Category Archives: God

Kuwaiti parliament approves death penalty for cursing prophet Muhammad

The parliament of Kuwait passed a bill Thursday imposing the death sentence for cursing God or the Prophet Muhammad, Dubai-based news channel Al-Arabiya reported.

The bill, which passed with a 41-6 majority, is the first of its kind in the Arab world, according to the report. The bill still needs to be ratified by Kuwait’s leader, Amir Sabah Al-Ahmad Sabah, before becoming law.

Member of Parliament Ahmad Lari, one of the six who voted against the law, told Al-Arabiya that he did not oppose the idea of severely punishing blasphemers, but that he merely disagreed with the ambiguous wording of the bill. MP Salah Ashour, however, said the law contradicted Islamic Sharia law, and that it was bad for Islam’s image.

The law also prescribes the death penalty for those who curse the Prophet’s wives or claim prophetic abilities.

“Today, we lead the world through this law,” MP Faysal Al-Muslim told Kuwaiti establishment daily Al-Watan. “It is a triumph for the Prophet to execute those who harm him and his wives, and especially Aisha the pure. Cursing them shames us all.”

Endowments Minister Jamal Shihab told Al-Watan that the government does not intend to block the law, and will act to implement it.

A Kuwaiti citizen was arrested in the past for mocking the prophet and his wife on Twitter, Al-Arabiya reports, but could not be tried under existing Kuwaiti law.

Jihad: The Law of War

The following essay was originally planned to discuss war under the law of Islam. With four schools of Sunni Islamic law, and then another four Shiite schools of law, it is a very complex topic. An entire book could be written about it. I don’t pretend to be a scholar on this subject, but it is still important to discuss, in summary, the motivation for Islamic war against the infidel. by Anestos Canelides .


In the mindset of the fundamentalist jihadi, holy war against the non-believer is a religious duty because of the universalism of his mission, which is to convert non-believers to Islam by force or persuasion. For the Islamist, persuasion is always the first choice, but if not then force becomes necessary.

Jihad is in fact regarded as a form of religious propaganda that is carried on by either persuasion or the sword, but jihad does not always mean war, since exertion in the path of Allah might come through peaceful means, as in the case of Indonesia. Muhammad warned his people against the sins of idolatry and invited them to worship Allah. “He who exerts himself (jihada) exerts only for his own soul, which expresses the Jihad in the terms of salvation of the soul rather than for Proselytization.”

The Koran says:

“9.25 — But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, And seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent (accept Islam) and establish regular charity then open the way for them; for God is forgiving, most merciful.”

Within the Muslim community or Ummah, legal war or jihad is an obligation or social duty (Fard Kifaya) There can be exemptions; when one group of Muslims carry out their duty out then it offers others exemption.Exemptions also include: sickness, extreme youth, insanity, blindness, lameness, sex (females), the inability to obtain what is needed to participate and being in a state of servitude.

But the Jihad becomes an obligatory or personal duty, for all Muslims, when they are enlisted or their country is invaded by an enemy. In this case it is obligatory for free men who have reached puberty and are endowed with reason and are able to fight. Holy war is not only considered an obligation but also a good and pious work.

Islamic Jurists have distinguished four ways in which a Muslim may fulfill his obligation: by his heart, his tongue, his hand, and by his sword that he may fulfill this duty. “The first is concerned with combating the devil in attempt to escape his persuasion to evil.” The first option was considered the greater jihad by their prophet. The second and third ways are fulfilled by supporting the right and correcting the wrong. The fourth is concerned with fighting the enemies of Allah, and believers are obligated to sacrifice their lives and wealth when fighting in the cause of their faith, in the prosecution of war. The fourth is called the lesser Jihad.

Abu Huraira relates, “the Prophet when asked what was the best of all works, replied; belief in God (and his Prophet) And then? Someone asked him — War for God’s cause, then a pious pilgrimage. Abu Sa’id reports also that the Prophet, when asked who was the best of all men, replied, “he who fights for God’s cause, personally and with his goods.”

