More lies against the Holy Bible
Quennel Gale
Recently Sam Shamoun and Jochen Katz wrote a refutation of Osama Abdallah’s claim dealing with “vagina being mentioned in Song of Songs”. Osama Abdallah seems to believe that if a person’s sexual organ is mentioned in a text then it must be deemed as pornographic. For the western reader we would wonder “why would he be so quick to believe such nonsense”? It should be noted that Mr. Abdallah is a Muslim and we all know what following Islam produces, i.e. intellectual bankruptcy, blood thirst and violent, bomb making murderers, anti-Jewish and anti-Christian. Hence, because Song of Songs is found in the Hebrew Old Testament instead of the Arabic Quran, Mr. Abdallah will do anything in his power to bring venomous attacks against it in the name of Islam. Since this argument is a favorite of Mr. Abdallah, any response was bound to be addressed quickly on his part. As you can see he was quick to respond to this refutation on his website here. The problem for Mr. Abdallah’s “pornography argument” is that it can be forcefully used to destroy Islam more than what he could ever do against the Bible.
I tried being nice to him, hoping that he would wake up from his self-delusional foolishness but he continued in his attacks so now we will have to destroy him soundly. We will also bring very incriminating quotes against Islam and his self-proclaimed prophet Muhammad. We will also expose Osama Abdallah as a chronic liar and put this issue to rest once and for all.
My
rebuttal to Shamoun's and Katz' "Osama's Dirty
Lies" absurd and self-refuting article:
This article is a
refutation to Sam Shamoun's and Jochen
Katz' absurd article that is located at: http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/dirty_lies.htm.
The reader will shortly see, how these two jokers have proven the filth
and sick pornography in their gospel of porn; the book of women's vaginas and
breasts taste like "wine".
The reader will shortly
see how I am so thankful to the two of them for admitting that their bible is
indeed a sick book!
In reading the refutation of “Osama’s Dirty Lies” found at the link on “Answering-Islam”, there isn’t any support for Osama’s conclusion. Instead we will prove how Osama Abdallah is sick and has to resort to using information not found in the Bible to arrive at his conclusion.
They wrote:
Osama's Dirty Lies
Trying so desperately to hit below the belt ...
Osama Abdallah announced the following on his site:
07/21/2005- I added an audio
file that I captured from the documentary film, "Sex
in the Bible", that proves from the Hebrew language experts'
commentaries that the Bible did say that women's vaginas taste like
"wine", to the article X-Rated Pornography in
the Bible. This will silence all of the noise and the
intentional and unethical accusations that were made by Sam Shamoun
and Quennel Gale of the "Answering Islam"
team regarding me being a "liar". They knew I was telling the
Truth, but they tried to play deceptive games with the reader. Now the
game is over, and their questionable ethics are exposed. (Source)
Eager to find out how
Osama "silenced" us this time, we listened to the audio clip. What
did we find? After citing the specific text so often abused by Osama (see our earlier rebuttal), the female narrator comments:
... But when we look
closely at the Hebrew, we find out that the anatomy that he is describing MAY
BE in fact a bit lower than the belly button.
That's it. The audio clip
trumpeted by Osama contains a claim. Wow! No proof. No reasoning. No evidence
to support the claim. Simply a claim.
Will anyone in his right
mind believe that this is to be counted as the evidence supporting
Osama’s perverted interpretations? This is merely the speculation of an unnamed
commentator who says that the Hebrew MAY BE speaking of something a bit lower
than the belly button. Again: What is her proof?
My
response:
Notice,
first of all, how the cowards unlinked to both my X-Rated Pornography in the Bible
article and to the audio file. They know well that if the reader,
or listener in this case, read and listened to my evidence, then the facts and
the Truth would become irrefutable and crystal clear. What they did
instead was to minimize the reader's access to my sources and to deceive
him/her into their false perceptions.
This team of clowns,
especially Sam Shamoun, is notorious in doing
this. I have raised this issue in a number of my rebuttals already
before.
Notice their lie:
"This is merely the speculation of an unnamed commentator
who says that the Hebrew MAY BE speaking of something a bit lower than the
belly button. Again: What is her proof?"
Osama Abdallah misses the entire argument in his response here. First he introduces an irrelevant point about “the authors not linking to his X-Rated Pornography in the Bible Article” even though on this very same article Osama Abdallah himself doesn’t link to my article answering and refuting this very article here. In fact he hasn’t been able to refute my rebuttal to his argument ever since I put it on my website over 2 years ago. So I find it hardly credible for him to demand that Katz and Shamoun link to his article, even though they did at the very beginning of the article:
07/21/2005- I added an audio file that I captured from the documentary film, "Sex in the Bible", that proves from the Hebrew language experts' commentaries that the Bible did say that women's vaginas taste like "wine", to the article X-Rated Pornography in the Bible. This will silence all of the noise and the intentional and unethical accusations that were made by Sam Shamoun and Quennel Gale of the "Answering Islam" team regarding me being a "liar". They knew I was telling the Truth, but they tried to play deceptive games with the reader. Now the game is over, and their questionable ethics are exposed. (Source)
Notice the (Source) above, where one can see what date Osama uploaded the article to his site, THE NAME OF THE ARTICLE, as well as the same description of what he said about this particular article on his main page. Apparently Mr. Abdallah didn’t read to well, which is something he rarely does anyway. However Osama failed to attack the argument presented by Shamoun and Katz:
(Carole Fountaine)... But
when we look closely at the Hebrew, we
find out that the anatomy that he is describing MAY BE in fact a bit lower than
the belly button.
That's it. The audio clip
trumpeted by Osama contains a claim. Wow! No proof. No reasoning. No evidence
to support the claim. Simply a claim.
The whole point of the response was “Osama didn’t present evidence dealing with the Hebrew word for ‘vagina’ in this passage”. What does Mr. Abdallah do? He ignores this fact and claims this:
Notice their lie:
"This is merely the speculation of an unnamed commentator
who says that the Hebrew MAY BE speaking of something a bit lower than the
belly button. Again: What is her proof?"
He focuses on the identity of the commentator, WHICH IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT TO WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED. The discussion of the matter wasn’t “what’s the name of the commentator” but “whether this passage mentions the word “vagina” for belly, etc.
Only you liars say she was unnamed!
