What is the ruling on one who published a picture mocking the religion of Allah and claimed that his friend, who denounced his action, had committed an act of disbelief (kufr)? And is the latter's action considered an act of disbelief (kufr) necessitating a ritual bath (ghusl) and the pronouncement of the two testimonies of faith (shahadatayn) as a precautionary measure? And to what extent is his understanding of the hadith: "Three things have been lifted from my Ummah: error, forgetfulness, and what they are coerced into" correct in this situation?

It is not permissible to delve into matters of Sharia without sufficient knowledge, and the matter must be referred to those who are knowledgeable in it. The publisher of the image has committed a grave error, for whoever prohibits what is known by necessity in religion to be permissible has committed kufr (disbelief). His assertion that what he pointed to glorifies the cross is mockery and a denial of the Quran. The publisher of the image must repent with sincere repentance, and the repentance of an apostate is by uttering the two Shahadas (testimonies of faith) and affirming what he had denied. Your friend erred in understanding the hadith, and whoever accuses a Muslim of kufr has committed a grave error, but does not become a disbeliever by that.