Downing Street and Criticism of Islam: Difference between pages

Criticism of Islam has existed since Islam's formative stages, as with any religion, on philosophical, scientific, ethical, political, and theological grounds.

History

Many criticisms of the central beliefs in Islam predate the codification of Islam itself. For instance, recorded criticism of a belief in a supernatural omnipotent creator dates at least as far back as the writings of ancient Greek philosophers such as Epicurus. Like their Christian counterparts, medieval Islamic scholars worked to reconcile or argue against such views.

The earliest records of criticism of Islam are found in early Islamic writings about criticism from their pagan Arabian adversaries and the Jewish inhabitants of south Arabia at the time, particularly the Jewish tribes of Medina, who claimed their scriptures were misquoted by Muhammad. Muslims, by contrast, have argued that the Qur'an, as divine revelation, is corrective of Jewish and Christian scriptures, and that discrepancies between the two are to be understood as evidence of corruption of the earlier texts, see Similarities between the Bible and the Qur'an.

The earliest sources of criticism recorded by non-Muslims are found in the medieval ecclesiastical writings of Christians such as John of Damascus, who came under the dominion of the Caliphate in areas such as Syria. John's scholarly work The Fount of Wisdom contains three chapters, the second of which, Concerning Heresies, addresses Islam as the Heresy of the Ishmaelites. John was familiar with the Qu'ran and the Hadith, quoting them in the original Arabic. A series of discussions between Christians and Muslims is presented along with the claim, rejected by Muslims, that a Nestorian monk influenced Muhammad and what Muslims regard as his revelation from God. Christians in Europe became increasingly aware of the growing Islamic Empire (see History of Islam, Battle of Yarmuk) and saw Islam as a pagan military scourge sent by God as a punishment against Christians for their sin. Some contemporary Muslims argued that this view, revisited over the centuries to follow, posits Islam as the Other, a prevailing system against which Christianity may better define itself through rejection, just as it defines itself, earlier in its history, by means of similar encounters with Judaism and paganism.

At its peak, the Islamic Empire extends as far as the north of the Iberian peninsula (see Al-Andalus and a Timeline of the Muslim Occupation of Spain) and the Christian Church began to view Islam as a religious as well as military threat. Medieval ecclesiastical writers began to portray Islam and Muhammad as having been possessed by Satan, a "precursor of the Antichrist" or as the Antichrist himself. Other religions, particularly Hinduism, developed similar criticisms of their own as a result of Islamic conquests beyond Arabia. Contemporary Muslim commentators draw parallels between modern criticisms of Islam and these medieval attacks upon it, which were steeped in the rhetoric of the Crusades.

In the modern era, European and American Orientalism examine the claims of Islam from a secular and academic perspective. At the end of the 20th century and the start of the 21st, as Islam shows a resurgence in global influence, political and military conflicts lead to talk of a "clash of cultures." During this period, criticism of Islam and Islamic practices have increased markedly in the U.S., Europe, and Australia.

Ethical criticism

Some critics claim that, as a religion and system of law for governing society, Islam falls short of providing acceptable ethical values according to modern standards. ^[1] In response, defenders of Islam have suggested a) that ethical critiques of Islam often focus, not on actual principles of the faith, but on various forms of cultural traditionalism; and b) that these critiques, when they do focus on Islamic legal principles, often focus on the most sensational cases, ignoring the generally popular social result produced by sharia law as a whole within a given Islamic community. [2].

General ethics

Alleged lack of reciprocity

According to Ali Sina ^[3], the Golden Rule "Do onto others as you would wish them do onto you" does not occur in the Qur'an. There exists an incarnation of this rule in the forty hadith collection of Nawawi but it is only given as valid between brothers ^[4]. Some Muslims regard only other Muslims as brothers ^[5]; others embrace an understanding of the word Ummah that emphasizes connection to the entire human family. The Qur'an's seemingly countless instructions to seek God's forgiveness by means of acts of charity and justice to other human beings, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, operate in roughly the same sphere as the Golden Rule.

