Islamic Hell: Absurdity of Science and Logic

The Qur'an, like the Bible, teaches that God (called 'Allah' by Muslims) sends those who displease Him to Hell. However, one wonders is the concept of Hell is rational or logical. Does Hell really exist? The arguments offered here can also be applied to Christianity, but this article will focus on Islam, as theological issues are not confronted in Islamic areas as much as they have been by critical thinkers in Christian countries.

The scientific problem

To discuss Hell with a Muslim is an exercise in futility that quickly becomes an exhibition of Islamic idiocy. Muslims are quick to proclaim scientific miracles within their texts, even though they have no desire to really discuss science at all. While they try to portray their texts as being compatible with modern secular science, they ignore the many scientific errors in their text, or claim that the critic of such texts does not know the true interpretation.

The idea of Hell is both illogical and scientifically absurd. How can eternal fire be any kind of divine punishment that one should fear? You cannot be burned for eternity. Your body only offers a given and finite amount of fuel for fire. Eventually there will be nothing left to burn.

Trying to get around such arguments, the believer in Hell will claim Hellfire consists of "smokeless fire" and that it "burns, but does not consume". If the fire does not consume one's flesh, there is no pain! Pain is caused by neural receptors in the brain alerting you to cells being destroyed. If the fire does not consume one's flesh, no cells are destroyed, and thus there is no pain!

Perhaps some supporters of the Hellfire theory will offer the idea that your "soul" is sent to Hell and not your body. If one is without their body, they are without cells, without neural receptors, and therefore without pain. These are scientific facts about pain that primitive cultures were not aware of. Those who believe Hell exists can only describe eternal damnation as a "phenomenon which science cannot explain".

While such a description makes belief in Hell something of the realm of fantasy, there are still stern arguments against such a concept. Whether there is pain or not, eternal flames is not a true punishment to be feared. If it is eternal, there is ample time to grow accustomed to one's environment. Surely eternity is enough time to develop a higher tolerance of pain. There have been examples of human beings who reached a mental state where they do not feel pain. An example would be Buddhist monks in Viet Nam who could set themselves on fire, and show no reaction while burning to death. Such people would have nothing to fear from Hell.

Who is sent to Hell?

In Islam people are sent to Hell for not believing in God. Unfortunately this is a vague reason, as in Islam it is not immediately clear who is a believer and who is not. Different schools of thought offer different explanations as to what is qualifies one as a believer. The following verse from the Qur'an may shed some light on the issue:

Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts; anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve. (Qur'an 5:69)

While Shia, Sufi, and Submitter schools of thought agree that the above verse proves Jews and Christians can go to heaven, Sunnis strongly disagree. Most Sunnis will state that the above verse has been abrogated by the following one:

And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers. (Qur'an 3:85)

While Rashad Khalifa, founder of the Submitter sect, argued that Islam was Arabic for "submission (to God)" and therefore included Jews and Christians, Orthodox Sunni Muslims rejected such a possibility. Furthermore, teachers of Sunni law have argued that "Islam" means Sunni Islam only, and sects such as Shia, Ahmedi, Sufi, Qadianni, et cetera, will also be sent to Hell. In trying to explain why all the other sects are displeasing to Allah, Sunnis offer the following verse from the Qur'an:

Do not be like those who split up their religion and became sects, they invented new things in the religion (bid’ah) and followed their vain desires, each sect rejoicing in that which is with it. (Qur'an 30:31-32)

Sunnis make up roughly 90% of all Muslims, and have thoroughly oppressed the much smaller sects. Rashad Khalifa himself was murdered in 1990 while visiting a Mosque in Arizona. Shias are the targets of much violence in Pakistan, and it is actually against the law to be a Shia in Malaysia! Many Islamic Sheikhs speak out against Sufi Islam, and countless Sunni religious leaders openly preach violence against those of the Ahmedi and Qadianni sects. Such oppression is easily accepted by Sunnis, as they believe they are punishing heretics, whom God himself hates. This is especially true of Shias, as many Sunnis believe that Shia Islam was started by the Jews.

Why send people to Hell?

Regardless of sectarian politics, all Muslims agree that those who do not believe in the God of Abraham will be sent to Hell. This includes Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, and of course Atheists. Most Muslims also now feel that Christians who worship Jesus as God (which is the vast majority of Christians) will be sent Hell also. The question is why are all these people sent to Hell?

