This is the raw, unfiltered teaching of the Quran and the Sharia it produced. No sugarcoating. No excuses about “7th-century context.” These rules are presented as Allah’s eternal guidance for all time.

SEX SLAVES — “WHAT YOUR RIGHT HANDS POSSESS”

The Quran explicitly permits men to have unlimited sexual access to their female slaves and war captives:

“And those who guard their private parts except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed.” (Quran 23:5-6)

This is repeated in Quran 70:29-30 and 4:24, which says married women are forbidden “except those whom your right hands possess.” Classical Islamic scholars understood this to mean a Muslim man could have sex with his slave girls without marriage and without their consent. These women were war booty, taken after battles against non-Muslims. Their previous marriages were dissolved the moment they were captured. This is not historical footnote — it is divine permission still cited by groups like ISIS when they enslaved Yazidi girls.

CHILD BRIDES AND PEDOPHILIA

The Quran does not set a minimum age for marriage. In fact, it makes provision for marrying and divorcing prepubescent girls: “As for those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, or those who have not menstruated, their waiting period is three months.” (Quran 65:4)

This verse assumes a man can be married to a girl who “has not menstruated” — meaning she has not yet reached puberty. The most authoritative hadiths record that Muhammad married Aisha when she was six and consummated the marriage when she was nine. Because Muhammad is considered the perfect moral example (uswa hasana — Quran 33:21), this practice is defended and replicated across the Islamic world. Child marriage remains legal or tolerated in many Muslim-majority countries today.

While the Bible records marriages at younger ages than today, there’s a massive difference. In ancient Israel, a 15 or 16-year-old girl was culturally mature, trained from childhood for marriage and family. Muhammad, at 54, married a 6-year-old and consummated it when she was 9. That’s not comparable — it’s child exploitation. The Quran commands Muslims to imitate Muhammad, and they do — child marriage remains common in places like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria, and even parts of Europe today.

MARRYING COUSINS — SANCTIONED INBREEDING

Unlike the Bible, which forbids marriage between close blood relatives, the Quran lists forbidden degrees of marriage in Surah 4:23 and deliberately leaves out cousins. First-cousin marriage is not only permitted — it is common in many Muslim societies. Muhammad himself married his cousin Zaynab. This practice has led to significantly elevated rates of genetic disorders in communities where it is prevalent.

POLYGAMY — UP TO FOUR WIVES

“Marry women of your choice, two or three or four. But if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly, then only one or what your right hands possess.” (Quran 4:3)Men are granted up to four wives at the same time. Women have no reciprocal right. The verse links this directly to the possession of slave women as an alternative when a man cannot treat multiple wives fairly.

GENESIS 4:19 — Does God Approve of Polygamy?

THE DIFFICULTY:
Genesis 4:19 states: “Lamech took two wives for himself.” Critics often point to the presence of polygamy among Old Testament figures such as Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon as evidence that God approved of the practice. Others argue that because the Bible records polygamy without immediate condemnation, Scripture implicitly endorses it. The difficulty is determining whether polygamy was part of God’s ideal arrangement for marriage or merely tolerated for a time.

THE CONTEXT:
The first mention of polygamy in the Bible appears not among faithful worshippers of Jehovah but within the violent line of Lamech, a descendant of Cain. The placement is significant. Genesis presents monogamous marriage as the original divine arrangement established in Eden: “a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife, and they must become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24) The pattern is one man and one woman joined in permanent union.

When Jesus Christ later discussed marriage, He did not appeal to patriarchal customs or later Israelite practices. He returned directly to Eden and reaffirmed the original standard of monogamy. (Matthew 19:4-6) This establishes that Genesis 2—not later human deviation—defines God’s intention for marriage.

The Old Testament narratives that include polygamy consistently reveal tension, jealousy, rivalry, favoritism, and spiritual decline. Scripture records these arrangements honestly without presenting them as ideals.

THE CLARIFICATION:
Jehovah did not originate or approve polygamy as His ideal for marriage. He tolerated it temporarily within a fallen human society, regulating it to limit abuse and injustice while gradually directing His people back toward the Edenic standard.

