Always searching for new ways of twisting the message of the Bible and insulting Christians and their faith, some Muslim polemicists know no taboos. On 9 June 2006, answering-christianity.com published an article written by Abdullah Smith and titled "Did Jesus Have Female Breasts?" (here). Seemingly annoyed that we have not given his article any attention, the author was looking for an occasion to raise the issue again. And he found it.

Being badly battered by our exposure of his many misquotations in another one of his articles, "The False Jesus of Christianity" (here), he is in total denial and claims that there is nothing wrong with that article. Nevertheless, instead of dealing with our evidence, he tries to detract attention from his various false claims and misquotations. Completely convinced of his invincible argument in the above mentioned article, the author issued the following challenge on 14 September 2006:

My article The False Jesus of Christianity is factual and correct. I challenge you to refute my article Did Jesus Have Female Breasts? And you wouldn't be able to do it. (Source)

I love challenges, particularly when I can make an idiot look like an idiot. Sorry for my unusually strong language but Abdullah Smith has not deserved anything else.^[1] The Bible says: "Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall." (Proverbs 16:18) Although Smith's rather ridiculous claim could be soundly refuted in less than a page, I have decided to have some extra fun with this one.

The first piece of irony is that Smith issued this challenge in response to an article that already provided a link to the refutation of his challenge. Like nearly all of his attacks against the Bible, this charge is not his own idea. In this case it is taken from the book The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur, one of Smith's favorite Christianity bashers. And since it is not new, it is not surprising that it has been answered before. In our article The Amazing Scholarly Level of Islamic Apologists, exposing various misquotations in his polemic "The False Jesus of Christianity", Wildcat stated:

In fact, utilizing questionable sources for information about the Bible and/or Christianity seems to be a staple of Mr. Smith. Of the numerous articles of his that I've read (which is a sizeable number, though not exhaustive), Smith regularly reproduces quotes from non-authorities like Tom Harpur, Lloyd Graham, G.A. Wells, Thomas Paine, etc., whose views would not be taken seriously by mainstream New Testament scholars. ...

Apparently without even bothering to check out what these pages have to say about his sources, particularly about Tom Harpur, Smith challenges us to deal with an argument that he has taken over from Tom Harpur. Unfortunately for him, the above linked page on Harpur also refutes this particular claim that the author of Revelation is depicting Jesus as having female breasts. In consequence, Smith is going to pay now for his foolishness.

The other possible explanation is even less flattering: He followed the link and read the evidence that was presented against this theory, but he simply does not care. Instead of apologizing and removing this false charge, he deliberately uses arguments he knows to be false, because he thinks they are effective and most people will accept them without bothering to search further. Well, even if he does not care about truth, at least those readers will care whom we care about, i.e. those who think, and demand evidence, and do not blindly believe every garbage that Muslim polemicists try to shove down their throats. Smith's reaction to this article will provide some indication whether it was merely ignorance and foolishness so far, or if he will continue to maliciously propagate the same argument for the purpose of deliberate deception.

Maybe the esteemed reader would like to participate in dealing with Smith's "challenge"? Instead of simply reading my answer, one could use this occasion for exercising one's own critical thinking powers. While reading the following argument, just note down all the errors and logical blunders that you discover Smith committing. And then compare notes and see whether you found all of them, when you read my analysis of his arguments. And let me know if you find some more that I overlooked. Moreover, everyone is invited to critically evaluate my own arguments.

To facilitate this exercise, I am going to first quote (the relevant parts of) his argument in full. Smith writes:

Christians are ignorant of the New Testament’s portrayal of Jesus; ... The book of Revelation is probably the most degrading book; it contains a passage that describes Jesus having woman breasts!

And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps (mastos) with a golden girdle. (Revelations 1:13)

Let us analyze the passage closely; Jesus is described as having “paps” with a golden girdle. But what are paps? According to the Oxford Dictionary, it basically means the “breasts”.  There is evidence to show that “paps” exclusively refers to woman breasts.

Here is the lexicon for “paps”

Strong’s Number: 3149

Transliterated Word:

Mastos

Phonetic

mas-tos

Definition:

1. the breasts
2. the breasts (nipples) of a man
3. breasts of a women

The word “paps” could refer to both male and female breasts, but the New Testament applies the Greek word “mastos” to woman only!

And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps (mastos) which thou hast sucked. (Luke 11:27)

For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps (mastos) which never gave suck. (Luke 23:29)

Since the New Testament never applies the word “paps” to males, the verse Revelation 1:13 does speak of Jesus having female breasts! Now if the author of Revelation wanted to say Jesus has MALE breasts, he should’ve used the Greek word “stethos”, which simply means “breast”.

