of Allah more deserving to be followed, or the order of my father?’

Not an enemy but Umar’s own son accuses his father of forbidding something that was ordered by Allah’s Messenger. Had Muhammad prohibited Mut’a, would there be an option to choose between following the order of the Prophet and the order of Caliph Umar? Hence, when Umar prohibited Mut’a, he went against an order of Allah and Muhammad. An order that was never rescinded in the Book of Allah. An order that is still in force for Muslims even today.

Here is another testimony by a prominent Sunni Hadith Master. Al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Syuti was a juristic expert and one of the most prolific Arab writers of the Middle Ages. He stated the following fact concerning Caliph Umar’s prohibition of Mut’a in Tarikh al-Khulafaa, p.136:

“He (Umar) is the first who made Mut’a forbidden (Haraam).”

The Hadiths that appear to point out the prohibition of Mut’a by Muhammad must be understood in their right perspective. This is because the same Hadiths also prove that Mut’a was practiced until the era of Umar. One such Hadith that is often quoted by Sunni Muslims is found in the Hadith of Sahih Bukhari. Despite the evidences provided by both the Qur’an and the Hadith that prove that Mut’a was never abolished during the lifetime of Muhammad, Sunni Muslims still try to refute this fact by selectively quoting a Hadith out of context to show that Mut’a was banned by Muhammad during his lifetime. As we have noted, Muhammad’s prohibition of Mut’a was only temporary in nature as he himself revived it when there was a need for it. Let us now look at Sunni Muslim’s favorite Hadith and expose their deception.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 527:

Narrated ‘Ali bin Abi Talib: On the day of KhaybarAllah’s Apostle forbade the Mut’a (temporary marriage) and the eating of donkey meat.

Firstly, a Hadith cannot cancel the teachings of the Qur’an. Since no Qur’anic verse was revealed to cancel the initial verse that permits Mut’a, it proves that Allah did not abolish Mut’a. Secondly, according to the principles of Islam, any Hadith that contradicts the Qur’an has to be rejected. There are about 117 Hadiths by Bukhari that refers to the day of Khaybar. These Hadiths narrate three things that were banned at Khaybar: (1) Mut’a (2) Donkey meat (3) Garlic.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 526:

Narrated Ibn Umar: On the day of KhaybarAllah’s Apostle forbade the eating of garlic and the meat of donkeys.

Then how is it that Sunni Muslims are still eating garlic today?  They say that Muhammad banned Mut’a on the day of Khaybar. But on the very same day he also banned the eating of garlic and donkey meat. So why do Muslims continue eating garlic? Is it because they knew that the ban was only temporarily in force for that period of time? Can this not then be the same with Mut’a? The answer to these questions can be found in the following Islamic source. In Sunni Muslim’s own Islamic source, “The Prophetic Biography, Ibn Kathir stated:

“The prohibition of the contractual marriage took place in the day of the Khaybar campaign. Yet it had been established in Sahih of Muslim that Muhammad allowed them again to (sign) a contractual marriage in the Day of Mecca’s conquest. Then he prohibited it. The Shafi’i said: ‘I do not know any other thing which was made lawful, then prohibited, then made lawful again, then unlawful except the contractual marriage, which was prohibited in the year in which Mecca was conquered, then after that it became lawful.” (Part 3, pp. 365-366)

Though Mut’a was prohibited on the day of Khaybar, it was later permitted again on the “Day of Mecca’s conquest. And after the battle was all over, Mut’a was again prohibited in the year in which Mecca was conquered” But the statement in the Hadith does not stop here. It continuous on: “…then after that it became lawful.” With deceit, Sunni Muslims will quote the Hadith that prohibits Mut’a at Khaybar but not the Hadith that shows that Mut’a was later permitted again in the Day of Mecca’s conquest. Then again, they will partially quote the part of the Hadith that states that Mut’a was prohibited in the year in which Mecca was conquered but not the part that says it was made lawful again. This shows that Muhammad did not ban Mut’a perpetually. Muslim apologists know this but like Allah, they too mislead the people. Can you now see the deception of these Muslim apologists?

