Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:45, 25 January 2007

This is a sub-article to Criticism of Islam and Qur'an.

Template:QuranRelated

Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the literal word of God (Allah) as recited to Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel. Critics argue against this belief, claiming to find fault in various statements in the Qur'an.

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.

Historical Authenticity of the Qur'an

All, or most, of the Qur'an was apparently written down by Muhammad's companions while he was alive, but it was, then as now, primarily an orally related document, and the written compilation of the whole Qur'an in its definite form as we have it now was completed early after the death of Muhammad. The Qur'an is generally thought to represent what issued from Muhammad's mouth from 610-632 A.D. F.E. Peters states. "Few have failed to be convinced that what is in our copy of the Quran is, in fact, what Muhammad taught, and is expressed in his own words... To sum this up: the Quran is convincingly the words of Muhammad, perhaps even dictated by him after their recitation" Peters argues that "The search for variants in the partial versions extant before the Caliph Uthman’s alleged recension in the 640s (what can be called the “sources” behind our text) has not yielded any differences of great significance." In fact, the source of ambiguity in the quest for historical Muhammad in western academic circles is uncertainty and the lack of knowledge about the pre-Islamic Arabia.

However, professors Patricia Crone and Michael Cook challenge the traditional account of how the Qur'an was compiled, writing that "there is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in any form before the last decade of the seventh century." They also question the accuracy of some the Qur'an's historical accounts. Also, professor Gerd R. Puin's study of ancient Qur'an manuscripts led him to conclude that the Qur'an is a "cocktail of texts", some of which may have been present a hundred years before Muhammad. However, while it is generally acknowledged that the work of Crone and Cook was a fresh approach in its reconstruction of early Islamic history, it has been dismissed as an experiment and criticised for its "...use (or abuse) of its Greek and Syriac sources..." Crone and Cook's controversial thesis is not widely accepted.

It should be however mentioned that there is a considerable debate in academia over the real chronology of the chapters of the Qur'an. Carole Hillenbrand states that there is still remaining tasks for the Orientalist Qur'anic scholars: Few Qur'anic scholars have worked on the epigraphy of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem and the luxury Qur'an recently discovered in the Yemen, now lodged in the House of Manuscript in Sana'a. The Carbon-14 test applied on the Qur'an discovered in Yemen dates it to 645-690AD with 95 percent accuracy. The dome of the Rock monument has a foundation inscription of 72/692.

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. Uthman (Caliph 644-656) ordered a new compilation of the Qur’an due to disputes arising about texts recited. The relationship of this compilation to that of Abu Bakr’s is not clear. If Abu Bakr’s compilation were in existence, it is not clear how disputes arose which required Uthman to recompile 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. Muslims consider the text of this compilation, known as the rasm, to be the same text as that of the Qur’an today.

Uthman ordered all alternative copies to be destroyed. The oldest generally accepted physical text of the Qur’an is found on inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock, built in 691. "Some Qur'anic fragments have been dated as far back the eighth, and possibly even the seventh century." The oldest fragments yet found are from Sana’a in Yemen. The oldest existing copy of the full text is from the ninth century, around one and a half centuries after Muhammad’s death.

Some Muslims say that the Samarkand manuscript is oldest text of the Qur’an (and is one of the original five copies of Uthman) however, many scholars, such as John Gilchrist, doubt that any of the Uthmanic originals remain. Having studied the early supposed Qur'an manuscripts very thoroughly John Gilchrist states: "The oldest manuscripts of the Qur'an still in existence date from not earlier than about one hundred years after Muhammdad's death".

Supporters of the Qur'an say that its initial circulation was as a spoken text which several hundred companions had perfectly memorized. 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). They point out that the Qur'an was not only transmitted orally but was also written down by the four scribes selected by Muhammad.

Claim of divine origin

According to Muslim tradition Muhammad received the Qur'an as a revelation from God through angel Gabriel. Some modern Western historians have concluded that Muhammad was sincere in his statement of receiving revelation, "for this alone makes credible the development of a great religion." Modern historians generally decline to address the further question of whether the messages Muhammad reported being revealed to him were from "his unconscious, the collective unconscious functioning in him, or from some divine source", but they acknowledge that the material came from "beyond his conscious mind" .

Muhammad is reported to have mysterious seizures at the moments of inspiration. Welch, a scholar of Islamic studies, in Encyclopedia of Islam states that the graphic descriptions of Muhammad's condition at these moments may be regarded as genuine, since they are unlikely to have been invented by later Muslims. According to Welch, these seizures should have been the most convincing evidence for the superhuman origin of Muhammad's inspirations for people around him. Muhammad's enemies however accused him as one possessed, a soothsayer, or a magician since these experiences made an impression similar to those soothsayer figures well known in ancient Arabia. Welch states it remains uncertain whether Muhammad had such experiences before he began to see himself as a prophet and if so how long did he have such experiences.

Muslims have traditionally said that the form and content of the Qur'an shows its divine source. Regarding the form of the Qur'an, Issa Boullata, professor of Arabic literature and Islamic studies at McGill University states: "Whereas the scholars of Arabic are largely agreed that the Qur'an represents the standards by which other literary productions in Arabic are measured, believing Muslims maintain that the Qur'an is inimitable with respect to both content and style." Thus, Muslims state that, in the Arabic original, the Qur'an is miraculously perfect.

Jewish Encyclopedia writes that the oldest portions of the Qur'an "reflect an extraordinary degree of excitement in their language—in their short, abrupt sentences and in their sudden transitions, but none the less they carefully maintain the rimed form, like the oracles and magic formulas of the pagan Arab priests". The later portions also preserve this form but also "in some of which the movement is calm and the style expository." Catholic Encyclopedia writes: "The language is universally acknowledged to be the most perfect form of Arab speech, and soon became the standard by which other Arabic literary compositions had to be judged, grammarians, lexirographers, and rhetoricians presuming that the Koran, being the word of God, could not be wrong or imperfect."

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. () 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." ().