And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast (stethos), saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. (Luke 18:13)

Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He then lying on Jesus' breast (stethos) saith unto him, Lord, who is it? (John 13:25)

Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast (stethos) at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? (John 21:20)

The difference is that “stethos” defines any breast, but “mastos” only refers to female breasts. The perverted author of Revelations decided to use the word “mastos” and not “stethos”.

The scholar Tom Harper comments on Revelations 1:13

Revelation 1:13, in the King James Version, says, “And I saw in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle”. “Paps” is the archaic word for a woman’s breasts. In the Greek, the word used is the plural mastos, which the lexicon defines as “the breast, esp., of the swelling breast of a woman”. Rarely, the plural was used to refer to a man’s breasts, but the prevailing sense is female. The fact that the figure in this passage from Revelation wore a “girdle”, or cincture, about the breasts—the modern equivalent would be a brassiere—confirms that the breasts in question are female. Indeed, the New English Bible translates the plural as though it were a singular—“with a golden girdle round his breast”. The New Revised Standard Version tried to avoid any embarrassment by wrongly translating it as “chest”. (The Pagan Christ, p. 211)

It is interesting to note that Revelations also contains a passage that speaks of angels having breasts!

And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts (stethos) girded with golden girdles. (Revelations 15:6)

Do angels have breasts? The passage doesn’t use the Greek word “mastos”, so the author is simply describing the breasts (non-female) of angels. Yet the verse Revelation 1:13 blatantly describes Jesus as a woman.

Christians must accept the Bible degrades Jesus and does not respect him. The only solution to this dilemma is rejecting the Bible stories altogether, except those attested by the Holy Quran and historical data. ...

The Islamic Version of Jesus is the true and correct Jesus, as the whole world should believe. ...

RESPONSE

The last couple of lines in the above quotation clearly reveal Smith's agenda. Frankly, I have never seen any secular scholar of history (i.e. non-Christian and non-Muslim), who considers the Islamic version of Jesus to be more trustworthy than the Biblical accounts. Anyway, let's take this step by step and analyze the recipe of this cooked up "perversion".

Disregard the dictionaries

Smith writes:

... But what are paps? According to the Oxford Dictionary, it basically means the “breasts”. There is evidence to show that “paps” exclusively refers to woman breasts.

Here is the lexicon for “paps”

Mastos

Definition:

1. the breasts
2. the breasts (nipples) of a man
3. breasts of a women

The word “paps” could refer to both male and female breasts, but the New Testament applies the Greek word “mastos” to woman only!

It is a relatively minor problem that the way Smith refers to dictionaries is totally messed up. He names the Oxford Dictionary but then proceeds to quote from an abridged version of Thayer's Greek Lexicon without providing any bibliographical reference for it, nor giving a link to his actual online source (here). Since the author of Revelation wrote in Greek, we need to investigate the meaning of the Greek word that is used in Revelation 1:13. It is therefore rather pointless to inquire about "paps" in the Oxford Dictionary. The most he could hope to achieve by doing so would be to find some evidence that the 17th century translators of the KJV mistranslated the Greek text, but a dictionary of the English language will never yield any information about the meaning of the Greek text.

However, I don't know why Smith bothers to consult any dictionaries at all, if he then disregards what they say. As unclear as his statements are, according to Smith the two dictionaries that he mentioned (one by name, the other by quoting it) agree that the word/words (paps and/or mastos) is/are generic and can refer to both male and female breasts. Nevertheless, and this is the major issue, he claims to know better than the experts and will allegedly provide evidence that the word can only mean "female breast" when it is used in reference to Jesus. Despite declaring that "historical data" are acceptable, when lexicographers — based on historical data — arrive at the conclusion that mastos can be used to refer to both the male and the female breast, Smith's desire for finding a perversion easily nullifies the dictionaries.

Throw away the data before devising a theory

Let's begin this section with pointing out a particularly funny howler. Smith argues (emphasis mine):

Christians are ignorant of the New Testament’s portrayal of Jesus; ...
The book of Revelation is probably the most degrading book; it contains a passage that describes Jesus having woman breasts! ...

The word “paps” could refer to both male and female breasts, but the New Testament applies the Greek word “mastos” to woman only!

Since the New Testament never applies the word “paps” to males, ...

