Shariah does not treat disagreement with Islam, criticism of Muhammad, or mockery of its symbols as matters for debate or persuasion. It treats them as crimes worthy of death. Where the Gospel calls Christians to answer insult with blessing and to endure mockery as they bear witness to Christ, Shariah calls Muslims to defend the honor of Allah and His Messenger with the sword, the rope, or the noose.

This is not a twist invented by extremists. It flows from Quranic verses about those who insult Allah and His Messenger, from sahih hadith that command killing blasphemers, and from the example of Muhammad himself, who ordered the assassination of poets and critics. Classical jurists codified these texts into blasphemy laws that still shape criminal codes today in countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Even where state punishments are slower, mobs and vigilantes often rush to carry out what they believe Shariah demands.

The result is a global climate of fear. Artists, writers, ex-Muslims, and ordinary citizens learn that a single word, cartoon, or social media post can cost them their freedom or their life—not only in Muslim-majority nations, but in Western cities as well. The threat of violence travels wherever Shariah’s view of blasphemy is carried.

From Jehovah’s perspective, this is a direct rejection of the pattern He gave in Christ. Jesus was mocked, spat on, and crucified, yet He prayed for His persecutors and forbade His followers to take up the sword in His defense. The God of the Bible does not need human violence to protect His honor. The “god” who demands the blood of those who insult him reveals his weakness, not his greatness.

Quranic and Hadith Commands to Kill Blasphemers

The Quran speaks repeatedly of those who mock Allah, ridicule His verses, or insult His Messenger. It describes them as enemies, hypocrites, and workers of corruption. Verses warn that those who harm Allah and His Messenger will face a painful punishment, that they are cursed in this life and the next, and that they deserve disgrace. In some passages, Muslims are told not to sit with people who mock the signs of Allah, lest they be counted among them.

These texts create a moral atmosphere in which insulting Islam or Muhammad is viewed as one of the gravest offenses. Yet it is the hadith and the example of Muhammad that give this offense its legal edge. Sahih collections record statements like, “Whoever reviles a prophet, kill him,” and, “Whoever abuses the prophets, kill him.” Report after report shows companions executing those who insulted Muhammad, with his approval.

Classical jurists drew clear conclusions. They ruled that a Muslim who openly reviles Allah, mocks the Quran, insults Muhammad, or belittles any of the prophets has committed kufr, unbelief. If he persists and does not repent, he must be executed. For non-Muslims living under Muslim rule, the standards are even harsher. A dhimmi—one of the protected People of the Book—who insults the Prophet or speaks disrespectfully of the Quran can lose his protected status. In many legal manuals, the default penalty is death unless the ruler decides to pardon.

These jurists did not see these punishments as optional. They treated them as rights of Allah and rights of the Prophet that must be enforced. They argued that the honor of the Messenger is more valuable than the life of an individual blasphemer, and that allowing insults to go unanswered invites chaos. In their view, killing those who mock Muhammad stops the spread of corruption and safeguards the faith of the community.

From a Christian perspective, this reasoning reveals a gospel of coercion, not of grace. Jehovah commands His people to proclaim the truth boldly, but He never gives them authority to execute those who mock Him. The Apostle Paul endured blasphemies against the name of Christ wherever he preached. He answered with arguments, not with swords. The only judgment he announced was the future judgment Christ Himself would bring, not a human death sentence in the present.

Assassinations of Poets and Critics Ordered by Muhammad

The most chilling demonstrations of Shariah’s blasphemy logic come from the earliest days of Islam itself. Muhammad is portrayed in the sources as ordering or approving the killing of individuals who mocked or opposed him—not for armed rebellion on the battlefield, but for words, satire, and public criticism.

Poets in seventh-century Arabia were influencers. They shaped public opinion with their verses, praising allies and humiliating enemies. Several poets and storytellers used their skills against Muhammad. The early biographies recount how he responded.

One story centers on a Jewish man who composed verses mocking Muhammad and Islam. A Muslim follower asked permission to kill him. Muhammad agreed, and the man was murdered in his sleep. The killer later boasted that he had stabbed the poet in the dark while the victim’s small children lay nearby. When the killer reported back, Muhammad praised him, assuring him that no blood money was due. The man had, in the Prophet’s eyes, defended the honor of Allah and His Messenger.

Another famous case involves a woman who repeatedly insulted Muhammad and composed verses mocking him. A follower killed her with a blade, reportedly while she slept with her children near her. When the man was brought before Muhammad and confessed, explaining that she had attacked the Prophet in her words, Muhammad declared that no retaliation was required. Her death was considered justified.