I did put in the article,
which you purposely unlinked, the reference to the Theology Professor that
mentioned this. Here is her info that was displayed on TV:
Carole Fountaine
Professor of Biblical Studies
Andover-Newton Theological School
This what was displayed on the screen of the
documentary film. So not only you invented a new lie by saying she is
"unnamed", but you also denied the fact that:
1- She is a Theology Professor - much more knowledgeable than you
two weasels and the real liars.
As you can see, Osama Abdallah commits the fallacy of red herring by calling Shamoun and Katz liars NOT BECAUSE THEY WERE WRONG IN CLAIMING THE HEBREW WORD FOR ‘VAGINA’ ISN’T PRESENT but because they said Ms. Fountaine was unnamed. What Osama Abdallah also fails to realize is that just because Ms. Fountaine is a Professor of Biblical Studies doesn’t mean that she is an expert on Hebrew in this case or that her conclusion is correct. Osama has done nothing more than commit the fallacy of “appealing to authority”. I myself can easily go to theology school and get my degree in Biblical theology and it would mean nothing if I state something that isn’t based on the Bible or is just plain wrong. Also I want to ask Osama Abdallah this:
1. If believing
in Scholars are a basis for your acceptance of a religious conclusion:
Then
2. Why do you follow Muhammad, who wasn’t
a scholar, who was unlearned and wasn’t a theological professor?
Also what Mr. Abdallah fails to realize is that he isn’t as knowledgeable as he assumes about Mr. Shamoun and Mr. Katz. Both are bilingual (Mr. Shamoun is Assyrian whose descendants spoke the very language of Jesus himself, while Mr. Katz speaks German and has degrees in both Hebrew and NT Greek). Osama Abdallah would have you to believe that both of these apologists are stupid laymen with no knowledge of the Bible. Hence, both, particularly Mr. Katz are able to speak on this issue irregardless of whether they are theology professors. If all of us went and got our theology degrees tomorrow, it wouldn’t change Mr. Abdallah and his stance on Christianity. He would still lie and make up false claims to propagate Islam as he does today. Also I want to ask Mr. Abdallah this:
1. If Ms. Fountaine is the basis for your acceptance of this
argument:
Then
2. Why didn’t she say this description
was pornographic?
If Osama tells us “oh well she didn’t want to be offensive etc,” this doesn’t help either because he doesn’t know her mind or is only assuming what he can’t prove in the first place. In other words ladies and gentlemen, HE IS DOING NOTHING MORE THAN OFFERING HIS UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION ON THIS ISSUE.
2- She spoke on the behalf of her school and, more
specifically, her theology department, when she said: "The lover says that
his beloved's naval is like a goblet of wine, but when we look closely at the Hebrew, we find out that the anatomy that he is describing, may
be in fact a bit lower than the belly button."
Ms. Fountaine wasn’t speaking on behalf of her school at all. WHERE EXACTLY DID SHE SAY “I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MY SCHOOL”? Again we have Osama Abdallah adding unsubstantiated claims to his argument for he knows that if he can make it sound better than what it actually is, the reader would somehow accept this twisted conclusion.
The "we" here is Carole Fountaine
and her team of department of theologians!
The "we" here of course includes everyone from the audience, but to be more specific, it includes her team of theologians, because they did the research and studied the Hebrew and discovered the pornography in this pornographic verse.
Notice how “we” includes the theologians EVEN THOUGH THE ONLY ONE MENTIONED WAS CAROLE FOUNTAINE AND NO ONE ELSE. But wait, Osama recognizes the fact that “we” could just be referring to the audience also! But then again it’s much easier TO ASSUME that this is the sole word of these theologians. As for the Hebrew, we will actually expose Mr. Abdallah for his lack of knowledge on this verse and show once and for all that he is totally clueless when it comes to debating against the religion of Christianity.
The lady smiled when she
said that. This proves:
(a)- She didn't want to be graphic by saying vagina!
(b)- The word "may be" that the two weasels
purposely misinterpreted, is actually a CONFIRMATION
and not a doubt! She was trying to be polite and proper in her
words. Plus the words "may be" are commonly used in our
everyday language, and we do sometimes use them as confirmations.
(c)- If one listens to her voice tone in the audio file, then he/she will see it
clearly.
"May
be you ought to do this!" is another way of
saying "You should really do this!"
It's a confirmation and not a doubt!
Osama then continues by saying “Oh she smiled when she said this”. So this proves his argument! LOL! So basically if we want to prove something is true in religion
Do you see how stupid this sounds! But wait, Osama left us a backdoor into exposing his stupidity. Earlier he said:
but to be more specific, it includes her team of theologians, because they did the research and studied the Hebrew and discovered the pornography in this pornographic verse.
So Osama thinks that Ms. Fountaine’s conclusions are correct because she and her imaginary team of theologians studied the Hebrew text to find this. So let’s show you the Hebrew text of the passage in question:
shârerêkh 'aggan hassahar 'al-yechsar hammâzegh bithnêkh `arêmath chithiym sughâh bashoshanniym: Song of Songs 7:3
If Ms. Fountaine wanted to validate Osama Abdallah’s theory then we should be able to go directly to the Hebrew text and find THE WORD “VAGINA” in the passage. The word in question is “Sharekh” or “shorer”, and this word is what Ms. Fountaine and her staff would be commenting on to reach their conclusion. So the million dollar question is:
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THIS WORD “Sharekh” or “shorer” in Song of
Songs 7:2-3?
Notice that Osama Abdallah doesn’t even know the word in question, which is why he never mentions it nor in fact does Ms. Fountaine, his esteemed scholar of theology. In fact, I challenged Osama Abdallah over a year ago to “tell us what the Hebrew word for vagina is”? He could never ever give me an answer. Why? Because he doesn’t know it, and apparently neither does Ms. Fountaine and her imaginary Hebrew scholars for that point. Is “Sharekh” or “shorer” the Hebrew word for “vagina”?
shorer {sho'-rer}
navel, umbilical cord
(Source: BlueLetter Bible [using in turn The
Abridged Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon of the Old Testament])
The word which Osama Abdallah thinks is “vagina” is actually the word “navel” in Hebrew! Notice how Osama criticized Mr. Katz and Shamoun, in relationship to Ms. Fountaine being a theologian:
1- She is a Theology Professor - much more knowledgeable than you
two weasels and the real liars.