If Mut’a is immoral, why did Allah make it lawful in the first place? If it is not immoral, why did Muhammad forbid it – and then only to revive it again? How can evil be both good and bad? It has to be one or the other. Will the true God give laws that make FornicationAdultery and Prostitution lawful under certain situations? Absolutely not! This transgression of Allah is far too serious for sincere Muslims to ignore. God will not encourage his worshippers to engage in fornication and adultery –not for a day. Not for a second.

Sadly, Caliph Umar later rescinded his decision to prohibit Mut’a. Does it mean that he now realized that he was wrong in his conclusion that Mut’a is the same as adultery?  Does it mean that he now views Mut’a as a virtuous act? No, but it was because of the existence of strong, overpowering evidences of the legitimacy of Mut’a in the Islamic faith. Besides that, there were the learned Companions of Muhammad to challenge the validity of Caliph Umar’s prohibition. With over-whelming living testimonies and evidences coming from prominent Muslims, Umar had no choice but to withdraw his decision to prohibit Mut’a. His banning of Mut’a was unscriptural. Who is he to take a stand against Allah and Muhammad? It is an act of open defiance against the laws of Allah. Personal moral convictions and preferences must be set aside.

We will now look at the historical works of Muhammad Ibn Jarir al-Tabari. He was one of Islam’s foremost historians and exegete of the Qur’an. He recorded a detailed person-to-person conversation between Imran bin Sawadah and Caliph Umar. In the person-to-person conversation, Imran bin Sawadah cites his objection to some of the decisions of Caliph Umar. One of the objections raised was Umar’s decision to ban Mut’a:

“It is also said that you have forbidden temporary marriage, although it was a license given by God. We enjoy a temporary marriage for a handful (of dates), and we can separate after three nights.” He (Umar) replied, “The Messenger of God permitted it at the time of necessary. Then people regained their life of comfort. I do not know any Muslim who has practised this or gone back to it. Now, anyone who wishes to can marry for a handful (of dates) and separate after three nights. You are right.” (History of al-Tabari, English version, Volume 14, pp 139 & 140)

Caliph Umar stated that the people can now once again engage in Mut’a. It is interesting to note Imran bin Sawadah’s comment about the right of the Muslims to practice Mut’a. He said “it was a license given by Allah. Yes, you read it right. Muslims are given a license to fornicate. It is also significant to note that Umar acknowledged that Imran bin Sawadah was “right.” And Caliph Umar reinstated Mut’a. In Islam, the dignity of women is equivalent to a “handful of dates” – the local fruit of Arabia.

There are many avenues for sexual pleasure in Islam and Mut’a is just one among the many. Carnal pleasure was the best Muhammad could come up with because he was unfamiliar with the holiness of Jehovah – the only true God. Islam is a man’s religion – made by a man, for man. Any Muslim who says that Mut’a is not in force today is clearly taking a stand against an act that is sanctioned by both Allah and his Prophet.

Another verse in the Qur’an that authorizes the practice of Mut’a is Surah 4:24:

“And forbidden to you are married women, except such as your right hands possess. This has ALLAH enjoined on you. And allowed to you are those beyond that, that you may seek them by means of your property, marrying them properly and not committing fornication. And for the benefit you receive from them, give them their dowries, as fixed, and there is no blame on you what you do by mutual agreement after the fixing of the dowry. Surely ALLAH is All-Knowing, Wise.” (Sher Ali)

You may perhaps wonder, where in this verse does it say anything about “Temporary Marriage.” English translators of the Qur’an hide the true meaning of this Qur’anic verse. The above English translation states: “you may seek them by means of your property, marrying them properly.” Most other English translations also express something similar. However, this is a deception by modern translators. In the Arabic Qur’an, the above verse does not use the Arabic equivalent of the word “marriage” (nikah) or any of its derivatives. Instead, it uses the term “Istamta’tum” which is a derivative of the word “Mut’a” which denotes pleasure or enjoyment. “Istamta’tum” is derived from the root m-t-a, which is also the root for “Mut’a.”

Compare now the above translation of Surah 4:24 with the following translation by the renowned Muslim scholar, Ibn Kathir:

Surah 4:24: “Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them (with a dowry) from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually (to give more) after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.”

