Criticism of Islam

Criticism of Islam has existed since Islam's formative stages, as with any religion, on philosophical, scientific, ethical, political, and theological grounds. Medieval criticism centred around Christian theologians and was primarily of theological grounds. Modern criticism tends to focus on perceived human rights problems.

History of criticism of Islam

The earliest records of criticism of Islam are found in early Islamic writings about criticism from pagan Arabs, and from Jewish inhabitants of Arabia.

The earliest written criticism by non-Muslims is found in the writings of Christians who came under the dominion of Islam, such as John of Damascus who was familiar with Islam and Arabic. He claimed that a Nestorian monk influenced Muhammad.

Medieval ecclesiastical writers portrayed Muhammad as possessed by Satan, a "precursor of the Antichrist" or the Antichrist himself. Other religions, particularly Hinduism, developed similar criticisms.

In the modern era, European and American Orientalism examine the claims of Islam from a secular and academic perspective. Today criticism of Islam and Islamic practices have increased markedly in the U.S., Europe, and Australia.

Islamic intolerance of criticism

Islam is frequently criticized as intolerant of and suppressive of criticism. Some critics see this as evidence of a way Islam avoids criticism it cannot satisfactorily answer.

Treatment of apostates

Main article: Apostasy in Islam

 : All five Shari'ah schools regard the death penalty as obligatory for those ex-Muslims who do not repent from their apostasy within three days, however the question of the penalties imposed in Islam for apostasy is a highly controversial topic that is passionately debated by various scholars. The Al-Azhar University has proposed to extend the period of repentance to the whole life of the ex-Muslim, thus effectively annulling the death penalty ^[1]. The Qur'an only Muslims reject any legal or other human sanctions against apostates arguing that verses 2:256, 3:72, 3:90, 4:48, 4:137 and 5:54 of Qur'an that directly deals with apostasy do not prescribe any earthly punishment or death. Others argue that there are quotes attributed to Muhammad (Hadith) that support the death penalty for apostasy. Some other religions such as Judaism traditionally prescibe death punishment for apostasy and blasphemy (see stoning), but have in practice not executed these punishments for thousands of years.

Treatment of blasphemy^{[2] [3]}

In recent times fatwas have been issued against Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia still have severe blasphemy legislation in place, based on Shari'ah. The Rushdie fatwa, as well as the blasphemy legislation, was controversial in the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds alike.

Muhammad

Martin Luther, referred to Muhammad as "a devil and first-born child of Satan". The Catholic Encyclopedia (1911) states that Muhammad was inspired by an "imperfect understanding" of Judaism and Christianity.

Recent Western scholars such as Sprenger, Noldeke, Weil, Sir William Muir, Koelle, Grimme and Margoliouth give a more positive estimate of Muhammed's life and character and agree as to his motives, prophetic call, and sincerity. They suggest that Muhammad was at first sincere but later became deceptive. Koelle finds "the key to the first period of Muhammad's life in Khadija, his first wife", after whose death he became prey to his "evil passions". Sprenger attributes Muhammed's revelations to epileptic fits or a "paroxysm of cataleptic insanity".

Muslims consider Muhammad to be the final and greatest prophet, the messenger of the final revelation, the Qur’an. Muslims believe that Muhammad was righteous and holy. However, according to some critics, parts of his life appear to show great immorality. Some critics believe that Muhammad compares poorly to the ethics of the Judaeo-Christian prophets which he claimed to be in succession. Islamic scholars disagree, especially when the comparison is made between Muhammad and Biblical prophets. Muslims have also questioned the historical evidence for some of Muhammad's alleged acts.

Muhammad's marriage to Aisha is particularly controversial. Many Muslim scholars have accepted the tradition that Aisha was nine years old when the marriage was consummated. This is particularly concerning to Non-Muslims, who denounce Muhammad for having sexual relations with a girl so young, which in modern times would be classified as child sexual abuse. In addition, based on the tradition that Aisha was nine years old when the marriage was consummated, critics argue that Muhammad could not justify her marriage to him at the age of six, whatever her age at the consummation.

However Aisha's age at the consumation of the marriage is an extremely contentious issue. On the other hand, there is also evidence supported by a number of scholars (both Muslim and non-Muslim) that she was at least fourteen to sixteen when the marriage was consummated. The Muslim scholars who have accepted the tradition that Aisha was married at the age of nine, respond to this criticism by claiming that Aisha was post-pubescent at nine and that early marriages were common in most cultures until fairly recent times.

Muhammad is criticised for the massacre of Jews of Medina who opposed Muhammad (the Banu Qurayza, in 629) and taking 17-year old Safiyya bint Huyayy as his wife immediately after killing her husband, a Jewish leader (also in 629). Critics such as Muir have argued that Muhammad ordered the torture and execution of her husband after the battle at Khaybar , but this is disputed by some Muslims, who argue that he was killed in battle. A further controversy is Muhammad’s marriage to Zaynab bint Jahsh, formerly wife of his adopted son. Muhammad's ownership of slaves is also used to criticise his conduct. Muslim scholars tend to argue that Muhammad's slaves were well treated and happy, and have paradoxically implied that their involuntary bondage would have been voluntary had they had a choice. According to the Hadith of Abu Da'ud, narrated by Muhammad's cousin, Abdullah ibn Abbas, Muhammad exonerated a man who killed a slave-woman who had been 'slandering' Muhammad. See Muslim responses regarding the above issues at the end of this article.