Critics reject the idea that The Qur'an is miraculously perfect and impossible to imitate. Jewish Encyclopedia, for example, writes: "The language of the Koran is held by the Mohammedans to be a peerless model of perfection. An impartial observer, however, finds many peculiarities in it. Especially noteworthy is the fact that a sentence in which something is said concerning Allah is sometimes followed immediately by another in which Allah is the speaker; examples of this are suras xvi. 81, xxvii. 61, xxxi. 9, and xliii. 10". However other scholars argue that this sudden shift in the pronoun of the speaker or the person spoken about is known as iltifāt(to turn/turn one's face to) in balāgha(Arabic Rheotoric). Many peculiarities in the positions of words are due to the necessities of rime (lxix. 31, lxxiv. 3), while the use of many rare words and new forms may be traced to the same cause (comp. especially xix. 8, 9, 11, 16)." .

Criticism of the science in the Qur'an

For example, they point to a statement the Qur'an makes regarding the setting of the sun (), which they take to mean that the sun sets in an actual body of water. They believe the verse is couched in such a way that it was meant to be taken literally instead of figuratively, which would imply a belief in a flat instead of a round Earth. Modern-day Muslims interpret this verse differently, saying that this part of the Qur'an is describing the man Dhul-Qarnain's point of view, and is indeed to be taken as a figurative description of what he saw - that the sun appeared to be setting into the sea, but was not actually doing so.

In a similar vein, critics point to verses they think imply that the moon gives off light instead of reflecting it from the sun, (, , ) and are skeptical of Muslim statements that the verses should be taken to mean reflective light only. Some critics also think that the Qur'an says that mountains were created to prevent earthquakes, (, ), a view which is incompatible with modern geology. Another criticism of the Qur'an involves verses . These verses are interpreted by critics and some Muslims to mean that sperm comes from the lower back. This contradicts the scientific fact that semen is produced by the testicles, prostate gland, and seminal vesicles, none of which are between the backbone and the ribs. Critics note that Hippocrates, whose writings were widely available in the pre-Islamic Middle East, had taught that semen passes from the kidneys via the testicles into the penis, and believe that this is a plausible source for the idea in this verse. Muslim apologist Maurice Bucaille states that these verses are "hardly comprehensible" and finds his own translations of them using meanings not found in dictionaries.

Quranic verses , , , , , , , , and are all related to the origin of mankind. Some critics of Islam and some Muslims state that the Qur'an and modern evolutionary theory are not compatible. This has led to a contribution by Muslims to the creation vs. evolution debate. Some Muslims have pointed to certain Qur'anic verses that they think are in fact compatible with evolutionary science, but others think that only creationism is supported by the Qur'an and the hadith.

Contradictions in the Qur'an

Critics believe that there are many mutually contradictory passages in the Qur'an. Examples are of verses that supposedly conflict regarding the length of Allah's day ( and vs. ), on whether or not all Jews and Christians will go to hell ( and vs. and ), and on how disbelievers should be treated (, , and vs. , , , and others). The Skeptic's Annotated Qur'an asserts that there are contradictions in the Qur'an related to how many angels spoke to Mary (, vs. ,and ), whether the Pharaoh was drowned or saved (, , vs. ), whether Muhammad asks for money (, , , etc. vs. , , , etc.), whether heaven or earth came first ( vs. , ), whether Allah will forgive everything (, vs. , , , etc.), the number of angels that fought for Muhammad (, vs. ), whether everyone is free to believe in what he or she wishes (, vs. , , ), and whether or not Allah is merciful (, , vs. , , ).

Satanic verses

Some early Islamic histories recount that as Muhammad was reciting Sūra Al-Najm (Q.53), as revealed to him by the angel Gabriel, Satan tempted him to utter the following lines after verses 19 and 20 :"Have you thought of Allāt and al-'Uzzā and Manāt the third, the other; These are the exalted Gharaniq, whose intercession is hoped for. (Allāt, al-'Uzzā and Manāt were three goddesses worshiped by the Meccans). These histories then say that these 'Satanic Verses' were shortly afterward repudiated by Muhammad at the behest of the angel Gabriel. Academic scholars such as William Montgomery Watt and Guillaume argued for its authenticity based upon the implausibility of Muslims fabricating a story so unflattering to their prophet. Watt says that "the story is so strange that it must be true in essentials." On the other hand, scholars such as Caetani and Burton rejected the tradition. Caetani argued for its weak isnāds. And Burton, in an inverted culmination of Watt's approach, argued for its fictitiousness based upon a demonstration of its actual utility to certain elements of the Muslim community- namely, those legal exegetes seeking an "occasion of revelation" for eradicatory modes of abrogation.

The incident of the satanic verses is put forward by some critics as evidence of the Qur'an's origins as a human work of Muhammad. Maxime Rodinson discusses the satanic verses as a conscious attempt to achieve a consensus with pagan Arabs, which was then consciously rejected as incompatible with Muhammad's attempts to answer the criticism of contemporary Arab Jews and Christians linking it with the moment at which Muhammad felt able to adopt a "hostile attitude" towards the pagan Arabs. Rodinson writes that the story of the satanic verses is unlikely to be false because it was "one incident, in fact, which may be reasonably accepted as true because the makers of Muslim tradition would not have invented a story with such damaging implications for the revelation as a whole". William Montgomery Watt while accepting the incident however states: "Thus it was not for any worldly motive that Muhammad eventually turned down the offer of the Meccans, but for a genuinely religious reason; not for example, because he could not trust these men nor because any personal ambition would remain unsatisfied, but because acknowledgment of the goddesses would lead to the failure of the cause, of the mission he had been given by God."

Fischer and Abedi state that the story is rejected by almost all Muslim exegetes. Ibn Kathir in his commentary points out the weakness of the various isnāds by which the story was transmitted, almost all of them mursal- i.e. without a companion of Muhammad in their chain. This argument is supported by some academics such as J. Burton who believe the story is a forgery. Some say that the authenticity of the 'Satanic Verses' is implausible because of the long period of time (many years) between when the verses were revealed and when they were corrected. They think that such avocation of idolatry would not have been tolerated by the fledging Muslim community for so long. They also point out that the standard hadith collections do not mention this incident at all.