English translators of the Qur’an know that the civilized world will be horrified to find such teachings as Mut’a in the Qur’an. Thus, they do some damage control to the uncivilized teachings of Allah. They conceal the true intention and distort the true meaning of the Qur’an to suit western audiences. They are ashamed of Allah’s teachings and they seek ways to make it palatable.

Surah 4:24 was revealed towards the beginning of Muhammad’s arrival in Medina. By the time this Qur’anic verse was revealed, Mut’a had already become a legal custom in Medina. It was looked upon as a kind of marriage and was referred to by the term “Istimta’a.  This term literally means, “To seek enjoyment.” On an occasion when the Prophet made a lesser pilgrimage to Mecca, the women of Mecca made themselves up especially for the event. Some of the Companions complained about the long separation from their wives, and the Prophet replied: “Then go and enjoy (Istamta’a) these women. (See Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p286).

In his Tafsirs (Commentary) of the Qur’an, Ibn Kathir clearly stated the meaning of Surah 4:24:

the general meaning of which was given as evidence for Mut’a Marriage (Marriage for an intended short time) which was, undoubtedly, prevalent at the onset of Islam, but was abrogated thereafter. Ash-Shafi’i and a group of scholars were of the opinion that Mut’a Marriage had once been permitted but was later invalidated on two occasions.”

This Commentary shows that “the general meaning of (Surah 4:24was given as evidence for Mut’a Marriage. In other words, Surah 4:24 provides evidence for the legitimacy of Mut’a in the Book of Allah. The Commentary also proves that Mut’a was “prevalent at the onset of Islam. And according to the Commentary, Mut’a was “invalidated on two occasions. This is only possible if it was validated twice – a second time validation after a prohibition. This proves that Mut’a becomes validated whenever there was a need for it. Muhammad set this pattern for the Muslim community to follow.

Constantly we find testimonies of great Muslim scholars who testify that unlike any other practices in Islam, Mut’a is the only practice that was revived after a prohibition. As stated earlier, it was Allah’s way to indicate that one can resort to Mut’a when it is needed. Scores of evidences from Islamic sources show that Mut’a was never abrogated.

Abu Ishaq al-Thalabi was an 11th-century Islamic scholar. In his prominent work known as “Al Kashaf al Bayan fi Tafseer al Qur’an,” he recorded the testimony of Imrain bin Hussain who was a close Companion of Muhammad:

“Mut’ah was revealed in the Qur’an and no verse was revealed after it, abrogating it. We practised Mut’ah during the life of Rasulullah, he never prohibited until he died, one person prohibited it based on his own view.”

Al-Thalabi was no ordinary scholar. He was awarded a high rank by the scholars of Sunni Islam. The appraisal of al-Thalabi is stated as follows in Tabaqat al Kubra, Volume 3, page 23:

“Thalabi was the greatest scholar of his time with regards to knowledge of the Qur’an.”

What is important for sincere Muslims to take into account is that it is an indisputable fact that the adulterous practice of Mut’a was authorized on a few occasions in Islam by Allah. The undeniable proof that this extremely immoral practice had the blessing of Allah should be reason enough for us to reject this depraved religion. Islamic history shows that nothing is sacred in Islam except sex. Even on a sacred trip to Mecca to perform the lesser hajj, Muhammad permitted his men to engage in fornication:

In his Tafsir on Surah 4:24, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi confirmed that Mut’a was authorized at the beginning of Islam. And he cited the reasons for the implementation of Mut’a during the time of Muhammad.

At-Tafsir al-Kabir, Q. 4:24:

“Mut’ah marriage involves a man hiring a woman for a specific amount of money, for a certain period of time, to have sex with her. The scholars agree that this Mut’ah marriage was authorized in the beginning of Islam. It is reported that when the Prophet came to Mecca to perform ‘umrah, the women of Mecca dressed up and adorned themselves. The companions complained to the Prophet that they had not had sex for a long time, so he said to them: ‘Enjoy these women.’”

Since it was Allah who sanctioned Mut’a in the Qur’an, one would expect Muslims to highly esteem the women participating in it in. After all, are not these women conforming to the teachings of the Qur’an? Let us consider now the true standing of the women who engage in Mut’a and how they are viewed in Islam. This will help us understand how Islam dignifies women.