There are similar accounts of other critics—men and women—being targeted, stabbed, or executed after Muhammad identified them as enemies whose tongues had harmed Islam. In the early Muslim community, this set a clear precedent: to insult the Prophet is to risk death, and those who carry out such killings with the right intention can expect praise, not punishment.

Whether a modern Muslim considers every detail of these stories reliable or not, the overall pattern has been embraced across centuries by major jurists and preachers. They hold up these assassinations as proof that the Prophet did not tolerate blasphemy, and that his followers today must likewise defend his honor, even with lethal force if necessary.

The biblical picture of God’s true servants is very different. The prophets of Israel were mocked, beaten, and killed by their own people, yet they did not send assassins after their critics. They spoke the Word of Jehovah and left judgment to Him. Jesus Himself endured brutal mockery from soldiers, religious leaders, and crowds. They spat on Him, crowned Him with thorns, and jeered at Him while He hung on the torture stake. He did not call down fire. He prayed, “Father, forgive them.” That is the standard for those who follow the true Messiah.

Blasphemy Laws Today: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran

The legacy of these Quranic and prophetic precedents lives on in modern legal codes. Several Muslim-majority countries have explicit blasphemy laws, sometimes framed as “insulting religion” or “insulting the Prophet,” that carry penalties ranging from long prison sentences to death. Among the most notorious are Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.

In Pakistan, a complex set of penal code provisions criminalizes defiling the Quran, insulting Muhammad, or speaking against Islam. Conviction for insulting the Prophet carries a mandatory death sentence or life imprisonment. Although not every case results in execution, the mere accusation can lead to years in prison, drawn-out legal battles, and relentless threats. Judges who show leniency have themselves been targeted and killed by extremists. Police officers, lawyers, and politicians who defend the accused risk assassination.

Saudi Arabia, operating under Shariah as interpreted by its religious establishment, treats blasphemy as a form of apostasy and “corruption on earth.” Those convicted of insulting Islam, criticizing its sacred symbols, or questioning foundational dogmas can be sentenced to death or long imprisonment, sometimes accompanied by flogging. Public expressions deemed disrespectful—whether in books, speeches, or online—can trigger charges. Because the judiciary is heavily influenced by religious scholars, the line between theological disagreement and criminal blasphemy is blurry.

Iran, under its Shiite theocracy, likewise punishes “insulting sanctities,” including insults against the Prophet, his family, or core Islamic beliefs. Defendants may be charged with “enmity against God” or “spreading corruption,” both of which can carry the death penalty. Writers, bloggers, converts from Islam, and minority believers have all faced prosecution. The regime uses blasphemy accusations not only to protect religious symbols but also to silence political dissent, since criticizing the system is often framed as insult against Islam itself.

These laws do not operate in a vacuum. They are shaped by centuries of Shariah jurisprudence that equates blasphemy with rebellion against Allah. Once charges are filed, public pressure mounts quickly. Lawyers face threats. Judges know that acquitting a defendant could mark them for death. Even when courts hesitate, the street may take over, as we will see next.

From Jehovah’s standpoint, such laws turn governments into enforcers of idolatry. The state takes upon itself the role of avenger for a false religious system, punishing not genuine crimes against neighbors but words about a human prophet. The true God demands that rulers punish murder, theft, and violence, not honest speech about false religion.

Mob Lynchings Without Trial

As severe as formal blasphemy laws are, mob violence often surpasses them. In many Muslim-majority societies, rumors of blasphemy can ignite lynch mobs before any court hearing is held. All it takes is a shouted accusation that someone insulted Muhammad, burned a Quran, or spoke against Islam. Crowds gather, emotions surge, and rage explodes into beatings, stonings, or burnings.

These mobs see themselves not as criminals but as defenders of the Prophet’s honor. They believe they are doing what Muhammad’s early followers did when they killed his critics. Preachers and teachers who emphasize the duty to love Muhammad more than one’s own life, parents, or children help create the mindset: if someone insults him, you must act.

Victims come from many backgrounds. Some are non-Muslim minorities—Christians, Hindus, or others—accused of saying a careless word or mishandling a copy of the Quran. Others are Muslims themselves, targeted for questioning traditions, refusing to join rituals, or simply falling into personal disputes where blasphemy is used as a weapon. Once the accusation is made, the accused often has little chance to explain.

Police, instead of stopping the violence, sometimes stand aside, fearing the mob or sympathizing with it. In other cases, they arrive too late. Bodies are dragged through streets or burned in public squares while onlookers chant slogans honoring Muhammad and declaring their willingness to die for him. Afterwards, even when some perpetrators are arrested, courts hesitate to convict, fearing backlash. Many killers walk free.

