Why Islam needs a Reformation

With the recent events of terrorist attacks in various countries, Islam has once again become a controversial subject. The terrorist group ISIS has gained much notoriety and fear around the world for their actions. This has resulted in members from different spectrum to take differing viewpoints. Members on the far-right are quick to point the finger at Islam, and demonize it as an evil ideology bent on world domination. While those on the left are quick to point out that "not all Muslims are terrorists" while ignoring the inhuman actions of Muslims across the world. To be fair, all religious systems and non-believers have committed evil acts in the course of human history. Whether we like it or not, Islam is not likely to go away any time soon. Nor am I calling for an end to this religion, but simply a reformation. Simply put: Islam needs a reformation. 

The image above is professor Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd who was a Muslim professor at Cairo University in the 1990s. I really don't think he did anything wrong. In fact, what he did is nothing different from what other historians, scholars and anthropologists have done with Jewish, Christian and other religious texts for centuries now. He simply proposed that the Quran was a cultural product of seventh-century Arabia, and that this text should be read in its historical context of 7th century Arabia. Also he didn't deny divine authority to the Quran, but he was forced to divorce his wife and he received many death threats from the Muslim scholars in Egypt. I want to readers to focus on an important piece of information: he didn't deny divine authorship of the Quran. He simply looked at it from a historical and cultural perspective, something that anthropologists do with many other texts. In reality this way of looking at the Quran, could be a very beneficial tool for bringing a reformation. If modern readers understood the tribal context and the time of warfare, that the Quran was revealed they may not be so quick to describe the Quran as a book of violence. Also Muhammad's so-called "sword verses" was in the historical context of the battles of the early Muslim community. The sad thing is fundamentalist Islamic groups use these verses to justify acts of terrorism.

This image is one of Sudanese Mahmoud Mohamed Taha who was executed in 1985. He was a legal reformer and he proposed that the Meccan and Medinan texts of the Quran differed greatly because they were addressed to specific historical audiences. oWhat exactly was his crime? Christian scholars have long recognized that there are discrepancies and differences among the Gospels? Was he correct in his claim? The early Muslim community faced different challenges when they were in Mecca and Medina, and he was simply using a historical methodology to make a valid claim.

Other than what has happened in the past, it is clear that Islam needs a reformation in another way. I'm referring to the death penalty for apostates. Now this raises a very interesting question for Muslims and non-Muslims alike who study the Quran. In Surah 2:256 the Quran reads, "There shall be no compulsion in acceptance of the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong". It is certainly true that Christians and Jews (called the dhimmis) were a proteced minority under Islamic rule. Jews, Christians and Muslims all lived together peacefully in Spain for a period of time. However, the problem comes with the Hadith or the sayings of the Prophet. According to Sahih al-Bukhari 9.57, Muhummad is purported to have said that anyone who changes the Islamic religion is to be killed. So what is it that Muslims should follow? 

In the above video you will see an interesting discussion. At the end, Richard Dawkins gets the Muslim scholar to admit that in Muslim countries Sharia law demands that apostates are to be killed. Is this compatible with 21st century ethics and morality? I would propose not. However, there are some places where Muslims would not be killed, like the United States or other countries where Sharia law is not imposed. Is Sharia law a barrier to Islam achieving a reformation? Since much of Shariah law is based on the Hadith is it time for Muslims to abandon the Hadith to live a life based on better morals and reason?

This is a famous youtube user who goes by the name "Converted2Islam". He was a prominent Muslim speaker and openly spoke about his decision to leave Christianity, and embrace Islam. In response to his recent choice, to leave Islam he has received multiple death threats. He understands that if he were living in a Muslim country he would in fact be killed according to Islamic law.

I would like to ask my readers what have any of these men mentioned in this article done wrong? What is wrong about questioning or even leaving Islam? Many times when someone criticizes Islam, Muslims begin to use the "race card". They claim any overt criticism of Islam is racism and declare that others are being intolerant. The scholars in this article were looking at the Quran from a historical and cultural perspective. They simply looked at the book in its historical context. When others do the same, they're not being intolerant or hateful; they just simply want to question the veracity of Islam's claims. Scholars have the freedom to do this in Western countries, but not other places. This then raises some more questions...

When will Muslims begin to allow honest discussions and even criticism of their religious text? When will they understand that these historical investigations are not an act of hatred or bigotry? When will Muslims stop killing those who decided to leave the faith? 

It is these reasons why Islam needs a reformation.