The morality of the Qur'an

Muslims say that God sent prophets to all groups of mankind across the globe, Jesus and Moses being two who were sent to the House of Israel, but that the Jews and Christians corrupted the teachings of the prophets. Islam states that it is to be a final revelation and a correction of Judaism and Christianity, as well as their holy texts. Islam, as a clear uncorrupted 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 says that it builds upon, or simply by the standards of the conscience. Catholic encyclopedia, for example, states that "the ethics of Islam are far inferior to those of Judaism and even more inferior to those of the New Testament" and "that in the ethics of Islam there is a great deal to admire and to approve, is beyond dispute; but of originality or superiority, there is none." William Montgomery Watt however states that: "In his day and generation Muhammad was a social reformer, indeed a reformer even in the sphere of morals. He created a new system of social security and a new family structure, both of which were a vast improvement on what went before. By taking what was best in the morality of the nomad and adapting it for settled communities, he established a religious and social framework for the life of many races of men. That is not the work of a traitor or a lecher."

Domestic behaviour

Verse of the Qur'an reads (some original Arabic words are indicated in square brackets):

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God 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 God would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct , admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For God is Most High, great (above you all).

The above verse thus instructs beating in certain situations. According to Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Ibn Kathir, the consensus of Islamic scholars is that the above verse describes a light beating. Abdullah Yusuf Ali in his Qur'anic commentary states that: "In case of family jars four steps are mentioned, to be taken in that order. (1) Perhaps verbal advice or admonition may be sufficient; (2) if not, sex relations may be suspended; (3) if this is not sufficient, some slight physical correction may be administered; but Imam Shafi'i considers this inadvisable, though permissible, and all authorities are unanimous in deprecating any sort of cruelty, even of the nagging kind, as mentioned in the next clause; (4) if all this fails, a family council is recommended in below." And Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi comments that "Whenever the Prophet (peace be on him) permitted a man to administer corporal punishment to his wife, he did so with reluctance, and continued to express his distaste for it. And even in cases where it is necessary, the Prophet (peace be on him) directed men not to hit across the face, nor to beat severely nor to use anything that might leave marks on the body."

It is also argued that this verse has exactly the reverse functionality, since domestic violence is usually the result of "temporary" anger and that in 4:34, men are asked to first admonish their wives, then refuse to share their beds. They argue that the intermediate steps provide the necessary time for both parties to cool off and reason. (Light) beating is only prescribed as a last resort.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a Muslim scholar, holds that the above verse can be explained in two ways. 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 according to them, the word 'idribuhunna' could very well mean to 'leave' them, "like telling someone to 'beat it' or 'drop it' in English".

A second issue relating to the validity of these criticisms is the Arabic word "nashooz", translated as "disloyalty and ill-conduct" by Yusuf Ali, "rebellion" by Pickthall and "desertion" by Shakir. As can be expected, there are different interpretations of this word's use in verse within the Muslim community itself. For example, some Muslims believe that: "The expression Nashooz نُشُوز occurring in the above Ayaah آيه means disobedience of the husband. The word is derived from 'Nashaz', which signifies rising. In other words, if the wife rises above the limit that God has laid down for obedience to the husband, she will be treated as disobedient." However, others believe that the word's true definition is "an unrighteous, wicked and rebellious act", thereby concluding that the verse does not necessarily prescribe the beating of disobedient wives. The word Nushooz also appears later in the same chapter in verse 128 as

If a wife fears ( nushooz ) cruelty or desertion on her husband's part, there is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such settlement is best; even though men's souls are swayed by greed. But if ye do good and practise self-restraint, Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do.

It is argued that nushooz cannot mean disobedience as both husband and wife cannot have authority over each other to demand obedience.

Islamic scholars state that there are verses of the Qur'an and several quotes attributed to Muhammad (Hadith wise), that bid believers to act kindly towards women and to not beat them. Critics reply 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."

War and violence

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|November 2006|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
Some Muslims believe Islam is a religion of peace, and that Islamic extremist terrorism is political terrorism or the actions of a few extremists. Many critics of Islam, and some of those who support Muslim terrorists and Jihadists believe that violence is Islamic, and that Islamic extremist terrorism is religious terrorism or true islam.

Criticisms

Some critics believe that it is not only extremist Islam that preaches violence but Islam itself, a violence implicit in the Qur'anic text.They argue that although Islam does not explicitly preach armed jihad, moderate Muslims cannot justify their denial that the violence practiced by extremists is based on the Qur'an.

Robert Spencer writes that the following verse is significant for the understanding of jihad as self defense:

The Sacred month for the sacred month and all sacred things are (under the law of) retaliation; whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you and be careful (of your duty) to Allah and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil). ()

Spencer writes: "This is a foundation for the revenge culture that dominates so much of the Islamic world." He goes on to note that according to this same sura (but not others, see below), "Fight is defensive, but not optional," whilst quoting verse . He forwards that Muhammad is instructed to take no prisoners, but also suggests that this prohibition "doesn't seem to be absolute," noting that in another verse () "Allah gives the Muslims permission to take the wives of those they have slain in battle as concubines." He writes that according to , those who fight are more pleasing to Allah than those who do not, and that those who take up arms for the Muslim cause rank highest among the believers .

Arab-American psychologist Wafa Sultan has pointed out that the prophet of Islam said: "I was ordered to fight the people until they believe in Allah and his Messenger." Sultan has called on Islamic teachers to review their writings and teachings and remove every call to fight people who do not believe as Muslims. Dr. Sultan is now in hiding, fearing for her life and the safety of her family after appearing on the al-Jazeera TV show. Muslims for a Safe America have opened a dialogue on some of the issues raised by Dr. Sultan.

Here is a partial list of Qur'anic verses that, according to a letter by Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar posted on JihadWatch, that deal with war, violence, and terrorism.