He is explicitly saying that “because she’s a recognized authority” on this issue what she says is true. So in turn we want to level the hammer on Osama by quoting The Abridged Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon of the Old Testament:
From A Hebrew and English
Lexicon of the Old Testament by Francis Brown, S.R. Driver, and Charles
Briggs, based on the lexicon of Wilhelm Gesenius.
Edited by Richard Whitaker (
It should be noted that this Lexicon IS CONSIDERED THE HIGHEST, FINEST AND MOST COMPREHENSIVE HEBREW LEXICON in the entire English language! Ms. Fountaine couldn’t even obtain her degree as a theologian without using this lexicon as a foundation! Anyone who ever wants to pursue their degree in OT studies has heard of this lexicon. All of these scholars are considered higher in authority as well as one of the basis of Biblical Hebrew study in all the western world. Oh, let’s not forget that this was provided by Princeton Theological Seminary, which is arguably the best Biblical Seminary in the world! How’s that for scholarly appeal eh? So to put it nicely in the words of Mr. Abdallah:
1- They are world-renown Theology scholars - much more
knowledgeable than you two weasels, and the real liars (Osama and Ms. Fountaine).
However, we will give Ms. Fountaine the benefit of the doubt since she, as a theologian, would obviously know that the word “shorer” isn’t the Hebrew word for vagina. Look at what the translations of the Bible rendered this word as:
"Your NAVEL
is like a round goblet Which never lacks mixed wine;
Your BELLY is like a heap of wheat
Fenced about with lilies." Song of Songs 7:2 NASB
"Your NAVEL
is a rounded bowl that never lacks mixed wine.
Your BELLY is a heap of wheat,
encircled with lilies." RSV
Both of these English translations of the Bible are considered very authoritative, with the NASB being the most literal translation available today. Notice the fact that the word “Shorer” which Osama claims is the word “vagina” is rendered as navel. This source here gives even more evidence:
2469 … (shrr). Assumed root of the following.
2469a … (shor) umbilical
cord (e.g. Ezk 16:4; Prov
3:8).
2469b … (shera) bracelet (Gen
24:22; Isa 3:19).
2469c … (sharir) sinew, muscle
(Job 40:16).
2469d … (sherirut),
… (sherirut)
stubbornness.
(Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., Bruce K. Waltke [Moody Publishers; 2 Volumes edition, June 1, 1980], Volume II, p. 957)
Now let’s look at the verses in question here:
The word of the LORD came to me:
"Son of man, confront
Now we want to ask Osama Abdallah
this question. Does
Mr. Abdallah
is every kid (male/female) born with a “vagina” since this must be cut at
birth?
Mr. Abdallah, does your son have a vagina? Yes or no? Here is more:
My son, do not forget my law,
But let your heart keep my commands; For length of days and long life.
And peace they will add to you. Let not mercy and truth forsake you; Bind them
around your neck, Write them on the tablet of your heart, And so find favor
and high esteem In the sight of God and man. Trust in the LORD with all your
heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all
your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a]
your paths. Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and depart from
evil. It will be health to your flesh,[b] (shorer) And strength[c] to
your bones. Prov. 3:1-8
Proverbs 3:8 Literally navel, figurative
of the body (Source)
Does Solomon have a vagina even though he is a man? Mr. Abdallah thinks so! This word, which is translated “flesh”, doesn’t have any reference to “vagina”. So Mr. Abdallah is your flesh a vagina? Notice how the Jewish translation of the Bible renders “shorer”:
Thy NAVEL
is like a round goblet, wherein no mingled wine is wanting;
thy BELLY is like a heap of wheat
set about with lilies. 7:3 Jewish Publication Society (JPS)
Notice how the Jewish translators, who are native Hebrew speakers, render this word. If Mr. Abdallah thinks that his theory is correct then he should have been able to back up what he claims with Hebrew references. How can you claim Ms Fountaine did a Hebrew works study when the very Hebrew you think she appealed to says “navel” and not “vagina” Mr. Abdallah? Did Ms. Fountaine explicitly say “shorer” means “vagina”? No. If she did she’d destroy her credibility as a professor since “shorer” isn’t the Hebrew word for “vagina”, something she would know very well.
Osama continues by saying:
Thank you for admitting that your pornographic bible is trash! (here is how you did it)
The two weasels have
charged me of being a liar and a pervert, despite all of the proofs that they
already knew above, for simply brining a quote from their gospel of porn. This obviously
proves the following:
1- They fully recognize the danger of pornography in their
gospel of porn.
2- They fully realize that such pornography only proves
that their bible is trash, or at least contains trash.
3- Them conveniently and falsely lashing back at me
only caused them to shoot themselves in the foot,
because they're basically now saying the following:
(a)- Osama Abdallah is a
pervert and a liar for inserting such sick lies and porn into our "Holy
Bible".
(b)- Such sick pornography can not exist in our
"Holy Book"
(c)- Osama is desperate (as ironically their title says)
and he is hopelessly trying to prove the lie of pornography in the Bible.
First off, Shamoun and Katz didn’t admit that the Bible is pornographic, they were right to charge Osama as being a liar since the Hebrew word for “vagina” isn’t “shorer”. In fact we will tell you the Hebrew word for “vagina” in just a bit and then show to you just how stupid and foolish Osama Abdallah actually is! He continues by saying:
Well too bad for the
weasels, Osama Abdallah is neither desperate, nor did
he invent any lie against the gospel of porn. Osama
Abdallah simply quoted the the
Professor who was representing the
So to accuse me of being
a liar is basically accusing them of being liars also. And I don't think
anyone would take two weasels' and real liars' words over professionals in
theology who know far more about Hebrew than them.
Checkmate!
So basically Osama Abdallah is trying to save face here. He basically says “I was basically quoting a professor”, even though he didn’t verify whether what the professor said was true or not. Also, we must reiterate again to Mr. Abdallah, Mr. Katz does have degree certificates in Hebrew and Greek, so he is qualified to speak on these issues and would obviously recognize stupidity on Osama’s part in this argument. Also I want to ask Osama these questions:
As for checkmate, we present this for Osama Abdallah. His favorite Bible is the NIV translation. Since he loves appealing to this Bible and using it against Christianity as shown here:
(Just who were the real authors of the Bible? ; Found on www.answering-christianity.com)
We want to show him this from the NIV publishers themselves:
The NIV is based on the most reliable Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts.