Oh Smitty! Apart from the attempt of forcing an unwarranted restriction on the meaning of “mastos”, I thought the whole point of your article was the claim that “mastos” was applied to Jesus, and that this is degrading and perverted. But if the word is applied to women only, and it is never applied to males, then it was never applied to Jesus who was a man. With these statements, your argument is over, unless you want to argue not only that Jesus has female breasts but upgrade to the claim that he was a woman.^[2] In that case, however, I do not understand why you consider it degrading and perverted to ascribe female breasts to a woman. Don't you think your argument is rather incoherent?

The incoherent formulation of this last sentence is only a symptom of the actual disease, the underlying methodological problem.

... But what are paps? According to the Oxford Dictionary, it basically means the “breasts”. There is evidence to show that “paps” exclusively refers to woman breasts. ...

The word “paps” could refer to both male and female breasts, but the New Testament applies the Greek word “mastos” to woman only! ...

Since the New Testament never applies the word “paps” to males, the verse Revelation 1:13 does speak of Jesus having female breasts! ...

The difference is that “stethos” defines any breast, but “mastos” only refers to female breasts. ...

Apart from the fact that he constantly alternates in a confused way between "paps" and "mastos", Smith makes some rather strong statements. Exclusively? Never? Only? On what basis do his conclusions rest? Is his database sufficiently strong and comprehensive to derive such absolute conclusions from it? Has he considered all the evidence? How small can a sample be before it becomes laughable to derive general conclusions from it?

Smith's statements give the misleading impression that there are a large number of passages where the word mastos appears and that they all are used in relation to women's breasts. This is wrong. The simple fact is, that there are only three verses in the New Testament that use this word. Of these three verses total, two verses in the Gospel according to Luke use the word "mastos" for female breasts, and one verse in the book of Revelation uses the word in a description of "one like unto the Son of man", i.e. there is an emphasis on the maleness or masculinity of the person described:

"And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps (mastos) with a golden girdle." Revelation 1:12-13 KJV

"I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, and among the lampstands was someone 'LIKE A SON OF MAN,' dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest (mastos)." Revelation 1:12-13 NIV

"To the angel of the church in Thyatira write: These are the words of THE SON OF GOD, whose eyes are like blazing fire and whose feet are like burnished bronze." Revelation 2:18

"I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one 'LIKE A SON OF MAN' with a crown of gold on HIS head and a sharp sickle in HIS hand. Then another angel came out of the temple and called in a loud voice to HIM who was sitting on the cloud, 'Take your sickle and reap, because the time to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.' So HE who was seated on the cloud swung HIS sickle over the earth, and the earth was harvested." Revelation 14:14-16

There is no question, Jesus is clearly portrayed as a powerful, masculine figure in the book of Revelation.

Again, there are three occurrences of the word "mastos" in the New Testament, and out of these three instances, it refers twice to the breasts of women (in only one book of the NT), and once to the chest of a man (in one other book of the NT). Does that sound like "only to women", "exclusively to women" and "never to males" is an accurate conclusion?

Is it really warranted to say that because the word refers twice to female breasts, therefore the third time it has to be a female breast as well, despite the fact that it clearly speaks about a man?

Are you serious? Let's examine this methodology a bit more.

It is simply not up to Smith to decide which books are part of the New Testament. And certainly he cannot exclude the book of Revelation in one part of his argument and include it in the next. He first excludes Revelation from the New Testament to derive his conclusion that "mastos" refers only and exclusively to female breasts, and then he includes it in the Bible again to be able to claim that the Bible degrades Jesus. He wants to eat his cake and have it too.

What Smith did is (1) to throw away one third of the data, (2) to build his theory on the basis of that carefully selected remainder, and (3) to force his fabricated conclusion on the rest of the data to make that last third of the data mean the opposite of what it actually means. That method is absolutely atrocious and no scholar will ever accept it.

Smitty's boomerang^[3]

With this kind of reasoning Abdullah Smith has just acquired a pair of female breasts, and he can't do anything about it. They will stick for life. How so?

Let's first establish that men have breasts by giving two authoritative quotations:

During puberty males may notice a change in their breasts. Although a female's breasts go through a much more significant and noticeable change, a male's breasts can also show signs of puberty. This is normal. (Source: Male Breasts, Palo Alto Medical Foundation)

This article focuses on human female breasts, but it should be noted that male humans also have breasts (although usually less prominent) that are structurally identical and homologous to the female, as they develop embryologically from the same tissues. While the mammary glands that produce milk are present in the male, they normally remain undeveloped. In some situations male breast development does occur, a condition called gynecomastia. Milk production can also occur in both men and women as an adverse effect of some medicinal drugs (such as some antipsychotic medication), extreme physical stress or in endocrine disorders. Oftentimes, newborn babies are capable of lactation because they receive some amount of prolactin and oxytocin (milk hormones) from their connection to the mother. (Breast, Wikipedia, 17 Sept. 2006)

[ Warning to Muslim readers: Do not click on the link to the Wikipedia entry or you will be in danger of going to hell for looking at the picture of a female breast! ]

Based on this information, we can safely assume that Abdullah Smith has breasts. The question is only: What kind of breasts? Let's apply his own methodology to determine the answer.