Under the subject, “Temporary Marriage in Islamic Law, the Shia website, states:

“Mut’a is considered a kind of ‘rental‘ because in general a man’s basic aim in this kind of marriage is the sexual enjoyment of a woman, and in return for his enjoyment the woman receives a certain amount of money or property. In defining ‘rental’ the jurisprudents say: ‘It is to gain possession of a benefit in exchange for a specified sum.’”  “…On this point there are specified Hadith as well as the general Hadith which state that a woman who enters into mut’a is ‘rented‘.” (Al-Serat Volume XIII, No. 1, Chapter 2)

“In other words, she has been ‘rented‘ for the purpose of sexual intercourse.”  (Al-Serat Volume XIII, No. 1, Chapter 3)

While trying to rationalize this disgraceful act, Al-Islam admits that just as it is in the case with prostitution, the women in Mut’a are also “rented” (hired). Women who are hired for sex can never be anything but prostitutes. Why did Allah then sanction prostitution and make it lawful in the first place? The fact that Allah sanctioned adultery and prostitution, however briefly, is a cause for concern. How can Allah legalize prostitution and call it marriage?

Let us now refer to the statement of Dr. Musa al Musawi. In his book, “The Shi’ites and the Reformation, he gave the following verdict regarding Mut’a:

This contractual marriage contains a license for licentiousness and degradation of woman’s dignity, the thing which we do not find even among permissive societies in ancient and modern history(p.109).

Then on page 111, he provided some additional characteristics of this type of marriage:

This marriage is carried out without a witness. The period of this marriage could be a quarter of an hour, or a day, or any period of time. In it, it is permissible for a man to have collectively an unaccountable number of women at the same time. The woman may not inherit her husband’s possessions, and a man does not give alimony to the spouse. Divorce is also carried out without a witness. This marriage is nothing but a license to practice sex provided that the woman is not married to another man.  (Source: Behind the Veil)

Dr. Musawi has a Ph.D. in Islamic law from the University of Tehran. He taught Islamic philosophy and was elected as President of the Supreme Counsel of West America. Of course, his criticism of the contractual marriage is appropriate. While believing that this type of marriage has been abolished, Dr. Musawi admitted to the following fact in his book:

All the scholars and legists without exception say that Muhammad made it lawful for his Companions from the very beginning(p.108)

And Dr. Musawi added:

This contractual marriage contains a license for licentiousness and degradation of woman’s dignity, the thing which we do not find even among permissive societies in ancient and modern history. (p.109)

We now ask Muslims, including Dr. Musawi: Why did Allah inspire a verse in the Qur’an to sanction a practice which we do not find even among permissive societies in ancient and modern history.”? Is this not an admission that the moral standards of those permissive societies are much higher then that of Islam? If you think the world of Islam, then reflect on this comparison between the moral standards of those permissive societies and Islam.

Another Sunni Muslim author, Dr. Salamah also wrote:

Mut’ah, on the other hand, is an open license for sexual pleasure with as many women as one can financially afford. The women who engage in Mut’ah are hired women; thus, it can be performed with all women irrespective of their age, character, conduct or religion. It requires no witnesses, nor is there any obligation on the man’s part to provide food and shelter to the woman. The only precondition is that the woman agrees to the price and the length of the Mut’ah and that the man pays her the compensation when he has relations with her. One can discern for himself whether such a practice leads to sheer promiscuity or promotes chastity. (

Dr. Salamah is making a basically ethical argument that Mut’a is the same as fornication. We could not agree more. Why then did Allah permit fornication and promiscuity in the Qur’an? By believing that Mut’a is the same as fornication and having then to acknowledge of its original permissibility in Islam, Muslims cannot escape the fact that Allah and Muhammad sanctioned fornication and adultery in the Qur’an. Therefore, Muslims must admit that the Allah they worship and the Prophet they follow promoted prostitution and try to pass it off as marriage. This is deception on their part and many a woman became the innocent victim of their deceit.

Sunni Muslim scholars try to conceal the shame and disgrace attached to Islam by the original permissibility of Mut’a in the Qur’an. On the one hand, they acknowledge that Mut’a is the same as adultery, but at the same time, they are forced to acknowledge its original permissibility Allah. Worse still, it is also considered as the “good things” of Allah. To consider acts of adultery and fornication as “good things” – even once – is the worst theological disaster. Men can err but not God. By this single verse in the Qur’an (Surah 5:87), Allah has proven himself to be the antithesis to the Holiness of God.