Alleged glorification of war and 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, moderate Muslims' denial that the violence practiced by extremist Muslims can be read in the Qur'an cannot be upheld. (Such a position is rejected forcefully by mainstream Islamic scholars, who cite longstanding prohibitions against suicide and the slaughter of noncombatants.) According to Spencer, a move toward human rights and peaceful assimilation in the West calls for moderate Muslims' rejection of aspects of Islam such as dhimmitude and obedience to Sharia law. ^[6]. Muslim intellectuals such as Tariq Ramadan, by contrast, have argued for establishing community ties with non-Muslims in countries where Islam is not the predominant faith system. Muslims have for centuries stressed that armed jihad is only one of several kinds of jihad: see Jihad.

Intolerance of criticsm

Critics frequently criticize practices within Islam which they regard as intolerant of criticism.

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 ^[7]. 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 Quran that directly deal 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 prescibed death punishment for apostasy and blasphemy (see stoning).

Treatment of blasphemy ^{[8] [9]}

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.

Issues of cruelty and human rights issues

Frequently cited, e.g. by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Robert Spencer, Qur'an-only Muslims and Ali Sina are:

Allegedly Cruel Punishments

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 ^{[10] [11] [12]} 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. Some other religions, Judaism for example, traditionally prescibed the same punishment. Many contemporary Muslims regard the issue as a question of local judicial interpretation, which has been placed out of context by sensationalist media.

Death penalty for practicing homosexuals

According to traditional Islam, men (and sometimes women) who engage in homosexual acts should be executed ^{[13] [14] [15]}. Critics regard this as intolerant and cruel.

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. This is essentially due to the question of freedom of religion. In 1990 the Islamic Conference published a separate Cairo Declaration of Human Rights compliant with Shari'ah ^[16].

Alleged discrimination against women and non-Muslims

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

Human-rights violations by adherents of Islam

See Historical persecution by Muslims.

Condoning of slavery & rape of female slaves

Chapter 23 (The Believers), lines 5 & 6, of the Qur'an states "And who guard their modesty - Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy"^[17]. It is understood that 'those whom their right hands posses' refers to slaves. The critics of traditional Islamic scholars claim they condone not only slavery, "but they also approved that every male master had the right to force any of his female slaves to have sex with him"^[18]. "Both Sunni and Shia consider Ali Ibn Abi Talib a major role model, and if he slept with his slaves, according to traditionalist logic, it must be fine."^[19] The Qur'an 70:29 & 70:30 states "And those who preserve their chastity. Save with their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for thus they are not blameworthy"^[20]. This is interpreted as, 'You don't have to be chaste around your wives or your slave girls.'

Each of these areas has been the focus of intense discussion in the early twenty-first century. Critics argue that the example by Muhammad and Quranic injunctions, such as the "sword verse" 9:11 promote religious violence by Muslims. 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. Internal ethical criticism of traditional Islam has led to reform and protest initiatives within Islam, for instance liberal Islam movements and the Qur'an-only movement.

Death penalties for adultery and sodomy, have long been practiced by many religions. Only in recent years, through a secular lens has this stopped being practiced. (ex. 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.

Theological criticism

Criticism of Islam's theology is often focused as much on Muhammad the individual as it is on beliefs held by Muslims about God. In addition, criticism of aspects of belief and practice that some consider "traditional" Islamic theology has often come from those identifying themselves as Muslims. A brief summary follows.

Muhammad

Many medieval and early modern writers were motivated to criticise Islam by admiration for or hatred of its prophet Muhammad. Martin Luther, for example, 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 and draws a parallel between Muhammad's theology and Luther's Protestantism.

More recent Western scholars such as Sprenger, Noldeke, Weil, Sir William Muir, Koelle, Grimme and Margoliouth give a more positive estimate of Mohammed's life and character and generally agree as to his motives, prophetic call, personal qualifications and sincerity. Whereas Muir, Marcus Dods and others suggest that Muhammad was at first sincere but later practised deception wherever it would gain his end, 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 alleged revelations to epileptic fits or a "paroxysm of cataleptic insanity", a claim commonly leveled by medieval critics.

In Islam Muhammad is considered the final and greatest prophet, messanger of the final and greatest revelation, the Qur’an. Muslims beleive that Muhammad was chosen for his goodness and holiness, and consider him to have been without sin. However some episodes of his life appear to show an immoral side to his character, which does compares very poorly with the judaeo-christian prophets Muhammad claimed to supercede. This includes the massacre of Jews of Medina who opposed him (the Banu Qurayza, in 629) and taking 17-year old Safiyya bint Huyayy as his wife immediately after torturing her husband, a Jewish leader, to death (in 629). Muslims have at times denied that Muhammad committed such things and have questioned the historical evidence for their occurence. Muhammad's marraige to Aisha is also controversial. Most Muslim scholars have accepted the tradition that Aisha was nine years old when the marriage was consummated. 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 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.