According to Islam, God (Allah) has ordained a very specific path for mankind. Those who stay on the path are rewarded with paradise, while those who stray from the path are severely punished (with Hellfire). Apparently Allah is very concerned about who is worshipping Him. So concerned, that He uses bribery and coercion to keep people in line.

The contradiction between the concept of a merciful God, and one that sends disbelievers to Hell, is one that cannot be reconciled. While Muslims, and the Qur'an, refer to God as Ar-Rahman (The Most Merciful), Allah is not very merciful at all. The God of Islam punishes those who do not recognize His dominance and acknowledge His superiority. This depicts Allah as being insecure, and having an inferiority complex. Psychologists could say a lot about Allah's aggressive nature, and desperate need to be worshipped.

In short Islam is a spiritual dictatorship. Allah is not loved by His followers, but feared. No person is allowed to live their life the way they want to. Fortunately for mankind, Allah is an impotent dictator. He is no longer able to carry out His punishments, and the iron fist with which He rules has grown soft. All that is left are His henchmen: Muslims, the pawns of the oppressor hurling hollow threats of a mythical place called Hell.

These comically misguided mercenaries patiently await the day Allah will come and destroy the infidels, and create an Islamic paradise for the faithful. Sadly they do not realize that their violent desert deity is a myth. The concept of Hell was created by a primitive society who's understanding of how a God should act was based on the behavior of the oppressive rulers of that time. While primitive cultures were terrorized by the thought of such a place, those who can think rationally should discard belief in such absurdities.

Shari'a Law: The Recipe For Disaster

Many people advocate the implementation of Sharia Law in Somalia. However, we should ask the subsequent questions: why should the embryonic Somali government implement the Sharia Law? What is the significance of its implementation? What are its benefits, if any? What are its negative affects? I am convinced that Sharia Law’s negative affects outweigh its benefits. Our modern day is extremely different from the earlier epochs—fourteen and some centuries ago. Ancient people had little knowledge about the world around them. They were less educated about geography, cultures, world religions, science…etc., and Sharia Law might have been applicable to their ways of life. However, it is, I believe, not applicable for our time, especially the condition in our country today. If one glances the nature of the Sharia Law, one finds that it contains not only a harsh and brutal banishments, but it also violates human rights: cutting hand and legs; stoning people to death; whipping; beating; cutting heads…etc. I challenge any reader to show me otherwise. Let us look Sharia Law in action.

Look at what happened to those who tried to implement Sharia Law in our modern time. A case in point is the brutal and notorious Taliban in Afghanistan. The Taliban implemented the Sharia in Afghanistan.. They denied women’s right to attend school; they forced men to grow ugly beards; they closed countless businesses (e.g., stores who sell TVs, cassettes, movies, music, pictures, theaters); they forced women to stay indoors; they stoned their own citizens to death without the due process of law; they permitted legally that men can marry 9-year-old girls; I can go on and on and on. The point is that these people, who were banished, were poor who were trying to support their children and families. Yet, without providing any social programs, the Taliban government destroyed their livelihood. That is, instead of focusing on elevating the poverty and illiteracy that engulfed Afghanistan for so long and enhancing and improving the living standard of their people, they waste their energy and their time monitoring and banishing the weak and the poor Afghanis. This is not to deny that Taliban helped to eliminate the robberies that engulfed the land, but they were more harsh and brutal. Their justification was simply that they were implementing the Sharia Law. This brutal and harsh treatment is repeated in Somalia.

One can easily recall the first time that extremists appeared in Somalia. They brutally murdered countless people. They immediately started to cut the hands and legs of those who were accused robbing people without any evidence. I personally remember and witnessed one young man who was accused as robbing people and he was sentenced without any presence of a defense lawyer. After his hand and one of his leg were caught, a BBC reporter asked the ‘sheikh’ whether they are going to support him and his family since he become a handicap. The ‘sheikh’ replied that they are not concern about his or his family’s future fate. Another vivid and horrendous instance is the widely reported underage girl who was stoned to death few weeks ago. There were countless stoning and cutting hand and legs cases that are not reported. These extremists closed countless businesses, as their Taliban counterparts. As reported, they prohibited watching football and movies and they forced women to wear burqas. The implication of this is that if Sharia Law is implemented in Somalia now, our people would experience a harsh and brutal banishments that they have never endured before.