First step: Since these two pages have now served their purpose, we can safely exclude them for the rest of the discussion.

Second step: Searching Google for the word "breasts", I got about 37.100.000 pages containing the word on 17 September 2006, i.e. more than 37 million pages. My guess is that at least 36 million of these speak about female breasts. (I will leave it to Abdullah Smith to refute that guess, if he is so inclined.) Women's breasts are simply more interesting to both men and women.

Wouldn't you agree that 37 million occurrences are sufficiently large number to derive some solid conclusions? In any case, if three is enough for Smitty, then 37 million are definitely enough to substantiate the following conclusions.

Let's be generous and assume that even five percent of the occurrences of the word "breasts" in English, refer to male breasts. If Smith thinks it is okay to throw away 33% of the data, he should not have a problem with disregarding 5% to come to a conclusion. Neglecting those insignificantly few occurrences of the word breasts in reference to men, I conclude that the English word "breasts" is used exclusively for female breasts.

The final step is an easy syllogism:

• Abdullah Smith has breasts.
• The word "breasts" refers always and only and exclusively to female breasts.
• Abdullah Smith has female breasts.

Congratulations! I hope you will enjoy them instead of feeling too much degraded and perverted.

Just in case you think they are not big enough, don't worry. Allah is in the business of breast enlargement operations:

He said, "O my Lord! enlarge my breast for me,   Sura 20:25 Rodwell

(Moses) said: "O my Lord! expand me my breast; ..." (Allah) said: "Granted is thy prayer, O Moses!"   Sura 20:25,36 Yusuf Ali

Have We not expanded thee thy breast? -   Sura 94:1 Yusuf Ali

As the reader can see, at least Moses and Muhammad had a breast enlargement according to the Qur'an.^[4] The author of the Qur'an is without doubt a sick pervert for making such degrading statements about Moses!

It should be sufficiently clear by now that Abdullah Smith's methodology and reasoning in this article is totally ridiculous.

But why stop here? Much more can be said. Let the show go on. The Arabic word used for breast in Sura 94:1 is "sader" and that is a generic term that refers to the breast of men and women. This is not surprising because here it refers to Muhammad's breast before its enlargement. Originally, it was a normal male breast, so the generic term "sader" was used to refer to it, and then this normal male breast got enlarged.

The Arabic word for a woman's breasts is "thadee". A Muslim medical doctor will provide us with an authoritative definition. Dr. Nori al-Mudars, head of the Department of Radiological Diagnosis, University of Damascus, Syria, states:

" الثدي هو العضو الذي ميز الله سبحانه و تعالى به المرأة عن الرجل، و هو رمز الأمومة و رمز الأنوثة "

The breasts (thadee) are the organ by which Allah Almighty differentiates between men and women. It is the symbol of motherhood and the symbol of femininity. (Arabic source, translation ours)

With this established, let us now turn to the authoritative hadiths:

3159 - حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ حَدَّثَنَا مُعَاذُ بْنُ هَانِئٍ أَبُو هَانِئٍ الْيَشْكُرِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا جَهْضَمُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ أَبِي كَثِيرٍ عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ سَلَّامٍ عَنْ أَبِي سَلَّامٍ عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ عَايِشٍ الْحَضْرَمِيِّ أَنَّهُ حَدَّثَهُ عَنْ مَالِكِ بْنِ يَخَامِرَ السَّكْسَكِيِّ عَنْ مُعَاذِ بْنِ جَبَلٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ

احْتُبِسَ عَنَّا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ذَاتَ غَدَاةٍ عَنْ صَلَاةِ الصُّبْحِ حَتَّى كِدْنَا نَتَرَاءَى عَيْنَ الشَّمْسِ فَخَرَجَ سَرِيعًا فَثُوِّبَ بِالصَّلَاةِ فَصَلَّى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَتَجَوَّزَ فِي صَلَاتِهِ فَلَمَّا سَلَّمَ دَعَا بِصَوْتِهِ فَقَالَ لَنَا عَلَى مَصَافِّكُمْ كَمَا أَنْتُمْ ثُمَّ انْفَتَلَ إِلَيْنَا ثُمَّ قَالَ أَمَا إِنِّي سَأُحَدِّثُكُمْ مَا حَبَسَنِي عَنْكُمْ الْغَدَاةَ أَنِّي قُمْتُ مِنْ اللَّيْلِ فَتَوَضَّأْتُ وَصَلَّيْتُ مَا قُدِّرَ لِي فَنَعَسْتُ فِي صَلَاتِي فَاسْتَثْقَلْتُ فَإِذَا أَنَا بِرَبِّي تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى فِي أَحْسَنِ صُورَةٍ فَقَالَ يَا مُحَمَّدُ قُلْتُ لَبَّيْكَ رَبِّ قَالَ فِيمَ يَخْتَصِمُ الْمَلَأُ الْأَعْلَى قُلْتُ لَا أَدْرِي رَبِّ قَالَهَا ثَلَاثًا قَالَ فَرَأَيْتُهُ وَضَعَ كَفَّهُ بَيْنَ كَتِفَيَّ حَتَّى وَجَدْتُ بَرْدَ أَنَامِلِهِ بَيْنَ ثَدْيَي َّ فَتَجَلَّى لِي كُلُّ شَيْءٍ وَعَرَفْتُ فَقَالَ يَا مُحَمَّدُ قُلْتُ لَبَّيْكَ رَبِّ قَالَ فِيمَ يَخْتَصِمُ الْمَلَأُ الْأَعْلَى قُلْتُ فِي الْكَفَّارَاتِ قَالَ مَا هُنَّ قُلْتُ مَشْيُ الْأَقْدَامِ إِلَى الْجَمَاعَاتِ وَالْجُلُوسُ فِي الْمَسَاجِدِ بَعْدَ الصَّلَوَاتِ وَإِسْبَاغُ الْوُضُوءِ فِي الْمَكْرُوهَاتِ قَالَ ثُمَّ فِيمَ قُلْتُ إِطْعَامُ الطَّعَامِ وَلِينُ الْكَلَامِ وَالصَّلَاةُ بِاللَّيْلِ وَالنَّاسُ نِيَامٌ قَالَ سَلْ قُلْ اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسْأَلُكَ فِعْلَ الْخَيْرَاتِ وَتَرْكَ الْمُنْكَرَاتِ وَحُبَّ الْمَسَاكِينِ وَأَنْ تَغْفِرَ لِي وَتَرْحَمَنِي وَإِذَا أَرَدْتَ فِتْنَةَ قَوْمٍ فَتَوَفَّنِي غَيْرَ مَفْتُونٍ أَسْأَلُكَ حُبَّكَ وَحُبَّ مَنْ يُحِبُّكَ وَحُبَّ عَمَلٍ يُقَرِّبُ إِلَى حُبِّكَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِنَّهَا حَقٌّ فَادْرُسُوهَا ثُمَّ تَعَلَّمُوهَا

قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ سَأَلْتُ مُحَمَّدَ بْنَ إِسْمَعِيلَ عَنْ هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ فَقَالَ هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ و قَالَ هَذَا أَصَحُّ مِنْ حَدِيثِ الْوَلِيدِ بْنِ مُسْلِمٍ

An online edition of the Arabic hadith is available here. The word highlighted in red is "thadee". On the ALIM CD-ROM Version this hadith is translated as follows:

Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal
Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) was detained one morning from observing the dawn prayer (in congregation) along with us till the sun had almost appeared on the horizon. He then came out hurriedly and Iqamah for prayer was observed and he conducted it (prayer) in brief form. When he had concluded the prayer by saying As-salamu alaykum wa Rahmatullah, he called out to us saying: Remain in your places as you were. Then turning to us he said: I am going to tell you what detained me from you (on account of which I could not join you in the prayer) in the morning. I got up in the night and performed ablution and observed the prayer as had been ordained for me. I dozed in my prayer till I was overcome by (sleep) and lo, I found myself in the presence of my Lord, the Blessed and the Glorious, in the best form. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What these highest angels contend about? I said: I do not know. He repeated it thrice. He said: Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of HIS FINGERS between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I could recognize everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? I said: Going on foot to join congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers, performing ablution well despite difficulties. He again said: Then what do they contend? I said: In regard to the ranks. He said: What are these? I said: Providing of food, speaking gently, observing the prayer when the people are asleep. He again said to me: Beg (Your Lord) and say: O Allah, I beg of Thee (power) to do good deeds, and abandon abominable deeds, to love the poor, that Thou forgive me and show mercy to me and when Thou intendst to put people to trial Thou causes me to die unblemished and I beg of Thee Thy love and the love of one who loves Thee and the love for the deed which brings me near to Thy love. Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: It is a truth, so learn it and teach it. Transmitted by Ahmad, Tirmidhi who said: This is a hasan sahih hadith and I asked Muhammad ibn Isma'il about this hadith and he said: It is a sahih hadith. (Tirmidhi Hadith, Number 245; ALIM CD-ROM Version; emphasis mine)

Instead of rendering the word "thadee" as (woman's) breasts, i.e. writing "I felt the coldness of his fingers between my breasts", they fudged the issue and wrote "... between the two sides of my chest". Could it be that the Muslim translators were too embarrassed to translate the word "thadee" in the Arabic text correctly?

Whatever the reason for this particular translation, this hadith clearly shows that Muhammad had female breasts.^[5] Again, this makes perfect sense when we compare it with Sura 94:1. Before Muhammad's breast enlargement (near the beginning of his prophetic career) the generic word "sader" is used. After this enlargement procedure we find that the hadith now uses "thadee" in reference to Muhammad's breasts. There seems to be little room for doubt that Allah enlarged Muhammad's "sader" into becoming a pair of true "thadee".

And there is yet another prophet whom perverted Muslims have degraded by claiming he got female breasts — at least for a certain period of time. Professor Stephen Vicchio writes:

Abu Jafar Al-Tabari, an early nineth-century Qu ranic interpreter, gives this account of Job s troubles:

Satan rushes back and forth from heaven to earth. He resorts to various ruses and disguises. He causes female breasts to grow on Job s chest, and warts the size of sheep s buttocks.^[22]

^[22] Hanna Kassis, A Concordance to the Quran (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982) p. 267. (The Image of Ayyub (Job) in the Qur'an and Later Islam; online source)

And who will even dare to make a guess today how many more female-breasted Islamic prophets future research is going to uncover?

Contradicting himself — left, right and center

Let's have a look at the later part of Smith's argument (underline and bold-capital emphasis are added by me):

Since the New Testament never applies the word “paps” to males, the verse Revelation 1:13 does speak of Jesus having female breasts! Now if the author of Revelation wanted to say Jesus has MALE breasts, he should’ve used the Greek word “stethos”, which simply means “breast”.

And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast (stethos), saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. (Luke 18:13)

Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He then lying on Jesus' breast (stethos) saith unto him, Lord, who is it? (John 13:25)

Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast (stethos) at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? (John 21:20)

The difference is that “stethos” defines any breast, but “mastos” only refers to female breasts. The perverted author of Revelations decided to use the word “mastos” and not “stethos”.

The scholar Tom Harper comments on Revelations 1:13

Revelation 1:13, in the King James Version, says, “And I saw in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle”. “Paps” is the archaic word for a woman’s breasts. In the Greek, the word used is the plural mastos, which the lexicon defines as “the breast, esp., of the swelling breast of a woman”. Rarely, the plural was used to refer to a man’s breasts, but the prevailing sense is female. The fact that the figure in this passage from Revelation wore a “girdle”, or cincture, about the breasts—the modern equivalent would be a brassiere—confirms that the breasts in question are female. Indeed, the New English Bible translates the plural as though it were a singular—“with a golden girdle round his breast”. The New Revised Standard Version tried to avoid any embarrassment by wrongly translating it as “chest”. (The Pagan Christ, p. 211)

It is interesting to note that Revelations also contains a passage that speaks of angels having breasts!

And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts (stethos) girded with golden girdles. (Revelations 15:6)

Do angels have breasts? The passage doesn’t use the Greek word “mastos”, so the author is simply describing the breasts (NON-FEMALE) of angels. Yet the verse Revelation 1:13 blatantly describes Jesus as a woman.

Isn't it wonderful? First Smith quotes Harpur to back up his case by a statement of a real "scholar", and then he destroys most of Harpur's "evidence" with another quote from Revelation 15:6. Did you see it? Where is the problem? Smith's mind is so fixated on breasts that he did not realize that Rev. 1:13 and Rev. 15:6 have at least to other words in common. Let's highlight them:

And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps (mastos) with a golden girdle (zonen chrysen). (Revelation 1:13)

And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts (stethos) girded with golden girdles (zonas chrysas). (Revelation 15:6)

Both, the Son of man and the angels have golden girdles around their chests. This girdle was Harpur's major piece of evidence that "mastos" in Rev. 1:13 has to be interpreted as speaking about female breasts. But if the golden girdle makes the breast female in 1:13, then the same golden girdles make the breasts of the angels female in Rev. 15:6. Or rather the other way around. If golden girdles are not a sufficient reason to turn the chests of angels into female breasts in 15:6, then it isn't doing so in 1:13 either. Thank you, Smitty, for refuting your own source of inspiration!