A translation team of more than 100 evangelical Bible scholars from many
different denominations, using four levels of committee review, worked for 13
years before the complete Bible was released in 1978. These scholars came from
the
OPERATING FROM THE CONVICTION THAT THE BIBLE IS THE INSPIRED AND WHOLLY RELIABLE WORD OF GOD, the translators wanted to faithfully reproduce what the original Scripture writers wrote, in language that people could read and understand without difficulty. They were - and are - committed to the AUTHORITY AND INFALLIBILITY OF THE BIBLE. The NIV has become the bestselling translation of the Bible, with more than 100 million copies in print. (NIV ONLINE LETTER)
Notice what these 100 Bible scholars said when dealing with Song of Songs 7:2,3:
Your navel (shorer) is a rounded goblet that never lacks blended wine. Your waist is a mound of wheat encircled by lilies. Song of Songs 7:2 NIV
NIV, which is based on the most reliable Hebrew text and translated by over 100 scholars’ claims that “shorer” isn’t “vagina” but “navel”:
Checkmate!
Either way Mr. Abdallah is fighting a losing battle. He can’t appeal to Ms. Fountaine to validate his argument since what she claims is not only contradicted by every Hebrew source known to man but by Bible translations that were translated by over 100 scholars! What is even more foolish is the fact that Mr. Abdallah doesn’t pay attention to the verse itself:
Your navel (shorer) is a rounded goblet that never lacks blended wine. Your waist is a mound of wheat encircled by lilies. Song of Songs 7:2 NIV
Since he believes that the word “navel” is the word “vagina” We want to educate him on this fact that:
1. A vagina isn't round like a goblet, which apparently means that Mr. Abdallah has never seen a vagina!
Here is the definition of a goblet:
Goblet:
1 archaic
: a bowl-shaped
drinking vessel without handles
2 : a drinking vessel (as of glass) with a foot and stem --
compare TUMBLER (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)
For those who don’t know what a “goblet” is, this word
describes something that is shaped like a bowel. It is round, etc. A Vagina
isn’t shaped like a bowel, but a navel is! Mr. Abdallah,
if your wife’s vagina looks like this then maybe she needs some type of
corrective surgery. If vagina is supposed to be present instead of navel then:
1. It would look like a two handled
ring!
2. It would be shaped like a bowel!
3. Every time you see someone with a bowel with handles, like a bucket in
modern times, Osama would think that it’s a vagina!!
Apparently Mr. Abdallah has been spending too much time reading Islamic science books, where Suns set in the sea or where non-Muslims have more intestines than Muslims. This would probably explain why he thinks that a vagina looks like a bowl! How hilarious!
Does a vagina look like a bowl?
Mr. Abdallah thinks so. So:
1. When you cook food in bowels are you cooking
them in vaginas? According to Mr. Abdallah you are.
2. If you carry things in a bowel are you carrying it in a vagina? According to
Mr. Abdallah you are.
3. If Mr. Abdallah has ever eaten soup did he eat it
from a vagina? According to his theory yes.
This makes no sense whatsoever. A navel would be round like a goblet especially if it is poking out. Especially when a woman is wearing a ring in her navel! A Vagina can never resemble a bowl!
Osama thinks that “navel
round like a goblet” is a vagina that looks like a bowl!
What more can we say about this issue? It is a dead issue propagated by an
ignorant apologist who can’t distinguish the anatomy of a woman’s body part let
alone a Semitic language he is totally unfamiliar in! Even if Ms. Fountaine claimed that “shorer” is the Hebrew word for “vagina her commentary must
be verified historically and through the Hebrew text of the Bible. If she
claims that the Hebrew word is “vagina” when it is the word “navel” then her
commentary is wrong and must be rejected. How can Osama call Shamoun and Katz a liar when he prescribes to a theory not
even verified by the text he uses in his defense! Osama can you do these
things:
1.
Show us
that the Hebrew word in question is vagina based on historical usage?
2.
Prove
that we lied and that the word “navel” has never meant what it says but always
meant “vagina?
3.
Show us
where vaginas look like bowels.
He continues by saying:
They
wrote:
Where is the lexical data
supporting her claim?
My
response:
In your butt! :-)
They
wrote:
What sources did she
quote to prove her assertion? Absolutely nothing. After all is said and done,
Osama is not even a millimeter closer to giving evidence for the perverted
interpretation of the text that has become his obsession.
My
response:
I love it when you say
"perverted interpretation". Keep attacking me, because these
are more bullets that you keep shooting yourself with in the foot, as I clearly
demonstrated.
When pressed for the lexical data to
support what Ms. Fountaine said, the best Mr. Abdallah could do was respond “in your butt”? If you read
his paper further down, in response to the usage of “sexual organs” in the Quran, Osama Abdallah basically
rejects what both Mr. Katz and Shamoun writes by just
saying the Arabic word for vagina is:
"Mah'bal" in
Arabic is the exact word for "vagina" or "sexual
organ" as the liars put it.
Where in the Noble Quran was the word
"mah'bal" used?
Notice that he doesn’t care about
the fact that Mr. Shamoun and Katz got their
information from Islamic sources or scholars. He rejects this information
outright by saying, the explicit word isn’t there in the Quran
but he wants Christians to accept his claims based on Ms. Fountaine,
when SHE DOESN’T EXPLICITLY SAY “VAGINA” ALSO!
WHAT IS THE
HEBREW WORD FOR VAGINA?
It should be noted that I did challenge Mr. Abdallah to tell us the Hebrew word for “vagina” for some time and, unlike the ease with which he was able to show what the Quranic word for this was, the best he could do was appeal to Ms. Fountaine to argue that “because she’s a scholar her conclusion is valid”. Or in other words HE DOESN’T KNOW THE HEBREW WORD FOR VAGINA! If he truly did, then he would have easily been able to find it long time ago and say “okay the Hebrew word is ‘this’ and this theologian verified it based on the Hebrew text.” However, I’ve known this word for a very long time but I refused to divulge it to Mr. Abdallah because I was so sure that he would continue to make a fool out of himself on this issue. So what is the Hebrew word for vagina? In an email sent to Rabbi Michael Skobac of Jews for Judaism (a favorite of Osama Abdallah and other Muslim Apologists) I posed this same question, even though I already knew this, but I just wanted to add extra verification for our readers:
-----
Original Message -----
From: Gale,
Quennel
To: toronto@jewsforjudaism.org
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 11:37 AM
Subject: Hi Need to ask you a very important
question
Hi,
What is the
Hebrew word for “vagina’? The reason I need to ask this is because a Muslim
apologists has been using Song of Songs 7:1-2 to claim the the
word “navel” is the same as the word vagina. Can you please answer this for me.