Zwemer (1907) criticises the life of Muhammad on various grounds. He criticises him firstly by the standards of the Old and New Testaments; secondly by the pagan morality of his Arabian compatriots; and lastly, by the new law which he brought. Zwemer suggests Muhammad was false to Arab ethical traditions, and that he violated the easy sexual morality of his own system. Quoting Johnstone, Zwemer concludes by claiming that his harsh judgment rests on evidence which "comes all from the lips and the pens of his [i.e. Muhammed's] own devoted adherents". However Zwemer’s work often lacks clear evidence or verifiable sources.

At the opposite end of the spectrum are contemporary writers like Karen Armstrong, whose critique of him and his religion consists primarily of an unwillingness to accept explicity the Muslim article of faith that the Qur'an represents the literal word of God. Armstrong and other authors prefer instead to adopt vague formulations about the transcendent quality of Muhammad's revelations and insights whenever the question of the Qur'an's divinity or lack thereof must be addressed. Such formulations are nevertheless regarded as anathema by Muslims.

The Qur'an

Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the literal word of Allah as recited to Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel. The choice of words is considered to be the exact choice of God. In this, it differs from other religions such as Christianity and Judaism, in which adherents often believe their holy book to be inspired by God, rather than chosen word for word by God. In Islam, the Qur’an constitutes God’s exact instructions for mankind. Both Muslim and non-Muslim critics consider the Qur’an to be an outstanding literary work. Criticism of the Qur'an generally consists of questioning traditional claims about the Qur'an's composition and content.

The origins of the Qur'an

Muhammad, according to tradition, recited perfectly what the angel Gabriel revealed to him for his companions to write down and memorize. Muslims hold that the wording of the Qur'anic text available today corresponds exactly to that revealed to Muhammad in the years 610–632.

Compilation

Many Muslims believe that Abu Bakr, the first Caliph (reigned 632-634) ordered the first compilation of the different fragments of the Qur’an, from odd parchements, pieces of bone, and the memories of Muhammad’s followers. Shi’as reject the idea of Abu Bakr’s compilation of the Qur'an, claiming it was Ali who made the compilation of Qur'an immediately after the death of Muhammad. Uthman (Caliph 644-656) ordered a compilation of the Qur’an due to disputes arising about recitation. The relation of this compilation to that of Abu Bakr’s reign is not clear. If Abu Bakr’s compilation were in existence, it is not clear how disputes arose which required Uthman to compile the Qur’an. Some traditions consider the first compilation to be the basis of the second (which requires the first to be incomplete), others that the first never existed, and others still that the two compilations were made independently but were found to be identical. The Qur’anic compilation of Uthman’s reign was completed between 650 & 656, about 20 years after Muhammad’s death, and about 40 years after the first revelations. Muslim’s consider that the text of this compilation, known as the ‘rasm’, is the same text as that of the Qur’an today. Uthman ordered all alternative copies to be destroyed. The oldest physical text of the Qur’an to be found on inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock, built in 691. Some Qur'anic fragments have been dated as far back as the seventh or eighth century. The oldest fragments yet found are from San’a in the Yemen. Both the San’a fragments and the Dome inscriptions differ slightly from the current text. The oldest comprehensive copy of the text is from the ninth century, over one and a half centuries after Muhammad’s death.

Critics argue that the absolute political and religious authority of the caliphs would have allowed them to easily add or remove text during the compilation process, (as later caliphs may have tried to do so after).

Supporters of the Qur'an claim its initial circulation as a spoken text, and claim that the several hundred companions perfectly memorized the Qur'an. Islamic sources suggest that Muhammad would recite the Qur'an in its entirety (that is, including both the earliest and the most recent elements) once every Ramadan but twice in the year he died. Also, The Qur'an was not only transmitted orally but also were written down by the four scribes selected by Muhammad. Some supporters of Quran argue that the claimed consistency and mathematical structure of Quran shows that Qur'an should have had one author. Some non-Muslim academics reject the notion that the Qur'an of today is markedly different from the Qur'an recited at the time of Muhammad's death. See Qur'an for further information about Compilation of Qur'an.

Claim of Divine Origin

According to Muslim tradition Muhammad was illiterate and therefore could not forge the Qur'an from the Bible or Talmud. The Qur'an is generally considered, even by non-Muslim scholars, to be a very moving and impressive piece of literature. Muslims claim that, in the Arabic original, it is miraculously perfect, and impossible to imitate. Many critics claim that this is simply an idea which Muslims accept because they are brought up with it. Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews do not find the text to be perfect or miraculous. Indeed it seems problematic to describe a text as a miracle, if the word 'miracle' is used as commonly understood in the non-Muslim world, that is to say, divine intervention in which the rules of nature are defied.

