Is apostasy allowed in Islam?

[daveyats]

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong." Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256

I have a friend who left Islam and was severely punished by his family and later disowned. Which is understandable, because which father will not want his son to take on his faith and values. but in some places that practice sharia law, an apostate can be punished even by death.

How can the Islamic faith claim to be "without compulsion" if muslims are not given the freedom to choose what religion they want to belong to?

[Iceee]

Salaam.

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong." Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256

It means that a Muslim can not force/compel a person of other religion to convert to Islam.

The reasons are simple; if a person converts to Islam by force, he will only be a Muslim on paper; inside he's always going to remain a non-Muslim.

[Muhaba]

Apostacy (conversion from Islam) is not allowed in Islam. The reason is that Islam is the true religion and when a person converts from Islam to another religion he doesn't do so because he has found a more correct way. He does so for some worldly benefit and knows well in his heart that he is leaving the truth and the reason for doing so. Unless the religion had never entered his heart and he had never realized that it was truth but had only been a Muslim by name throughout. This is possible in the case of Muslim children being raised in unislamic society without proper and thorough islamic education, especially when the rest of the family isn't even a practicing muslim family. Such children are muslims by name / tradition. It is a family thing just as is their family name. It is possible that such people are guided by Allah at a later time and revert to Islam.

[daveyats]

Let me clarify - Islam does not compel or force anyone to accept but it must force and compel to prevent anyone from leaving.

If this is the case, it comes back to the same problem: that Islam is not truly free of compulsion.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[daveyats]

Let me clarify - Islam does not compel or force anyone to accept but it must force and compel to prevent anyone from leaving.

If this is the case, it comes back to the same problem: that Islam is not truly free of compulsion.

I just wish to further clarify that you may disagree with me about what "acceptance" and "compulsion" means.

I understand acceptance of a belief or faith is not a one-time event or decision. A person's acceptance spans his whole lifetime. For any faith or organization to claim to be free of compulsion, it has to have a door that opens both ways - you are able to join freely and leave freely if at any point you encounter something in the faith that you reject. I believe any rationale person will agree with me, its not possible for a person to fully grasp or understand everything about Islam at the point when he first accepts it. So why is the door closed on muslims who grow up and have a change of mind due to new things that they learn?

In the context of a democratic government, true freedom and democracy is possible because you have regular elections to elect who you want to stay in power. You can argue that politicians change but Islam doesn't (which I would agree) but the issue is that people can change their way of thinking! if Islam claims to be free of compulsion, they should be free to leave if they want.

[greenhill]

How can the Islamic faith claim to be "without compulsion" if muslims are not given the freedom to choose what religion they want to belong to?

This is where it becomes a bit sensitive... They say islam is the perfect religion, but not necessarily the people who practice it.

I would agree with Dreamin in her synopsis of why people tend to leave. There is no compulsion in religion. That is it. We are free to choose. People make it hard. Authorities make their own mandate and the society gets affected. Fanatism can take over which may not even resemble the faith anymore. Can't blame the Deen on the various interpretations and actions some believers take.

Bottomline is that, we are free to enter and leave the Deen. Ultimately it is we who will either benefit or suffer the consequences...

:peace:

[daveyats]

This is where it becomes a bit sensitive... They say islam is the perfect religion, but not necessarily the people who practice it.

I would agree with Dreamin in her synopsis of why people tend to leave. There is no compulsion in religion. That is it. We are free to choose. People make it hard. Authorities make their own mandate and the society gets affected. Fanatism can take over which may not even resemble the faith anymore. Can't blame the Deen on the various interpretations and actions some believers take.

Bottomline is that, we are free to enter and leave the Deen. Ultimately it is we who will either benefit or suffer the consequences...

:peace:

Interestingly, I had this conversation with another muslim and he remarked the exact same thing - Islam is perfect but muslim are not. He went on to prove from the Quran that it is silent on the punishment for apostasy.

My problem with this idea is that in every Islamic country, there is a punishment for apostasy in the sharia law. Why are they allowed to violate Quran 2:256 and why is no one concerned that whole nations are not obeying Allah? I only see a few possibilities:

1. The followers contradict Quran 2:256 by willfully choosing to disobey it. This is extremely serious because they are guilty of sinning against Allah.
2. The Koran is self-contradictary. So there is no real right or wrong in this matter.
3. The Koran must be interpreted with a different set of rules. There is somehow another way to interpret Quran 2:256 and implement the punishment for apostasy..which i imagine will involve rules of interpreting the Quran or changing the entire definition of "acceptance" or "compulsion"

I probably said too much. Peace

[greenhill]

My problem with this idea is that in every Islamic country, there is a punishment for apostasy in the sharia law.

Seeing as you put it that way, I see that in most muslim countries, the laws are mainly of colonial origins, totally secular. And when a country is governed autocratically that way for some time, it is often very difficult to change. As with any colonial policy, it would be divide and rule. If a majority of people are muslims, then they would try to make it islamic, and the politics will step in. Leading to people getting sucked into 'worldly matters', bigotry etc, and fear creeps in. The younger generation are getting more and more influenced by the 'Western' culture, so fear is used to force them back into islam, the ultimate 'weapon' the oppressed has is to renounce islam and then say, you have no jurisdiction over me. Now if all people left the Deen to enjoy the Western lifestyle, who would be the minions of these law-makers? Hence the law of punishment if you leave the Deen. It is all rather silly.

Why are they allowed to violate Quran 2:256 and why is no one concerned that whole nations are not obeying Allah?

Well, there are numerous matters that has suffered with the human touch and not just this matter. We are living in the world that commonly accepts, live and forms a large part of our lives and without it the world grinds to a halt - money and riba'. The soil we walk on is no longer with Allah as the sovereign but the Government; and that muslim nations should seek or establish steps to reconcile with each other and eventually towards a caliphate.

Besides, knowing the truth can be very scary. It can become a burden. So it is easier to deny it. But the undeniable fact is, there will be a Judgement Day. Deny it all we want. The truth is in islam. We cannot step away unless we choose to disbelieve. Then it will be our error. A very grave error indeed. But the burden, if done for the right reasons, can be an addictive pleasure. Suddenly, we can win! That is, we win it for ourselves.

So to stop apostasy, we need to educate. Instead, we punish and make fear!

Hmmmm, now I probably said too much...:p


:peace:

[Jedi_Mindset]

If one apostates due to doubts or ignorance he should be left alone. And plenty of time should be given to him to rethink his decision and da'wah.
If one apostates and then causes fitnah, corruption and joins the enemies of islam then he should be executed. Allah knows best

[Muhammad]

Greetings daveyats,

It might be helpful to read the following article which explains how there is no logical, historical or philosophical argument that proves that Islam’s law of apostasy is unacceptable or irrational:

Jamaal Zarabozo Apostasy and Islam: The Current Hype بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم الحمد لله &#

Below is an extract:

Apostasy and Islam: The Current Hype
Jamaal Zarabozo

Much has been said in recent months concerning the law of apostasy in Islam. In particular, the recent case in Afghanistan has highlighted, once again, to many in the Western world that the Muslim world is neither civilized nor respective of human rights. Repeatedly one hears cries that the Muslim countries must change in order to join “the family of civilized countries” in today’s world. In fact, the Islamic law of apostasy seems to be one of the most obvious cases where a “fundamental” human right is violated by Islamic law, bringing up the question of whether Islamic law is even suitable for modern times or must Muslims be compelled to modify and change their religion and laws. [1]

Indeed, Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed by the vast majority of today’s countries, reads: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”

On the other hand, Muslims believe that the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said,

لا يَحِلُّ دَمُ امْرِئٍ مُسْلِمٍ إِلاَّ بِإِحْدَى ثَلاَثٍ الثَّيِّبُ الزَّانِي وَالنَّفْسُ بِالنَّفْسِ والتَارِكُ لِدِيْنِهِ المُفَارِقُ لِلْجَمَاعَةِ

“It is not legal [to spill] the blood of a Muslim except in one of three cases: the fornicator who has previously experienced legal sexual intercourse (i.e. with one’s husband, wife, etc.), a life for a life and one who forsakes his religion and separates from the community.” (Recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim.)

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is also reported to have said,

مَنْ بَدَّلَ دِينَهُ فَاقْتُلُوهُ

“Whoever changes his religion is to be killed.”[2] (Recorded by al-Bukhari and others.)

These texts from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) have led the vast majority of Muslim scholars to conclude that the punishment for apostasy from Islam in Islamic Law is death. It is true that there are some, especially contemporary writers, who opt for very different conclusions and argue that such a death penalty is a misunderstanding of Islamic Law. This is not the proper place to enter into such a debate. Instead, this author shall presume that the opinion that has been held by the vast majority of the scholars is the correct opinion. This entire discussion, therefore, shall be in the light of that conclusion. If the harsher punishment can be “defended” from the current onslaught, any lesser punishments will, obviously, be even more so defensible.

This opinion held by the vast majority of Muslim scholars of the past puts the contemporary Muslim into quite a quandary—especially given a “modern” view of religion that believes that religion must be changed if it does not meet the rational requirements of the times. However, before one immediately jumps to resolve an issue of this nature, one has to realize that there are a number of unstated premises that are in the background.

Furthermore, if one is being asked to give up the dictates of his faith, there should be rather strong compelling evidence demonstrating that his faith (or some aspect of it) is simply unacceptable. In other words, nobody should be asked to give up something that they believe in unless there truly is strong proof that what he believes in must be wrong or unacceptable. Otherwise, on what basis should an individual—any individual, be he Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu, whatever—compromise on something that he believes is demanded by or beloved to his very own creator and lord?

At this point, it is necessary to inject a further comment, because issues of this nature are often the result of different worldviews and perceptions. Many in the West have the understanding that “faith” means to believe in something that one cannot prove. This is not the approach of Islam.[3] In general, Muslims hold that there are very strong, rational reasons for them to believe in their religion. It is not simply a matter of “blind faith.” Instead—and this is obviously not the proper place to go into this in detail—Muslims think, for example, that the excellence of the Quran, its unquestionable historical authenticity, and the numerous miracles[4] related to it all point to this book being a true revelation from God. Thus, before a Muslim is asked to override something found in his religion, there had better be very strong evidence that something is mistaken or unacceptable in the religion of Islam. Furthermore, from a Muslim’s perspective, the burden of proof in such a case would be upon the one who claims that there is something superior or more suitable than what is found in Islamic law. (It must be stressed that this seems to be an issue that many in the West simply cannot comprehend because they think that faith is just a matter of blind faith and they do not realize that Muslims have rational reasons for believing in Islam and Islamic Law.)

The question that the Muslim must pose, therefore, is the following: Do those who promote “human rights” or “civilization/modernity” have such evidence and strong proofs? Without jumping too much ahead, it would seem that they do not.[5] In fact, one can question, based on their own statements about civilization, whether those who call for “civilization” are actually civilized themselves. What are the criteria by which a country is to be judged to be among “the family of civilized nations” today? Is it, for example, the acceptance and respect for those vaunted “human rights”? This would seem to be the underlying premise of many statements heard in the media today. If that is the case, then the list of human rights need to be studied in further detail...


[...]

Conclusion

It is beyond the scope of this article to touch upon all of the relevant points related to the question of the law of apostasy in Islam[25] in the light of contemporary thought and attitudes. However, the above has been sufficient to demonstrate that there does not seem to be any logical, historical or philosophical argument that proves that Islam’s law of apostasy is unacceptable or irrational, especially when applied within the strict confines of the principles of Islamic Law.

The belief in the Islamic law of apostasy stems from the Islamic belief in God, the Creator. It stems from the belief that God has the right to lay down laws for His creatures and that, in fact, He is the best in laying down such laws. This should be considered logical by anyone who believes in God. Even though it can be considered logical, this argument is repugnant to many of the West, even those who believe in God. However, this fact has more to do with the West’s unique history than with the logic of the argument being made. The West experienced a period in which many were killed in the name of God and they also experienced a period in which they realized that their scriptures are not truly from God, due to their manifest contradiction with science. Both of these facts led the West to move away from “God’s law” to man-made laws. One, though, cannot derive “universal principles” from the experience of this small portion of human beings. In fact, those phenomena have no relevance whatsoever to Islam.

Thus, there is no logical reason for a Muslim not to trust in Islam’s scripture, the Quran, as being a true revelation from God.

Hence, there is no reason for a Muslim to abandon God’s law.

Similarly, there is no reason for a Muslim to stop believing in the fact that the best lawgiver is God Himself.

Therefore, there is no logical reason for a Muslim to stop believing in the Islamic law of apostasy as explained by the Prophet of God, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

The following might also be useful to read:
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/in...twaId&Id=85488

Both of these links mention evidences from Islamic texts that apostasy is a capital offence.

I hope this helps to clarify the issue for you.

[Genesis]

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong." Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256

I have a friend who left Islam and was severely punished by his family and later disowned. Which is understandable, because which father will not want his son to take on his faith and values. but in some places that practice sharia law, an apostate can be punished even by death.

How can the Islamic faith claim to be "without compulsion" if muslims are not given the freedom to choose what religion they want to belong to?

I don't think any parent should punish or disown their child.

[Genesis]

This is where it becomes a bit sensitive... They say islam is the perfect religion, but not necessarily the people who practice it.