He is slandering the Tanekh and this needs to stop.
Thanks
HE RESPONDS
BY SAYING:
bs"d
their claim is absurd for a few reasons:
a) their translation is wrong...as far as i know, there is no biblical hebrew term for vagina, the more modern hebrew term is 'nartik'...navel is a far better translation here
b) the context certainly doesn't support their rendition...a woman is being praised for her exterior beauty in these passages...
As
you can see the Hebrew word for vagina isn’t “shorer”
but Nartik
In ancient biblical Hebrew, it would
be impossible to mention the word “vagina” in the Bible since there was no term
for it! However the Jews later on do have a term for vagina in Hebrew and it is
“nartik”! Now if Osama Abdallah
is such an expert on Hebrew like Ms. Fountaine, both
of them must know this! Even I knew this myself and I don’t have to go to
seminary school for a number of years just to learn this. This is very similar
to the fact that a non-Muslim doesn’t have to know Arabic to know that “Allah”
is the name of God in the Quran or that “tawhid” is used for strict monotheism in Islam. So to put
it eloquently in the words of Osama Abdallah:
"Nartik" in Hebrew is the exact word for "vagina" or "sexual organ" as the liars put it.
Where in the Holy Bible was the word "Nartik" used?
Also just for kicks, nartik isn’t round like a bowel or goblet. LOL! My dear reader as you can see, the Hebrew word for “vagina is “nartik”, not “shorer” as Osama claimed in his argument on pornography. Earlier, Mr. Abdallah criticized Mr. Katz by saying that he doesn’t know Hebrew but obviously Mr. Katz would know this for he has certificates in both Hebrew and Greek. Now if the Hebrew text said:
NARTIK 'aggan hassahar 'al-yechsar hammâzegh bithnêkh `arêmath chithiym sughâh bashoshanniym: Song of Songs 7:3
It would mean:
Your vagina (nartik) is a rounded goblet (which is stupid to say the least, no vagina looks like a bowl) that never lacks blended wine. Your waist is a mound of wheat encircled by lilies. Song of Songs 7:2 NIV
Then Osama would have a point, however the scriptures say:
shârerêkh 'aggan hassahar 'al-yechsar hammâzegh bithnêkh `arêmath chithiym sughâh bashoshanniym: Song of Songs 7:3
Your navel (shorer) is a rounded goblet that never lacks blended wine. Your waist is a mound of wheat encircled by lilies. Song of Songs 7:2 NIV
Any translation of the Bible,
including the most anti-Christian translations of the Bible, has never rendered
“shorer” to mean vagina, but navel.
"Your NAVEL is like a round goblet Which never lacks mixed wine; Your BELLY is like a heap of wheat Fenced about with lilies." Song of Songs 7:2 NASB
"Your NAVEL is a rounded bowl that never lacks mixed wine. Your BELLY is a heap of wheat, encircled with lilies." RSV
Your NAVEL is a rounded goblet that never lacks blended wine. Your waist is a mound of wheat encircled by lilies. NIV
Your NAVEL is as delicious as a goblet filled with wine. Your BELLY is lovely, like a heap of wheat set about with lilies. NLT
Thy NAVEL is like a round goblet, which wanteth not liquor: thy BELLY is like an heap of wheat set about with lilies. KJV
Your NAVEL is like a beautiful glass full of wine. Your STOMACH is like gathered grain with lilies around it. NLV
Your NAVEL is a rounded bowl; it never lacks mixed wine. Your waist[1] is a mound of wheat surrounded by lilies. HCSB
Footnotes
1.
c 7:2
Or belly HCSB
Your NAVEL is a rounded bowl that never lacks mixed wine. Your BELLY is a heap of wheat, encircled with lilies. ESV
Your NAVEL is a wine glass filled to overflowing. Your body is full and slender like a bundle of wheat bound together by lilies. CEV
Your NAVEL is a rounded goblet; It lacks no blended beverage. Your waist is a heap of wheat Set about with lilies. NKJV
Thy NAVEL is like a round goblet, which wanteth not liquor; thy BELLY is like a heap of wheat set about with lilies. KJV21
Thy NAVEL is a round goblet, [which] wanteth not mixed wine; Thy BELLY a heap of wheat, set about with lilies; Darby
Your NAVEL is like a round bowl that always has mixed wine in it. Your waist is like a mound of wheat that is surrounded by lilies. NIRV
Your NAVEL is a rounded goblet that never lacks blendedwine. Your waist is a mound of wheat encircled by lilies. NIV-UK
Do you see anywhere in the translations where “NAVEL” is the word “VAGINA”? No. Such stupidity on Osama’s part is embarrassing to say the least. If his theologians and scholars were objective and truthful then they should have shown from the Hebrew text where the word “navel” was actually the word “vagina”. Or in other words where “nartik” is present and not “shorer”!
Hey
Osama "Nartik" is the Hebrew word for
vagina not “shorer” in Song of Songs!
Now that
we have exposed Osama Abdallah as the uninformed
misfit that he is, we continue to examine his response to Shamoun
and Katz:
They wrote:
Yet, unlike Osama, we do
not have to twist the Quran to find evidence for
Allah's fascination with women's anatomies since he refers to their breasts and
vaginal areas:
"Surely for the godfearing awaits a place of security, gardens and
vineyards, and maidens of SWELLING BREASTS (Arabic- kawa'ib),
like of age, and a cup overflowing." S. 78:33 Arberry
(see also Dawood, Rodwell)
And (remember) her who
guarded her SEXUAL ORGAN (Arabic- farjahaa):
We breathed into her from Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a Sign for
all people. S. 21:91
And Mary the daughter of
'Imran, who guarded her SEXUAL ORGAN (Arabic- farjahaa) and We breathed INTO IT of Our spirit;
and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His revelations,
and was one of the devout (servants). S. 66:12
In the Arabic there is no
need to speculate that this may be a euphemistic way of referring to something
"a bit lower than the belly button". There is no maybe here.