The morality of the Qur'an

Muslims claim that God sent (Muslim) prophets to the adherents of other religions, but that the Jews and Christians corrupted the teachings of the prophets. Islam claims to be a final revelation and a correction of Judaism and Christianity, as well as their holy texts. Islam, as a clear uncorrupteed representation of God’s will, is therefore expected to be morally superior to Judaism and Christianity. However, according to some critics, the morality of the Qur’an (like the life story of Muhammad) appears to be a moral regression, by the standards of these two moral traditions it claims to build upon, or simply by the standards of the conscience.

Domestic violence

In 4:34 the Koran reads (some original Arabic words are indicated in brackets):

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct [nashooz], admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them [idribuhunna]; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all)."

Domestic violence is thus instructed by the Qur’an in certain situations. It is justified not by the women’s actions but by the man's fears. One often-debated issue relating to these accusations that Islam supports domestic violence is the meaning of the word "idribuhnna" in the above verse. Islamic scholars have very often explained that the above verse describes a light beating. Abdullah Yusuf Ali in his Quranic commentary cites Imam Shafi'i who discourages beating at all, calling it 'inadvisable but permissible'. Some non-Muslim critics, in explaining the beliefs of these certain scholars, say that their conscience pushes them away from the alleged instructions of God as revealed in the Qur’an. However, these Muslim scholars believe that their understanding is based on Qur'anic verses and Hadiths.

Other Islamic scholars argue that this verse has exactly the reverse functionality since the domestic violence is usually the result of a temporary anger and that in this verse men are asked to first admonish their wives, then refuse to share their beds if all other options have been exhausted, beat them. It is often noted by some other Islamic scholars that the Arabic word used in 4:34, "idribuhunna", is derived from "daraba" which literally means "beat", "go abroad", or "give" in the sense of giving or providing an example. Thus the word "idribuhunna" could mean to "leave" them. They add that, for example, in the same chapter the word "darabtum", which is derived from the word "daraba", is used to mean to "go abroad". Critics, however, maintain that the verb "darb" means "to beat" or "to strike", and as support cite not only the wealth of translations supporting this view, but the comparative use of the verb in other contexts. ^[4]

A second issue relating to the validity of these criticisms is the Arabic word "nashooz", translated as "disloyalty and ill-conduct" by Yusufali, "rebellion" by Pickthall and "desertion" by Shakir. As can be expected, there are different interpretations of this word's use in verse 4:34 within the Muslim community itself. For example, some Muslims believe that "The expression Nashooz نُشُوز occurring in the above Ayaah آيه means disobedience of husband. The word is derived from 'Nashaz', which signifies rising. In other words, if the wife rises above the limit that Allah has laid down for the obedience to husband, she will be treated as disobedient." ^[5] However, others believe that the word's true definition is " an unrighteous, wicked and rebellious act", thereby conluding that the verse does not necessarily prescribe the beating of disobedient wives. ^[6].

Islamic scholars add that there are several quotes attributed to Muhammad (Hadith) and verses of Qur'an biding believers to act kindly towards women and not beating them [7]. Also, Muhammad forbade beating on the face (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 67, Number 449) However, many critics of Islam believe that this Qur'anic verse is responsible for poor treatment of Muslim women in Islamic countries and even in Western immigrant populations. They also claim that "the command to beat disobedient wives" that they believe to exist within the Qur'an "is founded upon a woman’s subservient / secondary status in Islam." ^[8]

Slavery

The Qur’an explicitly allows and regulates slavery. Muhammad is documented as having kept many slaves. Qur'anic regulation made prisoners of war the source of slaves. Prisoners of war includes not only captured enemy soldiers but also captured civilians . For instance, it allows Muslims to take civilian women of enemy tribes or nations as slaves , and furthermore to consider any marriage bond dissolved by their enslavement. While the Qur’an suggests liberation of slaves under certain circumstances, it does not require it. Some hadiths recommend kindness to slaves, but there is no verse of Qur’an that specifically enjoins kindness to slaves. There are verses of Qur'an that generally enjoin showing kindness.

The Qur’an alledgedly condones the rape of female slaves. The meaning of the text is not entirely clear: Chapter 23 (verses 1, 5, 6) of the Qur'an states “The believers must win through… who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in marriage, or whom their right hands possess- For they are free from blame”. Sura 70, verses 29-30 repeats the same idea. In Islam, “those whom their right hands possess” has always been understood to refer to slaves and captives. Some critics of traditional Islamic scholars claim that “they also approved that every male master had the right to force any of his female slaves to have sex with him”. . According to some critics, Qur'anic ambiguity on such a matter is itself evidence of human origins for the Qur’an. If these verses are not considered to justify rape of slaves, they still appear to justify adultery with slaves, and as such are claimed to represent a regression from the fundamental moral precepts of Judaism (as practiced by the time of Muhammad by the Jews of Arabia) and Christianity.