:"Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not." ()

"Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the Fire: And evil is the home of the wrong-doers!" ()

"How many a township have We destroyed! As a raid by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them. No plea had they, when Our terror came unto them, save that they said: Lo! We were wrong-doers." ()

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.'" ()

The continued list includes the following verses: , , , , , , ,, , , , , , ,

Sura 9 and the “Verse of the Sword”

Spencer writes that Sura 9:5, called “the Verse of the Sword,” is a cornerstone of the Qur’an’s teaching about jihad:

So when the Sacred Months have passed, then fight the Mushrikun wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform the Salah , and give the Zakah , then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. ()

Spencer quotes Ibn Kathir, a prominent commentator of the Qur’an, with a tafsir (exegesis) of this verse. According to Ibn Kathir, “the first part of this honorable Surah was revealed to the Messenger of Allah when he returned from the battle of Tabuk.” This military expedition took place within a year of Muhammad’s death, and was the last of his life. Ibn Kathir gives an explanation of Sura 9:5 as follows: “Do not wait until you find them. Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks ever smaller to them. This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam.” Spencer quotes Hazrat Moulana Sayyed Abul Hassan Ali Nadwi, a Muslim scholar and biographer of Muhammad, who writes that the Prophet was attempting a pre-emptive strike: “The Messenger of Allah decided to lead a Muslim army into Roman territory before Roman armies crossed the Arab borders and threatened the heart of Islam.” Spencer notes that in Sura 9:81, Allah scolds those who did not cross the desert with the Prophet to fight:

Those who were left behind (in the Tabuk expedition) rejoiced in their inaction behind the back of the Messenger of Allah: they hated to strive and fight, with their goods and their persons, in the cause of Allah: they said, ‘Go not forth in the heat.’ Say, ‘The fire of Hell is fiercer in heat.’ If only they could understand! ()

Spencer writes that Sura 9 is, according to the Sahih Bukhari, “the last Sura revealed in full.” Spencer writes: "to the distress of those who claim that while Muhammad may have fought these particular infidels, he didn't actually mean to leave his followers a universal command to fight all infidels, Ibn Kathir quotes an earlier authority, Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim, to establish that the Verse of the Sword 'abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty, and every term.'" Ibn Kathir quotes another authority: "No idolater had any more treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Bara’ah (Surah 9) was revealed." Spencer notes that another early commentator, Ibn Juzayy, agrees that one of this verse’s functions is "abrogating every peace treaty in the Quran."

Spencer interprets these writings: "In other words, the Muslim community is indeed commanded to fight against any and all unbelievers, not just against those Muhammad was facing when the Verse of the Sword was revealed." He writes that Ibn Juzayy was referring to the Islamic doctrine of naskh, under which later Quranic revelations may modify and cancel certain directives, replacing them with others.

Spencer writes that “this idea is crucial as a guide to the relationship of the Qur’an’s peaceful passages to its violent ones. Suras 16, 29, 52, 73, and 109-the sources of most of the verses of peace and tolerance above-are all Meccan. That means that anything they teach must be considered in light of what was revealed later in Medina. (The sole exception to this is the “no compulsion in religion” verse from the Medinan Sura 2, discussed below.) On the other hand, the last sura revealed, Sura 9, is Medinan. Thus it is in effect the Qur’an’s last word on jihad, and all the rest of the book-including the “tolerance verses”-must be read in its light.” Spencer concludes: “In other words, Muhammad gave peace a chance with the Pacific suras, and then understood that jihad was the more expedient course.”

Responses

Regarding the criticism that the violence practiced by extremists is based on the Qur'an, Michael Sells, Professor of Islamic History and Literature at University of Chicago, states that such is the case with other scriptures: "During the Inquisition, killing a heretic was considered to be more compassionate than allowing him to lead others to damnation. Gospel passages that have helped inspire compassion have also been used to justify persecution of Jews. The Koran is read by the Taliban and by the Muslims who were persecuted by the Taliban. Verses that inspired Gandhi are cited by those who recently massacred unarmed Muslims in India."

Regarding the above mentioned verses, it is argued that they have been taken out of context. The verses should be read with the whole surah; also the time and circumstances of the verses should be considered. Carl Ernst asserts that the scholarship and interpretations of the critic, Robert Spencer, are fundamentally flawed - that he supports preconceived notions through selection bias and that he does not publish his books through academic presses since the books fail the blind peer-reviews as practiced by academic presses. Regarding the issue of context, Robert Spencer writes that the Qur'an itself provides little context for understanding verses , and notes that the surahs in the Qur'an are not ordered chronologically, but by length. In response to Ernst, Spencer states that "I present the work not on the basis of my credentials, but on the basis of the evidence I bring forth; evaluate it for yourself... Carl Ernst did not and cannot bring forth even a single example of a supposed inaccuracy in my work."

Severe punishments

Islam has been criticised for allegedly endorsing cruel and unusual punishments for certain crimes. William Montgomery Watt believes that "such penalties may have been suitable for the age in which Muhammad lived. However, as societies have since progressed and become more peaceful and ordered, they are not suitable any longer." Gerhard Endress, professor of Islamic Studies at Ruhr University, states that at the time of advent of Islam, several social reforms happened in which a new system of marriage and family, including legal restrictions such as restriction of the practice of polygamy, was built up. Endress says that "it was only by this provision (backed up by severe punishment for adultery), that the family, the core of any sedentary society could be placed on a firm footing."

Some have spoken against sentences of stoning to death which have been handed down by Islamic courts in some modern countries, most notably in Nigeria. The punishment of adulterers via this method is not mentioned in the Qur'an but "derives its authority from hadith literature references which are imputed by many," according to Kemal A. Faruki.