By regulating the institution of prostitution under the guise of marriage, Muhammad and Allah have opened the floodgates for descent Muslim women to be incorporated in this age-old profession. The adulterous and fornicatory poison is the same, only the label has been changed by Allah and Muhammad. Now, Muslim women can be both prostitutes and good Muslims too. Acts of shame have become acts of virtue. Religion is supposed to transform prostitutes into chaste women. However, in the religion of Islam, we find it the other way round – chaste women are turned into prostitutes.  That is why Asma bint Abu Bakr, the daughter of the first Caliph, was proud to announce openly of her participation in Mut’a:

What has been reported from Asma, al-Nesa’i narrates it from Muslim Quri: “We went before Asma bint Abu Bakr and we asked her about Mut’ah al-Nisa, she replied: ‘I performed this Mut’ah during the lifetime of Rasulullah.’” (Source:  Volume 3 No. 1506)

With how many men she contracted Mut’a? Well, as Muslim scholars like to say, Allah knows best. Of course, some Muslims at that time would have had concerns that their women would become nothing more than whores through this practice. Their concerns are valid. As we can see, even a woman from an upstanding household, the very daughter of Caliph Abu Bakr, ventured out and offered herself to contract Mut’a with the Muslim males. Women were deceived to the point that they are unable to discern right from wrong. Calling prostitution by any other name does not make it right.

Abraham Lincoln once asked, “If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?” When someone said “five”, Lincoln said that was wrong, because calling a tail a leg does not make it so. Similarly, calling prostitution a marriage, even temporarily, does not make it so.

Imagine, Muslim mothers proudly testifying about their participation in fornication to their sons. Abdullah ibn Alzubair was opposed to Mut’a. And he voiced his opposition to Mut’a when debating with Ibn Abbas. Ibn Abbas silenced Abdullah ibn Zubayr by informing him that he was a product of Mut’a. In the esteemed works of al-Raghib al-Isfahani, this event is reported in Muhazraat, Volume 2, p. 96:

Ibn Zubair denounced Ibn Abbas for his opinion on Mut’ah. Thus Ibn Abbas told him: “Go and ask your mother what she did with your father.” When Ibn Zubair asked her, she said: “By God, I did not conceive you except through Mut’ah.”

Like a magical wand in the hands of a wicked sorcerer, Islam turns descent women into whores in an instant. Islam’s witchcraft is so potent that the victims are unaware of what they have actually become – prostitutes and adulteresses. Islam not only robs one’s dignity but also one’s mind.

Among the Muslim legists who believed that Muhammad made Mut’a lawful at the inception of Islam are: Ibn’AbbasIbn Mas’udSahih al BukhariSahih MuslimIbn HishamIbn KathirIbn Qayyim al-Jawziyyaal-Imam al-Baydawi and the Imam Fakhr al-Razi. All these scholars are heavyweights in Islam and their testimonies are sufficient to prove that Mut’a was an integral part of Islam. These scholars are recognized by all the contemporary scholars of Islam. And all the contemporary scholars of Islam agree that Mut’a was made lawful at the inception of Islam.

It is also important to note that the scholars who confirmed that Mut’a was not abolished in Islam are among the most esteemed scholars. Among these are esteemed scholars such as Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas’ud and Imam Fakhr al-Razi. Moreover, as we have noted, even Caliph Umar who prohibited Mut’a was later shown to have reinstated it. As stated earlier, even if Sunni Muslims were to claim that Mut’a was allowed only for a short time during the onset of Islam, it still shows that Islam authorized fornication, adultery, and prostitution in its theology. Can we then trust this religion to provide us with sound moral guidance? Can we trust a religion that turns women into whores? Can we trust a religion that has a moral standard that is lower then the “permissive societies in ancient and modern history”?

Ample proof has been provided in this article to show that Mut’a was authorized in Islam and it is still in force today. The claim by Sunni Muslims that it is no longer allowed in Islam does not essentially change anything. For Allah to sanction a morally wrong course even once shows that he simply cannot be the true God. And this automatically disqualifies Islam as the true religion. As for Muslims who express shock at the practice of Mut’a, they are either hypocrites or ignorant of their religion. Why do we say that?