The duty of the Ummah truly is Jihad, holy war, and not just any war, but a war to force the unbeliever to embrace universal Islamic doctrines, unless he is a Christian or a Jew. In this case, if the non-believers pay the so-called protection tax, they become a protected minority. This status applies even when they are not really a minority in numbers. This so-called protection tax did not always guarantee Christians or Jews that they would not face oppression, or in some cases forced conversion.

There is a deeply held conviction that the soul of every Muslim, without exemption, was created to fight on the path of God. Through this call of supreme authority they must, with joy, spread Islam and allow the word of God to have the final say. According to the Muslim jurist, holy war is a requirement. It is the law of God and is the part of worship offered to Allah, since the doctors of the law classify it in the category of ibadat or acts of adoration. Muhammad received the order to proclaim the faith of Allah or what has been commanded, and to debate with the Infidel. If the unfaithful were to reject the message and refuse to follow the path of Allah then the believers were ordered to attack them.

Later the Muslim casuist (one who resolves moral issues) adopted an explanation that is found in a specialized treaty. War in itself is evil because it involves the destruction of the human body which was created by Allah. It also devastates entire regions, and to deny man any means of sustaining life is wrong and evil.

“The human body is the work of God, who fashioned it himself with clay taken from the earth: the country inhabited by man, and which he needs for food was granted to him by divine Providence. To deprive man of life and the means of sustaining it is to go against the will of God, to incur his reprobation and the malediction of his Prophet.”

If war is evil in Islam, then how did it become a good thing? Why did d it become incumbent on men? Since its purpose is the exaltation of the true faith though Muhammad, the Prophet of God, it is understood that holy war is a necessary evil as long as there are people on Earth who will not willingly embrace the faith of Muhammad.

“And so the casuist ended up with classifying holy war among the accidental acts of piety, and they rank it after faith, prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage, which are essentially acts of piety.” Because of such fanaticism it is little wonder that a few burnt Qur’ans were of more value than the deaths of 17 Afghan Muslims by an American soldier. Just imagine how little they value the life of any infidel who rejects the message of Muhammad! Even though man is a divine creation of God, by their own creed, unbelief by the infidel turns one into an enemy of Allah. It is their pious duty to convert or kill you.

It is a good thing that not all Muslims adhere to this belief, but there are some today who do. These are the ones we must be concerned with. These are the ones who believe holy war is a calling by Allah against all unbelief, in which they include truly moderate Muslims.

Clement Huart (1854-1926), a scholar on Arabic, Persian and Turkish languages, says, “In reality Muslims place [holy war] on the same footing as the other primordial duties of his religion. He is trained to do so by the custom of bloody sacrifices, consummated by his own hands at certain times of the year.” Islam is a faith with strict ritual and moral codes. With the promise of martyrdom and eternal life with 72 virgins, without facing God’s wrath, the extreme fundamentalist follows Allah’s path and declares holy war against all infidels.

Majid Khadduri, a professor of Middle Eastern Studies, states, “Thus the jihad (holy War) may be regarded as Islam’s instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the Prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis) at least in the belief in God.” It will not be until all are either subjected as dhimmi or become believers, in the path of God, and embrace Muhammad as Allah’s Prophet, that there will be universal peace. Until then there will be a permanent obligation upon the whole Muslim Ummah to fight the unbeliever.

If you like this article, please subscribe to Right Side News Daily (AND ME:))

ISLAM:Inventing Muhammad and the Koran

By Robert Spencer// Why would it matter if Muhammad never existed?  Certainly the accepted story of Islam’s origins is taken for granted as historically accurate; while many don’t accept Muhammad’s claim to have been a prophet, few doubt that there was a man named Muhammad who in the early seventh century began to claim that he was receiving messages from Allah through the angel Gabriel.  Many who hear about my new book Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry Into Islam’s Obscure Origins ask why it would matter whether or not Muhammad existed — after all, a billion Muslims believe he did, and they are not going to stop doing so because of some historical investigations.  Yet the numerous indications that the standard account of Muhammad’s life is more legend than fact actually have considerable implications for the contemporary political scene.

These are just a few of the weaknesses in the traditional account of Muhammad’s life and the early days of Islam:

  • No record of Muhammad’s reported death in 632 appears until more than a century after that date.
  • The early accounts written by the people the Arabs conquered never mention Islam, Muhammad, or the Qur’an.  They call the conquerors “Ishmaelites,” “Saracens,” “Muhajirun,” and “Hagarians,” but never “Muslims.”
  • The Arab conquerors, in their coins and inscriptions, don’t mention Islam or the Qur’an for the first six decades of their conquests.  Mentions of “Muhammad” are non-specific and on at least two occasions are accompanied by a cross.  The word can be used not only as a proper name, but also as an honorific.
  • The Qur’an, even by the canonical Muslim account, was not distributed in its present form until the 650s.  Casting into serious doubt that standard account is the fact that neither the Arabians nor the Christians and Jews in the region mention its existence until the early eighth century.
  • We don’t begin to hear about Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, and about Islam itself until the 690s, during the reign of the caliph Abd al-Malik.  Coins and inscriptions reflecting Islamic beliefs begin to appear at this time also.
  • In the middle of the eighth century, the Abbasid dynasty supplanted the Umayyad line of Abd al-Malik.  In the Abbasid period, biographical material about Muhammad began to proliferate.  The first complete biography of the prophet of Islam finally appeared during this era-at least 125 years after the traditional date of his death.

The lack of confirming detail in the historical record, the late development of biographical material about the Islamic prophet, the atmosphere of political and religious factionalism in which that material developed, and much more, suggest that the Muhammad of Islamic tradition did not exist, or if he did, he was substantially different from how that tradition portrays him.

How to make sense of all this?  If the Arab forces that conquered so much territory beginning in the 630s were not energized by the teachings of a new prophet and the divine word he delivered, how did the Islamic character of their empire arise at all?  If Muhammad did not exist, why was it ever considered necessary to invent him?

Every empire of the day had a civic religion.  The Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire was Christian.  Its rival Persia, meanwhile, was Zoroastrian.  The Arab Empire quickly controlled and needed to unify huge expanses of territory where different religions predominated.  The empire was growing quickly, soon rivaling the Byzantine and Persian Empires in size and power.  But at first, it did not have a compelling political theology to compete with those it supplanted and to solidify its conquests.  It needed a common religion — a political theology that would provide the foundation for the empire’s unity and secure allegiance to the state.

Toward the end of the seventh century and the beginning of the eighth, the leaders of the Muslim world began to speak specifically about Islam, its prophet, and eventually its book.  Stories about Muhammad began to circulate.  A warrior-prophet would justify the new empire’s aggressive expansionism.  To give those conquests a theological justification — as Muhammad’s teachings and example do — would place them beyond criticism.

This is why Islam developed as such a profoundly political religion.  Islam is a political faith: the divine kingdom is very much of this world, with God’s wrath and judgment to be expected not only in the next life, but also in this one, to be delivered by believers.  Allah says in the Qur’an: “As for those disbelieving infidels, I will punish them with a terrible agony in this world and the next. They have no one to help or save them” (3:56).  Allah also exhorts Muslims to wage war against those infidels, apostates, and polytheists (2:191, 4:89, 9:5, 9:29).

There is compelling reason to conclude that Muhammad, the messenger of Allah came into existence only after the Arab Empire was firmly entrenched and casting about for a political theology to anchor and unify it.  Muhammad and the Qur’an cemented the power of the Umayyad caliphate and then that of the Abbasid caliphate.

This is not just academic speculation.  The non-Muslim world can be aided significantly in its understanding of the global jihad threat — an understanding that has been notably lacking even at the highest levels since September 11, 2001 — by a careful, unbiased examination of the origins of Islam.  There is a great deal of debate today in the United States and Western Europe about the nature of Islamic law; anti-sharia measures have been proposed in at least twenty states, and one state — Oklahoma — voted to ban sharia in November 2010, although that law was quickly overturned as an infringement upon Muslims’ religious freedom.  Others have been successfully resisted on the same grounds.

If it is understood that the political aspect of Islam preceded the religious aspect, that might change.  But that will happen

Read more:


Robert Spencer Asks: Did Muhammad Exist?