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment. ()

According to Daniel Madigan, although verse mandates one hundred lashes as punishment for adultery, the majority of the Islamic schools of thought do prescribe stoning. He says that Islamic theologians found support for the stoning punishment in a verse that was not in the official text of the Qur'an but one that "still carries the weight of Qur'anic authority." There are certain standards for proof that must be met in Islamic law for this punishment to apply. In the Shafii, Hanbali, Hanafi and the Shia law schools the stoning is imposed for the married adulterer and his partner only if the crime is proven either by four male adult eye witnessing the actual sexual intercourse at the same time or by self confession. In Maliki law school, however, the evidence of pregnancy also constitutes a sufficient proof. Scholars such as Fazel Lankarani and Ayatollah Sanei hold that stoning penalty is imposed only if adulterer have had sexual access to his or her mate. Ayatollah Shirazi states that the proof for adultery is very hard to be established since nobody does adultery in public unless the person is irreverent.

The sentence of amputation of the limbs of thieves by Shari'ah courts has been very controversial. The relevant verse in the Qur'an is -

As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power. ()

Commenting on this verse, Yusuf Ali says that most Islamic jurists believe that "petty thefts are exempt from this punishment" and that "only one hand should be cut off for the first theft." Maududi also agrees that petty theft is exempt, although he admits that jurists disagree as to the exact dividing line. In Shi'a law, the penalty for the first theft is interpreted as the severing of the four fingers of the right hand based on hadith authentic to them, and this penalty will be applied only if the thief is adult, sane, has stolen from a secure place, was not under compulsion or misery, and does not repent before the crime is proved, among other conditions.

Cases of the death penalty being applied for homosexuality or sodomy in Muslim countries have been condemned by human rights groups and others: "Human rights groups have documented numerous cases in which Iran has executed its citizens on charges of sodomy and adultery." Homosexuality is forbidden by the Qur'an, notably in the story of Lot found in verses .

We also (sent) Lut: He said to his people: "Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? "For ye practise your lusts on men in preference to women : ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds." And his people gave no answer but this: they said, "Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" But we saved him and his family, except his wife: she was of those who legged behind. And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): Then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime! ()

Commenting on these verses, Maududi writes that "here and at other places the Qur'an merely declares that sodomy is such a heinous sin... that it is the duty of the Islamic State to eradicate this crime and... punish those who are guilty of it." He says that a majority of Islamic authorities advocated the death penalty as punishment.

John Esposito explains that some Muslims justify these punishments in general terms because they punish crimes that are "against God and a threat to the moral fabric of the Muslim community." He observes that Islamic law provides strict regulations regarding evidence in cases involving these crimes, and that false accusations are seriously punished.

There is a movement among some modern liberal Muslims to "re-interpret Islamic verses about ancient punishments," in the words of Professor Ali A. Mazrui. He states that the punishments laid down fourteen centuries ago "had to be truly severe enough to be a deterrent" in their day, but "since then God has taught us more about crime, its causes, the methods of its investigation, the limits of guilt, and the much wider range of possible punishments." Esposito also observes that Muslim reformers have argued that "these punishment were appropriate within the historical and social contexts in which they originated but are inappropriate today and that the underlying religious principles and values need to find new expression in modernizing societies."

Apostasy in Islam

Apostasy is defined as the rejection of one's religion. According to all five major schools of Islamic jurisprudence in Islamic Law, apostasy in Islam is punishable by death (i.e. execution). The Qur'an does not explicitly prescribe an earthly punishment for apostasy, while the hadith do.

Slavery

Islam has come under criticism for permitting slavery, a practice that was a common feature of pre-Islamic pagan Arabia. The Qur’an, like the Old and the New Testaments, assumes the existence of slavery, Bernard Lewis states; it regulates the practice of the institution and thus implicitly accepts it, while at the same time limiting the circumstances under which a free person can be enslaved. Robert Spencer specifically holds up verses for scrutiny, claiming that they allow for the taking of slaves as concubines. Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi comments that these verses do in fact explicitly allow sex with slave girls outside of marriage, although Yusuf al-Qaradawi states that these slave girls would automatically become free if they got pregnant, and that the child would also become free:

The believers must (eventually) win through,- Those who humble themselves in their prayers; Who avoid vain talk; Who are active in deeds of charity; Who abstain from sex, Except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame, ()

It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee, except any thy right hand should possess (as handmaidens): and Allah doth watch over all things. ()

Spencer claims that slavery is still practiced in several Muslim countries today, such as Sudan and Mauritania, a situation that he thinks will always be possible as long as slavery is "explicitly sanctioned by the Qur'an and Islamic law". He also claims that the impetus to end slavery came from the West, and was resisted by at least one Muslim leader who defended the practice as not prohibited by the "laws of any sect". According to Lewis, the abolition movement got started in the Muslim world primarily because of European pressure, and for a long time continued only because of that pressure. He says that these reforms were strongly resisted by religious conservatives who saw themselves as upholding an institution that was "authorized and regulated by the holy law." However, there were also many pious Muslims who refused to have slaves and persuaded others to do so.

Those scholars sympathetic to Islam generally respond by pointing out that while Islam regulates slavery, the good treatment and manumission of slaves are seen as ideals. John Esposito points out that the "Qur'an command(s) the just and humane treatment of slaves, and regard(s) their emancipation as a meritorious act," referencing verses , , and . He goes on to note that slave owners were encouraged to permit their slaves to earn their freedom, and states that forcing female slaves into prostitution was condemned. Yusuf Ali concurs. He comments that verse enjoins believers to do all they can to give or buy the freedom of slaves.

Allah has bestowed His gifts of sustenance more freely on some of you than on others: those more favoured are not going to throw back their gifts to those whom their right hands possess, so as to be equal in that respect. Will they then deny the favours of Allah? ()

But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered,- (It is ordained that such a one) should free a slave before they touch each other: Thus are ye admonished to perform: and Allah is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do. ()

(It is) the setting free of a slave, ()

Writing about verse , he says that "Islam made the slave's lot as easy as possible." He goes on to outline how this verse guarantees a slave's right to enter into an agreement to earn money by lawful means and to "earn their freedom for a certain sum." Yusuf Ali also points to this specific verse as outlawing the practice of forcing one's slave girls into prostitution.

Muhammad Qutb claims that slaves were not considered inferior to their masters in theological terms, referencing hadith such as Bukhari Template:Bukhari-usc in support of his position.