This pattern reveals how deeply Shariah’s teachings on blasphemy have penetrated everyday thinking. When the state is seen as slow or weak in enforcing the death penalty for blasphemers, the crowd steps in as Allah’s “volunteer executioner.” The difference between official law and vigilante justice blurs. Both flow from the same belief: insult to Islam must be answered with blood.

The biblical view of justice is utterly opposed to this. Jehovah condemns mob violence and demands due process. The Law required careful investigation of accusations. Judges were to hear witnesses, examine facts, and avoid partiality. No one had the right to seize the sword in passion and kill his neighbor. Jesus rebuked His disciples when they wanted to call down fire on those who rejected Him. He warned that those who take the sword will perish by it.

When mobs lynch alleged blasphemers, they reveal the true spirit of the system they serve. It is not the Holy Spirit of God, who brings conviction of sin and grants repentance. It is a spirit that delights in blood and uses fear to enforce silence.

The Global Silencing Effect on Free Speech

The reach of Shariah’s blasphemy doctrine does not stop at the borders of Muslim-majority states. In a world connected by the internet and migration, its chilling effect spreads globally. Writers, cartoonists, filmmakers, ex-Muslims, and Christians who wish to speak frankly about Muhammad, the Quran, or Shariah know that their words may trigger violent responses anywhere the doctrine of death for blasphemy is believed.

Attacks in Western countries against those who drew cartoons of Muhammad, published critical books, or hosted public debates have sent a clear message: even in lands with legal free speech, offending the Prophet may bring bullets and knives. Publishers and media outlets, aware of this threat, often choose self-censorship. They refuse submissions, cancel projects, or sanitize discussions to avoid provoking violent reaction.

Universities and cultural institutions likewise practice caution. Panels about Islam steer away from examining Muhammad’s actions too closely. Exhibits featuring depictions of him are quietly removed. Professors who critique Shariah’s blasphemy laws or discuss early Islamic history honestly may face protests or demands for discipline. The fear is not only physical; it is also social and professional.

Western governments, desperate to avoid unrest, sometimes reinforce this pressure. They issue vague statements condemning “offensive” speech about religion, as though the real problem were the cartoon or the book, rather than the ideology that threatens death in response. In international forums, they sign onto resolutions that call for outlawing “defamation of religion,” language that traces back to Shariah’s logic. Slowly, the culture shifts. The one religion that demands legal protection from criticism begins to receive it.

For ex-Muslims and Christians who evangelize Muslims, this climate is especially heavy. To share the Gospel effectively, they must explain why Muhammad is not a true prophet and why the Quran is not God’s Word. Yet to do so publicly is to risk being labeled hateful, losing platforms, or even facing physical danger. The practical effect is that many remain silent, and millions of Muslims never hear a clear biblical critique of Islam.

From Jehovah’s viewpoint, this suppression of truth is a grave injustice. He commands His people to preach the Word in season and out of season, to demolish arguments raised against the knowledge of God, and to proclaim the uniqueness of Christ. When a religious system threatens death for honest speech, it declares war on the mission Christ gave to His congregation.

Yet despite the fear, God continues to work. Some believers are emboldened to speak, counting the cost and trusting that eternal life with Christ outweighs any earthly danger. Some Muslims, seeing how violently their religion reacts to criticism, begin to question whether a faith that must be protected by murder can really be from God. The same terror that silences others drives them to search for a God who can bear insult without commanding His followers to kill.

That God is Jehovah, revealed in Jesus Christ. He does not need human violence to guard His glory. He will judge blasphemy in His own time, but until then He sends His people into the world armed not with swords but with the Gospel. His Kingdom is not advanced by assassinating poets, lynching critics, or passing laws against insulting His name. It is advanced by preaching Christ crucified and risen, trusting that the Spirit will open hearts.

Shariah’s doctrine of death for blasphemy and insulting Muhammad stands as one of the clearest proofs that Islam and the Gospel are fundamentally opposed. One system crushes speech and demands blood to defend a human prophet’s honor. The other offers forgiveness even to those who once blasphemed Christ, inviting them to receive the very One they mocked as Lord and Savior.

Until Muslims turn from a law that kills critics and turn to the Lord who died for His enemies, they will remain under the shadow of a system that fears words more than it fears sin. Only when they bow before Jesus will they discover a God whose honor is unshakeable and whose grace is stronger than every insult.

You May Also Enjoy

September 11, 2001: Al-Qaeda’s Jihad Against America and the Attack on the American Homeland

October 7, 2023: Hamas, Iran, and the Open Jihad War Against Israel

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS