Critique of The Law of Apostasy in Islam Essay Example for Free

Critique of The virtue of Apostasy in Islam set aboutIn 1924 Samuel Zwemer wrote The Law of Apostasy in Islam as a response to several books and articles that claimed there is no penalization in Islam for poltroon Islamics. Zwemer quotes Khwajah Kemal-ud-Din who wrote in his book India in the Balance, in Islam there is no penalty for apostasy and Mohammed Alis English translation of The script n each here nor anywhere else in the Holy Koran is there even a hint of the infliction of capital or any other punishment on the apostate. Zwemer disputes these claims and tries to prove his contention that there is a long history of punishing apostates throughout the Muslim world (Zwemer 8-9). Zwemer was a missionary for the Christian Dutch Reformed church in the Middle eastside during the latter part of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. The people he worked with and tried to convert to Christianity were Muslims. Zwemer begins his furrow in the chapter Why so Few Moslem Converts by citing numerous cases where Muslims practiced punishment and ostracism against apostate Muslims, that is, Muslims who had converted to Christianity.The incidents described are anecdotal and deal with specific examples where apostate Muslims underwent punishment or discrimination at the hands of practicing Muslims. Assuming, for the sake of argument, Zwemer is correct and such practices occurred, Zwemer still does non disprove either of the statements quoted above. What Zwemer proves is that some Muslims were punished, nothing more. He has not proven the Koran supports such practices.The title of this chapter must obtain the reader pause it does not seem to be the title of an intellectual argument, but more homogeneous a defense of his and other missionaries efforts while working among Muslims. Apparently he had concluded the reason for his wish of success was due to fear of punishment by other Muslims, not because he was a ill missionary, or because the tenets of Islam were more convincing to people in the region than the principles in Christianity (Zwemer 15-29).In the chapter dickens The Law of Apostasy Zwemer quotes three passages of the Koran that he claims indicate an semiofficial sanctioning of punishment of apostates. Zwemer is unconvincing. The phrase crawfish from them apostate Muslims neither patron or help (IV. 90, 91) and alleges that the standard commentary of Baidhawi, whoever that is, means take and kill him wheresoever you find ye find him, like any other infidel (Zwemer 33).It appears Baidhawi has chosen an interpretation that is not warrant from the original text. He treats the other passages in a similar fashion, interpreting them to mean apostates should be killed or punished, when a more straightforward interpretation does not imply his conclusion. Zwemer errs in at least two fashions. First he appears to equate evidence that indicates punishment has been administered against apostates indicates the sanction of such actions by the teaching of Islam. This is not the case.Throughout history there are far too many examples where common practices were either forthwith prohibited by official policies or were not addressed by these policies. This does not indicate official policies authorized such actions. Secondly, Zwemers evidence is largely either anecdotal or demand such bathetic interpretations of the Koran as to unconvincing. Consequently The Law of Apostasy in Islam does not prove that punishment for apostate Muslims is a tenant of Islam.Works CitedZwemer, Samuel M. The Law of Apostasy. London Marshall Brothers Ltd, n. d.