The Bible’s treatment of polygamy is descriptive, not prescriptive. Abraham’s household experienced conflict because of Hagar and Sarah. Jacob’s marriages produced jealousy and family strife between Leah and Rachel. David’s multiple marriages contributed to domestic turmoil and political instability. Solomon’s many wives ultimately turned his heart away from Jehovah into idolatry. Scripture repeatedly exposes the painful consequences of the practice.

Jehovah’s Law never commanded polygamy. Instead, it placed restrictions upon it. Exodus 21:10-11 protected the rights of wives within such arrangements, while Deuteronomy 21:15-17 regulated inheritance to prevent favoritism. Most significantly, Deuteronomy 17:17 specifically warned Israel’s kings not to “multiply wives,” recognizing the spiritual danger involved. Solomon’s tragic downfall later confirmed the wisdom of that command.

Why, then, did God tolerate polygamy for a time? Human society after Eden had become deeply corrupted and resistant even to basic divine standards. Jehovah exercised patience while advancing His larger purpose, particularly preserving the nation through which the promised Seed would come. Temporary toleration did not equal approval, just as God temporarily tolerated other imperfections among ancient peoples while progressively directing them toward higher standards.

Polygamy may also have served practical functions within ancient conditions of warfare, instability, and population growth. Yet these practical realities never transformed the practice into God’s ideal arrangement.

THE DEFENSE:
Genesis 4:19 does not endorse polygamy; it introduces it as part of humanity’s growing departure from God’s original design. The consistent testimony of Scripture is that monogamy is Jehovah’s standard, while polygamy was a tolerated deviation within imperfect human society.

The Bible’s honesty strengthens rather than weakens its credibility. Instead of glorifying patriarchs unrealistically, Scripture records the painful consequences of their choices. Nearly every polygamous household in the Bible becomes marked by rivalry, sorrow, division, or spiritual compromise. This repeated pattern functions as an implicit condemnation of the practice.

Jehovah ultimately restored the original marital standard through Christ, who reaffirmed the one-man, one-woman union established in Eden. Christians were therefore forbidden from practicing polygamy, and Christian overseers were required to be husbands of one wife. The movement of Scripture is consistently back toward Eden, not away from it.

Thus, God did not approve of polygamy as His design for marriage. He temporarily tolerated it within a fallen world while regulating its abuses and preserving His redemptive purpose until the fuller standard was restored and reaffirmed through Christ.

EXODUS 21:20–21 — Does the Bible Condone Slavery?

THE DIFFICULTY:
Exodus 21:20–21 speaks of a slave owner disciplining a servant and gives legal consequences if the servant dies. Critics argue that this proves the Bible condones slavery and even permits abuse. The word “slave” immediately evokes the brutal race-based chattel slavery of more recent history, leading many readers to assume that the Mosaic Law approved oppressive human ownership.

THE CONTEXT:
The slavery regulated in the Mosaic Law was not the same as the later Islamic slave trade, the transatlantic slave trade, or any system built on kidnapping, racial domination, permanent hereditary bondage, and commercialized human cruelty. In Israel, much servitude was closer to indentured labor, debt service, or household employment. A poor Israelite could sell himself into service for a limited time, not as a degraded object, but as a way to survive poverty, repay debt, and regain stability.

The Law was given to a people living in an already fallen world with existing social and economic systems. Jehovah did not originate oppressive slavery. He regulated an existing institution so that it would be restrained, humane, temporary in many cases, and accountable under divine law.

THE CLARIFICATION:
Exodus 21:20–21 does not give permission to abuse slaves. It does the opposite. It places the master under legal accountability. If a servant died from mistreatment, the offender was to be punished. This was a major protection in an ancient setting where servants in surrounding nations often had little or no legal standing.