Incompatibility with Christian and Jewish scriptures

You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|June 2006|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.

This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Religious differences between believers of Christianity and Islam have lead to criticisms and debate back and forth over the legitimacy and authenticity of both the Bible and the Qur'an. Christians have argued that the Qur'anic accounts of past events differ from the Bible, characterizing that difference as 'misquoting'.

The response that Muslims commonly make to this criticism is that is that they believe 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 The Qur'an is therefore explained as Biblical error, either intentional or unintentional. See Tahrif for further information about the Muslim doctrine of distortion of the text. Some critics, however, see this response as a form of circular reasoning because they believe it pre-assumes the legitimacy of the Qur'an.

Scholars such as Ahmed Deedat have defended the Qur'an by arguing that the Bible is in fact a collection of books by 'anonymous hands' and that the Qur'anic assumptions about the authenticity of the Bible (particularly the 4 gospel) and the Torah are in fact truths. He makes his case by using secular sources and studies that suggests the Bible has changed over time, and argues that such changes in fact prove the Islamic view that the Jewish and Christian scriptures have deviated from their original state. See also Internal consistency and the Bible.

The Qur'an repeatedly cites the Injil and Tawrat as examples of divine guidance, and urges both Jews and Christians to judge by, and stand fast to their respective scriptures. It also states that if God had so willed, He would have made of humanity a single people — but that His plan is to test various peoples by means of what He has given them:

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. () 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. ()

The Jewish Encyclopedia states that, in Islam: The Torah is confused with the Tables of the Law, and the latter are increased in number. Again, the Torah is enormously increased in bulk: it is alleged to contain a varying number of parts, up to 1,000, and to make seventy camel-loads. Each single part takes a year to read through. Only four men — Moses, Joshua, Ezra, and Jesus — have studied it all. Clear statements, all imaginative, are given as to how it begins and ends.

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 actually crucified by the Jews. They presume that the Gospel writers were mistaken or their texts were later altered. See Historicity of Jesus.

There are several references to the death or removal of Jesus in the Qur'an. Verse 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. Muslims believe that Jesus was lifted to the heavens by God and will return to earth in physical form before the day of judgement. See Islamic view of Jesus' death.

Christians and Jews in the Qur'an

It is a commonly held belief by mainstream Islam that Jews and Christians are considered people of the book. Bernard Lewis states that there was little hostility between Jews and Muslims that would qualify as antisemitism However, according to the Encyclopedia Judaica, the quran contains many attacks on Jews and Christians for their refusal to recognize Muhammad as a prophet.

Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. ()

The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!()

And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah. ()

For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (foods) good and wholesome which had been lawful for them;- in that they hindered many from Allah's Way;- ()

The Qur'an also contains some passages stating Jews had been transformed into "apes" and "pigs" due to misdeeds. An example of such passages is:

And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: "Be ye apes, despised and rejected." () "Say: "Shall I point out to you something much worse than this, (as judged) by the treatment it received from Allah? those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil;- these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path!"

Muslim scholars disagree on the meanings of such verses. Some believe Jews were actually turned into apes and pigs, while others believe they began to act like animals. However, most Muslim scholars believe this punishment was not meant for all Jews, and that they were only meant for the Jewish inhabitants that were sinning at the time. According to professor Khaleel Mohammed, "many Muslim preachers use the verses in a manner that is totally wrong, demonizing all Jews." According to Freedom House, Muslims use these verses to teach intolerance.

The issue of context

Muslims often seek to dismiss critics' interpretations of verses in the Quran by saying that they quote the verses out of context, and thus cannot make a valid interpretation. Regarding this issue, Robert Spencer writes that the Qur'an itself provides little context for its verses, and notes that the surahs in the Qur'an are not ordered chronologically, but by length. Ibn Warraq refers to the Muslim lack of context response as "that old standby of crooked, lying politicians."

See also

• Qur'an
• Criticism of Islam
• Islam
• Creation-evolution controversy
• The relation between Islam and science
• Islamic extremist terrorism
• Islam and slavery
• Apostasy in Islam
• Women in Islam
• Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons
• Criticism of the Bible

Further reading

• Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out by Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books (May 2003) ISBN 1-59102-068-9
• Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books (hardcover), 1995, ISBN 0-87975-984-4
• The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion, by Robert Spencer, Regnery Publishing 2006 (NYT bestseller list )
• The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims, by Robert Spencer, Prometheus Books, 2005. ISBN 1-59102-249-5
• The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And the Crusades), by Robert Spencer, Regnery Publishing, 2005. ISBN 0-89526-013-1 (NYT bestseller list)
• Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West, by Robert Spencer, Regnery Publishing, 2003. ISBN 0-89526-100-6
• Inside Islam: A Guide for Catholics,by Robert Spencer, (with Daniel Ali), Ascension Press, 2003. ISBN 0-9659228-5-5
• Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith, by Robert Spencer, (Foreword by David Pryce-Jones), Encounter Books, 2002. ISBN 1-893554-58-9
• Islam: Opposing Viewpoints edited by William Dudley. Greenhaven Press (Farmington Hills) in 2004 as a 203-page hardcover (ISBN 0-7377-2238-X) and paperback (ISBN 0-7377-2239-8).
• Against the Tides in the Middle East, by Mark A. Gabriel International Academic Centre for Muslim Evangelism in South Africa, 1997 (published under the name "Mustafa").
• Islam and Terrorism: What the Qur'an really teaches about Christianity, violence and the goals of the Islamic jihad by Mark A. Gabriel. 2002, ISBN 0-88419-884-7
• Islam and the Jews: The Unfinished Battle by Mark A. Gabriel. 2003, ISBN 0-88419-956-8
• Jesus and Muhammad: Profound Differences and Surprising Similarities by Mark A. Gabriel. 2004, ISBN 1-59185-291-9
• Journey into the Mind of an Islamic Terrorist by Mark A. Gabriel. 2006, ISBN 1-59185-713-9