Zwemer (1907) criticises the life of Muhammad

• firstly by the standards of the Old and New Testaments, both of which he claimed Muhammad acknowledged as divine revelation (though Muslims could argue the point, stressing that Islam accepts only the original -- and now lost -- versions of these texts);
• secondly by the pagan morality of his Arabian compatriots;
• lastly, by the new law of which he "pretended" to be the "divinely-appointed medium and custodian" (an assessment that stands in stark contrast to that of the vast majority of Muslims throughout history).

Zwemer suggests Muhammad was false even to the ethical traditions of the idolatrous brigands among whom he lived and that he violated the easy sexual morality of his own system. Quoting Johnstone, Zwemer concludes by claiming that the judgment of some modern scholars against Islam, however harsh, rests on evidence which "comes all from the lips and the pens of his [i.e. Muhammed's] own devoted adherents".

Various critics 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 visions and insights whenever the question of the Qur'an's divinity or lack thereof must be addressed. Such formulations, however tactful, are nevertheless regarded as anathema by most pious 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. Criticism of the Qur'an generally consists of questioning traditional claims about the Qur'an's composition and content. Muslim scholars see other surviving religious texts as corrupted through human interference.

Criticism related to 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.

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. 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 he 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 eigth 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.

To Shi’a muslims, both Abu Bakr and Uthman were usurpers, whose leadership of Islam was illegitimate, and who conspired against the true leader of Islam, Ali, cousin of Mohammad. The absolute political and religious authority of the caliphs would have allowed them to easily addd or remove text during the compilation process, (as later caliphs may have tried to do so after). Nonetheless Shi’a surprisingly trust the integrity of the supposed Uthmanic compilation of the Qur’an.

According to Muslim tradition Mohammad was illiterate and therefore could not forge the Quran from the Bible or Talmud. The Quran 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.

Muslims claim that Mohammad's illiteracy and the Qur'an's perfection make it unreasonable to claim that it was written by Mohammad or indeed by any human being.

Supporters of the Qur'an emphasize its initial circulation as a spoken text, and point out that the several hundred companions memorized the Qur'an by heart. The Islamic sources suggest that Muhammad would recite the Quran in its entirety (that is, including both the earliest and the most recent elements) once every Ramadan; 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.

Criticism related to the morality of the Qur'an

Muslims claim that God sent (Muslim) prophets to these religions, but that the Jews and Christians corrupted the teachings of the prophets. Islam claims to be a final revelation and a correction of the Jewish and Christian religions. Islam, as a clear uncorrupteed representation of God’s will, is therefore morally superior to Judaism and Christianity. However, 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.

In 4:34 the Koran reads “As to those women on whose part you fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, and beat them.” Domestic violence is thus instructed by the Qur’an. It is justified not by the women’s actions but by the man’s fears. Islamic scholars have very often suggested less violent treatment of womenfolk (eg. Abdullah Yusuf Ali), perhaps because their conscience pushes them away from the alledged instructions of God as revealed in the Qur’an.

The Qur’an explicitly allows and regulates slavery. Muhammad is documented as having kept many slaves. Quranic regulation made prisoners of war the source of slaves. Prisoners of war includes not only captured enemy soldiers but also captured civilians [needs Quranic reference]. For instance it allows Muslims to take enemy civilian women 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 the Qur’an itself does not.

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 beleivers 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”. [Spencer, Robert. Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West., pgs 299–300]. Quranic 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 represent a regression from the fundamental moral precepts of Judaism (as practiced by the time of Muhammad) and Christianity.

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, moderate Muslims' denial that the violence practiced by extremist Muslims can be read in the Qur'an cannot be upheld. 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 in the West calls for moderate Muslims' rejection of traditional aspects of Islam such as jihad, dhimmitude and shari'ah [6]. Muslims stress that armed jihad is only one of several kinds of jihad, despite the fact that until the twentieth century Jihad exclusively meant war, and ‘fighting’ unbeleivers was always interpreted as war-fighting; see Jihad.

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.