Other Mosaic laws make the point unmistakable. Kidnapping and selling a person was punishable by death (Exodus 21:16). Hebrew servants were to be released after six years (Exodus 21:2). In the fiftieth year, liberty was proclaimed broadly throughout the land (Leviticus 25:40–41). A poor Israelite was not to be treated as a slave in harsh service but “like a hired laborer” (Leviticus 25:39–40). When released, the servant was not to be sent away empty-handed but generously supplied (Deuteronomy 15:13–14). If a master permanently injured a servant, even by causing the loss of a tooth or eye, the servant was set free (Exodus 21:26–27).

These laws do not describe approval of cruelty. They show restriction, protection, accountability, and mercy within an imperfect society. Jehovah’s Law moved Israel away from exploitation and toward love of neighbor, justice for the poor, and humane treatment of the vulnerable.

THE DEFENSE:
The Bible does not condone oppressive slavery. It records and regulates servitude in a fallen world while progressively directing God’s people toward justice, mercy, and love. The Mosaic Law prevented kidnapping, limited servitude, protected the poor, punished abuse, and required generosity toward released servants. That is the opposite of endorsing the brutal systems most modern readers associate with slavery.

Exodus 21:20–21 must therefore be read within the whole legal framework. It is not a license for mistreatment but a restraint against it. The master was not above the law; he was accountable before Jehovah.

Later, under Christianity, the “law of the Christ” raised the moral obligation still higher. Masters were commanded to treat servants justly, and slaves and masters who became Christians were to regard one another as brothers. The Bible’s trajectory is not toward oppression but toward true freedom under God’s righteous rule. Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon not to preserve slavery as an ideal, but to press a new relational reality in Christ, where a former slave is to be received as a beloved brother. That reframing undermines exploitation and calls the congregation to treat fellow believers with justice, dignity, and family-level love under the law of the Christ.

The New Testament did not launch a social revolution against slavery because its mandate was to make disciples and form congregations whose transformed relationships would undermine exploitation from the inside. By requiring masters and slaves who were in Christ to live as brothers under justice and love, the apostolic writings planted principles that ultimately eroded slavery’s moral legitimacy without distracting the church from its primary mission.

TEMPORARY MARRIAGE (MUT’AH)

The Quran contains a verse widely understood to permit mut’ah — a temporary “marriage” contracted for a fixed period of time, essentially religiously sanctioned prostitution:“…So for whatever you enjoy from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation.” (Quran 4:24)While Sunni Muslims later restricted this practice, the plain reading of the text and Shia practice preserve it.

GUARDIANSHIP AND OBEDIENCE — MEN RULE WOMEN

“Men are in charge of women by right of what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient…” (Quran 4:34)

The same verse gives men a disciplinary sequence for “disobedience”: admonish them, refuse to sleep with them, and then strike them. This is not a cultural relic — it is Allah’s direct instruction.

SECOND-CLASS LEGAL STATUS

• Testimony: “And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men available, then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses — so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her.” (Quran 2:282)
  A woman’s testimony is officially worth half a man’s in financial matters.
• Inheritance: “The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females.” (Quran 4:11)
  Daughters typically receive half the inheritance of sons.

DIVORCE RULES — HEAVILY WEIGHTED TOWARD MEN

Men can divorce their wives easily through talaq. Women face far greater restrictions and must usually seek a judge’s permission through khula, often having to return their dowry. The Quran’s divorce regulations (Surah 2:228-232 and Surah 65) give the husband clear authority and multiple chances to revoke the divorce during the waiting period.

This is not a list of isolated practices. These rules form a complete theological system that places women in a permanently subordinate position — whether as wives, daughters, or slaves. The Quran does not present these as reluctant accommodations to a primitive society. It presents them as the perfect, unchangeable will of Allah.

This system is actively practiced across the Islamic world — from child marriage in Afghanistan and Pakistan, to state-supported polygamy in parts of Europe where multiple wives collect welfare benefits, to the grooming scandals in the UK where cultural attitudes toward non-Muslim girls echoed the “right hand possesses” mentality.

These doctrines travel with Muslim immigration. They are not “cultural.” They are Quranic.

You May Also Benefit From

Top Ten Rules in the Quran That Oppress and Insult Women

The Qur’an’s Oppression of Women

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS