After cartoons mocking Muhammad made headline news another controversy captured the
world's attention. In Afghanistan, Abdul Rahman was charged with the Islamic capital
offence of apostasy for converting to Christianity. Irrespective of the trial’s
outcome, the controversy surrounding it looked as though it would trigger a popular
uprising in Afghanistan to lynch Rahman.
A reporter for the Associated Press, March 23rd 2006, interviewed prominent clerics in four of Kabul's most popular mosques. According to this report almost all Afghan clerics were adamant that Rahman should be executed. The article quoted Abdul Raoulf, a member of the country's main Islamic organization, the Afghanistan Ulama Council, as saying, "The government is playing games. The people will not be fooled ... Cut off his head ... We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left."
The report continues, "Raoulf said the only way for Rahman to survive would be for him to go into exile. But S.M. Nasri, the top cleric at Hossainia Mosque ... said Rahman must not be allowed to leave the country. "If he is allowed to live in the West, then others will claim to be Christian, so they can too," he said. "We must set an example ... He must be hanged."
Another Afghan Muslim leader, Ahmad Shah Ahmad-Zai, said to Asia Times Online, "Regardless of the court decision [whether or not he is hanged], there is unanimous agreement by all religious scholars from the north to the south, the east to the west of Afghanistan, that Abdul Rahman should be executed".
In another article the AP reported how an international outcry put President "Karzai in a difficult position because he risked offending religious sensibilities in Afghanistan, where senior Muslim clerics have been united in calling for Rahman to be executed."
To say that the cleric's "sensibilities" were offended is quite an understatement. In order to understand the deep indignation behind these calls for execution, we must realise that, "Apostasy has been a capital crime ever since Muhammad’s times and there is no disagreement between all Islamic schools of jurisprudence on this point." (Asia News, 24 March, 2006)
Mercifully, the charges against Rahman were dropped (incidentally, his name means 'mercy'). President Hamid Karzai was eventually able to negotiate a compromise. The Supreme Court, which, only days earlier, had emphatically told Karzai not to let politics interfere in this case, finally called off the trial, saying there was insufficient evidence to prove Rahman mentally fit to stand trial. This face-saving tactic seems to have averted pressure from human rights groups. However, this is only a bandage solution. It is not a real cure. The underlying issue has been left to fester. Make no mistake, it will resurface later.
The root of the problem is that the constitution of Afghanistan is based on Sharia law which states that apostasy is punishable by death. If this foundation is not addressed, the question will arise sooner or later, "What should be the fate of a 'normal' (mentally fit) Afghani who might leave Islam and choose to follow Jesus Christ?" As the law stands now, any Muslim converting to another religion would be legally charged as an apostate and sentenced to death. If this should happen another ugly trial would be exposed in the media, revealing yet another embarrassing example of human rights violations by Muslim leaders. Why wait for this to happen, when proactive measures might be taken to prevent this?
Would it not be advantageous for Muslim authorities to revise their interpretation of Sharia law to make it compatible with the UN charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Optimists suggest we hold out hope that moderate Muslims will raise a counterargument to the centuries old unanimous judicial precedent. But how realistic is this? If you want to find a 'moderate' Muslim judge why look any further than Abdul Raoulf, the above-quoted cleric, who said Rahman should be hanged? Raoulf qualifies as a 'moderate', because he was jailed for his opposition to the Taliban. The prospect of finding qualified jurists in Afghanistan who are more moderate than Raoulf is extremely bleak, perhaps impossible, in the foreseeable future. Where can we find a moderate Muslim scholar who has cogently defended freedom of conscience in a way that tolerates Muslims leaving Islam? There is nothing in print like this that I am aware of!
Incidentally, it is not enough to quote the well known American umbrella Muslim association, CAIR which said a "man's conversion is a personal matter not subject to the intervention of the state." (source) A brief statement such as this makes no impact on the thinking of Muslim jurists who have earned eminent degrees in Islamic law and are firmly entrenched in powerful positions. A small step in the right direction would be to publish a cogently reasoned argument, based firmly on Islamic judicial sources.
Is there any reason for us to hope that the law of apostasy could be changed? For a long time the threat of the death penalty has been hanging over the heads of converts from Islam to Christianity. For example, over 80 years ago, Samuel Zwemer, commented on the trends of his time, saying, "Today we read of new mandatories, of liberty, and of promised equality to minorities under Moslem rule; and newspapers assert that a new era has come to the Near East. Economic development, intellectual awakening, reforms, constitutions, parliaments and promises." [Zwemer, then asked], "Does the sword of Damocles, however, still hang over the head of each convert from Islam to Christianity?" ... "Again and again has European pressure, aided by a few educated Orientals, endeavoured to secure equality before the law for all religions and races in the Near East. But as often as the attempt was made it proved a failure, each new failure more ghastly than the last. The reason is that the conscience and faith of the most sincere and upright Moslems are bound up with the Qur'an and the Traditions." (quoted in 'Death by Apostasy', by Andrew G Bostom, Front Page Magazine, March 27, 2006, bold font added for emphasis) Since Zwemer wrote this article there has been ample opportunity for moderate Muslims to present a credible counterargument against the consensus of traditional-bound Muslim jurists.
Earlier I asked, "What would happen if a 'normal' Afghan Muslim should convert to Christianity?" However, this is not just a hypothetical question. Well placed sources in Afghanistan report that "up to 10,000 Afghans have secretly converted to Christianity in recent years" (The Sunday Telegraph, March 26, 2006) An Afghan who converted to Christianity 20 years ago, was interviewed by the Telegraph. He admitted that he and other converts are threatened but added, "we don't get trouble from ordinary people, but extremist religious groups will try to kill or kidnap us."
Some readers might infer from this that the threat of persecution is a minor problem. This is not true as can be seen by what has happened since Rahman's trial started. Reports tell of Afghan converts experiencing more threats including two converts being imprisoned (source). This same problem prevails in over a dozen other Muslim nations where apostasy is labelled a crime and "in at least 8 of these states [it] is punishable by death, either through explicit anti-apostasy laws or the broader offence of blasphemy." (Daveed Gartenstein-Ross in ‘The New Roman Lions’, The Weekly Standard, March 29, 2006). While the death-for-apostasy controversy was happening in Afghanistan, the Algerian parliament passed a law basically intended to "ban religious activity and secret religious campaigns" - these are the words of an official of the Algerian ministry of religious affairs (source). This new law shows a definite trend towards adopting radical Islamic policies. This development, along with the rise of a radical Muslim agenda in Palestine and Iran, does not bode well for human rights in the Arab world. Paul Marshall, who has written the most definitive recent study on worldwide persecution, estimates that about 160,000 Christians are being martyred every year ('Their Blood Cries Out'). Tragically many of the perpetrators are Muslims.
One wonders, "Are these martyrs sentenced to death by judges?" Usually not. Daveed Gartenstein-Ross points out, "The greatest threat to apostates in the Muslim world derives not from the state, however, but from private individuals who take punishment into their own hands. In Bangladesh, for example, a native-born Muslim-turned-Christian evangelist was stabbed to death in the spring of 2003 while returning home from a film version of the Gospel of Luke. As another Bangladeshi apostate told the U.S. Newswire, 'If a Muslim converts to Christianity, now he cannot live in this country. It is not safe. The fundamentalism is increasing more and more.'" (Commentary, February 2005) The judicial basis for this is "the important legal text The Hidaya by Al-Marghiniani (d.1197), 'if any person kills an apostate....Nothing [i.e. No punishment] ... is incurred by the slayer'." (Andrew G Bostom, Death By Apostasy, FrontPageMagazine, March 27, 2006)
Abdul Rahman was spared from execution by the courts but if he had remained in Afghanistan, street-justice would probably have killed him. Will other Afghan converts to Christianity be allowed freedom of conscience? -- freedom to chose their faith and worship God as they see fit.
When freedoms are restricted Christians need to remember Jesus' words, "you will be arrested, persecuted and killed. You will be hated all over the world because of your allegiance to me." (Matthew 24:9) Not only did Jesus forewarn his followers about such suffering, he clarified that God turns these tragedies into opportunities for witness. Jesus foretold; "you must stand trial before governors and kings because you are my followers. This will be your opportunity to tell them about me – yes to witness to the world." Jesus continues, saying, "Don't be afraid of those who want to kill you. They can only kill your body; they cannot touch your soul." (Matthew 10:17, 28, 29)
Holy boldness will be a hall mark of certain Christians living in the end times. Like Abdul Rahman these believers will "not be afraid to die ... they defeated him (Satan) because of the blood of the Lamb and because of their testimony." (Revelation 12:10,11)
Campaign for freedom and human rights?
Should Christians lobby governments to implement policies that uphold freedom of conscience? Of course we should, but I question whether this should become a major emphasis.
Freedom and the west?
Western nations pride themselves for having freedom of press, freedom of worship, etc. But are we willing to admit that freedom has become tainted by lust and greed? Many things could be cited indicating this degenerating trend including, rampant sensuality, pornography, abortion, high divorce rates and love of money. The Bible clearly warns against abusing freedom in this way, "For you have been called to live in freedom - not freedom to satisfy your sinful nature, but freedom to serve one another in love." (Galatians 5:13)
Freedom and the east?