But Smitty also contradicts himself across several articles. Here is another quote where he uses Revelation 15:6:

According to the Bible, God repents (Gen. 6:6) sleeps (Ps. 44:23, 78:65), forgets (Ps. 13:1, Lam. 5:20) claps (Ezek. 21:17, 22:13) whistles (Isaiah 5:26, 7:18) smokes (2 Sam. 22:9, Ps. 18:8, Job 41:20) shaves your legs (Isaiah 7:20) commands Isaiah to strip NAKED (Isaiah 20:1-3) and RIDES female angels (2 Sam. 22:11) who have BREASTS (Rev. 15:6) (Source)

In this other article, Smith uses Rev. 15:6 in order to prove that the Cherubim are female angels based on the fact that they have breasts, but in this present article he brings that same verse as proof that if the author of Revelation wanted to say Jesus had male breasts, he would have used stethos instead of mastos just like he did in 15:6.

Is the use of the word stethos now proof for having female breasts or male ones? Smith has to decide what he wants to believe. He contradicts himself inside one article and across several articles. He is one messed up kid! He should decide what he wants to believe before he starts writing and gets himself in a mess that he will hardly be able to clean up again.

What about "mastos"?

Finally, after all the parody and mockery of Smith's nonsense, let's get serious again and present the linguistic evidence. As stated above, the argument is not new but was taken over by gullible Smith from a book by Tom Harpur. Because there already exists a good answer, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. I will simply quote the answer that Smith could easily have found online and which would have saved him a lot of embarrassment.

The Tektonics website exposes Tom Harpur's shoddy scholarship in a long article that covers many topics. I will reproduce here only the specific portion of this article which rebuts Harpur's erroneous claims regarding the word mastos implying that Jesus is pictured as an androgynous figure. It is actually part of several rounds of email correspondence between Harpur and a Christian, "P." Anyway, had Smith taken that hint in our last article, he could have found on that page the following discussion and decisive answer:

Harpur (in a published article, Oct. 5, 2003):

Revelation 1:13 describes the Christ as an androgynous figure with "paps" or female breasts.

P: I wrote to Harpur (Oct. 15, 2003):

You claimed: "Revelation 1:13 describes the Christ as an androgynous figure with 'paps' or female breasts."

Firstly, 'paps' simply means 'nipples.' Secondly, the only translation that uses the word 'paps' is the King James Version, translated in 1611. English has changed a lot since then. You should have consulted a modern translation. The verse simply refers to his 'chest' or 'breast.' Thirdly, note that the verse says 'son of man,' not 'daughter' or 'androgynous figure.' The verse does not imply an androgynous Christ.

Harpur replied (Oct. 15, 2003):

I needn't consult a modern translation re. "paps" as I taught advanced NT Greek at TST for a number of years and read the Koine fluently. Th fact of the girdle alone signifies female breasts. Your sources are wrong on this just as they are re. the historicity of the crucifixion. ...

P: I replied (Oct. 16, 2003):

You wrote: "I needn't consult a modern translation re. 'paps' ... The fact of the girdle alone signifies female breasts."

Concerning the Greek word "mastois" (translated as "paps" in KJV), you should be aware that this term can refer to males. In Pausanias' Description of Greece, book 9, chapter 34, section 4, he refers to springs that are "shaped like a woman's breasts" ("gunaikos mastois eisin eikasmenai"). The word "gunaikos" would have been redundant if "mastois" only referred to women. Also, take a look at these passages, which all definitely refer to males:

Homer's Iliad, book 4, line 528: "mazoio"
Homer's Iliad, book 8, line 121: "mazon"
Homer's Odyssey, book 22, line 82: "mazon"
Xenophon's Anabasis, book 1, chapter 4, section 17: "maston"
Xenophon's Anabasis, book 4, chapter 3, section 6: "maston"

These terms can also refer to females, of course (e.g., "gunaika te thesato mazon" [Homer's Iliad, book 24, line 58], "proukeito maston peronis" [Sophocles' Trachiniae, line 925]).

Furthermore, a girdle does not signify female breasts. The Greek word translated as "girdle" in Revelation 1:13 is also used to describe the garments of John the Baptist (Matthew 3:4; Mark 1:6) and Paul (Acts 21:11). The word simply means "belt" or "band." A girdle is a belt or band that encircles the body. Again, Revelation 1:13 does not imply an androgynous Christ.

In conclusion, the classical Greek writers such as Homer and Xenophon clearly show that the Greek word "mastos", much like the English word breast, is used for both the male and female chest areas. The usage in Revelation 1:13 is nothing strange but is entirely in agreement with the common usage of the Greek language.