Political criticism

Critics of political islam (Islamism) claim that, as a religion and system of law for governing society, Islam falls short of providing an acceptable political life according to modern standards. ^[21] Proponents of Islamism, for their part, cite the broad popular support for variations on Sharia law that have emerged in many contemporary Muslim societies, such as those in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and northern Nigeria.

Liberal movements within Islam attempt criticism of Islamic society from within, typically differentiating religious issues from issues of traditional society. Points often mentioned in critical discussion of Islamic society include attitudes to women.

Scientific criticism

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).

Quran and Hadith

Critics argue that several Qur'anic verses, when read literally, contradict scientific findings. Examples can be found at Skeptics Annotated Quran[22] and Deabate.org [23][24]. For their part, Muslims suggest that the apparent contradictions are the consequences of either mistranslations or misunderstandings of the text, with the former very common, given the Qur'an's notorious resistance to effective translation, and the latter attributed to the complexity of the Qur'an itself and the later influence of Hadith compilers. Defenders of Islam may also argue that a critic's' interpretation of what is and is not a "literal" understanding of any given verse may well be a matter of controversy extending back for fourteen centuries. They are likely to point out, too, that mastery of Classical Arabic is essential to an understanding of Islam's holy book.

Both Qur'anic Muslims and non-Muslim critics of Islam point to internal contradictions and scientific inaccuracies within the Hadith and contradictions between the Qur'an and Hadith[25] [26], while Muslim scholars, such as Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, counter these arguments claiming that the Qur'an contains numerous scientific facts which were not understood until recent times.

Muslim Responses

Divisions of Islam

Main article: Divisions of Islam

There are many divisions of Islam. Consequently, Muslims often disagree regarding theological, ethical, political, and scientific issues. For example, many Muslims consider Islamism unislamic, and indeed, many victims of Islamist movements are other Muslims. 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.

Islamophobia

Main article: Islamophobia

Islamophobia is a neologism used to refer to an irrational fear or prejudice towards Muslims and the religion of Islam. Actions and beliefs typically described as Islamophobic are of a broad range, ranging from systematic discrimination, to physical assault. Hate crimes as well as inflammatory hate speech against Muslims are commonly categorized as Islamophobic. In addition, a wide range criticisms that are based on mischaracterizations, stereotypes, and negative prejudices of Muslims and Islam are also commonly categorized as Islamophobic. See also Persecution of Muslims.

Contemporary critics

See List of Critics of Islam.

See also

Topics of Islam and controversy

• Category:Critics of Islam
• Apostasy in Islam
• Islamophobia
• Religious persecution
• Persecution of Muslims
• Historical persecution by Muslims
• Religious conflict and Islam
• Liberal movements within Islam
• Women as imams

Criticism of other religions

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

Books Critical of Islam

• . ISBN 0801064309. {{cite book}}: Missing or empty |title= (help); Unknown parameter |First= ignored (|first= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |Last= ignored (|last= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |Publisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |Title= ignored (|title= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |Year= ignored (|year= suggested) (help)
• Zwemer Islam, a Challenge to Faith (New York, 1907)
• Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not a Muslim (1995)
• —, Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out
• 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. ^ Ali Sina, Reciprocity in islam
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. ^ http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=21058&dgn=4
14. ^ http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=10050&dgn=4
15. ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3265127.stm
16. ^ http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/28126/
17. ^ http://islamic-world.net/islamic-state/right_survey.htm#CAIRO%20DECLARATION%20VIS%20A%20VIS%20THE%20UNIVERSAL
18. ^ http://www.religlaw.org/interdocs/docs/cairohrislam1990.htm
19. ^ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7035470/
20. ^ http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/23/index.htm#6
21. ^ http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2005/07/traditionalist.php
22. ^ http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/70/index.htm#29
23. ^ http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud/038.sat.html
24. ^ http://answering-islam.org.uk/Silas/theo_van_gogh.htm

External links

Christian academic sources

• Catholic Encyclopedia
  • Islam (Concept)
  • Mohammed and Mohammedanism
• www.carm.org/islam

Directories of sites critical of Islam

• dmoz.org
• faithfreedom.org
• Islam and Terrorism
• Signs that Allah (God) is not on Your Side

Muslim responses to critcism

• Misconceptions about Islam
• Tolerance in Islam
• Five Common Myths About Islam
• Shariah: The Way of Justice
• islamicity.com
• jannah.org
• IslamLife.com
• Free and Equal under the Qur'an - an analysis by Havva G Guney-Ruebenacker