I would agree with Dreamin in her synopsis of why people tend to leave. There is no compulsion in religion. That is it. We are free to choose. People make it hard. Authorities make their own mandate and the society gets affected. Fanatism can take over which may not even resemble the faith anymore. Can't blame the Deen on the various interpretations and actions some believers take.

Bottomline is that, we are free to enter and leave the Deen. Ultimately it is we who will either benefit or suffer the consequences...

:peace:

so the consequences being death ! Sounds like compulsion to me !

[daveyats]

It might be helpful to read the following article which explains how there is no logical, historical or philosophical argument that proves that Islam’s law of apostasy is unacceptable or irrational:

greetings! the problem is not a logical, historical or philosophical one. it is a theological one. How can you implement punishment for apostasy and not contradict or violate Quran 2:256?

[greenhill]

Bottomline is that, we are free to enter and leave the Deen. Ultimately it is we who will either benefit or suffer the consequences...

This is my statement...

so the consequences being death ! Sounds like compulsion to me !

I was not clear in my statement. I meant when we are all raised again on the Day of Judgement we will either benefit (from our correct choices) or suffer the consequences (in the error of our choices). Nothing to do with the interpretations of mankind and their respective 'laws' with regards to apostasy.

:peace:

[daveyats]

Seeing as you put it that way, I see that in most muslim countries, the laws are mainly of colonial origins, totally secular. And when a country is governed autocratically that way for some time, it is often very difficult to change. As with any colonial policy, it would be divide and rule. If a majority of people are muslims, then they would try to make it islamic, and the politics will step in. Leading to people getting sucked into 'worldly matters', bigotry etc, and fear creeps in. The younger generation are getting more and more influenced by the 'Western' culture, so fear is used to force them back into islam, the ultimate 'weapon' the oppressed has is to renounce islam and then say, you have no jurisdiction over me. Now if all people left the Deen to enjoy the Western lifestyle, who would be the minions of these law-makers? Hence the law of punishment if you leave the Deen. It is all rather silly.



Well, there are numerous matters that has suffered with the human touch and not just this matter. We are living in the world that commonly accepts, live and forms a large part of our lives and without it the world grinds to a halt - money and riba'. The soil we walk on is no longer with Allah as the sovereign but the Government; and that muslim nations should seek or establish steps to reconcile with each other and eventually towards a caliphate.

Besides, knowing the truth can be very scary. It can become a burden. So it is easier to deny it. But the undeniable fact is, there will be a Judgement Day. Deny it all we want. The truth is in islam. We cannot step away unless we choose to disbelieve. Then it will be our error. A very grave error indeed. But the burden, if done for the right reasons, can be an addictive pleasure. Suddenly, we can win! That is, we win it for ourselves.

So to stop apostasy, we need to educate. Instead, we punish and make fear!

Hmmmm, now I probably said too much...:p


:peace:

I can understand how fear might motivate people to prevent young people from leaving the faith. I can accept that all humans being imperfect - we all possess a fallen nature and the heart being deceitful beyond cure - may at times abuse religion for our own interests (political etc). But to be honest, I see a great contradiction in the Islamic faith. It cannot claim to be "free of compulsion".

What I cannot accept is that
1. there is punishment for apostasy in the Sharia Law which contradicts Quran 2:256 (and I understand contradicts other verses as well)
2. The muslim world is indifferent to it.

[Genesis]

Greetings daveyats,

It might be helpful to read the following article which explains how there is no logical, historical or philosophical argument that proves that Islam’s law of apostasy is unacceptable or irrational:


I hope this helps to clarify the issue for you.

I read the articles. There are some inaccuracies in the first article. Especially Pauls quote in Romans. It also seems to say that because the Torah allowed similar behaviors for the ancient Israelites and because the West in Medieval times was similar then that excuses Muslims killing an apostate. The problem with this however is that Israel has moved on from that time and as far as the West is concerned it has also moved forward and you will not find anything in the New Testament / Injil that would support executions for apostasy anyway.

[Genesis]

This is my statement...




I was not clear in my statement. I meant when we are all raised again on the Day of Judgement we will either benefit (from our correct choices) or suffer the consequences (in the error of our choices). Nothing to do with the interpretations of mankind and their respective 'laws' with regards to apostasy.

:peace:

Greetings Greenhill. Thank you for clarifying. However the fact remains that a consequence for apostasy could be to be murdered or executed.

[greenhill]

Greetings Greenhill. Thank you for clarifying. However the fact remains that a consequence for apostasy could be to be murdered or executed.

Perhaps, but that is entirely dependent on where you are and the people who are entrusted with the power. It does not happen here in Malaysia. Many muslims leave their Deen and they are still alive to tell their tale. I believe the same in Indonesia.

Murdered as you say... then it is the murderer that has to answer when his time comes on the day of judgement.

:peace:

[daveyats]

Perhaps, but that is entirely dependent on where you are and the people who are entrusted with the power. It does not happen here in Malaysia. Many muslims leave their Deen and they are still alive to tell their tale. I believe the same in Indonesia.

Murdered as you say... then it is the murderer that has to answer when his time comes on the day of judgement.

:peace:

There are "reformative camps" in malaysia and indonesia where those who want to convert to christianity can be sent to. My friend was sent to one in indonesia. He says he feared for his live the whole time he was there. but don't take my word for it...

[Genesis]

Perhaps, but that is entirely dependent on where you are and the people who are entrusted with the power. It does not happen here in Malaysia. Many muslims leave their Deen and they are still alive to tell their tale. I believe the same in Indonesia.

Murdered as you say... then it is the murderer that has to answer when his time comes on the day of judgement.

:peace:

But Greenhill. Murder is murder. It is the Quran and Hadith that say to kill the apostate.

[greenhill]

Where does it say it, again? Don't have to find hadeeth, but at least the Quran. I'm sure there is a context to it.

Peace

[Genesis]

Where does it say it, again? Don't have to find hadeeth, but at least the Quran. I'm sure there is a context to it.

Peace

Peace Greenhill.Bukhari, volume 9, #17
"Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

Bukhari, volume 9, #57
Narrated Ikrima, "Some atheists were brought to Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's messenger forbade it, saying, "Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire)." I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Messenger, "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."
Bukhari, volume 9, #58

My understanding is that there are also surahs in the Quran that Muslims often interpret to be able to kill apostates.

[Signor]

Assalamu Alaikum

I think Br Muhammad forgot his "Index of useful threads" which is now back once again,providing a lot on this topic to daveyats and others...

Apostasy
Islam and Apostasy
clarification of apostasy
Apostasy: an unqualified fatwa
[post] clarification of apostasy
[post] US pastor burns Koran in protest - Article by Jamal Zarabozo [Full article], [pdf]
US pastor burns Koran in protest - Fatwa from AMJA Online
Death Penalty for Apostasy in Islam
How do you treat an apostate?
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=5226
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/in...twaId&Id=85488

[daveyats]

Assalamu Alaikum

I think Br Muhammad forgot his "Index of useful threads" which is now back once again,providing a lot on this topic to daveyats and others...

Apostasy
Islam and Apostasy
clarification of apostasy
Apostasy: an unqualified fatwa
[post] clarification of apostasy
[post] US pastor burns Koran in protest - Article by Jamal Zarabozo [Full article], [pdf]
US pastor burns Koran in protest - Fatwa from AMJA Online
Death Penalty for Apostasy in Islam
How do you treat an apostate?

I have read the 2nd and 3rd link (i think greenhill should too haha cos it will blow away what you said earlier). Before I go on, please forgive me for pushing the issue. If I can only choose one issue to talk about, it would be this..because of people like my friend and because of christians and christian converts who have been killed because of such teachings.

Islam and Apostasy

I want to point out a couple of problems with his argument:

1. Justifying the NEED for punishment of apostates does not address the theological issue of why the Koran is self-contradictory in this matter. You cannot say - "There are tigers in India" and "There are no tigers in India" and claim that both statements are true. A command from God cannot be contradictory for it to be true. Why would God contradict Himself???

2. He argues that people should know enough about Isiam and they should not be allowed to leave if they didn't understand it properly. May I ask - how much or how well a person should understand before you judge that he has known enough? I have been told you only need to know and acknowledge the 5 pillars of Islam to be a muslim.

And what happens after you consult the person, and find out that he indeeds understand Islam very well but rejects it simply because he doesn't think its true?

Let me assure whoever is reading this, that I understand where my muslim friends are arguing from: Islam is the true religion and if you understand it for what it is, you will be attracted and believe in it. I would like to point out that the individual needs to make a judgement and personal decision to decide whether Islam is true or not before accepting it. Would you agree with me on this?

This is the crux of the issue: what if a person at some point, learns something new about Islam or some new religion and makes a judgement and decides that Islam is not true, but false?

3. There is also the issue of children who have been born into a muslim family. They are considered to be born muslim. So this presents another theological problem - the children have been stripped off their free will and have been compelled by Allah to be believers when he assigned them to be born in a muslim home.

What if a child after growing up, learns new things (example: science, Christianity etc) and makes his/her own personal decision not to be a muslim? Should he be punished because he never made his own choice to be a muslim?

I'm glad a muslim brother already asked the same thing here: clarification of apostasy

4. The last thing is - why are muslims so INSECURE about their own beliefs? If you believe Islam to be true and people disbelieve to their own eternal detriment....what difference does it make if people leave the faith? Do apostates make the message of Islam less true? If you are concerned that apostates may end up speaking up and defaming Islam...may I then ask why is no Islamic country or organization punishing ISIS for defaming Islam? Or are you now going to say that all that ISIS is approved by Allah? :)

[InToTheRain]

I don't see the contradiction. There is no complusion in Religion - this is regarding to our relation with Allah Most High as Allah Most High has no need for someone to practice Islam against their will. If the whole world were to renounce Allah Most High then it would not diminish His granduer nor does our accepting Him add to it. However this is regarding ones relation with Allah Most High.

The law regarding apostacy was made to preserve an "ISLAMIC NATIONS" ideals; such as the law for adultery and murder. In Islam there should be no seperation between religion and state; Islam forms our basis for everything. So to leave Islam openly was tantamount to treachery and to leave it alone was tantamount to encouraging murder and adultery. There is judicial process in place for all this.

For example during the time of the Khalif Umar Al Khattab(RA) there were 4 witnesses to an adultery (as 4 witnesses are required); 3 mentioned they saw the actual act of penetration however 1 of them said they didn't see the actual act of penetration rather the duvet covers moving! So he lashed the 3 witnesses for accusation without firm proof because false accusation was also a henious crime which could not be encouraged.

However there is no "Islamic state" and whether a nation decides to implement it to preserve its ideals is their prerogative; just like the UK has it's own laws:
8 Of The Weirdest British Treason Laws

Ofcourse if one feels they can't abide by the laws of the nation then they should move elsewhere where such laws cannot affect them.

Also experts in Shariah Law are called Mufti's (it's equivelant to a Masters in Islamic Studies) and unfortunately no one here, to my knowledge, is one as such we can't go into intricate details of the fatwa for apostasy.

[daveyats]

I don't see the contradiction. There is no complusion in Religion - this is regarding to our relation with Allah Most High as Allah Most High has no need for someone to practice Islam against their will. If the whole world were to renounce Allah Most High then it would not diminish His granduer nor does our accepting Him add to it. However this is regarding ones relation with Allah Most High.

The law regarding apostacy was made to preserve an "ISLAMIC NATIONS" ideals; such as the law for adultery and murder. In Islam there should be no seperation between religion and state; Islam forms our basis for everything. So to leave Islam openly was tantamount to treachery and to leave it alone was tantamount to encouraging murder and adultery. There is judicial process in place for all this.

For example during the time of the Khalif Umar Al Khattab(RA) there were 4 witnesses to an adultery (as 4 witnesses are required); 3 mentioned they saw the actual act of penetration however 1 of them said they didn't see the actual act of penetration rather the duvet covers moving! So he lashed the 3 witnesses for accusation without firm proof because false accusation was also a henious crime which could not be encouraged.

However there is no "Islamic state" and whether a nation decides to implement it to preserve its ideals is their prerogative; just like the UK has it's own laws:
8 Of The Weirdest British Treason Laws

Ofcourse if one feels they can't abide by the laws of the nation then they should move elsewhere where such laws cannot affect them.

Also experts in Shariah Law are called Mufti's (it's equivelant to a Masters in Islamic Studies) and unfortunately no one here, to my knowledge, is one as such we can't go into intricate details of the fatwa for apostasy.

Let me understand you correctly, you just said:

1. Allah sees no need for a person to believe and behave according to the Koran against that person's will.
2. Allah sees a need for an Islamic state, where people belonging to the state are expected to believe and behave according to the Koran even against their own will.

[Hulk]

In regards to the original poster's argument, the issue is not about what the punishment for apostasy is. Rather, it is that there is a punishment at all. So even if for example the punishment for apostasy is a "slap on the wrist" it still does not change the argument by the original poster as his argument is that "If there is no compulsion in religion, then why is there a penalty for leaving Islam."

So in this regard, there is no need to mention that while there is the opinion that majority of Scholars hold, there are differences of opinions on the matter as well. Neither is there a need to mention that throughout history in Islam there are instances where the leaders did not put apostates to death, since that is not the issue.

So Daveyati's argument is "Quran says that there is no compulsion in religion, but Hadith states that there is a punishment for people who leave Islam. That means that there is a contradiction in Islam."