References

1. The Cambridge History of Islam, p.32
2. ^ Peters, F. E. "The Quest of the Historical Muhammad." International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 23, No. 3. (Aug., 1991), pp. 291-315.
3. Patricia Crone, Michael Cook, and Gerd R. Puin as quoted in Toby Lester (January 1999). "What Is the Koran?". The Atlantic Monthly.
4. van Ess, "The Making Of Islam", Times Literary Supplement, Sep. 8 1978, p. 998
5. Stephen Humphreys, Islamic History, (Princeton, 1991) pp. 84-85
6. Political Islam: Essays from Middle East Report. Los Angeles, California: University of California Press. 1997. pp. p. 47. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
7. ^ Carole Hillenbrand, The New Cambridge Medieval History, vol. 1, p.329
8. BBC religion and ethics, Qur'an
9. BBC religion and ethics, Qur'an
11. Gilchrist, "Jam' Al-Qur'an" p 153)
12. ^ The Cambridge History of Islam (1970), Cambrdige University Press, p.30
13. Encyclopedia of Islam online, Muhammad article
14. Issa Boullata, Literary Structure of Qur'an, Encyclopedia of the Qur'an, vol.3 p.192, 204
17. Jewish Encyclpoedia: comp. also xvi. 70
20. "Islam and the Setting of the Sun". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
21. "Qur'anic Commentary on Sura' Al-Kahf (18):86". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
22. "Qur'an and Science: Moon Light is Reflected Light". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
23. William F. Campbell M.D. "A. THE EARTH, THE HEAVENS AND THE 6 OR 8 DAYS OF CREATION". The Qur'an and the Bible in the light of history and science.
24. http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/embryo.html
25. Basim Musallam, Sex and Society in Islam. Cambridge University Press.
26. Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, the Qur'an, and Science, quote on page 208.
27. Campbell, page 184.
28. Saleem, Shehzad (2000). "The Qur'anic View on Creation". Renaissance. 10 (5). ISSN 1606-9382. Retrieved 2006-10-11. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |quotes= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
29. answering-christianity perspective on evolution
30. IslamOnline perspective on evolution
31. answering-Islam and evolution
32. free-minds.org and evolution
34. Jews-for-allah and evolution
35. IslamOnline and Intelligent Design
36. Islam Tomorrow and evolution
37. "How long is Allah's day?". The Skeptic's Annoted Quran.
38. "Will all Jews and Christians go to hell?". The Skeptic's Annoted Quran.
39. "Is each person be free to believe as he or she wishes?". The Skeptic's Annoted Quran.
40. "Contradictions in the Qur'an".
41. "Contradictions in the Quran". The Skeptic's Annoted Quran.
42. "The Life of Muhammad", Ibn Ishaq, A. Guillaume (translator), 2002, p.166 ISBN 0-19-636033-1
43. Watt, W. Montgomery (1961). Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman. Oxford University Press. p. 61. ISBN 0-19-881078-4.
44. John Burton (1970). "Those Are the High-Flying Cranes". Journal of Semitic Studies 15: 246-264.
45. Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad (Tauris Parke, London, 2002) (ISBN 1-86064-827-4) ps. 107-8
46. Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad (Tauris Parke, London, 2002) (ISBN 1-86064-827-4) p. 113
47. Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad (Tauris Parke, London, 2002) (ISBN 1-86064-827-4) p. 106
48. W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Meccam Oxford, 1953. 'The Growth of Opposition', p.105
49. M. M. J. Fischer & M. Abedi, "Bombay Talkies, The Word And The World: Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses", Cultural Anthropology, 1990, Washington, Volume 5, No. 2, p. 127.
50. Tafsir Ibn Khatir on Sura 22 Google cache, retrieved on Apr 21 2006
51. J. Burton, "Those Are The High-Flying Cranes", Journal Of Semitic Studies, 1970, Volume 15, No. 2, p. 265.
52. "Those Are The High Flying Claims"
53. Cite error: The named reference Oussani was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
54. W Montgomery Watt, Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman, chapter "ASSESSMENT" section "THE ALLEGED MORAL FAILURES", Op. Cit, p. 332.
55. "The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary", Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Amana Corporation, Brentwood, MD, 1989. ISBN 0-915957-03-5, passage was quoted from commentary on 4:34
56. Kathir, Ibn, “Tafsir of Ibn Kathir”, Al-Firdous Ltd., London, 2000, 50-53
57. "The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary", Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Amana Corporation, Brentwood, MD, 1989. ISBN 0-915957-03-5, passage was quoted from commentary on 4:34
58. "Towards Understanding the Qur'an" Translation by Zafar I. Ansari from "Tafheem Al-Qur'an" by Syed Abul-A'ala Mawdudi, Islamic Foundation, Leicester, England. Passage was quoted from commentary on 4:34
59. ^ What does Islam say about wives beating? - Islamonline.net
60. How women are treated in Bible and Qur’aan!, by Shahid Bin Waheed, Islam Is The Only Solution, October 21, 2004, retrieved April 16, 2006.
61. Qur'anic Perspective on Wife beating and Abuse, by Fatimah Khaldoon, Submission, 2003, retrieved April 16, 2006
63. Silas (pseudonym). "Wife Beating in Islam".
65. Robert Spencer. Onward Muslim Soldiers, page 121.
70. [http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/011397.php JihadWatch.org: "Letters from a mujahid "]
71. The Daily Tar Heel- Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar letter
72. ’’Onward Muslim Soldiers,’’ page 132
73. Onward Muslim Soldiers, page 134.
74. Onward Muslim Soldiers, page 134.
75. ’’Onward Muslim Soldiers,’’ page 136.
76. ibid.
77. Michael Sells, Understanding, Not Indoctrination, Thursday, August 8, 2002; Page A17, The Washington Post
78. Cite error: The named reference Boundries_Princeton was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