If Islam allows the raping of female war captives in the presence of their husbands, then to pay a dower to have sex with a woman with her permission is considered noble by Islamic standards. The moral darkness of Islam is so great that even whoredom appears noble. When a religion degrades to such low levels, it should be shunned at all costs. A spiritually bankrupt religion can only appeal to the carnal to survive. The light at the end of the Islamic tunnel is indeed dark.

Ibn Kathir wrote:

Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, “We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed: “(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women.” (This is the wording collected by At-Tirmidhi An-Nasa’i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih.) (Reference at

Can you now see the moral mire of this religion? Islam removes every fiber of decency that humans are endowed with and reduces them to levels lower than that of animals. Men, who were reluctant to rape the married captives just moments ago, now, raped these very women with an untroubled conscience after they received a single verse from Allah. Can Muslims really worship a god whose moral levels are so unimaginably evil? How much more evil must it take for Muslims to see that Allah cannot be the true God? These teachings of Islam do not represent the righteous moral standards of a Holy God. The holiness of the true God is so profound that those who desire to worship him are expected to reflect his holiness in their lives. This righteousness that is required of all true worshippers of Jehovah is highlighted in the following Biblical verse:

Leviticus 19:2: “Speak to the entire assembly of the Israelites and tell them, ‘You should be holy, because I, Jehovah your God, am holy. ’”

Just as the moon reflects the light from the sun, true worshippers are similarly required to reflect the holiness of Jehovah their God. Nothing less is expected from them. The holiness that God requires of his worshippers is also highlighted in the following verses of the Bible:

1 Thessalonians 4:3-7: “For this is the will of God, that you should be holy and abstain from sexual immorality. Each one of you should know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not with greedy, uncontrolled sexual passion like the nations have that do not know God. … For God has called us, not for uncleanness, but for holiness.”

For a Christian husband, there is no place for sex outside the limits of a single wife. This is the divine arrangement in a Christian marriage. Professed “Christians” who choose to act differently are acting on their own and are placing themselves under the adverse judgment of God Almighty.

Marriage is the first human institution ordained and designed by God. In Christianity, marriage is viewed as a sacred institution ordained by God for the lifelong union of a man and a woman. This original principal was first articulated in the Book of Genesis:

Genesis 2:24: “And they will become one flesh.

Jesus reiterated this same basic position on marriage in the Gospels. He described the marriage union as a sacred union. Because of the loyalty, trueness, closeness and intimacy that are meant to be between a man and his wife in the Christian marriage, Jesus stated the following regarding this sacred union:

Mark 10:8: “And the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh.”

In truth, husband and the wife are now one – a single unit. The Christian Marriage is one man, one woman, one life – in union with their Creator. The husband and wife are of equal value and valuable in the eyes of their Creator. The sacredness of the Marriage institution is emphasized further in the following verse:

Hebrews 13:4: “Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.”

And the Almighty God also gave the following warning in the Holy Bible:

Malachi 3:5: “And I will come near to you people for the judgment. And I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers.”

These are the standards of gold that is laid out in the Holy Bible. Standards that honor the Originator of Marriage. Standards that honor women and dignifies them. There is no such thing as a “Temporary Marriage” in the divine laws of Jehovah.

In contrast, the dark teachings of Allah is manifested throughout the Qur’an. In this dark environment, how will Muslims be able to reflect any light? If the light of Islam itself is dark, imagine how dark its darkness will be. In this spiritually dark condition, it is difficult for Muslims to tell the differences between acts of virtue and acts of sin. Therefore, it should not surprise us if we find Muslims defending the legality of prostitution in the Qur’an. Yes! Prostitution is absolutely legal in Islam.

1 John 1:5-6: This is the message which we have heard from him and are announcing to you: God is light and there is no darkness at all in him. If we make the statement, “We are having a fellowship with him,” and yet we go on walking in the darkness, we are lying and are not practicing the truth.

No comments:


Has Islam Improved to Become Better Than Christianity? Does Muhammad fulfill and complete the mission and purpose of Christ? Muhammad emphat...