'Eastern thinkers' have sometimes advocated freedom of conscience by quoting the Qur'an, "Let there be no compulsion in religion" Another classic statement on freedom originating in the Near East is, "the truth will set you free". The full statement is found in John 8:31-59.
Jesus said to the people who believed in him, "You are truly my disciples if you keep obeying my teachings. And you will know the truth and the truth will set you free."
"But we are descendants of Abraham," they said. "We have never been slaves to anyone on earth. What do you mean 'set free'?"
Jesus replied, "I assure you that everyone who sins is a slave of sin. A slave is not a permanent member of the family, but a son is part of the family for ever. So if the Son sets you free, you will indeed be free. Yes I realise that you are descendants of Abraham. And yet some of you are trying to kill me because my message does not find a place in your hearts. I am telling you what I saw when I was with my Father. But you are following the advice of your father."
"Our father is Abraham," they declared.
"No," Jesus replied, "for if you were children of Abraham, you would follow his good example. I told you the truth I heard from God, but you are trying to kill me. Abraham wouldn't do a thing like that. No, you are obeying your real father when you act that way."
They replied, "We are not born out of wedlock! Our true father is God himself."
Jesus told them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, because I have come to you from God. I am not here on my own but he sent me. Why can't you understand what I am saying? It is because you are unable to do so! For you are the children of your father the Devil and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning and has always hated the truth. There is no truth in him. When he lies it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies. So when I tell the truth, you just naturally don't believe me! Which of you can truthfully accuse me of sin? And since I am telling you the truth, why don't you believe me? Anyone whose Father is God, listens gladly to the words of God. Since you don't, it proves you aren't God's children."
The people retorted, "You Samaritan devil! Didn't we say all along that you are possessed by a demon?"
"No," Jesus said, "I have no demon in me. For I honour my Father -- and you dishonour me. And, though I have no wish to glorify myself, God wants to glorify me. Let him be the judge. I assure you, anyone who obeys my teaching will never die!"
A Muslim reader might find it difficult to conceive of the Jews speaking of God as 'Father' (and Jesus too). (See Surah 5:18 and read about its implications here.) But pause and think for a minute. Although God is described as 'Father', Satan is also described as 'father'. Jesus accused the murderous Jews of being like their 'father', the Devil. This is specially interesting when we consider that the Qur'an describes Satan using the same metaphor, "Iblis broke the command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny [children] as protectors?" I trust that, at least for the moment, we have resolved any hesitation you might have felt about seeing God metaphorically as Father. I presume, therefore, we are ready to continue reading and to see how this debate ends.
As you continue reading the heated exchange between Jesus and the Jews, you will see how the discussion takes an unusual turn (see appendix for full details). The Jews accused Jesus (again) of being demon possessed. They reasoned that if "Abraham and the prophets died", it is ridiculous for Jesus to think that anyone who "obeys his teaching will never die". And yet this riddle is exactly what Jesus intends for us to decipher. Solving this riddle will enable us to glimpse the wonderful destiny – the true freedom that God has prepared for those who love him. May I conclude by quoting two scriptures that express this glorious hope of paradise and immortality; "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no mind has imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him... God has revealed them to us by his Spirit, and his Spirit searches out everything and shows us even God's deep secrets." God will give eternal life to those who persist in doing what is good, seeking after the glory and honor and immortality that God offers ... freedom from death and decay." (1 Corinthians 2:9,10; Romans 2:7; 8:21)
This riddle about immortality is explained in this article.
Another article which is relevant to the topic of human rights and apostasy is available here.
Appendix : The conclusion of the debate -- John 8:52-59
The people said, "Now we know you are possessed by a demon. Even Abraham and the prophets died, but you say that those who obey your teaching will never die! Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? Are greater than the prophets, who died? Who do you think you are?"
Jesus answered, "If I am merely boasting about myself, it doesn't count." But it is my Father who says these glorious things about me. You say, 'He is our God,' but you do not even know him. I know him. If I said otherwise, I would be as great a liar as you! But it is true – I know him and obey him. Your ancestor Abraham rejoiced as he looked forward to my coming. He saw it and was glad."
The people said, "You aren't even 50 years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham."
Jesus answered, "The truth is, I existed before Abraham was even born!" At that point they picked up stones to kill him. But Jesus hid himself from them and left the Temple.
Articles by Roland Clarke
Answering Islam Home Page