If you want to say that this is a contradiction, then what about Christianity? I can say something similar as well.

"Christianity says that people are free to believe that they want to believe, but Christianity also says that people who are not Christian will go to Hell. That means that there is a contradiction in Christianity."

Whether the punishment is in this life or the afterlife does not take away from the validity of the argument.

However, I obviously do not agree with the argument. I am only presenting to you your line of reasoning. People are free to believe whatever they want, but that doesn't mean that they are not accountable for their beliefs. Inwardly, no one truly knows what people believe. But outwardly, we cannot deny that our actions have consequences. We can tell someone that it is up to them to eat whatever they want, but it doesn't mean that they will not have to deal with the consequences of what they eat.

In regards to the hadith, notice that there is an additional condition other than apostasy and that is "leaving the muslims". From my understanding, some understand this to refer to treason. But whatever it is, we know that it is a condition which is in accompaniment with apostasy that is punishable.

[Muhammad]

greetings! the problem is not a logical, historical or philosophical one. it is a theological one. How can you implement punishment for apostasy and not contradict or violate Quran 2:256?

The matter is quite simple. It is not a contradiction but a failure (or reluctance) to understand. I came across the following explanation which might be worth mentioning here:

...in light of the context of the guidance of the Quran and the Sunnah this Command of the Lord Most High ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion’ means and implies that since Allah has given every individual a ‘free will’ as a test; for a period of one lifetime every individual has a God-given right to choose for himself between the paths of Truth and error, Guidance and misguidance, Belief and disbelief, Obedience or disobedience. Every individual has a right to choose whatever path he wishes to live his life, and none should or can be forced or coerced or compelled to choose belief if one chooses to disbelieve. Thus it is absolutely impermissible in Islamic Law to force, or coerce, or compel anyone to accept Islam as their way of life if they do not themselves, of their own free will, choose to do so.

But if one, of his own free will chooses to believe and enters Islam by declaring the ‘shahaadah’ or testification of faith, then he is bound by his declaration and all the disciplines of Islam become obligatory upon such a person. If one after accepting Islam as his deen does not pray, he will be compelled by Law to offer his prayers; or if he refuses to pay the zakah dues, he will be compelled by Law to fulfill his zakah dues; or if he refuses to distribute inheritance as prescribed by Shariah, he will be compelled by Law to do so; etc. Once the person of his own free will accepts Islam, he has no right to pick-and-choose the laws he wishes to follow; but rather he will be compelled to follow all the obligatory dictates of Shariah by Law. Here one cannot say or bring forth the excuse ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion’! nor would it be accepted. This command only applies to one who has not accepted Islam as his way of life.

Allow us to relate a simple example to further explain the point. In today’s age, one is not compelled to take citizenship of any nation (for eg. United States of America); but if one of his own free will chooses to take on and accept US citizenship, he cannot pick-and-choose which law he wishes to follow. If the law of the land states that he has to pay tax, he will be compelled to pay it whether he likes it or not; of if the law of the land states he has to be drafted in the army, he will be compelled to join the army; or if the law of the land states he has to pay half his wealth to his divorced wife, he will be compelled to do so; etc...

I read the articles. There are some inaccuracies in the first article. Especially Pauls quote in Romans. It also seems to say that because the Torah allowed similar behaviors for the ancient Israelites and because the West in Medieval times was similar then that excuses Muslims killing an apostate. The problem with this however is that Israel has moved on from that time and as far as the West is concerned it has also moved forward

I think more accurately the article is pointing out the perplexing behaviour of Jews and Christians when they raise issue with Muslims for following laws that they themselves have in their books but chosen to neglect.

and you will not find anything in the New Testament / Injil that would support executions for apostasy anyway.

Muslims do not consider the New Testament as the Injil. As for your claim, the following seems quite clear:

Deuteronomy 13:6-11:

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

Deutronomy 13: 12-18:

¹² If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in ¹³ that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), ¹⁴ then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, ¹⁵you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely,^[b] both its people and its livestock. ¹⁶ You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt, ¹⁷ and none of the condemned things^[c] are to be found in your hands.

Deutronomy 17:1-7:

² If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant, ³ and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky, ⁴ and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, ⁵ take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.

2 Chronicles 15:12-13:

12 And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul; 13 That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.



It's strange you endorse a book containing the above and much more, yet come here seeming so concerned about 'murder'.

[daveyats]

In regards to the original poster's argument, the issue is not about what the punishment for apostasy is. Rather, it is that there is a punishment at all. So even if for example the punishment for apostasy is a "slap on the wrist" it still does not change the argument by the original poster as his argument is that "If there is no compulsion in religion, then why is there a penalty for leaving Islam."

So in this regard, there is no need to mention that while there is the opinion that majority of Scholars hold, there are differences of opinions on the matter as well. Neither is there a need to mention that throughout history in Islam there are instances where the leaders did not put apostates to death, since that is not the issue.

So Daveyati's argument is "Quran says that there is no compulsion in religion, but Hadith states that there is a punishment for people who leave Islam. That means that there is a contradiction in Islam."

If you want to say that this is a contradiction, then what about Christianity? I can say something similar as well.

"Christianity says that people are free to believe that they want to believe, but Christianity also says that people who are not Christian will go to Hell. That means that there is a contradiction in Christianity."

Whether the punishment is in this life or the afterlife does not take away from the validity of the argument.

However, I obviously do not agree with the argument. I am only presenting to you your line of reasoning. People are free to believe whatever they want, but that doesn't mean that they are not accountable for their beliefs. Inwardly, no one truly knows what people believe. But outwardly, we cannot deny that our actions have consequences. We can tell someone that it is up to them to eat whatever they want, but it doesn't mean that they will not have to deal with the consequences of what they eat.

In regards to the hadith, notice that there is an additional condition other than apostasy and that is "leaving the muslims". From my understanding, some understand this to refer to treason. But whatever it is, we know that it is a condition which is in accompaniment with apostasy that is punishable.

Hulk, I greatly appreciate the fact that you follow my reasoning closely and your statements make the most sense to me. I do recognize that Islam allows for a diversity of views but certainly in no way will any rationale person accept any truth about God (or any other matter) to be self-contradictory.

You are only slightly mistaken about the Christian belief. God commands and expects man to believe in Jesus Christ but he does not command His people to compel anyone to believe. We are only commanded to persuade men. Only God is qualified to met out judgement and the consequences to unbelievers.

In Islam, Allah does not compel anyone to believe but commands his followers to compel others to believe. That is the contradiction which I must emphasize again.

[daveyats]

Muhamad, if you fail to see the contradiction in this I can't say anything more than all I've said in this thread.

"Every individual has a right to choose whatever path he wishes to live his life, and none should or can be forced or coerced or compelled to choose belief if one chooses to disbelieve"..." This command only applies to one who has not accepted Islam as his way of life. "

please also read my earlier posts about the problems with the statements above...

[daveyats]

Deuteronomy 13:6-11:

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

Deutronomy 13: 12-18:

12 If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in 13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely,[b] both its people and its livestock. 16 You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt, 17 and none of the condemned things[c] are to be found in your hands.

Deutronomy 17:1-7:

2 If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant, 3 and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky, 4 and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, 5 take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.

2 Chronicles 15:12-13:

12 And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul; 13 That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.

I just wish to say that I can reply you on this, but I don't wish to. I respect that this is an Islamic forum. If you have christian friends, you can approach them to clarify about this.

[M.I.A.]

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong." Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256

I have a friend who left Islam and was severely punished by his family and later disowned. Which is understandable, because which father will not want his son to take on his faith and values. but in some places that practice sharia law, an apostate can be punished even by death.

How can the Islamic faith claim to be "without compulsion" if muslims are not given the freedom to choose what religion they want to belong to?

i feel its almost self explanatory in the simplest terms, when you get to the point where right and wrong become clear.. then you cant go back.

if you feel religion is compulsion then you have not yet realised what life is. what acceptance is.


but i would use your own example to voice my own disagreement,

if the world and its practice of islam is perfect, then why is the ummah not near what we would expect from it?


i would guess its complicated, each to his own path.

live and learn really.

[ardianto]

In Islam, Allah does not compel anyone to believe but commands his followers to compel others to believe. That is the contradiction which I must emphasize again.

Some people in my mother family are Christians. Some of my friends are non-Muslims too, mainly Christian. And no one compel them to convert to Islam although they live in Muslim majority country.

There is no command to compel other people to convert to Islam. But unfortunately, there are Muslims who make their own initiative to compel other people accept Islam, although there is no command for it.

[Hulk]

Hulk, I greatly appreciate the fact that you follow my reasoning closely and your statements make the most sense to me. I do recognize that Islam allows for a diversity of views but certainly in no way will any rationale person accept any truth about God (or any other matter) to be self-contradictory.

You are only slightly mistaken about the Christian belief. God commands and expects man to believe in Jesus Christ but he does not command His people to compel anyone to believe. We are only commanded to persuade men. Only God is qualified to met out judgement and the consequences to unbelievers.

In Islam, Allah does not compel anyone to believe but commands his followers to compel others to believe. That is the contradiction which I must emphasize again.

Was I mistaken in the example that I gave? I'm pretty sure christians for the most part would agree with what I said

"Christianity says that people are free to believe that they want to believe, but Christianity also says that people who are not Christian will go to Hell."

this is similar to your argument "Islam says that there is no compulsion in religion, but Islam also says that there is a punishment for those who leave islam."

As I said, "no compulsion in belief" does not equal "no consequences of belief". You can't deny that the argument you presented can be used against christianity as well. A person who leaves christianity will still be punished correct? Just that you would say that it happens in the afterlife, which is only an issue of "when" he will be punished.

If you want to say that there is a difference in "who carries out the punishment" then that's fine as well but it is still the same argument that you are dealing with, the only difference is "when" and "who". The same goes with your claim "Allah commands muslims to compel others to believe", regardless of how true the statement is, it's still a matter of "who is doing the compelling".

Christianity is still faced with the same argument, and thus "contradiction".

You'd have to acknowledge that the argument you presented is invalid, as "no compulsion in belief" does not equal "no consequences of belief".
-----------------------
In regards to "Allah commands muslims to compel others to believe", the burden of proof is on you to prove that. Keep in mind my previous post regarding the hadith of "apostasy with treason". But it would be going off topic already since the original argument has already been shown to be invalid.

[daveyats]

Was I mistaken in the example that I gave? I'm pretty sure christians for the most part would agree with what I said

"Christianity says that people are free to believe that they want to believe, but Christianity also says that people who are not Christian will go to Hell."

this is similar to your argument "Islam says that there is no compulsion in religion, but Islam also says that there is a punishment for those who leave islam."

As I said, "no compulsion in belief" does not equal "no consequences of belief". You can't deny that the argument you presented can be used against christianity as well. A person who leaves christianity will still be punished correct? Just that you would say that it happens in the afterlife, which is only an issue of "when" he will be punished.

If you want to say that there is a difference in "who carries out the punishment" then that's fine as well but it is still the same argument that you are dealing with, the only difference is "when" and "who". The same goes with your claim "Allah commands muslims to compel others to believe", regardless of how true the statement is, it's still a matter of "who is doing the compelling".

Christianity is still faced with the same argument, and thus "contradiction".

You'd have to acknowledge that the argument you presented is invalid, as "no compulsion in belief" does not equal "no consequences of belief".
-----------------------
In regards to "Allah commands muslims to compel others to believe", the burden of proof is on you to prove that. Keep in mind my previous post regarding the hadith of "apostasy with treason". But it would be going off topic already since the original argument has already been shown to be invalid.

I wish to assure you I understand where you're coming from. It makes a whole lot of sense. God in giving men free will, does not remove the consequence of their choice. I agree with this.

I picture both narratives this way:

Jesus Christ tells men - You have absolute free will to choose. You can choose to follow me or take any other path but I must warn you that any other path leads to a place called Hell. Anyone is free at any point of time to choose any path for the duration of his earthly life but your choice is final when you die. This is the Christian narrative.

Allah tells men - You have absolute free will to choose, I and no one can compel you by force or coercion to accept Me. You can choose between following me or taking any other path but I must warn you that if you choose the other path, it leads to a place called Hell. If you choose to follow me, your acceptance is final. You will not be allowed the freedom to choose the other path. Doing so will meet with your punishment and death. This is the Islamic narrative.

Before I go on to elaborate, am I right or wrong in picturing Islam this way? This is the picture I get from the replies here, because I think the difference and contradiction is what I see in the narrative.

[Genesis]

[QUOTE
I think more accurately the article is pointing out the perplexing behaviour of Jews and Christians when they raise issue with Muslims for following laws that they themselves have in their books but chosen to neglect.

Muslims do not consider the New Testament as the Injil. As for your claim, the following seems quite clear:

Deuteronomy 13:6-11:

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

Deutronomy 13: 12-18:

¹² If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in ¹³ that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), ¹⁴ then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, ¹⁵you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely,^[b] both its people and its livestock. ¹⁶ You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt, ¹⁷ and none of the condemned things^[c] are to be found in your hands.

Deutronomy 17:1-7:

² If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant, ³ and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky, ⁴ and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, ⁵ take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.

