It takes a lot of hubris for someone to give such an assertive opinion about a subject they utterly lack linguistic, cultural, and historical knowledge about. Your analogy with verses in the bible is both smug and ill-informed. Ayat al-ahkam are the main source of legislation in Muslim countries, not some obscure archaic scribblings that only theologians are interested in.
There is no ambiguity about that verse for Arabic speaking Muslims. The different interpretations you speak of are intended for the non-Arabic speaking westerners to make Islam more palatable. your claim that the verb you quoted is 'problematic' or open to various contradictory interpretations is not accepted as a part of the aqidah. No one in the Muslim world has ever heard of those 'scholars' responsible for these anachronistic interpretations, which, again, are not in circulation in Muslim countries and the vast majority of them are published in English or French. these people aren't authorities in Islamic thought by any stretch of the imagination. Different readings for that verse by Islamic jurists disagree only on what constitutes a justification of the beating, and the severity of it.
P.S. There's really no need to berate people paying tribute to Connery's death. He was a despicable man, but I doubt many care (or ever cared) about Connery the person. With the exception of MRAs and their ilk, people only like their perception of him, which is entirely based on the film roles he played.
www.morrisseycentral.com