It should be also noted that while the Bible allows for slaves and their children to be willed and inherited from one generation to the next (Leviticus 25:44-46), Quran gives the slaves the right to get their freedom and get some money from their Muslim Masters so they can get a good start in life.

"Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them), (Quran, 24:33)"

Muslims also believe that the Qur'an also teaches brotherhood among slaves and masters. There is a hadith which claims that Muhammad said: "Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.' " Bukhari 1.2.29 Muslims argue that the concept of equality of all men is expressed in the Quran (49:13).

See Religion and slavery for more information about the slavery in Islam and other religions.

War & Violence

Critics such as Robert Spencer believe that it is not only extremist Islam that preaches violence but Islam itself, implicit in the Qur'anic text. He argues that though Islam does not explicitly preach armed jihad, the denial of moderate Muslims' that the violence practiced by extremist Muslims is based on the Qur'an cannot be justified. For instance, Qur’an 9:29 reads “Fight those who do not believe in God… or follow the religion of truth, out of the people of the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.” According to Spencer, a move toward human rights and peaceful assimilation into the Western culture calls for moderate Muslims to reject traditional aspects of Islam such as jihad, dhimmitude and shari'ah [6].

In response to the criticism regarding jihad and the Qur'an's promotion of violence, Muslims argue that the real purpose of armed jihad is to remove injustice and aggression. In response, ex-Muslim Ali Sina have claimed that the Islamic concept of "injustice and aggression" is simply refusing to join or submit to Islam [9].

Muslims claim that Islam teaches zero tolerance for injustice and oppression:

"And why should you not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from Your side one who will protect; and raise for us from Your side one who will help!" (4:75)

Moreover, Islam teaches that fighting is only against those who fight. Quran states "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors." (2:190)

Muslims stress that armed jihad is only one of the five kinds of jihad (see Jihad). Karen Armstrong in her book "Muhammed," writes: "Fighting and warfare might sometimes be necessary, but it was only a minor part of the whole jihad or struggle. A well-known tradition (hadith) has Muhammad say on returning from a battle, ' We return from the little jihad to the greater jihad,' the more difficult and crucial effort to conquer the forces of evil in oneself and and in one's own society in all the details of daily life."[10] Critics argue that the example of Muhammad, and Qur'anic injunctions such as the "sword verse" 9:11 promote and explain religious violence by Muslims.

Severe punishments

File:IslamicDivorce.jpg

This picture, smuggled out of Iran, was taken in 1992 in the town of Arak. Critics of Islam often claim that human rights violations in Islamic theocracies like Iran are the result of the teachings and practice of Islam. Many Muslims either assert the right of Muslim nations to live under religious law, or try to distance their faith from such practices.

The Qur'an 5:38 orders the severing of hands of thieves, although this practice is rejected by many Muslims. The stoning of married adulterers is mandatory in five Shari'ah schools ^{[11] [12] [13]} and is practiced in countries such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and local Shari'ah courts in northern Nigeria. This practice is also rejected by many Muslims. Muslims state that the prescription of severe punishments in both the Quran and the Bible shows that God is strict in punishment and takes the human sins seriously. Many contemporary Muslims regard the issue as a question of local judicial interpretation, which has been placed out of context by sensationalist media. According to traditional Islam, men (and sometimes women) who engage in homosexual acts should be executed ^{[14] [15] [16]}. Critics regard this as intolerant and cruel.

Death penalties for adultery and sodomy have long been practiced by many religions. Only in recent years as a result of modern secular conceptions of human rights has this stopped being practiced. (For example, in England during the early 1900's, sodomy was punishable by death). Introducing Islamic law as an alternative for secular Western law, however, implies reintroduction of those death penalties.

Internal ethical criticism of traditional Islam has led to reform and protest initiatives within Islam, for instance liberal Islam movements.

Scientific criticism of the Qur’an

As with all religions, critics of Islam have pointed to what they believe are internal inconsistencies and scientific inaccuracies within its sacred texts (the Qur'an) and traditions (Hadith). These are perhaps more important in Islam, where the Qur’an is supposed by Muslims to be a perfect revalation from God.

Critics cite several Qur'anic verses which appear to contradict scientific findings. Muslims suggest that the contradictions are the consequences of misreading, mistranslations or misunderstandings of the text, resulting sometimes from the Qur’an’s complexity and the difficulty of translating it properly without mastery of classical Arabic.

Some scholars such as Maurice Bucaille and Muhammad Hisham Kabbani claim that the Qur'an contains numerous scientific facts which were not known until recent times.[17] Critics and skeptics such as Ali Sina have claimed both that the Qur'an is scientifically incorrect but that attempts to associate it with modern science are baseless [18].

Befriending the Christians or Jews

Some critics view verse 5:51 as forbidding Muslims from being friends with Christians or Jews.