It is an absolutely clear and unambiguous word for the sexual organ.
For the evidence from
various sources, including Muslim commentators and scholars, demonstrating that
the word farj means the vagina in these
specific contexts please consult the article, The Birth Narratives of Jesus in the Quran.
If mentioning the vagina
explicitly or implicitly is disqualifying a text from being revelation from
God, then the Qur'an is clearly not from God. If this
is not a valid criterion, then what is Osama's point? If Osama thinks that
mentioning the vagina in any book makes it a text of sexual perversion (and
Osama has still not proven that it even is in the Bible), then it is Osama's
god and his prophet who are the perverts for producing such sexually explicit
texts.
My
response:
First of all, even in
your twisted translation above, the reader clearly sees that there is ABSOLUTELY
no pornographic in any of the Noble Verses above! A person doesn't have
to be over 18 with viewer discretion is advised to read the Noble Quran as it is the case with your gospel of porn.
Twisted Translation? Really? Osama
then proceeds to say:
Mary Guarded her chastity, not her "vagina"!
Notice that for Noble
Verses 21:91 and 66:12, the liars did not specify the translation
source. This is because they are the liars who twisted the
meaning of the Arabic word "Farj",
which means the woman's womb, and also means woman's
chastity.
Mary guarded her "chastity"
not her vagina in Noble Verse 21:91 above! She was
GOD-fearing and a virgin chaste woman. That's what the Noble Verse is
saying.
"Mah'bal" in
Arabic is the exact word for "vagina" or "sexual
organ" as the liars put it.
Where in the Noble Quran
was the word "mah'bal" used?
If this is all you can come up with, then you are soundly and hopelessly losing
your battle with me tonight. If Allah Almighty's Divine Claim about the Virgin
Mary getting pregnant even though she was never touched by any man
is pornography to you, then you are not only weasels, but you are total goofs!
First off, Osama Abdallah
has committed a very grave error and contradicted himself to an almost
laughable position. Remember earlier when he said to Mr. Katz and Mr. Shamoun, dealing with Ms. Fountaine
and her staff:
1- She is a Theology Professor - much more knowledgeable than you two weasels and the real liars.
So because Ms. Fountaine
was a scholar and authority on Christianity, her statement supersedes Katz and Shamoun (even though we’ve disproved this). However the
twisted translation which Osama complains about isn’t so twisted at all. And
guess what, they come from Islamic scholars and tafsirs.
Mahmoud M. Ayoub contrasts the birth narratives of the Gospel of Luke with that mentioned in the Quran. All bold and capital emphasis is ours:
"The language of this verse (author- Luke 1:35) is clearly circumspect. It implies no sexual union or divine generation of any kind. Furthermore, while Luke's description agrees both in form and spirit with the Qur'anic idea of the conception of Christ, the language of the Qur'an IS FAR MORE GRAPHIC AND OPEN TO INTERPRETATION." (Christian-Muslim Encounters, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad & Wadi Z. Haddad [University Press of Florida, 1995], p. 67)
He goes on to say:
"... Then of Mary He (author-allegedly God) continues: ‘And she who guarded well [lit. fortified] her chastity [lit. GENERATIVE ORGAN], and thus We breathed INTO HER of our spirit, and We made her and her son a sign [or miracle, 'Aya] for all beings’ (S. 21:90-91) ...
"In the second instance the Qur'an speaks of Mary as a righteous woman who lived in strict chastity and obedience to God: ‘And Mary daughter of 'Imran who guarded well her GENERATIVE ORGAN farjaha, and thus We breathed INTO HER of our spirit’ (S. 66:12). THE BOLD AND GRAPHIC STATEMENT APPEARS TO HAVE SHOCKED TRADITIONISTS AND COMMENTATORS, so that most of them tried to cover it up with different and FARFETCHED significations or glossed over it with out comment...
"Ibn Kathir interprets the phrase ‘guarded well her generative organ’ to mean: ‘safeguarded and protected it. Guarding well ihsan signifies chastity and high birth.’ He comments on the phrase, ‘and thus We breathed into it of our spirit’ thus ‘that is, through the angel Gabriel. This is because God sent him to her, and he took for her the form of a man of good stature (S. 19:17). God commanded him to breathe INTO THE BREAST OF HER CHEMISE. HIS BREATH WENT DOWN AND PENETRATED HER GENERATIVE ORGAN, AND THUS CAUSED HER TO CONCEIVE JESUS ...’" (Ibid.)
Finally:
"Abu Ja'far al-Tusi, the jurist doctor of the Shi'i community, as well as his well known disciple al-Tabarsi, read the words, ‘We breathed INTO IT’ literally. Al-Tusi says: ‘It has been held that Gabriel BREATHED INTO MARY'S GENERATIVE ORGAN then God created Christ in it’ ..." (Ibid., p. 68)
Ibn Kathir provides additional evidence for the very graphic and distasteful nature of the Quranic birth narratives. In his comments on S. 66:12, Ibn Kathir writes:
<And Maryam, the daughter of 'Imran who guarded her chastity (PRIVATE PART).> meaning who protected and purified her honor, by being chaste and free of immorality,
<And We breathed INTO IT (PRIVATE PART) through Our Ruh,> meaning, through the angel Jibril. Allah sent the angel Jibril to Maryam, and he came to her in the shape of a man in every respect. Allah commanded him TO BLOW into a gap of her garment and that breath went into her womb THROUGH HER PRIVATE PART; this is how 'Isa was conceived. This is why Allah said here,
<And We breathed INTO IT through Our Ruh, and she testified to the truth of her Lords Kalimat, and His Kutub,> meaning His decree and His legislation. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir - Abridged, Volume 10, Surat At-Tagabun to the end of the Qur'an, pp. 75-76; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Ibn Kathir makes the following comments in reference to S. 19:22-23:
"Allah, the Exalted, informs about Maryam that when Jibril had spoken to her about what Allah said, she accepted the decree of Allah. Many scholars of the predecessors (Salaf) have mentioned that at this point the angel (who was Jibril) blew into the opening of her garment that she was wearing. Then the breath descended until it entered INTO HER VAGINA and she conceived by the leave of Allah." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 6, Surat Al-Isra', Verse 39 To the end of Surat Al-Mu'minun, first edition July 2000, p. 244; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Ibn Kathir's notes on S. 2:223 also help us to see the very graphic nature of the term farj:
<as Allah has ordained for you.>
this refers to Al-Farj (THE VAGINA), as Ibn 'Abbas, Mujahid and other scholars have stated. Therefore, anal sex is prohibited, as we will further emphasize afterwards, Allah willing ...