The alleged perversion is not in the book of Revelation. None of its original readers would have understood it that way. It is merely the perverted mind of Tom Harpur and Abdullah Smith who want to force such an interpretation onto the text in order to justify their unbelief and rejection of the Bible.

This last section alone would have been sufficient to put to rest Smitty's "challenge", but I think — and hope that most readers agree — that this rebuttal had a lot more entertainment value for doing it with all the other "preliminary" sections.

A couple of afterthoughts ...

Now that we have established that Smith/Harpur's charge regarding Jesus in the book of Revelation is completely baseless, a mere concoction of lies, there are a couple of additional observations that should be pointed out as well.

Although I have not pursued this issue further in the second section, let's now assume for the sake of argument that Smith actually meant what he wrote: "The book of Revelation is probably the most degrading book; it contains a passage that describes Jesus having woman breasts!" and "Yet the verse Revelation 1:13 blatantly describes Jesus as a woman."

Does that mean that Smith considers being a woman to be degrading?

If Smith had made his case against Revelation 1:13 by saying that the author of the book chose a wrong or incorrect word, and therefore this text could not have come from divine inspiration, that would have been a different issue. But Smith used the words "degrading" to describe what he objected to. Therefore, based on his choice of words, describing a man as a woman is not merely incorrect, it is degrading. This establishes that — at least in the mind of Abdullah Smith — women are substantially lower and worth less than men. Is that merely his personal opinion, or does his attitude actually reflect the general Islamic understanding?

The second issue of contempt is related to the first, and it came to mind while searching the web for information on "male breasts".

Does the fact that Smith considers larger breasts on men, breasts that look nearly like female breasts, to be degrading imply that Islam as a whole looks down on such men and ostracizes those who suffer from gynomastia? (Cf. these articles on the disease: [1], [2].) Even though Smith's argument was proven totally wrong, does the fact that he would make such an argument not reveal a rather despicable attitude?

This whole issue is particularly strange since Osama Abdallah, the sheikh of that website, has suggested that Muhammad may have suffered from Alzheimer's Disease. In fact, just a couple of days ago, they published another article on this topic, written by another author of the team of answering-christianity.com. He wrote:

The first thing lie Jalal makes is that he claims that Osama claimed that the prophet Muhammad suffered from a mental disease. This is an outright lie, or maybe Jalal and Nadir Ahmed are too stupid to understand biology and the body. This could be true, since Nadir Ahmed is a known high-school drop out from what I hear, but regardless, Osama Abdullah gave a theory, and his theory is that the prophet Muhammad could have had alzeimers disease, also known as old-timers disease. Now when Jalal and the monky heard this, they went crazy, obviously showing how stupid they are, since they both don t know what this disease means, I will be more than happy to help them, here is the definition of this disease:

Dementia is a brain disorder that seriously affects a person s ability to carry out daily activities. The most common form of dementia among older people is Alzheimer s disease (AD), which initially involves the parts of the brain that control thought, memory, and language. Although scientists are learning more every day, right now they still do not know what causes AD, and there is no cure.

Scientists think that as many as 4.5 million Americans suffer from AD. The disease usually begins after age 60, and risk goes up with age. While younger people also may get AD, it is much less common. About 5 percent of men and women ages 65 to 74 have AD, and nearly half of those age 85 and older may have the disease. It is important to note, however, that AD is not a normal part of aging.

So as you can see, this disease is not embarrassing at all, nor does it bring any shame to the prophet. And how does this disease infer that the prophet was mentally unstable? Having some memory loss does not make a person mentally unstable, and it never did. Only an idiot like Jalal would think that.

All this disease does to a person is that it affects their daily routine, and causes the person to have memory loss. Is this an insult on the prophet Muhammad? Would it be an insult to say that the prophet may have forgotten some things that he did the day before? Or the week before? Is that an insult?! Is it an insult to say that the prophet may have not been able to do his daily routine tasks as he did when he was 25, 35, or 45? This is something very normal, and something very normal that happens to old people, how in the world is this an insult to the prophet? (Source: Jalal Abualrub and Nadir Ahmed: two men who think the world is flat by Sami Zaatari, published 14 September 2006)

If Muhammad suffering from Alzheimer's Disease is an acceptable thought to them,^[6] and in no way degrading to Muhammad, why would they consider another merely physical disease to be degrading and even a perversion?

Well, what can we say? That is called Muslim apologetics.

Notes:

Rebuttals to Answering-Christianity
Answering Islam Home Page