"O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as allies; these are allies of one another. Those among you who ally themselves with these belong with them. God does not guide the transgressors." (Quran 5:51)

However, Islamic scholars argue that to understand the issue of befriending the Jews and Christians, one has to study all the relevant verses together. Moreover, verses should not be taken out of the context. A Muslim explanation of this text would note that the following two verses regulate relations with any people, regardless of faith:

"God does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. God loves the equitable. God enjoins you only from befriending those who fight you because of religion, evict you from your homes, and band together with others to banish you. You shall not befriend them. Those who befriend them are the transgressors." (Quran 60:8-9)

Verses 5:51 is immediately followed by:

” You will see those who harbor doubt in their hearts hasten to join them, saying, "We fear lest we may be defeated." May God bring victory, or a command from Him, that causes them to regret their secret thoughts. “ (Quran 5:52)

Islamic scholars explain that the statement "We fear lest we may be defeated." suggests that the situation being referred to is when there is a division and an overhanging conflict between Muslims and others, and in these situations the Qur'an claims that those with doubts in their hearts will ally themselves with the enemy. Moreover, according to Muslims, a couple of verses after 5:51, it is made clear who are and aren't to be taken as friends:

O you who believe, do not befriend those among the recipients of previous scripture who mock and ridicule your religion, nor shall you befriend the disbelievers. You shall reverence God, if you are really believers. (Quran 5:57)

Criticism from the Biblical point of view

Jews and Christians have occasionally criticized the Quran for misquoting the Biblical historical accounts and stories. See Similarities between the Bible and the Qur'an for further details of the differences in the narratives.

The obvious response that Muslims would give to this criticism is that it is irrelevant, since they explicitly believe that some parts of the Bible have been distorted by human interference, and that therefore the Qur'an need not agree with it. Any difference between the Bible and Qur'an is therefore explained as biblical error, either intentional or unintentional.

Critics of this response have argued that it is a form of circular reasoning which is only valid for those who already believe in the validity of the Quran, and that this standpoint is therefore only acceptable for Muslims, as it is entirely based on their trust in what they believe that God has revealed. ^[19] Some Muslims argue that in every religion there are many statements in which followers must put trust and have faith (e.g. metaphysical beliefs or the story of creation).

It should be also noted that the Qur'an always calls the Bible a guide and light and wants Jews and Christians to judge by and stand fast to their own scriptures. The Qur'an states that if God had so willed, He would have made the human a single people but his plan is to test people by what he has given them:

"It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed to God's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of God's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what God hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers. "(Quran 5:45)

"Let the people of the Gospel judge by what God hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what God hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel." (5:48)

"To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what God hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If God had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to God. it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;"(5:49)

Particular Muslims groups, such as the Mu'tazili and Ismaili sects, as well as various liberal movements within Islam, believe that different revelations were made by God for the needs of the people in particular times and places; this could potentially account for differences between the Bible and the Qur'an without having to accuse the Bible of being corrupted.

According to Thomas McElwain, the foremost body of Biblical texts disagreeing with the Qur'an are those referring to the crucifixion of Jesus. Muslims deny the crucifixion of Jesus because the Qur'an says that Jesus was not crucified by Jews. They presume that the gospel writers were mistaken or their texts were later altered.

There are several references to the death or removal of Jesus in the Qur'an. Q4:157 reads `And for their (Jews) saying (in boast) "Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the Apostle of God;" But they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but (it) became dubious unto them; and indeed those who differ therein are only in doubt about it, they have no knowledge about the (real) matter, pursuing (only) a conjecture; and certainly, they slew him not.'

The text on the crucifixion is generally interpreted to deny the crucifixion of Jesus, and deny his death at the hands of the Jews. Muslim folklore speculates that Jesus left Israel at the time of the supposed crucifixion. The Qur'an does not explain what happened to Jesus at the end of his life on earth.

In Q19:33 Jesus is said to have exclaimed miraculously in the cradle, `And peace be on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I am raised alive.' This implies a resurrection, which is believed to refer to the resurrection at the judgment day.

Other notable passages

Some passages depict King Solomon talking to birds in his army:

"... He (Solomon) said: "O ye people! We have been taught the speech of birds, and on us has been bestowed (a little) of all things: this is indeed Grace manifest (from Allah.)" (27:16)

Verse 27:18 implies that ants can talk:

"At length, when they came to a (lowly) valley of ants, one of the ants said: "O ye ants, get into your habitations, lest Solomon and his hosts crush you (under foot) without knowing it." (27:18)

It should be noted that in Islam, Solomon is considered both a king and a prophet who performed various miracles. Therefore, one Muslim response to this criticism is that there is no reason to doubt that ants can communicate, as Muslims believe that one of the miracles of Solomon was the ability to speak to animals. Another is that these verses are teaching devices used to convey a message and that typically such verses are pulled out of context from the Qur'an.

Other criticism

Human Rights Issues

Human-rights violations by adherents of Islam

See Historical persecution by Muslims.

Alleged discrepancy between Islam and the UN Declaration of Human Rights

Malaysia and Saudi Arabia have refused to ratify the Declaration 1948 United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, essentially due to the question of state establishment of religion. In 1990 the Islamic Conference published a separate Cairo Declaration of Human Rights compliant with Shari'ah ^[20].