79. Khaleel Muhammad, professor of religious studies at San Diego State University regarding his discussion with the critic Robert Spencer states that "when I am told ... that Jihad only means war, or that I have to accept interpretations of the Quran that non-Muslims (with no good intentions or knowledge of Islam) seek to force upon me, I see a certain agendum developing: one that is based on hate, and I refuse to be part of such an intellectual crime."
80. Robert Spencer, Onward Muslim Soldiers, pages 126-127.
81. Gerhard Endress, Islam: An Introduction to Islam, Columbia University Press, 1988, p.31
82. Koinange, Jeff (February 23, 2004). "Woman sentenced to stoning freed". CNN.
83. "Nigeria: Death by stoning upheld in the case of Amina Lawal". Amnesty International. August 19, 2002.
84. Faruki, Kemal A. (1983). Voices of Resurgent Islam (ed. John Esposito). Oxford University Press. p. 286. ISBN 0-19-503340-X.
85. Madigan, Daniel (2001). The Qur'an's Self-Image: Writing and Authority in Islam's Scripture. Princeton University Press. p. 32. ISBN 0-691-05950-0.
86. Buba Iman. "Safiyatu's conviction untenable under sharia". Jenda: A Journal of Culture and African Women Studies, Vol. 1.2 (2001). ISSN 1530-5686.
87. "On Capital Punishments". Official website of Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani.
88. "Resaleye Touzih al-Masayel". Grand Ayatollah Saneyi.
89. "Shamime Rahmat". Official website of Grand Ayatollah Shirazi.
90. Olukoya, Sam (December 19, 2002). "Eyewitness: Nigeria's Sharia amputees". BBC.
91. Ali, Abdullah Yusuf (2004). The Meaning Of The Holy Qur'an (11th Edition). Amana Publications. p. 259. ISBN 1-59008-025-4.
92. Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi (2000). The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 2. Islamic Publications. p. 451.
93. Selection of Tafsir Nemooneh, Grand Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi, p. 28, volume 1, on verse 5:38
94. "On Capital Punishments". Official website of Grand Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani.
95. "Noor Malakoote Quran". Ayatollah Haj seyyed Muhammad Hussein Tehrani.
96. Kim, Richard (August 7, 2005). "Witnesses to an Execution". The Nation.
97. Trifkovic, Serge (January 24, 2003). "Islam's Love-Hate Relationship with Homosexuality (book except)". FrontPageMagazine.com.
98. Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi (2000). The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 2. Islamic Publications. pp. 48–52.
99. Esposito, John L. (2002). What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam. Oxford University Press. pp. 150, 151. ISBN 0-19-515713-3.
100. Mazrui, Ali A. "Liberal Islam versus Moderate Islam: Elusive Moderation and the Siege Mentality". Retrieved 2006-7-03. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
101. Esposito, John L. (2002). What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam. Oxford University Press. p. 151. ISBN 0-19-515713-3.
102. W. Heffening, in Encyclopedia of Islam
103. ^ Robert Spencer, "Islam Unveiled", p. 63, 2003, Encounter Books, ISBN 1-893554-77-5
104. Jonathan Bloom, Sheila Blair, "Islam: A Thousand Years of Faith and Power", p. 47, 2002, Yale University Press, ISBN 0-300-09422-1
105. Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, "The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 3", note 7-1, p. 241, 2000, Islamic Publications
106. In islamonline.net,
107. Robert Spencer, "Islam Unveiled", p. 65, 2003, Encounter Books, ISBN 1-893554-77-5
108. Bernard Lewis, "Race and Slavery in the Middle East", p. 79, 1992, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-505326-5
109. Bernard Lewis, "Race and Slavery in the Middle East", pp. 78-79, 1992, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-505326-5
110. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Heart of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity, p.182.
111. John Esposito, "Islam: The Straight Path", p. 79, 1998, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-511234-2
112. Yusuf Ali, "The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an", (11th Edition), p. 655, Amana Publications, 1989, ISBN 0-915957-76-0
113. Yusuf Ali, "The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an", (11th Edition), p. 875, Amana Publications, 1989, ISBN 0-915957-76-0
114. Muhammad Qutb, "Unveiling Islam", p. 70, 1992, Islamic Texts Society, ISBN 0-8254-2400-3
115. Jochen Katz. "Can we argue from a corrupted source?".
116. Deedat, Ahmed. Is The Bible God's Words?.
117. Bible in Mohammedian Literature., by Kaufmann Kohler Duncan B. McDonald , Jewish Encyclopedia, retrieved April 22, 2006
118. Islam In The Bible, Chapter 12, Thomas McElwain, Printed In Great Britain for Minerva Press, 1998, ISBN 0-7541-0217-3
119. Lewis (1984) p.32-33
120. Gerber (1986), pp. 78&ndas;79
121. "Anti-Semitism". Encyclopedia Judaica
122. "Mutation of Israelites", Internet Sacred Text Archive. (retrieved May 3, 2006)
123. "Hizbullah Al-Manar TV’s Children's Claymation Special: Jews Turn Into Apes & Pigs, are Annihilated & Cast into the Sea",, Middle East Media Research Institute, December 16, 2005. (retrieved May 3, 2006)
124. Maududi, Sayyid Abul Ala (1967). The Meaning of the Quran.
125. Maududi, Sayyid Abul Ala (1967). The Meaning of the Quran.
126. Glazov, Jamie, "Symposium: The Koran and Anti-Semitism", FrontPageMag.com, June 25, 2004. (retrieved May 3, 2006)
127. Saudi Arabia's Curriculum of Intolerance (pdf), Freedom House, May 2006, pp.24-25.
128. Such an attempt can be found on page 125 of Onward Muslim Soldiers.
129. Robert Spencer, Onward Muslim Soldiers, pages 126-127.
130. Ibn Warraq, editor, Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out.

External links

• English translation Of The Qur'an

Critical sites

• answering-Islam.org
• jihadwatch.org
• The Skeptics Annotated Qur'an
• faithfreedom.org

Muslim responses to criticism

• Five Common Myths About Islam
• Misconceptions about Islam
• Islamic-Awareness.org
• Bismika Allahuma.org
• Tolerance in Islam

• Qur'an
• Criticism of religion
• Islam-related controversies