There are some people who argue that the problem is not the Sharia Law per se, but the problem is the people who were implementing the Sharia Law. Put it bluntly, their argument goes like this: Sharia Law is a good law but those people who are implementing do not know how to do it. Their argument falls into the ground when one glances the real nature of Sharia Law itself. The problem is not the people who are trying to implement, but the nature of the Sharia itself. If you read any of the main schools of the Sharia be it Hanbali, Hanafi, Maliki or Shafi’I, you will find that Sharia Law is simply consists of brutal punishment. I challenge anyone to show me that Sharia Law is not the way I described. Based on this conviction, we should oppose any Sharia implementation.Many people advocate the implementation of Sharia Law in Somalia. However, we should ask the subsequent questions: why should the embryonic Somali government implement the Sharia Law? What is the significance of its implementation? What are its benefits, if any? What are its negative affects? I am convinced that Sharia Law’s negative affects outweigh its benefits. Our modern day is extremely different from the earlier epochs—fourteen and some centuries ago. Ancient people had little knowledge about the world around them. They were less educated about geography, cultures, world religions, science…etc., and Sharia Law might have been applicable to their ways of life. However, it is, I believe, not applicable for our time, especially the condition in our country today. If one glances the nature of the Sharia Law, one finds that it contains not only a harsh and brutal banishments, but it also violates human rights: cutting hand and legs; stoning people to death; whipping; beating; cutting heads…etc. I challenge any reader to show me otherwise. Let us look Sharia Law in action.

Look at what happened to those who tried to implement Sharia Law in our modern time. A case in point is the brutal and notorious Taliban in Afghanistan. The Taliban implemented the Sharia in Afghanistan.. They denied women’s right to attend school; they forced men to grow ugly beards; they closed countless businesses (e.g., stores who sell TVs, cassettes, movies, music, pictures, theaters); they forced women to stay indoors; they stoned their own citizens to death without the due process of law; they permitted legally that men can marry 9-year-old girls; I can go on and on and on. The point is that these people, who were banished, were poor who were trying to support their children and families. Yet, without providing any social programs, the Taliban government destroyed their livelihood. That is, instead of focusing on elevating the poverty and illiteracy that engulfed Afghanistan for so long and enhancing and improving the living standard of their people, they waste their energy and their time monitoring and banishing the weak and the poor Afghanis. This is not to deny that Taliban helped to eliminate the robberies that engulfed the land, but they were more harsh and brutal. Their justification was simply that they were implementing the Sharia Law. This brutal and harsh treatment is repeated in Somalia.

One can easily recall the first time that extremists appeared in Somalia. They brutally murdered countless people. They immediately started to cut the hands and legs of those who were accused robbing people without any evidence. I personally remember and witnessed one young man who was accused as robbing people and he was sentenced without any presence of a defense lawyer. After his hand and one of his leg were caught, a BBC reporter asked the ‘sheikh’ whether they are going to support him and his family since he become a handicap. The ‘sheikh’ replied that they are not concern about his or his family’s future fate. Another vivid and horrendous instance is the widely reported underage girl who was stoned to death few weeks ago. There were countless stoning and cutting hand and legs cases that are not reported. These extremists closed countless businesses, as their Taliban counterparts. As reported, they prohibited watching football and movies and they forced women to wear burqas. The implication of this is that if Sharia Law is implemented in Somalia now, our people would experience a harsh and brutal banishments that they have never endured before.

There are some people who argue that the problem is not the Sharia Law per se, but the problem is the people who were implementing the Sharia Law. Put it bluntly, their argument goes like this: Sharia Law is a good law but those people who are implementing do not know how to do it. Their argument falls into the ground when one glances the real nature of Sharia Law itself. The problem is not the people who are trying to implement, but the nature of the Sharia itself. If you read any of the main schools of the Sharia be it Hanbali, Hanafi, Maliki or Shafi’I, you will find that Sharia Law is simply consists of brutal punishment. I challenge anyone to show me that Sharia Law is not the way I described. Based on this conviction, we should oppose any Sharia implementation.