Alleged Discrimination

Alleged discrimination against women and non-Muslims

Critics argue that in Islam women have fewer rights than men and that non-Muslims under the dhimmi system have fewer rights than Muslims. Muslims argue that men are the protectors of women (Qur'an 4:34) and that Kafirs must 'return the favour' of the "protection" given by an Islamic state. Non-Muslims also have certain privileges in Muslim countries, for example, they may be permitted to drink alcohol, although it would be illegal for Muslims to do so.

Some Islamic scholars justify the different religious laws for men and women by the biological and sociological differences between men and women. For example, the inheritance law that women’s share of inheritance is half of that of men is prescribed due to the fact that in the traditional society men were the only supporters of the family expenses. Many modern Islamic scholars issue fatwas to more similar laws for men and women arguing that the modern society has a different social structure, as both men and women are allowed to work and support the family expenses.

Muslims reject the assertion that different laws prescribed for men and women implies that men are more valuable than women, arguing that the only criterion of value before God is piety. Verse 3:36 literally reads as “the male is not like the female” is usually used to show that the value of the female is greater than or at least equal to the value of the male.

Alleged lack of reciprocity

According to Ali Sina, the Golden Rule, sometimes articulated as "Do onto others as you would wish them do onto you", is not present in the Qur'an or other Islamic texts. After identifying the Golden Rule in the other major world religions of today, a few ancient beliefs, and in the writings of some ancient philosophers, Sina argues that the closest reference to this universal law in Islam is in a Hadith, and even then it only refers to the treatment of other Muslims: "None of you will have faith till he wishes for his (Muslim) brother what he likes for himself." (Sahih Bukhari 1.2.12) Sina claims that it is the lack of presence of the Golden Rule in Islam which seperates it from every other religion. ^[21]

Imam Nawawi, one of the greatest scholars of Islam, commented in his compilation of 40 Prophetic Traditions "that the brotherhood referenced in the tradition is that of humanity". In response to this general claim, Sina argues that passages in the Qur'an such as 9:23 and 48:29 prove that membership of or exclusion from "brotherhood" in Islam is defined based one's belief or disbelief in it. ^[22] Others argue that the Qur'an's many instructions to seek God's forgiveness by means of acts of charity and justice to other human beings operate in roughly the same sphere as the Golden Rule, although often these injuctions are only designated towards other believers. It is also claimed that nowhere does the Qur'an specifically reject the Golden Rule. Muslims also argue that the Quran teaches brotherhood among the believers, whether they're a master or slave. For example, Muslims note that the though Qur'an doesn't verbatim say "Do onto others as you would wish them do onto you", it says "Goodness and evil deed are not alike. Repel the evil deed with one which is better, then he, between who and you there was enmity (will become) as though he was a bosom friend." (41:34)

Hadith

After the Qur'an most Muslim schools of thought place the Hadith as the next most important source of Islamic law, although the Maliki school offers a counterpoint. Ignaz Goldziher is the best-known early twentieth-century critic of these texts, alongside Margoliuth, Henri Lammens and Leone Caetani. In his Muslim Studies Goldziher writes:

... it is not surprising that, among the hotly debated controversial issues of Islam, whether political or doctrinal, there is not one in which the champions of the various views are unable to cite a number of traditions, all equipped with imposing isnads.

Following generations of Western scholars were also mostly sceptical: in Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (1959), Joseph Schacht argued that isnads going back to Muhammad were in fact more likely to be spurious than isnads going back to his companions. In the 1970s John Wansbrough and his students Patricia Crone and Michael Cook were even more sweeping in their dismissal of this tradition and argued that even the Qur'an was likely to have been collected later than claimed.

Contemporary Western scholars of hadith include:

• Herbert Berg, The Development of Exegesis in Early Islam (2000)
• Fred M. Donner, Narratives of Islamic Origins (1998)
• Wilferd Madelung, Succession to Muhammad (1997)

Of these, Madelung is the least critical.

Muslim Responses

Many of these areas have been the focus of intense discussion in the early twenty-first century. In addressing them, Muslims have sometimes argued that no religious or social system's principles can be praised, condemned, or even understood in the abstract, and have argued for a fuller understanding of the core ideas underlying controversial Islamic rulings.

Regarding the common criticisms of Islam such as the corruption and bad behaviour in so-called Muslim lands, the warfare Muhammad waged or polygamy in Islam, some Islamic scholars such as Gary Miller argue that "In response, it must be said that bad Muslims condemn Islam only if bad Christians condemn Christianity; warfare disqualifies Muhammad as God's spokesman only if it also disqualifies Joshua; polygamy condemns Islam only if it condemns Christianity. (It is Christian culture, not the Christian religion, which has prohibited polygamy. In the Bible Paul has recommended monogamy for bishops and Jesus has spoken of the sanctity of the union but no Bible verse prohibits the practice.)" ^[23]

Muhammad

Response to the claim that Muhammad was possessed by Satan

Some Muslims argue that it is not possible for the Qu'ran to be inspired by Satan when it curses Satan and calls him the worst enemy of man, asks people to do good, to be moral and virtuous, to worship none but God, to not follow Satan or his whispers, and to avoid and struggle against evil. Muslims also commonly retort that the Qu'ran can not be inspired by Satan because the Qu'ran commands that before reciting it, one must first say:

“When you read the Quran, you shall seek refuge in God from Satan the rejected.” (16:98)

Other relevant verses that are used by Muslims to respond to criticism include:

"...And they say: "Surely he is possessed!" But it is nothing less than a Reminder to all the worlds. " (68:51-52)

"No evil ones have brought it [i.e., this revelation] down. It would neither be fitting for them, nor would they be able. Indeed they have been removed far from hearing." (26:210-212)

"Similarly, no apostle came to the Peoples before them, but they said (of him) in like manner, "A sorcerer, or one possessed"! Is this the legacy they have transmitted, one to another? Nay, they are themselves a people transgressing beyond bounds!" (51:52-53)

"In arrogance: talking nonsense about the (Qur'an), like one telling fables by night. Do they not ponder over the Word (of God), or has anything (new) come to them that did not come to their fathers of old? Or do they not recognize their Apostle that they deny him? Or do they say, "He is possessed"? Nay, he has brought them the Truth, but most of them hate the Truth. If the Truth had been in accord with their desires, truly the heavens and the earth, and all beings therein would have been in confusion and corruption! Nay, We have sent them their admonition, but they turn away from their admonition. Or is it that thou askest them for some recompense? But the recompense of thy Lord is best: He is the Best of those who give sustenance." (23.67-72)

"Thou art not, by the Grace of thy Lord, mad or possessed. " (68:2)

"And (O people!) your companion is not one possessed; and without doubt he saw him (Gabriel) in the clear horizon. Neither doth he withhold grudgingly a knowledge of the Unseen. Nor is it the word of an evil spirit accursed. When whither go ye? Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds: (With profit) to whoever among you wills to go straight: But ye shall not will except as Allah wills,- the Cherisher of the Worlds." (81:22-29)

Response to the claim that Muhammad was a Liar, an Insane, a Poet or a Sorcerer

In response to the criticism that Muhammad wrote the Qur’an for material gain and glory, Muslims argue that all the descriptions of Muhammad's family life emphasize his total disregard for luxurious food, clothing, and surroundings. In Ibn Sa'd, there's a tradition that Muhammad said that the only worldly things in which he took pleasure were women and perfume. The Sira of Muhammad claims that he was of the most noble of tribes, of the most noble of families and the husband of a wealthy tradeswoman. According to these traditions, before he received his revelations, he was well-known to his own people to be trustworthy and reliable. He was named “Al-Amin”, which means “The Trustworthy”. After his claim of prophethood, he became a social outcast. For 13 years in Makkah, he and his followers faced excruciating torture, which led to the death of some of his followers, ridicule, sanctioning, and excommunication from society. Many note that he spent all his money and devoted his life for his goal.

There were many ways which a person could gain fame in the society of that time, mainly from valor, and poetry. Muslims argue that if Muhammad had made the claim that he himself authored the Quran that would have been enough for him to be recognized as a great poet. Other passages that are cited to support this point include:

"Say: No reward do I ask of you for it but this: that each one who will may take a (straight) Path to his Lord."; "Say: "No reward do I ask of you for this (Qur'an), nor am I a pretender. This is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds."; "...Say: "No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin..." (25:57;38:86-87;42:23)

Response to the claim that Muhammad copied Quran from Bible

It is usually argued that similarities between Qur’an and Bible do not necessarily imply a borrowing theory. Muslims believe that the Qur’an and Bible are similar because they have the same source and that Qur’an confirms the truth of Bible. Muslims believe that any differences from absolute similarities would either mean replacement of a new Law with the previous ones or correction of the message that got corrupted. Sources of this belief from the Qur'an include:

"We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear." (16:103)

"But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged, and others have helped him at it." In truth it is they who have put forward an iniquity and a falsehood. And they say: "Tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written: and they are dictated before him morning and evening." Say: "The (Qur'an) was sent down by Him who knows the mystery (that is) in the heavens and the earth: verily He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (25:4-6)

The Qur'an

Issues of severe punishment and human rights

The Qur'an in many places states that God is strict in punishment (both in this world (8:25, 69:4-10) and in hereafter (69:31-36)) and thus should be feared. Severing the hands of thieves or stoning of married adulterers basically only differ with other punishments in that they are included in the Islamic Law, Sharia. Otherwise punishments are always strict if not covered by God's mercy through repentance.

"The Thamud and the 'Ad People (branded) as false the Stunning Calamity! But the Thamud,- they were destroyed by a terrible Storm of thunder and lightning! And the 'Ad, they were destroyed by a furious Wind, exceedingly violent; He made it rage against them seven nights and eight days in succession: so that thou couldst see the (whole) people lying prostrate in its (path), as they had been roots of hollow palm-trees tumbled down! Then seest thou any of them left surviving?" (Qur'an 69:4-10)

According to many Muslims, punishments in Islam should be judged not by a human perspective but rather from the perspective of Allah, who is believed to know and see all.