Ibn Jurayj (one of the reporters of the Hadith) said that Allah's Messengers said ...
((From the front or from behind, as long as it occurs IN THE FARJ (VAGINA).)) ...
Abu Bakr bin Ziyad Naysaburi reported that Isma'il bin Ruh said that he asked Malik bin Anas, "What do you say about having sex with women in the anus?" He said, "You are not an Arab? Does sex occur but in the place of pregnancy? Do it only IN THE FARJ (VAGINA)." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 1, Parts 1 and 2 (Surat Al-Fatihah to Verse 252 of Surat Al-Baqarah), first edition January 2000, pp. 618, 619, 622; bold and capital emphasis ours)
In responding to the Shia position regarding the permissibility of temporary marriages (mutah), this Sunni writer defines farj as:
I'arat al-Furuj (Loaning of Vaginas)
The Shi'ah books of fiqh carry a separate chapter entitled "I’arat al-Furuj." This could literally be translated as "The Loaning of Vaginas." ... (Dr. Ahmad 'Abdullah Salamah, Shi’ah Concept of Temporary Marriage (Mut’ah); online edition)
The scholars used to prove this
point are Ayoub, one of the most respected Islamic
scholars, as well as the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir! Notice this on Ibn Kathir:
Translated and abridged by a group
of scholars under the supervision of Sheikh Safiur-Rahman
Al-Mubarakpuri.
Click here for the
biography of the author, Hafiz Ibn Kathir
The
Qur'an is the revelation of Allah's Own Words for the
guidance of His creatures. Since the Qur'an is the
primary source of Islamic teachings, the correct understanding for the Qur'an is necessary for every Muslim. The Tafsir of Ibn Kathir IS THE MOST RENOWNED AND ACCEPTED explanation of the
Qur'an IN THE ENTIRE WORLD. In it one finds THE BEST
PRESENTATION of Ahadith, history, and scholarly
commentary…
Tafsir Al-Qur'an Al-Azim, which is
famous by the title Tafsir Ibn
Kathir, by Al-Hafiz. Abu Al-Fida'
'Imad Ad-Din Isma'il bin 'Umar bin Kathir Al-Qurashi Al-Busrawi (d. 774 H.), is the most popular interpretation of the Qur'an in the Arabic language, and THE MAJORITY OF THE
MUSLIMS CONSIDER IT TO BE THE BEST SOURCE BASED ON THE QURAN AND SUNNAH.
This Arabic work spans three thousand and two hundred pages in four volumes. To
cover all of the references, Ibn Kathir
has also collected some weak Ahadith and Israelitish stories. Some repetitions also occur in it, as
and when the topics required these.
As
Darussalam has made a policy to publish
only such works which are based on Qur'an and
authentic Ahadith we appointed a board of Islamic
scholars to summarize Tafsir Ibn
Kathir in the original Arabic language. Shaykh Abu Al-Ashbal Ahmad Shagif of Rabitah Al-'Alam Al-Islami, Makkah, and Shaykh Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri,
Head of the Research Committee of Darussalam worked with a team of other
scholars for about two years on this project. We published this summarized
version in the Arabic language titled as Al-Misbah
Al-Murur fe Tahdhib Tafsir Ibn Kathir…
Abdul-Malik Mujahid
General Manager, Darussalam Publications
Riyadh, March 2000 (Source; emphasis ours)
So one of the twisted meanings comes from Ibn Kathir, who produced one of the most renowned and widely accepted Islamic commentaries in the world! In fact, Osama Abdallah is wrong for claiming that “farj” can’t be the word vagina when he says:
"Mah'bal" in
Arabic is the exact word for "vagina" or "sexual
organ" as the liars put it.
He apparently forgot about this:
Ibn Jurayj (one of the reporters of the Hadith) said that Allah's Messengers said ...
((From the front or from behind, as long as it occurs IN THE FARJ (VAGINA).)) ...
Abu Bakr bin Ziyad Naysaburi reported that Isma'il bin Ruh said that he
asked Malik bin Anas,
"What do you say about having sex with women in the anus?" He said,
"You are not an Arab? Does sex occur but in the place of pregnancy? Do
it only IN THE FARJ (VAGINA)."
It is obvious that the place of pregnancy IS THE VAGINA AND YET THE WORD “Mah’bal” isn’t present here. So Mr. Abdallah DOES THIS MEANS that your own false prophet was TWISTED AND WRONG AND A LIAR? He didn't use the word "mah'bal" for the place of pregnancy but the word “farj”! If you notice in his response, Mr. Abdallah does nothing to elaborate on the meaning of “farj” like we did with “shorer” and “nartik”. He just brushed it aside, called Shamoun and Katz liars and then proceeded to claim that the Arabic word for “vagina” is “mah’bal”! What he failed to tell you was that Muhammad, his companions and the scholars on Islam believed that the word farj, which Osama accused Shamoun and Katz of twisting, did mean what the Christians claimed!
Here is the final Muslim example showing that farj refers to the female organ:
Narrated Basrah:
A man from the Ansar called Basrah
said: I married a virgin woman in her veil. When I entered upon her, I found
her pregnant. (I mentioned this to the Prophet). The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: She will get the dower, for you
made her VAGINA (farj) lawful for you. The
child will be your slave. When she has begotten (a child), flog her (according
to the version of al-Hasan). The version of Ibn AbusSari has: You people,
flog her, or said: inflict hard punishment on him. (Sunan
of Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number
2126)
What more can we say? The “Mah’bal’” argument won’t help Mr. Abdallah.
Muhammad addressed this very word when he was dealing with anal intercourse!