"... It is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." (2:216)

The Qur'an states that God is first concerned with the afterlife of man and secondly with his momentary worldly life.

“Set forth to them the similitude of the life of this world: It is like the rain which we send down from the skies: the earth's vegetation absorbs it, but soon it becomes dry stubble, which the winds do scatter: it is (only) Allah who prevails over all things. “ (Qur'an 18:45)

From the Islamic point of view, the punishment of the adulterer is appropriate because he or she will reap the fruit of his or her act anyway. Islamic sources explain that in this world, the punishment of stoning functions like a repentance that is enough for seventy men (Kitab Al-Hudud 017, Number 4207) and frees adulterer from the more severe punishment in the hereafter. Muslim scholars state, however, that even if the sin is not atoned in this world, since God is merciful, He may change his mind and reverse the afterlife punishments of the sinner.

Other

Divisions of Islam

Main article: Divisions of Islam

There are many divisions within Islam. Consequently, Muslims often disagree regarding theological, ethical, political, and scientific issues. For example, a very small amount of Muslims consider Islamism unislamic. Taking Islamism as an example, some Muslims claim that Muslims are required to be Islamist, and others argue that Islamism is a corruption of Islam. Some Muslims reject the use of the term Islamist as un-Islamic.

Contemporary critics

See List of Critics of Islam.

See also

Topics of Islam and controversy

• Apostasy in Islam
• Historical persecution by Muslims
• Islam and anti-Semitism
• Islamophobia
• Liberal movements within Islam
• Persecution of Muslims
• Religious persecution
• Religious conflict and Islam
• Women as imams

Criticism of other beliefs

• Anti-Christianity
• Criticism of Christianity
• Anti-Judaism
• Anti-Catholicism
• Anti-Protestantism
• Criticism of Mormonism
• Anti-Mormonism
• Anti-clericalism
• Criticism of Atheism

Books Critical of Islam

• Geisler, Norman L. (2002). Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross. Baker Books. ISBN 0801064309.
• Zwemer Islam, a Challenge to Faith (New York, 1907)
• Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not a Muslim (1995)
• —, Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out
• The Institute for the Study of Civil Society report - The ‘West’, Islam and Islamism
• Category:Books critical of Islam

References

-

- -

1. ^ Lester, Toby. What Is The Koran?.
2. ^ Brief History of Compilation of the Qur'an.
3. ^ Spencer, Robert. Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West., 299–300
4. ^ "Arab Christian" (pseudonym). Beat your wives or “separate from them”?
5. ^ Shahid Bin Waheed. How women are treated in Bible and Qur’aan!.
6. ^ Khaldoon, Fatimah. [http://www.submission.org/women/beating.html Quranic Perspective on

Wife beating and Abuse].

1. ^ "Silas" (pseydonym). Wife Beating in Islam
2. ^ Ali Sina, The Golden Rule and Islam
3. ^ Ibid, page 3.
4. ^ Gary Miller, Missionary Christianity
5. ^ Religious Tolerance.org, SHARED BELIEF IN THE "GOLDEN RULE" - Ethics of Reciprocity.
6. ^ Muzammil Siddiqui, Does Islam Forbid Befriending non-Muslims?.
7. ^ Religious Tolerance.org, Apostacy in islam.
8. ^ islamonline.net, Stoning: Does It Have Any Basis in Shari`ah?
9. ^ Muslims Against Stoning
10. ^ http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=14312&dgn=4
11. ^ http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=13926&dgn=4
12. ^ http://www.afrol.com/articles/16722
13. ^ Katz, Jochen. Can we argue from a corrupted source?
14. ^ http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=21058&dgn=4
15. ^ http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=10050&dgn=4
16. ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3265127.stm
17. ^ http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/28126/
18. ^ http://islamic-world.net/islamic-state/right_survey.htm#CAIRO%20DECLARATION%20VIS%20A%20VIS%20THE%20UNIVERSAL
19. ^ http://www.religlaw.org/interdocs/docs/cairohrislam1990.htm
20. ^ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7035470/
21. ^ http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/23/index.htm#6
22. ^ http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2005/07/traditionalist.php
23. ^ http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/70/index.htm#29
24. ^ http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud/038.sat.html
25. ^ http://answering-islam.org.uk/Silas/theo_van_gogh.htm

External links

Christian academic sources

• Catholic Encyclopedia
  • Islam (Concept)
  • Mohammed and Mohammedanism
• [24]

Directories of sites critical of Islam

• Comprehensive List of Islamofascist Attacks
• dmoz.org
• faithfreedom.org
• Islam and Terrorism

Muslim responses to critcism

• Islam Religion
• Misconceptions about Islam
• Tolerance in Islam
• Five Common Myths About Islam
• Shariah: The Way of Justice
• Qur'an and modern science