Osama himself has a page on this very issue here. He uses the
exact verse Surah 2:223 that Ibn
Kathir expounds on above! We post it again for your
readership:
<as Allah has ordained for you.>
this refers to Al-Farj (THE VAGINA), as Ibn 'Abbas, Mujahid and other scholars have stated. Therefore, anal sex is prohibited, as we will further emphasize afterwards, Allah willing ...
Ibn Jurayj (one of the reporters of the Hadith) said that Allah's Messengers said ...
((From the front or from behind, as long as it occurs IN THE FARJ (VAGINA).)) ...
Abu Bakr bin Ziyad Naysaburi reported that Isma'il bin Ruh said that he asked Malik bin Anas, "What do you say about having sex with women in the anus?" He said, "You are not an Arab? Does sex occur but in the place of pregnancy? Do it only IN THE FARJ (VAGINA)." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 1, Parts 1 and 2 (Surat Al-Fatihah to Verse 252 of Surat Al-Baqarah), first edition January 2000, pp. 618, 619, 622; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Now notice on Osama’s page, which is
so nicely addressed to me, says:
It's quite ironic that the Christian team of "Answering Islam" claim that Islam allows and even promotes Anal sex between the husband and the wife. There is a clown among them named Quennel Gale who used this argument in several of his arguments. This paper will expose this cheap lie from this dumb team (I apologize to the reader), and will once again, put Islam on the highest rank of Truth.
Anal sex, or sex from the rear end of the wife is not allowed in Islam. Let us look at the following Noble Verse from the Noble Quran:
"Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear God. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe. (The Noble Quran, 2:223)"
This Noble Verse was clarified in details through the Sayings (Hadiths) of our beloved Prophet peace be upon him. Let us look at some of them:
"Narrated Jabir: Jews used to say: 'If one has sexual intercourse with his wife from the back [The vagina as clearly shown below], then she will deliver a squint-eyed child.' So this Verse was revealed:-- 'Your wives are a tilth unto you; so go to your tilth when or how you will.' (2.223) (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Prophetic Commentary on the Qur'an (Tafseer of the Prophet (peace be upon him)), Number 51)" (Source)
Should I laugh or cry? In his most
recent rebuttal Osama claims:
"Mah'bal" in
Arabic is the exact word for "vagina" or "sexual
organ" as the liars put it.
Where in the Noble Quran
was the word "mah'bal" used?
Then he contradicts himself when he
says above:
"Narrated Jabir: Jews used to say: 'If one has sexual
intercourse with his wife from the back [The vagina as clearly shown below], then she will
deliver a squint-eyed child.' So this Verse was revealed:-- 'Your wives are a tilth unto you; so go to your tilth
when or how you will.' (2.223) (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60,
Prophetic Commentary on the Qur'an (Tafseer of the Prophet (peace be upon him)), Number 51)"
He even uses Ibn Kathir, which discloses the fact that “farj” is the word vagina! He even says it himself - [The vagina as clearly shown below], and now he gets amnesia and then claims that no it is mah’bal! We don’t disagree that Mahbal is the word for vagina but that “farj”, which he didn’t make any effort to address (now you know why) IS A WORD THAT WAS UNDERSTOOD BY MUHAMMAD, HIS COMPANIONS AND THE TAFSIRS TO BE EQUIVALENT TO THE SAME THING. Look at this list for words equivalent to male and female body parts
Male: Penis = Cock
Female: Vagina = Couchie
Now if I
write a sentence using “cock” or “couchie” it would
be immediately known to refer to male and female sexual organs. I would look
stupid if I said no this is wrong for saying that these didn’t refer to the
sexual organs just because “penis & vagina” wasn’t mentioned! This is
exactly what Osama Abdallah is doing with his
rebuttal.
In Islam
“Farj” = Vagina
Osama
agreed in an earlier article and then later contradicted himself by trying to
claim that only “mahbal” means “vagina”. He can’t
even lie straight and he contradicts his own prophet and his companions!! AND
HE CLAIMS KATZ AND SHAMOUN WROTE A SELF-REFUTING ARTICLE? LOL! He says:
You might have a little
bit stronger position with the "big breasted"
maidens in
Show me where in the Noble Quran does it
say anything like this.
Notice he agrees that Katz and Shamoun have a stronger point on “big breasted” maidens. So
how does he respond? HE JUST SAYS IT ISN’T PORNOGRAPHIC AND THAT’S IT! Why
exactly is mentioning one part of a female’s body parts porn and the other part
isn’t? Osama doesn’t tell us. This exposes his double standard on this
argument. In fact to show you just how stupid he really is, notice how he does
say big breasts are pornographic when dealing with the Bible:
1- X-Rated Pornography in the Bible:
The Bible has some really weird things in it that you would really be ashamed to even share with your own little kids!. It teaches you to fantasize about women's breasts and vaginas. It also teaches you to sleep with your own sister!.
A quick answer to the Christian folks who claim that the "Song of Songs" book in the Bible is talking about a husband and a wife: As you will see below in the article, the book is not talking about a husband and a wife. It's talking about two lovers. But even if it was talking about a husband and a wife, then wouldn't you agree with me that exposing your wife's privates to the world is pornography by itself?
What is the
spiritual point and wisdom from having pornography in the Bible? How is
it supposed to be GOD Almighty's True Living Words? (http://www.answering-christianity.com/x_rated.htm)
Look at Mr. Abdallah’s stupidity here! He claims on his pornography page that IT IS PORN TO MENTION WOMEN’S BREAST! But oh wait! Now this liar is saying that:
You might have a little
bit stronger position with the "big breasted"
maidens in
So which one is it? Is it porn to mention breast or is it not porn to mention breast? Osama seems to change his mind every article thereby contradicting himself! If he claims that it isn’t porn to mention breast in the Bible then he is refuting his very own article regarding the Bible being pornographic! If he agrees that it is porn then his Quran would be guilty of the very same thing he accuses “Song of Solomon” of, namely being a filthy, perverted porno! Notice how he explains this away by saying that:
Allah Almighty never Said that they shall suck the males' cocks as the gospel of porn says (see the verses below), and cum (as the christian horny whores most of them lose their virginities to their boyfriends without marriage, and they wear bikinis where they expose 99% of their cheap and unchaste bodies to the public do today) with a never-tasted before,