2 Chronicles 15:12-13:

12 And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul; 13 That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
It's strange you endorse a book containing the above and much more, yet come here seeming so concerned about 'murder'.[/QUOTE]
Hello Mohammad
The authors argument is floored due to their misunderstanding of Romans. So that is worth neglecting straight away. The Old Testament scriptures are also worth neglecting because they are old covenant - not new covenant. That is ancient Jewish behaviour, not New Covenant religion that Jesus introduced.
Also in regards to the Injil what Injil did Mohamad have that was different to the New Testament we have today. The New Testament canon was established over the 600 years before Mohamad. So of course the Injil he had access to was the same as todays.
Of course

[Ummshareef]

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong." Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256

How can the Islamic faith claim to be "without compulsion" if muslims are not given the freedom to choose what religion they want to belong to?

Nobody should be forced to choose Islam but if you are born into Islam or have made the choice by saying the Shahada then it must be followed for life. That means submitting to the will of Allah subhanahu wa ta'alaa by believing in Him, worshiping Him and accepting His laws. The obligations that this comes with are not something you can turn away from when you feel like it - we are commanded to follow Islam in full for life. Our religion incorporates a full legal system - abandoning Islam is seen as amongst the most serious sins for which exemplary punishment is due.

[aamirsaab]

There is no theological contradiction.

The Qur'an gives is us the rule (no compulsion in religion) AND the exception to this rule (apostates who then fight against/betray/cause havoc in the land of Muslims).

When the apostasy ruling was revealed, it was during a turbulent time between Muslim and Non-Muslim; some Non-Muslim would pretend to convert and learn vital information about Muslim armies etc. They would then apostatize and give this information to their commanders. Thus in order to prevent a massacre of Muslims, the ruling was sent allowing for the killing of apostates in those particular circumstances.

Again, this is not a contradiction it is merely providing us the rule and the exception to it.

[InToTheRain]

:)

Let me understand you correctly, you just said:

1. Allah sees no need for a person to believe and behave according to the Koran against that person's will.

Yes

2. Allah sees a need for an Islamic state, where people belonging to the state are expected to believe and behave according to the Koran even against their own will.

Yes and No... They are expected to behave in accordance to the laws made by the nation to preserve it's values. They don't have to believe it; as mentioned every nation has their own pregortive to make laws in their own interest. It's like saying people in UK are expected to behave in an orderely manner against their own will; **** right they are. Just like in the UK, there are rules/regulations for normal citizens however for others such as M15 agents or workers there are far more stringent sets of laws; all to do with guarding their own insterests.

In fact a brother above gave this example which fits:
Allow us to relate a simple example to further explain the point. In today’s age, one is not compelled to take citizenship of any nation (for eg. United States of America); but if one of his own free will chooses to take on and accept US citizenship, he cannot pick-and-choose which law he wishes to follow. If the law of the land states that he has to pay tax, he will be compelled to pay it whether he likes it or not; of if the law of the land states he has to be drafted in the army, he will be compelled to join the army; or if the law of the land states he has to pay half his wealth to his divorced wife, he will be compelled to do so; etc...

1) has to do with Belief (internal state)
2) has to do with guarding our own interests (controlling the external behaviour of masses). This does not form part of belief meaning I do not have to execute an apostate in the UK to remain a Muslim should someone apostate infront of me rather it's the states responsibility should it wish to do so.


Your argument is no different to saying "There is a contradiction in Islam because Allah (Most High) says you should love other Muslims so why do you kill them (once they murder/adultery etc)?". One is to do with belief (internal state) the other to keep law and order (national interest). Your just taking it completely out of context.

[daveyats]

The problem is: "There is no compulsion in religion"

This sentence alone does not allow for exceptions because implies that there is, and should be no compulsion at any time, with regards to a person's choice of faith or beliefs. It can also read as a declaration that Islam is free of any compulsion.

If Allah only meant that no one should be compelled to enter Islam, the verse should read something like "there is no compulsion in entering religion". a reading like this would allow for an exception - leaving the religion.

I also pointed out other problems like with regards to children, whether they had any real choice in the matter...and does the idea of being "born a muslim" violates the idea that Allah does not compel anyone to believe.

I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse now, so I'm going to leave the discussion as it is. As I stated earlier...i'm just voicing my opinion.

thanks for the replies. Peace

[Muhaba]

Please do not misinterpret my statement. It in no way means that Muslims are free to leave the religion. What I meant was that a Muslim who learns the religion well is never going to leave because there is no reason why he/she should. It is like a perfect city, better than all other places in the world. You would never leave it because no other place would give you similar benefits. The only time you would leave is when you knowingly decide to exchange the better for something of lower standard for some worldly reason (like a king giving you a few million $). This is not acceptable.

This is the case of the person who has knowledge of the religion. On the other hand, there are those who are just Muslim by name, being raised in unislamic circumstances and families that aren't religious. Islam to these people is just a label, just as their nationality is. While it isn't allowed for them to leave Islam, if they do so, it is understandable because they were never true Muslims in the first place. This is why it is important to raise your children with islamic education, otherwise you risk raising a hypocrite who is just muslim by name. Your child will be Muslim so long as he/she is compelled to be one but on the inside he/she will not be a Muslim. And as soon as he/she gets a chance, he/she will remove the "Muslim" label too. And this is a fact. I've read about Muslim children becoming atheists. The responsibility of such children falls on the parents and the parents will be questioned about the child's straying.

[daveyats]

Please do not misinterpret my statement. It in no way means that Muslims are free to leave the religion. What I meant was that a Muslim who learns the religion well is never going to leave because there is no reason why he/she should. It is like a perfect city, better than all other places in the world. You would never leave it because no other place would give you similar benefits. The only time you would leave is when you knowingly decide to exchange the better for something of lower standard for some worldly reason (like a king giving you a few million $). This is not acceptable.

This is the case of the person who has knowledge of the religion. On the other hand, there are those who are just Muslim by name, being raised in unislamic circumstances and families that aren't religious. Islam to these people is just a label, just as their nationality is. While it isn't allowed for them to leave Islam, if they do so, it is understandable because they were never true Muslims in the first place. This is why it is important to raise your children with islamic education, otherwise you risk raising a hypocrite who is just muslim by name. Your child will be Muslim so long as he/she is compelled to be one but on the inside he/she will not be a Muslim. And as soon as he/she gets a chance, he/she will remove the "Muslim" label too. And this is a fact. I've read about Muslim children becoming atheists. The responsibility of such children falls on the parents and the parents will be questioned about the child's straying.

I think its clear enough for me. no muslims are free to leave the religion although Islam claims that "there is no compulsion in religion".

[daveyats]

:)



Yes



Yes and No... They are expected to behave in accordance to the laws made by the nation to preserve it's values. They don't have to believe it; as mentioned every nation has their own pregortive to make laws in their own interest. It's like saying people in UK are expected to behave in an orderely manner against their own will; **** right they are. Just like in the UK, there are rules/regulations for normal citizens however for others such as M15 agents or workers there are far more stringent sets of laws; all to do with guarding their own insterests.

In fact a brother above gave this example which fits:
Allow us to relate a simple example to further explain the point. In today’s age, one is not compelled to take citizenship of any nation (for eg. United States of America); but if one of his own free will chooses to take on and accept US citizenship, he cannot pick-and-choose which law he wishes to follow. If the law of the land states that he has to pay tax, he will be compelled to pay it whether he likes it or not; of if the law of the land states he has to be drafted in the army, he will be compelled to join the army; or if the law of the land states he has to pay half his wealth to his divorced wife, he will be compelled to do so; etc...

1) has to do with Belief (internal state)
2) has to do with guarding our own interests (controlling the external behaviour of masses). This does not form part of belief meaning I do not have to execute an apostate in the UK to remain a Muslim should someone apostate infront of me rather it's the states responsibility should it wish to do so.


Your argument is no different to saying "There is a contradiction in Islam because Allah (Most High) says you should love other Muslims so why do you kill them (once they murder/adultery etc)?". One is to do with belief (internal state) the other to keep law and order (national interest). Your just taking it completely out of context.

well, find me one single law in the whole of UK that says you are not allowed to renounce your citizenship and join as a citizen of another.

[InToTheRain]

well, find me one single law in the whole of UK that says you are not allowed to renounce your citizenship and join as a citizen of another.

Bottom line is how muslim nations decide to maintain law and order in their nations is their pregoritive as well as what they see as a potential problem.
I think it's best to agree to disagree as I am sure we will not see eye to eye on many Laws be it from Shariah or other sources.

Regarding bring born a Muslim there are two reasons:

1) Allah Most High mentions that He has already taken testimony from us regarding our servitude to Him so we cannot make excuses saying we did know of Him and our fealty to Him. So Servitude to Allah Most High also means following the respective Prophets(AS) and Massengers(AS) that were sent by Allah Most High to guide mankind towards Him. So being Born a Muslim also means following Musa(AS) and Isa/Jesus(AS) during the era there was no Islam. This is why when someone follows Islam we say they "reverted" not "converted".

Allah Most High does not say He forced a testimony from us but rather we have already sworn fealty (most probably out of Awe). Also this why Dhikr (praising Allah Most High) is also translated to "remembrance" in Allah Most High because mankind is born and in a state of forgetfulness until they Remember their Purpose which is to Worship Allah Most High.

2) The Fitra in it's primordial state believes in Allah Most High; has an affinity towards Him and to do Good (that which pleases Him). As the saying goes "The Truth is Within" :) More on that on link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NdfJSS2B2I

And everyone is born with their Fitra intact this is why we say everyone is born a Muslim.

The Prophet Muhammad said, "No babe is born but upon Fitra. It is his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian or a Polytheist." (Sahih Muslim, Book 033, Number 6426)


All the best :)

P.S: please leave the dead horses alone

[Scimitar]

daveyats,

the shariah states that apostacy is only to be punished by death if the person who apostates is doing so for the sake of treason - in any law, in any country, even in the modern age - treason is punishable by death.

There is no issue here - it would serve you well to look into the details.

Scimi

[Muhaba]

I think its clear enough for me. no muslims are free to leave the religion although Islam claims that "there is no compulsion in religion".

Why are you misinterpreting the verse. We have to accept the verses as interpreted by God's Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) (through hadith and application). This verse is for those who are not Muslims. There is no compulsion on them to become Muslims, just as the verse says. The verse is not regarding those who have already accepted Islam of their own free will. Such have to remain Muslims and can not renounce their religion.

You cannot misinterpret a verse and then say that the accepted interpretation contradicts with your interpretation and that means that the Quran contradicts itself.

[daveyats]

All the best :)

P.S: please leave the dead horses alone

Lol!! I will now. All the best to u too

[Hulk]

I think its clear enough for me. no muslims are free to leave the religion although Islam claims that "there is no compulsion in religion".

Similarly, no christians are free to leave christianity without being punished although christianity claims that you are free to believe whatever you want.

[Muhammad]

Muhamad, if you fail to see the contradiction in this I can't say anything more than all I've said in this thread.

Yes, it is best not to say anything more if you are not prepared to see other than what you want to see. When biblical verses are quoted, both of you are quick to forward explanations about abrogation and flawed understanding. But when it comes to the Qur'an, you insist on your personal opinion and are not interested in factual discussion.

[theplains]

Similarly, no christians are free to leave christianity without being punished although christianity claims that you are free to believe whatever you want.

I have heard of several Christians who have left Christianity to become atheists,
Buddhists, Muslims, etc. after turning their backs on their prior faith but I have
never heard of any punishments for them.

Thanks,
Jim

[daveyats]

Similarly, no christians are free to leave christianity without being punished although christianity claims that you are free to believe whatever you want.

I think you and I both know that statement is inaccurate. The Christian is free to leave Christianity and face the same consequence that befalls any person who rejects Christ when he dies.

It is accurate to say that the Muslim is not free to leave because he will be punished and compelled to remain a Muslim. That is the purpose of the punishment - to prevent apostasy.

If you wish to insist that no men have free will because God/Allah punishes unbelievers, you only further the contradiction not resolve it. Peace.

[Genesis]

Nobody should be forced to choose Islam but if you are born into Islam or have made the choice by saying the Shahada then it must be followed for life. That means submitting to the will of Allah subhanahu wa ta'alaa by believing in Him, worshiping Him and accepting His laws. The obligations that this comes with are not something you can turn away from when you feel like it - we are commanded to follow Islam in full for life. Our religion incorporates a full legal system - abandoning Islam is seen as amongst the most serious sins for which exemplary punishment is due.

Exemplary punishment being death. Why is Islam so insecure. If indeed it is the ultimate and highest of religion then it should stand on its own without having to force compliance with the threat of death.
How can something so superior be so insecure with it self.

[Genesis]

I think you and I both know that statement is inaccurate. The Christian is free to leave Christianity and face the same consequence that befalls any person who rejects Christ when he dies.

It is accurate to say that the Muslim is not free to leave because he will be punished and compelled to remain a Muslim. That is the purpose of the punishment - to prevent apostasy.

If you wish to insist that no men have free will because God/Allah punishes unbelievers, you only further the contradiction not resolve it. Peace.

All religions have some type of sanction. Hinduism and Buddhism have negative reincarnation for those who do not show Godley lives. What we are talking about here is a person being threatened by death by another person ---.

[Genesis]

daveyats,

the shariah states that apostacy is only to be punished by death if the person who apostates is doing so for the sake of treason - in any law, in any country, even in the modern age - treason is punishable by death.

There is no issue here - it would serve you well to look into the details.

Scimi

If I leave my country to take nationality in another I do not get punished by death.
If this was the way it was in Medieval Arabia due to Muslims being at war with tribes around them fair enough. However all that tells me is that Islam is not an absolute and timeless religion for all people at all times. Not relevant to today.

[Genesis]

Similarly, no christians are free to leave christianity without being punished although christianity claims that you are free to believe whatever you want.

leaving Christianity is not punishable by death.

[Hulk]

I have heard of several Christians who have left Christianity to become atheists,
Buddhists, Muslims, etc. after turning their backs on their prior faith but I have
never heard of any punishments for them.


Thanks,
Jim

Are you saying they will never be punished? Not even in the afterlife?

I think you and I both know that statement is inaccurate. The Christian is free to leave Christianity and face the same consequence that befalls any person who rejects Christ when he dies.


It is accurate to say that the Muslim is not free to leave because he will be punished and compelled to remain a Muslim. That is the purpose of the punishment - to prevent apostasy.


If you wish to insist that no men have free will because God/Allah punishes unbelievers, you only further the contradiction not resolve it. Peace.

How can it be inaccurate if it is true? He is not obligated to accept Christ, but he will be punished if he rejects him. The threat of hell fire is to prevent apostasy. See how the same logic works for Christianity as well? I am merely pointing out that you are using the samereasoning against Islam but you don't realise that the same can be used against Christianity.

"It is accurate to say that the Muslim is not free to leave because he will be punished and compelled to remain a Muslim"
The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim.

All religions have some type of sanction. Hinduism and Buddhism have negative reincarnation for those who do not show Godley lives. What we are talking about here is a person being threatened by death by another person which is far more crude and barbaric.

Burning in Hell is less barbaric?

[daveyats]

Read the news. This year a pregnant Sudanese woman was put in jail on charges of apostasy.
Last year, an Iranian pastor on similar charges. There are "reformative camps" in Malaysia and Indonesia where Christian converts from Islam are sent for "reformation". This is just the tip of the iceberg. But don't take it from me, you can do your own research.

[Hulk]

Read the news. This year a pregnant Sudanese woman was put in jail on charges of apostasy.
Last year, an Iranian pastor on similar charges. There are "reformative camps" in Malaysia and Indonesia where Christian converts from Islam are sent for "reformation". This is just the tip of the iceberg. But don't take it from me, you can do your own research.

The actions of people is not proof that that is what their religion commands them to do. The proof is from the text itself. If a person follows a recipe book wrongly and messes up chocolate cake you don't use that person's cooking as proof that the chocolate cake recipe is not good. You need to provide evidence from the text itself.

[daveyats]

I don't know you tell me. Every reply I've gotten in this thread says apostasy in Islam is punishable by death and from what I see and hear, it is being practiced in countries that has strict sharia laws.

I know not all Muslims approve of it and there is a diversity of views within the faith itself on this matter.

[ardianto]

Read the news. This year a pregnant Sudanese woman was put in jail on charges of apostasy.
Last year, an Iranian pastor on similar charges. There are "reformative camps" in Malaysia and Indonesia where Christian converts from Islam are sent for "reformation". This is just the tip of the iceberg. But don't take it from me, you can do your own research.

What do you mean with "reformation camp"?. I live in Indonesia. One of my friend is ex-Muslim who now Christian. Few public figure in Indonesia are Christians who convert from Islam (beside some public figures who convert from Christianity to Islam). And they live safely.

Some people in my mother family are Christians. Few of my friends are Christians too. And no one compel them to convert to Islam.

You should do your own research, or come to Indonesia to see the reality.

[Muhammad]

It is accurate to say that the Muslim is not free to leave because he will be punished and compelled to remain a Muslim. That is the purpose of the punishment - to prevent apostasy.

If you wish to insist that no men have free will because God/Allah punishes unbelievers, you only further the contradiction not resolve it.

Punishment for crimes does not contradict the concept of free will, whether that punishment is in the worldly life or afterlife. As you said, it is a case of facing the consequence of one's actions. Yes, punishments do act as deterrents, but that is totally different to the concept of free will.

Exemplary punishment being death. Why is Islam so insecure. If indeed it is the ultimate and highest of religion then it should stand on its own without having to force compliance with the threat of death.
How can something so superior be so insecure with it self.

It is not Islam that is insecure, it is the hearts of humans. Islam is so complete that its laws take into consideration society as a whole and how the transgression of humans may impact that society.

If you have a problem with punishment by death, then once again you need to consider your Bible. You may say that those teachings are not applicable in your religion anymore, however, that does not negate the fact that Christians believe these punishments to be divinely ordained and considered the law for centuries. Why then the hypocrisy of criticising Islamic laws?

[daveyats]

My friend was sent to Indonesia for "reformation" before but that was more then 10 years ago. That place was probably run by extremists. But again, don't just hear it from me. My info may be wrong, outdated inaccurate etc the best way is to find out for yourself or simply treat my words as rubbish. It's no loss or gain for me whether you believe me or not.

[Hulk]

My friend was sent to Indonesia for "reformation" before but that was more then 10 years ago. That place was probably run by extremists. But again, don't just hear it from me. My info may be wrong, outdated inaccurate etc the best way is to find out for yourself or simply treat my words as rubbish. It's no loss or gain for me whether you believe me or not.

Since we're using personal experiences. One of my family friends is an ex-muslim (in indonesia) woman who married a christian and now have kids who are in early to mid 20s. That's more than 20 years of being "ex muslim" with nothing ever happening to her, not even cutting of family ties.

[Genesis]

Punishment for crimes does not contradict the concept of free will, whether that punishment is in the worldly life or afterlife. As you said, it is a case of facing the consequence of one's actions. Yes, punishments do act as deterrents, but that is totally different to the concept of free will.

It is not Islam that is insecure, it is the hearts of humans. Islam is so complete that its laws take into consideration society as a whole and how the transgression of humans may impact that society.

If you have a problem with punishment by death, then once again you need to consider your Bible. You may say that those teachings are not applicable in your religion anymore, however, that does not negate the fact that Christians believe these punishments to be divinely ordained and considered the law for centuries. Why then the hypocrisy of criticising Islamic laws?

Yes the hearts of humans are fickle. But your religious system is what is being held to account for the insecurity- not the hearts of humans.
Yes the Old Testament scriptures were ordained by God but they were not his perfect will. His perfect will has been revealed through the New Covenant heralded by John the Baptist and brought into effect by Jesus

[Genesis]

Burning in Hell is less barbaric?

Hello Mohamad.
The Qaran stressors the horrors of hell far more than the Bible. And yes it is less barbaric because it is about the just and merciful justice of God. Compare this to some shonky court in Sudan or Iran

[Muhammad]

Greetings Genesis,

Yes the hearts of humans are fickle. But your religious system is what is being held to account for the insecurity- not the hearts of humans.

Forgive me if I don't consider what you personally hold to account to be of any value.

Yes the Old Testament scriptures were ordained by God but they were not his perfect will.

So you believe God can be imperfect? What kind of a God is this?

The Quran stressors the horrors of hell far more than the Bible.

Even if true, so what? The Bible contains a great many disturbing passages involving lewd behaviour, attributes shocking crimes to Prophets, whereas the Qur'an does not.

And yes it is less barbaric because it is about the just and merciful justice of God.

The exact same thing can be said about Islam.

[Scimitar]

If I leave my country to take nationality in another I do not get punished by death.
If this was the way it was in Medieval Arabia due to Muslims being at war with tribes around them fair enough. However all that tells me is that Islam is not an absolute and timeless religion for all people at all times. Not relevant to today.

I like your veracity, it's cute :)

hmm *snaps fingers* hey, look around you - what do you see? 1 fifth the worlds population is Muslim in case you haven't noticed, and more people from the west - women over men on a ration of 4/1, are reverting to Islam more than any other religion in the world - try telling me again, how Islam is irrelevant please?

Despite the media spin, lies, and waffle to push public opinion into mindless regurgitations of its own broadcasts, people are waking up. And the world is higher in numbers of Muslims today than it ever has been. How is this possible? Please, I'd like to hear your explanation of this :D i'm up for a laugh.

Scimi

[theplains]

It is not Islam that is insecure, it is the hearts of humans. Islam is so complete that its laws take into consideration society as a whole and how the transgression of humans may impact that society.

Would you provide a few sources in the Quran or Hadith showing that a person who converts out
of Islam should be punished or killed?

Thanks,
Jim

[Woodrow]

But Greenhill. Murder is murder. It is the Quran and Hadith that say to kill the apostate.

Apostasy in an Islamic Nation will sometimes entail treason. Under the 4 Madhabs of Sharia, simple apostasy is not punishable. What is punishable is if the apostasy results in other crimes.

No one has every been executed for apostasy in an actual Sharia court that abides by one of the Madhabs. However, people were executed for acts of treason and often they were also apostates. But the fact they were apostates was not the reason they were executed.

[h-n]

When people join the US army, are they not in trouble for not fighting? Are people not sent to jail, so basically your telling them to go and potentially die that is more acceptable then you denying fighting for your country.

On another note, your referring to people who worshipped, believed in God. After having faith, and rejecting the message, what more do you think God would give the individual?? Even Allah has stated after the food came down at the time of Prophet Jesus peace be upon him, that if anyone leaves believe, will be punished like he has never punished anyone before.

OF course we don't expect Christians to understand who left the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him because they were too afraid of the authorities, rather then adhering to FAITH.

[h-n]

The issue is that people don't think and remember that this world is a test. There are many individuals that after faith, God wasn't going to give them anything else on the straight path-because there are limits. For example;-


-Satan-God doesn't have to give him anything to help him to be good, as he already understand, acknowledges the one God, he only has reprieve till the Day of Judgement, which is not beneficial to him as he has witnessed and rejected all the Prophets. Now the Muslims are no different to accepting the truth as if you were in heaven, so if you leave Islam and you did not die, those people will NEVER be treated the same as an non-Muslim. As that non-Muslim never reached, believed as that Muslim ever did, so God would help the non-Muslims to Islam, rather then a person who rejects, rejects Islam after belief.


- After the table spreadth at the time of the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him, Allah said of those that were present, that if anyone rejects him after this will be punished as he has never punished anyone before.


- People learnt black magic from Harut and Marut who were two angels. Note that the angels were just openly warning and told people not to do black magic (where people use devils to inflict suffering, as devils not only follow and talk to people, they also of course touch people’s bodies). It is no different in a good, innocent person telling you not to go into that room as it contains a knife, or someone telling you were they keep their money and telling people not to steal.


Now the people at the time of Harut and Marut, knew that they were angels, this is how evil these people were. Normally if you saw an angel you probably ask questions about the next world, what is Paradise like, or what do I need to do in life to be successful for the next. But these people were more interested in harming other humans-this is where they are non-Muslims and they are in Hell fire. AS there is nothing that Allah needs to give these people to get them to accept the truth in the one God, the Day of Judgement, Paradise and Hell.


-Which also brings the issue of devils they live in a parallel world, they know that heaven exists, they used to eavesdrop on heaven which is why people were able to tell future events. There is nothing that God needs to give the devils more to help them to repent. They outwardly become repulsive as well as the inside. Note here it is no issue that they are still alive, as God has said that they are feeble.


- After the Prophet Salih peace be upon him with his camel, God wasn’t going to give to the people any other sign.


Now if a Muslim living in the USA lets say, leaves Islam, he/she may wish to live as non-Muslims do, and to them they may think that they are living the same, but they are NOT. As God himself is treating both parties differently the former Muslim and people who never became Muslim. In that Allah is providing guidance and showing people the straight path.


-Prophet Noah peace be upon him had a son, he could not have asked for a better father, he was one of those who were sinful and were drowned. It is an honour to have righteous parents, and what excuse is there for the children to say that they do not wish to follow Islam that they were brought up into? No difference in living in Paradise and you couldn’t get away with rejecting God as there isn’t anything more.


-Prophet Jonah peace be upon him refusal to help other people, after all the knowledge that God gave him was not accepted, thus he was swallowed by the whale and went on his way. Of course he wasn’t turning away from belief, but was carrying out Allah’s wishes.


Now in the west you hear many examples ie;-


1. Soldiers being taken to court for refusing to fight.
2. People like Snowden being forced to flee, by not complying with a man-made law-so is it OK for people to be affected by a Man made law, but not the law of God??


Muslims as God as stated are the best people ever raised, we forbid evil and enjoin what is good, we are not going to reject, and pick and choose so as to appear as others wish us to appear.


When have you actually Prophets being specifically sent to people who rejected belief after accepting? No, they are sent to help guide people.


We are not here to go on a killing spree, killing people who refuse to repent, never did Allah say to us to kill those who refuse to repent and accept Islam (this is where Allah destroys the evil doers for not repenting such as he has done at the time of the Prophet Noah peace be upon him) -but these people are not and NEVER will be in the same position as those who received the food from heaven, been a Muslim. God, the angels treat the former Muslim forever differently then they would ever do to someone who has never become a Muslim before. This is why leaving Islam again and again is bad, as it causes the individual to stay in unbelief, as they wrong themselves, Allah wrongs them not. There’s only so much that Allah is going to show, if Allah was going to stop them from leaving Islam every time, then when they died how have they earned their place in Heaven??

As stated Allah destroys the evil doers for rejecting him, no Prophets have ever said it was our job to do. Allah has stated it is for Muslims to carry out sentences against Murderers depending on negotiations with family members, punish for adultery. So Allah is not going to send an earthquake for every Murderer.


It is an issue of the west where they think they are doing better then others. Here’s an example, you may get tribes around the world with odd practises, now to the west they would say that they are living better and that they are the poor improvised people. But in the west if they decide to get tattoos and normalise it, because they like to emphamise that it was their choice and nobody told them then they are free, even though they are follwing their own desires. So they are critical of Muslims for following the commandments of Allah, but think they are better for following their own wants.


All the Prophets came with one message to worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement, Paradise and Hell.


The jews were left wandering around the desert as they were not supportive of the Prophet Moses peace be upon him. Now Jews reject the existence of Hell saying that the pervious jews got it wrong about it-when the jews have NOT received a revelation from God to say this. That also say that Satan is not evil but God’s servant to test mankind, even though they say the serpent was bad during Prophet Adam peace be upon him’s time in Paradise.


The Christians did not support Prophet Jesus peace be upon him-when you say this to them, some say that they were jews at the time, in somehow trying to make that acceptable,


We follow the word of God, his commandments, we are not here to follow the desires of others. Yes you can choose what colour clothes you wear, what job you want, but not against the belief of the one God. You can't say people leaving Islam is a light thing, and not much of a sin, when it is an awful one at that.


I hope that people do a good search for topic answers, instead of just coming online, thinking that a statement is somehow going to say that Islam is all wrong, when it follows after the teachings of all the Prophets. It is always best to spend time away from forums and pray to God Almighty who has not taken himself a son, and neither is he one of three.


Surah Ikhlas


In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.
Say: He is Allah, the One!
Allah, the eternally Besought of all!
He begetteth not nor was begotten.
And there is none comparable unto Him.


72. They do blaspheme who say: "(Allah) is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.


73. They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

[Muhammad]

Greetings Jim,

Would you provide a few sources in the Quran or Hadith showing that a person who converts out
of Islam should be punished or killed?

From the quote earlier in the thread, there are two Hadith mentioned:

Muslims believe that the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said,

لا يَحِلُّ دَمُ امْرِئٍ مُسْلِمٍ إِلاَّ بِإِحْدَى ثَلاَثٍ الثَّيِّبُ الزَّانِي وَالنَّفْسُ بِالنَّفْسِ والتَارِكُ لِدِيْنِهِ المُفَارِقُ لِلْجَمَاعَةِ

“It is not legal [to spill] the blood of a Muslim except in one of three cases: the fornicator who has previously experienced legal sexual intercourse (i.e. with one’s husband, wife, etc.), a life for a life and one who forsakes his religion and separates from the community.” (Recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim.)

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is also reported to have said,

مَنْ بَدَّلَ دِينَهُ فَاقْتُلُوهُ

“Whoever changes his religion is to be killed.”[2] (Recorded by al-Bukhari and others.)

These texts from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) have led the vast majority of Muslim scholars to conclude that the punishment for apostasy from Islam in Islamic Law is death.

This link also quotes some statements from the scholars: Punishment for apostasy - Islam web - English

'In the establishment of this ruling, there is protection for the sanctity of religions not to be toyed with, lest those who are manipulative and desire-driven do not obtain the means to advance their personally-motivated ambitions and objectives. Furthermore, in that which Allah has ordained, He has the perfect proof and argument, as well as the Ultimate Wisdom. We ask Allah to grant guidance to all.'

[daveyats]

just want to say I'm leaving this discussion. I don't mean to be rude or anything. I came in with a simple question - how can Islam claim to have no compulsion and yet compel its followers to stay - and I think its made abundantly clear that Quran 2:256 is interpreted as no compulsion only to non-muslims. For the most part, every person has been civil and respectful in their replies though this question is admittedly sensitive and provocative. Appreciate that. cheers Dave

[Scimitar]

Ah Dave, sorry to see you leave without feeling you understand the nuance here.

1) there is no compulsion in Islam to come to faith unless one has reached faith - and then, that person cannot deny it because it would make he or she miserable.

2) there is no compulsion for Muslims to push their faith on other peoples in the manner Constantine did (by the sword) and so, Muslims have largely in history spread Islam through peaceful means:

Syrian archaeological dig reveals myth of Islam spreading by the sword

by Mike Addelman
Source: The University of Manchester

An archaeologist working in Syria has solved the mystery of why one of Islam’s earliest fortresses dropped out of the historical record around 1,100 years ago.

Senior Lecturer Dr Emma Loosley from The University of Manchester was one of an international team of experts invited into the world-renowned Khanuqa Gap by the Syrian Department of Antiquities before its secrets – and 11,000 years of human history – may be lost to a controversial dam project.

Dr Loosley, who has been unable to return to Syria because of the current conflict, found that 1,100 years ago a fire raged through what was regarded as an impregnable fortress.

Her work has also helped show that, contrary to popular understanding, the earliest Muslim expansion across the Middle East was largely peaceful and typified by coexistence with Christians.

Like Jerusalem’s Dome of the Rock, the citadel – called Zalabiyeh – was one of the first buildings to be inhabited by Muslims as they spread across the Syrian desert.

It was constructed during the Byzantine Empire before being renovated under the Umayyad Dynasty during Islam’s first period of expansion from Mecca in the early seventh century.

The first of four Arab caliphates following the death of Muhammed, the Umayyad dynasty left Mecca to establish one of the largest empires the world had yet seen.

Zalabiyeh, its sister citadel Halabiyeh and dozens of other crucially important sites may be flooded as part of a major HEP project.

Dr Loosley’s undergraduate student Joshua Bryant, who worked with her, was able to date the citadel to c.500 AD by analysing the way its walls were constructed.

He received a University award for his dissertation which he hopes to publish in a journal – a rare feat for an undergraduate.

Dr Loosley excavated burned beams and roof tiles – alongside other finds -including a fully functioning barracks, a human tooth, copper belt buckle, plaster spinning wheel, fragments of an alabaster mirror, and painted wall plaster.

She also found some ovens still crammed with charred chicken bones and ash.

The evidence points to a fire which forced the soldiers to leave but also a peaceful takeover of the previously Byzantine controlled citadel by Umayyad soldiers.

The artefacts are in Syria awaiting further analysis by Dr Loosley once – or if – she is able to return.

She said: “There is little evidence of any violence in the years before the citadel burned down, but there is intriguingly so much more to learn.

“We don’t even know if the soldiers who took over control from the Byzantines were Muslims or Christians even though they were subjects of the Umayadd caliph.

“Coexistence typified those times: some even argue that one reason why so many Christians converted to Islam is because the major sources of tension and conflict were between Christian factions themselves.”

She added: “The Khanuqa Gap is a major crossing point on the River Euphrates and so has been politically, economically and socially important to human beings for 11,000 years.

“It contains evidence of continuous human settlement through many civilisations including Assyrian, Roman, Arab – an astonishing area to work in and one of the most important in the world.

“So our work to understand as much as we can before it disappears is hugely important and I hope to be able go back as soon as it is safe to do so.”

The work was funded by the British Academy and the Osmane Aidi foundation.

A version of Dr Loosley’s book, Christian Responses to Islam and Muslim-Christian Relations in the Modern World, edited with Anthony O’Mahony is published by Manchester University Press in January 2012.

3) There is no compulsion in Islam for anyone under the protection of Shariah to believe in Islam if their hearts are not convinced, and no danger should they be in because they have not accepted Islam - they are still citizens of Islamic territories and are afforded the protection and exemption from fighting the wars the Muslims will have to fight against invading armies.

4) There is no compulsion in Islam for anyone to punish another who has come to belief and then left belief due to lack of conviction - the only exemption to this rule being in case of treason.

I can go on, and on bro Dave, but I want to make this short, so I will just say one thing: Why is it that people in this modern age do not study the details of certain laws - but instead prefer to shout about what they believe is common practice simply because that Sony 1080p TV told 'em so? there's lame... then there's lamer - especially if someone falls for lamestream media.

Don't consider this a personal attack on you, as it isn't... it's just something to provoke a little thought - not to provoke any argument,

God bless,

Scimi

[Woodrow]

But Greenhill. Murder is murder. It is the Quran and Hadith that say to kill the apostate.

Neither the Qur'an nor Ahadith command to kill an apostate simply for being an apostate. Both give additional reasons why the Death penalty was permitted

In the situations mentioned in the Qur'an and Ahadith, the person not only left Islam, but actively engaged in war against Muslims. In other words engaged in acts of treason.

[h-n]

The answer has already been given so many times, it is the issue of arrogance that people don't think they need to listen to others, you have examples which is common place, where if you were to tell someone to even politely not to do something wrong, they would automatically go in a tirade of abuse saying who the hell are you to tell us what to do.


If Prophet Jesus peace be upon him came back today and told people to;-


-stop drinking alcohol
-stop wearing revealing clothes
-stop getting tattoos


Would people be so readily to give up bad behaviour, as the Muslims had done at the time of the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon?


Which is where people rejected the Prophets not because they believed that Prophet David, Moses, Ibrahim, Muhammad, Jesus, Lut peace be upon them were bad, but because people used to say to them, who the Hell do you do think you are to tell us what to do, why should God make you a Prophet and not us (even though the people did not enjoin good or forbid evil-nothing
was preventing them from opposing evil). But they were arrogant, DISOBEDIENT to the message and the commandments of God.


They trivialise the sins of people, even people rejecting God after becoming a believer. Is it not even worse that the wives of the two Prophets: - Noah and Lut peace be upon them became evil. If this happened today, people would be just saying its their choice, they can do what they like, when they have committed an awful sin, by allowing the sinful people to take more influence over their lives then their own righteous husbands.


You even get cases today where a woman who when she was asked to by her husband to get rid of the cats or he will leave, choose her cats. So that Man worked and provided a standard of living, is a pensioner, was looking forward to spending his retirement to now only be out of home and alone. But what are people saying? They are saying that the wife has made a stand for her rights-well maybe she should have chosen what was important to her first, instead of getting her husband
provide for her, when he could have found someone else. So becoming disloyal this is unacceptable. After having a relationship and becoming disloyal, this is why also divorce is frowned upon. Now that people are upset how some women treat their husbands, how upsetting do you think it is that when people decide to reject God after having a relationship
with him, by being on the straight path. Wereby having the angels praying for such and such. It is no difference if you decided not to get along with Archangel Gabriel anymore. The religious people have a position with Allah that nobody ie idol worshippers have. It is not for us to disregard, and trivialise it for the sake of people following their lusts and deciding its not important. There is nothing else after belief, there is nothing else after God.


As above it is not the laws that are at fault, it is the way that people disregard, devalue what God has given them when they say that it doesn't matter that when a person has so much from God (whether God saves them from calamities) we can just throw that relationship away. This is also why people should respect their parents and its not something that's acceptable to throw away.


Remember Allah and the Day of Judgement much.

[greenhill]

Salaams,

Being away for a few days helps... coming back to the main point, "is apostasy allowed in Islam?". Perhaps the question puts something that is peripheral as a center piece. Hence when discussion is brought up on the matter, it is exploded into death and contradiction.

Those who leave the deen are those who never really believed or were never islam except by the utterance of the shahadah, because if a person were to truly believe, he/she would not leave the deen under any circumstances, so the question would not really exist.

So, the question of death, as many have said above is really reserved for treason.

The rest are man made decisions at their time and place.

[Genesis]

Hi Scimi
In regards to Islam spreading peacefully. The Rashidun caliphate spread by the sword as did the later caliphates. The Najran Christians were forcibly expelled from the Arabian peninsula very early on. In regards to people of the modern age not studying the details of certain laws - how did the Islamic experts in Sudan and Iran get by then. Qualified Islamic jurists condemning a pregnant Sudanese Christian woman to death for apostasy. And a court in Iran sentencing a Iranian Christian pastor to death. And these were qualified courts.

[Genesis]

Greetings Genesis,

Forgive me if I don't consider what you personally hold to account to be of any value.

So you believe God can be imperfect? What kind of a God is this?

Even if true, so what? The Bible contains a great many disturbing passages involving lewd behaviour, attributes shocking crimes to Prophets, whereas the Qur'an does not.

The exact same thing can be said about Islam.

Hello Mohamad- you ask can God be imperfect. God is not imperfect- but he will to humanity has been an evolving revelation.

[Genesis]

I like your veracity, it's cute :)

hmm *snaps fingers* hey, look around you - what do you see? 1 fifth the worlds population is Muslim in case you haven't noticed, and more people from the west - women over men on a ration of 4/1, are reverting to Islam more than any other religion in the world - try telling me again, how Islam is irrelevant please?

Despite the media spin, lies, and waffle to push public opinion into mindless regurgitations of its own broadcasts, people are waking up. And the world is higher in numbers of Muslims today than it ever has been. How is this possible? Please, I'd like to hear your explanation of this :D i'm up for a laugh.

Scimi

Irrelevant ? Morally bankrupt then. Boko Harem abducting Christian school girls and selling them into slavery. A pregnant woman in Sudan jailed and condemned to execution for apostasy, ISIS ,a failed Arab Spring, the Sunni Shiite split , a court in Iran condemning a Christian to death for apostasy.

An explanation? Where are you getting your stats from? The research Ive done reports Christianity as the worlds last and fastest growing religion. Al Jazeera reports 6 million African Muslims converting to Christianity every year.

[Genesis]

Neither the Qur'an nor Ahadith command to kill an apostate simply for being an apostate. Both give additional reasons why the Death penalty was permitted

In the situations mentioned in the Qur'an and Ahadith, the person not only left Islam, but actively engaged in war against Muslims. In other words engaged in acts of treason.

Is the Hadith really that clear in making the distinction about treason. The court that condemned that pregnant lady in Sudan to death for apostasy would have been more qualified than you. As would the court in Iran who condemned the Christian pastor. These are experts in the hadith making these rulings.

[Iceee]

The court that condemned that pregnant lady in Sudan to death for apostasy would have been more qualified than you. As would the court in Iran who condemned the Christian pastor.

Salaam.

Before we have any confusion, can you please give us your sources?

[greenhill]

The court that condemned that pregnant lady in Sudan to death for apostasy would have been more qualified than you. As would the court in Iran who condemned the Christian pastor.

As it is said, the religion is perfect but the people are not. What the latter Caliphates did that ultimately lead the Ottoman Empire to its decline was not islamic, but authority and power corrupts. They 'deviated' in their execution of duty. Does not in anyway prove anything.

These are experts in the hadith making these rulings.

Being an expert does not mean that they will be fair. Again these are human qualities, hence the need for the deen to put people on the right path. But ultimately the choice is the individuals.

Peace

[Genesis]

Salaam.

Before we have any confusion, can you please give us your sources?

Hello Iceee
If you research the cases of Youcef Nadarkhani and Meriam Yehya you will see what I refer to.

[Genesis]

As it is said, the religion is perfect but the people are not. What the latter Caliphates did that ultimately lead the Ottoman Empire to its decline was not islamic, but authority and power corrupts. They 'deviated' in their execution of duty. Does not in anyway prove anything.



Being an expert does not mean that they will be fair. Again these are human qualities, hence the need for the deen to put people on the right path. But ultimately the choice is the individuals.

Peace

With all due respect Greenhill but I think this is cop out. A convenient avoidance. It is the hadith that is creating this situation.

[Hulk]

Genesis you're merely committing an appeal to irrelevant authority fallacy, if you're just going to say "they are experts they know better than you" then no amount of intellectual explanation is going to be accepted by you. Ironically, you referred to Greenhill's post as a cop out.

[greenhill]

I have a friend who left Islam and was severely punished by his family and later disowned. Which is understandable, because which father will not want his son to take on his faith and values. but in some places that practice sharia law, an apostate can be punished even by death.

The key here is as per the original post above - "but in some places that practice syaria law..." not all places. And that is as a result of the interpretation of what they think the law is about. If all places practiced it then we do have a an issue, but it is not.

Peace

[greenhill]

I think this is cop out. A convenient avoidance. It is the hadith that is creating this situation.

Personally I don't think it is a cop out.

Convenient avoidance could be used for everything. From what I have read of the hadeeths, it is usually said in certain situations to clarify certain things or action observed by the people on the prophet's ways.

Collectively, the answers have come and it could be summarized by treason. But it seems that the examples cited are based on human judgements and perhaps even error.

In addition, there are many examples in history where leaders make their own decision based on their own agenda and it cannot be said that their subjects 'copped out', it is just that the were powerless to prevent it from happening.

I saw somewhere about Malaysia being cited with the 'camps' story. Several years ago there was a headline in the papers about a muslim girl who decided to become a Christian. She changed her name to Lina Joy. Her face splashed all across the papers and in the end, nothing happened to her, she was not lynched by a maddening crowd. No forced march into a camp etc. So, really people seem to be plucking out of context info just to prove a point that really does not exist. Or a mistake in the administrative policies of human (in implementing their judgement) and forget that these 'mistakes' are common throughout history and not just in the interpretation of islam.

Peace

[Genesis]

As it is said, the religion is perfect but the people are not. What the latter Caliphates did that ultimately lead the Ottoman Empire to its decline was not islamic, but authority and power corrupts. They 'deviated' in their execution of duty. Does not in anyway prove anything.



Being an expert does not mean that they will be fair. Again these are human qualities, hence the need for the deen to put people on the right path. But ultimately the choice is the individuals.

Peace

But Greenhill-
how can the religion be perfect with hadith like that?
You mention the later caliphates. But these issues existed also with the "Rightly Guided" early Caliphates.

[Genesis]

Personally I don't think it is a cop out.

Convenient avoidance could be used for everything. From what I have read of the hadeeths, it is usually said in certain situations to clarify certain things or action observed by the people on the prophet's ways.

Collectively, the answers have come and it could be summarized by treason. But it seems that the examples cited are based on human judgements and perhaps even error.

In addition, there are many examples in history where leaders make their own decision based on their own agenda and it cannot be said that their subjects 'copped out', it is just that the were powerless to prevent it from happening.

I saw somewhere about Malaysia being cited with the 'camps' story. Several years ago there was a headline in the papers about a muslim girl who decided to become a Christian. She changed her name to Lina Joy. Her face splashed all across the papers and in the end, nothing happened to her, she was not lynched by a maddening crowd. No forced march into a camp etc. So, really people seem to be plucking out of context info just to prove a point that really does not exist. Or a mistake in the administrative policies of human (in implementing their judgement) and forget that these 'mistakes' are common throughout history and not just in the interpretation of islam.

Peace

The aswers came from Islamic jurists in Sudan and Iran as well as they interpreted it as changing religion - not treason.
You say "plucking out of context information to make a point".The apostasy cases I mentioned actually happened - no plucking out of context in that.
If Islam is the perfect religion why do we have this problem with the hadith. Better not to have the hadith in the first place.

[Hulk]

The aswers came from Islamic jurists in Sudan and Iran as well as they interpreted it as changing religion - not treason.
You say "plucking out of context information to make a point".The apostasy cases I mentioned actually happened - no plucking out of context in that.
If Islam is the perfect religion why do we have this problem with the hadith. Better not to have the hadith in the first place.

As I said.. there's no point in explaining anything to you if you're just going to commit an appeal to irrelevant authority fallacy.

Also, yes Islam is perfect but that doesn't mean muslims are, that includes a muslim's understanding of Islam. A cookbook can be perfect, but it doesn't mean it's impossible for people who claim to follow it to end up with bad cooking.

[daveyats]

OK here is an example of violating your own words - I'm going to re-join this discussion by posting again but as I understand, Islam allows for such exceptions ;D (no offence intended)

but seriously, I'm just wish to summarize the responses received so far for comments:

Responses to supposed contradiction between Quran 2:256 and punishment for apostasy:

1. Muslims should be free to leave their faith. Those who support punishment for apostasy are subjecting the Koran to their own (wrongful?) interpretation. (greenhill, ardianto and hulk? believes this to be the case)
2. Muslims are not free to leave their faith. Only non-muslims should not be compelled to accept Islam. (FYI ISIS is compelling everyone to accept Islam)
3. Muslims are free to leave their faith in theory but in practice apostates must be punished because the law of the Islamic state needs to be upheld. Any apostasy to Islam will harm the Islamic State. The rule of Quran 2:256 can allow for such exceptions.
4. Muslims are not free to leave their faith but apostates can only be put to death if their apostasy involves treason
5. Muslims are not free to leave their faith. Apostates should be put to death.

6. Children born to a muslim family are born muslim. This is not a form of compulsion to accept Islam.
7. Children born to a muslim family are not born muslim. They are given a chance to personally accept Islam and all of them do so willingly.
(You can say that 6 and 7 is subject to the individuals interpretation of the faith)

Which is the correct interpretation? I'm sure no sane person will accept that there can exist both elephants in India and no elephants in India at the same time. Comments?

[ardianto]

1. Muslims should be free to leave their faith. Those who support punishment for apostasy are subjecting the Koran to their own (wrongful?) interpretation. (greenhill, ardianto and hulk? believes this to be the case)

I didn't say Muslims should be free to leave Islam. I just choose to not punish. If a Muslim told me that he wanted to leave Islam, of course I would try prevent him, but in soft manner. If he still leave Islam, I would not punish him, but I would show him that the door to back to Islam still opened.

Do you know?. There are people who left Islam, but finally came back to Islam. Like the famous Indonesian Navy admiral. He left Islam when he was young, and lived as non-Muslim for several decades, even became important figure for churches. But then he decided to back to Islam, just few years before he passed away.

My in-law neighbor left Islam when she was young. But her neighbor did not punish her. Then she married and had few children who later decided to embrace Islam when they were going adult. Now all of her children and grandchildren are Muslims.

Like I've said. Some people in my mother family are Christians. This was result of missionaries work in 19th century. But those who still Muslims did not punish them. And now let me tell you. In percentage, the Christians in my mother family have been reduced because there were among them who then decided to become Muslims, while there's no anyone among my family who leave Islam in the last few decades.

I understand if there are Muslims who disagree with my decision to not punish those who leave Islam. But it's because I believe that Islam is religion that "Rahmatin lil Alamin" (bless for the universe), and those who leave Islam actually those who are in confusion, or those who disappointed by Muslims (not disappointed by Islam). And it's my duty to still show them the beauty of Islam.

[Genesis]

As I said.. there's no point in explaining anything to you if you're just going to commit an appeal to irrelevant authority fallacy.

Also, yes Islam is perfect but that doesn't mean muslims are, that includes a muslim's understanding of Islam. A cookbook can be perfect, but it doesn't mean it's impossible for people who claim to follow it to end up with bad cooking.

Hello Hulk
I disagree. We've been discussing whether the hadith is about treason or simply changing ones religion. And my point being that Islamic jurors in the Sudan and Iran have interpreted the hadith as ordering death for a change of religion. Therefore a legal precedent has been set by specialists in the field. I wouldn't call this irrelevant authority.


In terms of Islam being perfect. Do you think the relevant hadith about apostasy is perfect ?

[ardianto]

Hello Hulk
I disagree. We've been discussing whether the hadith is about treason or simply changing ones religion. And my point being that Islamic jurors in the Sudan and Iran have interpreted the hadith as ordering death for a change of religion. Therefore a legal precedent has been set by specialists in the field. I wouldn't call this irrelevant authority.


In terms of Islam being perfect. Do you think the relevant hadith about apostasy is perfect ?

In early of 2000's Muslim scholars in my place demanded govt to arrest and give death penalty to someone who committed over-limit blasphemy toward Islam. But that man already left Indonesia. However, I never heard Muslim scholars in my place demanded govt to arrest and give death penalty to those who left Islam.

My stance toward those who left Islam actually is common stance of Muslims in my place. And we have reason for this stance. If Sudan and Iran gave death penalty to apostates, it's because they have reason too which we don't really know.

Genesis, there are many Muslims in the world, and you cannot make stereotype of the whole Muslims just based on some Muslims.

[Hulk]

Hello Hulk
I disagree. We've been discussing whether the hadith is about treason or simply changing ones religion. And my point being that Islamic jurors in the Sudan and Iran have interpreted the hadith as ordering death for a change of religion. Therefore a legal precedent has been set by specialists in the field. I wouldn't call this irrelevant authority.

In terms of Islam being perfect. Do you think the relevant hadith about apostasy is perfect ?

It is an appeal to irrelevant authority. For one thing, you're resorting to bringing them up instead of addressing the proper responses given. You're also expecting us to accept them as an authoritative figure on the matter. It's like we're here explaining to you 1+1+1=3 and you're responding by saying "no it's 1 because a math teacher i saw on the news said so".

Yes Islam is perfect. I will not be entertaining your question "Do you think the relevant hadith about apostasy is perfect?" as it is inconsequential to the discussion.

[Hulk]

Responses to supposed contradiction between Quran 2:256 and punishment for apostasy:

1. Muslims should be free to leave their faith. Those who support punishment for apostasy are subjecting the Koran to their own (wrongful?) interpretation. (greenhill, ardianto and hulk? believes this to be the case)
2. Muslims are not free to leave their faith. Only non-muslims should not be compelled to accept Islam. (FYI ISIS is compelling everyone to accept Islam)
3. Muslims are free to leave their faith in theory but in practice apostates must be punished because the law of the Islamic state needs to be upheld. Any apostasy to Islam will harm the Islamic State. The rule of Quran 2:256 can allow for such exceptions.
4. Muslims are not free to leave their faith but apostates can only be put to death if their apostasy involves treason
5. Muslims are not free to leave their faith. Apostates should be put to death.
6. Children born to a muslim family are born muslim. This is not a form of compulsion to accept Islam.
7. Children born to a muslim family are not born muslim. They are given a chance to personally accept Islam and all of them do so willingly.
(You can say that 6 and 7 is subject to the individuals interpretation of the faith)

Which is the correct interpretation? I'm sure no sane person will accept that there can exist both elephants in India and no elephants in India at the same time. Comments?

What exactly are you trying to say? Seems that what you're trying to present is just a false dichotomy. If you feel there is a contradiction then point it out specifically. Likening the list to saying "I believe there are no elephants in india and that there are elephants in india at the same time" is a faulty comparison unless you can prove that it's similar.

[MuslimInshallah]

Hello Daveyats and Genesis,


I have read your posts with someinterest. I welcome your comments, and I hope that you may find my small comments to be of some use to you. And I hope that they may also be of some use to the Muslims out there who sincerely want to Please our Lord, and are seeking Light on this question.


The first and most important point thatI would like to bring to your attention is that when evaluating a position in Islam, we look FIRST to the Qur'an, and then to the ahadith (plural of hadith). If, as in this case, there are veryclear passages in the Qur'an that support the freedom of choice in a person's deen (way of life), versus an ambiguous and weak hadith (even if it is in Sahih al-Bukhari) that is open to a wide amount of interpretation, the Qur'an trumps every time. Actually, in the Prophet's (PBUH) time, when the Prophet (PBUH) said or did something that God Knew was incorrect, He would Correct him. God's Word always trumps the Prophet's. You have quoted Al-Baqarah 2:256 extensively. But let me recommend the following verses: An-Nisa 4:137 Those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe again, then disbelieve,and then increase in their disbelief - Allah will never forgive them nor guide them to the path. And Al-Kahf 18:29. Let him who wishes to believe, do so; and let him who wishes todisbelieve, do so.


Actually,frankly, I would recommend that you read the Qur'an in it's entirety.It talks about “belief” and “disbelief” (I somewhat disagree with these simplistic translations of the verbs aamana and kafara) throughout its length. The context of the Qur'an should help youunderstand what God is actually saying. These snippets we quote can be misunderstood. I suggest Yahya Emerick's translation. It has many footnotes with a lot of historical information giving the verses context. Muhammad Asad's translation is very heartfelt, too, though sometimes perhaps a little mystical at times. But always recall, that the translations are flawed and pale compared with the beauty and breadth of the original.


Secondly, deen does not mean religion.It means the Way you have chosen in your life. Do you chose to struggle towards God and try to know His Will and Please Him? Or do you not? We all have our deen, including atheists. And we all choose it freely. It is an inner state of being, of our relationship with God. We humans are rather obsessed with our labels and religious decorations. God is Interested in our Hearts. And as He is the Judge, we must refrain from taking on His Domain.


Thirdly, for those that are interested,the hadith in question is available in English at searchtruth.com (sorry, I can't put the full link in; as I am new here, I'm not permitted to do so). It is in Sahih al Bukhari Book 84, number 57. The translation is flawed, though. For instance, the word deen has been translated as Islamic Religion, and this is clearly incorrect.You may find other ahadith on apostasy which you might find supports what you presently wish to believe. I would recommend, however, for the one who seeks the best, that you check al-Bukhari Book 83, hadith37. It may help you understand why many scholars feel that the punishment of death for apostasy is limited to those who are involved with a serious crime against the community of Muslims. The reality is, that there are many ahadith out there, of varying quality, and in order to come to as serious a decision as the taking of a human life,one should be well-versed in the field.


Fourthly, there are many cases of people in the time of the Prophet (PBUH) who left Islam. And returned and left, perhaps, again. The majority were NOT killed. Those that were, were under specific circumstances. Unfortunately, I don't have the time or space to go into these cases fully. Yahya Emerick discusses this point in his commentary on the Qur'an.


And finally, if anyone wants a clear explanation of this particular question by a scholar, I would suggest the following (again, I can't post the link. Google "hadith" and "apostate" and you should see the following: Is Killing An Apostate in the Islamic Law?). I drew a lot on this text for my discussion here.

May God Guide us and Help us Find the Light. And only God truly Knows.

[daveyats]

What exactly are you trying to say? Seems that what you're trying to present is just a false dichotomy. If you feel there is a contradiction then point it out specifically. Likening the list to saying "I believe there are no elephants in india and that there are elephants in india at the same time" is a faulty comparison unless you can prove that it's similar.

I'm merely pointing out that on a subject like this, which i presume should be an important one, there exist just within this community a number of views. Some of which directly contradict the other. I'm simply asking a question - which is the correct interpretation? I've asked that in my post but you might have missed that?

If truth is absolute, this question should be asked. Muslims believe in absolute truths because you believe absolutely that Allah is the true God. So why is there an inability to be absolute about this subject? The other problem I see, if statement no.2 is true (refer back to my post), why is there seemingly so little concern to teach it and make sure truth is propagated...why have 100s left the UK to join ISIS? did they not know that their version of truth is wrong?

Ardianto's response is the most interesting to me because you (Ardianto) seem to be saying that apostates ought to be punished but you choose not to because there is a higher law or virtue. And that higher law or virtue is... mercy? I don't know if you learnt that from the Koran, instinctively or from some place else. Does the Koran tell you that mercy is a higher virtue than justice?

[Woodrow]

Hello Iceee
If you research the cases of Youcef Nadarkhani and Meriam Yehya you will see what I refer to.

Working backwards. I will get to your earlier post shortly.

While Youcef Nadarkhani was arrested in Iran, which is Shi'a they do not follow neither any recognized Madhab of shariah not the same collections of Ahadith as recognised by Sunni.



Additionally his actually charges were rape and "Crimes against the Government" the media stressed the fact he was an apostate but that is not what Iran charged him with

Iranian pastor faces death for rape, not apostasy - report

Washington (CNN) -- Christian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani will be put to death for several charges of rape and extortion, charges that differ greatly from his original sentence of apostasy, Iran's semi-official Fars News agency reported Friday.

Gholomali Rezvani, the deputy governor of Gilan province, where Nadarkhani was tried and convicted, accused Western media of twisting the real story, referring to him as a "rapist." A previous report from the news agency claimed he had committed several violent crimes, including repeated rape and extortion.

"His crime is not, as some claim, converting others to Christianity," Rezvani told Fars. "He is guilty of security-related crimes."

SOURCE


As for Merriam Yehya Ibrahim The Charge she was charged with was "Adultery: that is what she got the death penalty for. Although during her trial it was brought out she was an apostate. but that is not what she got the death penalty for.

It also appears she was tried in a Sudanese court, not a Sharia court

Ibrahim was arrested in August after Muslim relatives charged her with adultery for marrying a Christian man,

SOURCE

[Woodrow]

Is the Hadith really that clear in making the distinction about treason. The court that condemned that pregnant lady in Sudan to death for apostasy would have been more qualified than you. As would the court in Iran who condemned the Christian pastor. These are experts in the hadith making these rulings.

Neither was in a recognized Shariah Court.

Do you have any evidence either was following any one of the 4 recognized Madhabs (Which are based upon Hadith.) The Scholars that wrote the Madhabs were much more familiar with the Ahadith than anyone living today.

None of the 4 Madhabs require the death penalty for Apostasy. While an Apostate can be executed, the conditions to allow the Death Penalty require much more than apostasy. Under one of the Madhabs (Hanafi) Apostasy is not to be viewed as a crime.

See my above post

ADDENDUM: Neither Court the one in Sudan nor the one in Iran, made any claim that apostasy is a capital crime. In both cases the Charges were not Apsostasy. Neither was given the death sentence for Apostasy.

You might have a valid claim the Charges were fabricated because both were Apostates and Charges had to be fabricated to get the Death sentence. But, that shows both courts knew Apostasy alone does not carry the death penalty.

[greenhill]

why have 100s left the UK to join ISIS? did they not know that their version of truth is wrong?

Don't know. Why? Why people do things is not something we can say with absolute authority because it is their decision and not our own. Sometimes people are 'reactionary' they do because theydemand a change. Like many who would vote for the opposition party in elections just to teach their party of choice a lesson. This question is misleading and has no relevance to the 'title' post.

Ardianto's response is the most interesting to me because you (Ardianto) seem to be saying that apostates ought to be punished but you choose not to because there is a higher law or virtue. And that higher law or virtue is... mercy? I don't know if you learnt that from the Koran, instinctively or from some place else. Does the Koran tell you that mercy is a higher virtue than justice?

Again, this question is not relevant.

Let us take another law (similar) about cutting hands for stealing. The law is there but often it is down to the person who is entrusted to make the decision to spell out the punishment. He will weigh the points at hand and deliver the verdict based on his findings. Then we have a result. What you are talking about is the result. Not the same result for every similar circumstance does not mean the deen is wrong, but the implementation of the understanding.

I'm merely pointing out that on a subject like this, which i presume should be an important one, there exist just within this community a number of views.

I don't believe it to be an important one. As I said in my earlier post, this is a peripheral matter made into a centre piece.

What is important? That Allah is Most Forgiving and Most Merciful. That life is a test and that we should perform righteous deeds and abstain from wrongful deeds. And the guide is given as to what is permissible and what is not. These are things that should be highlighted and not the obvious (as you have pointed out) discrepancies in the interpretation of certain hadiths or snippets from the Quran.

What I see is that the majority's stand is on 'treason'. SOme people are for 'public caning' in schools and some are not. Who is right?


Peace :shade:

[greenhill]

But Greenhill-
how can the religion be perfect with hadith like that?

There was once a question posed to me... 'Can God create a rock bigger than HE can carry?' Either way the question tries to prove that God is not All Powerful. Either way we chose to answer, does not give a true answer. The thing is, we, ourselves may never know the true reason for many things, just as Moses never knew why and Khidr was doing. So, the perfection of religion is what Allah claimed for us and we ought to believe it. If we do not understand then perhaps our capacity for understanding is limited (for now).

If we were to delve in to it slightly deeper, (perhaps spiritually) and not look at it to provide an 'escape clause', if we found the deen to be the one, and after researching we chose to revert, and some time down the road you chose to leave, again, that is your choice. The community (wherever they are) may not like it. But if you wee to publicly say and cause a few people to be 'riled' up by your action, they might dig up some sayings or hadith or quote verses to have you punished for being a bad influence on other believers. That is their cause of action. Not the entire population.

Peace

[ardianto]

Ardianto's response is the most interesting to me because you (Ardianto) seem to be saying that apostates ought to be punished but you choose not to because there is a higher law or virtue. And that higher law or virtue is... mercy? I don't know if you learnt that from the Koran, instinctively or from some place else. Does the Koran tell you that mercy is a higher virtue than justice?

According to the law, someone who steal someone else's property should be punished. We need law like this to prevent people steal other people's properties. But can we punish someone who stole a bread because hungry same as we punish professional thief who stole cars many times?.

What is higher than law is justice. It's very injustice if we give same punishment to two persons who stole because different reason.

I was born in Muslim family. And like many other Muslim boys I also learned Islam since I was kid in years of 70's (I am almost 47 now). My Islamic teachers taught me, not only aspect of relationship between human and God like how to perform salah, how to fast, but also taught me the aspect of relationship between human and human. They taught me about love, compassion, mercy, tolerance, care, and many things in human and human relationship.

I was born in a family with good financial condition. It made my life was so easy. My teachers knew it, and then they reminded me that I should be grateful since I was born in family like this, because Allah could make me born in poor family, and then my life would be difficult. My teachers told me to imagine if I was born in poor family, then what was my life?. This is what made me could understand a situation that happened to someone and not fast to judge.

Yes, like in case of apostasy.

There are Muslims who too fast in judging other Muslims who leave Islam without they try to see the background of this cases. Not every Muslim knows that there are people who left Islam because felt disappointed. They were hungry, but their wealthy Muslim neighbors did not care although they had many foods. Those wealthy Muslims did not help those poor Muslims although those poor Muslims begged for it. It made those poor Muslims lost their faith, and they then moved to other religion because people from this other religion promised them to help.

Who should be punished in this case?. The poor who left Islam to save their life from die from starvation?. Or the wealthy Muslims who neglected prophet Muhammad (saw) command to always care to their neighbor and not let their neighbor hungry?. Remember what I've said that what is higher than law is justice. And justice is one thing that I've learned from Islam.

I know, there are Muslims who say that those who leave Islam should be punished. But I hope they know too that punishment for apostasy is not always implemented automatically. Those apostates can be given a chance to back to Islam, and the Muslims should make the door of Islam always opened.

But unfortunately, there are people outside Islam who try to convince other people that if someone leave Islam, then he/she would be killed. Actually it's to make people who interested to accept Islam feel scared. No, no, I don't accuse you try to spread rumor like this too. I know you have heard about this, and you feel curious. That's why you made this thread. And I very appreciate it.

:)

[daveyats]

According to the law, someone who steal someone else's property should be punished. We need law like this to prevent people steal other people's properties. But can we punish someone who stole a bread because hungry same as we punish professional thief who stole cars many times?.

What is higher than law is justice. It's very injustice if we give same punishment to two persons who stole because different reason.

I was born in Muslim family. And like many other Muslim boys I also learned Islam since I was kid in years of 70's (I am almost 47 now). My Islamic teachers taught me, not only aspect of relationship between human and God like how to perform salah, how to fast, but also taught me the aspect of relationship between human and human. They taught me about love, compassion, mercy, tolerance, care, and many things in human and human relationship.

I was born in a family with good financial condition. It made my life was so easy. My teachers knew it, and then they reminded me that I should be grateful since I was born in family like this, because Allah could make me born in poor family, and then my life would be difficult. My teachers told me to imagine if I was born in poor family, then what was my life?. This is what made me could understand a situation that happened to someone and not fast to judge.

Yes, like in case of apostasy.

There are Muslims who too fast in judging other Muslims who leave Islam without they try to see the background of this cases. Not every Muslim knows that there are people who left Islam because felt disappointed. They were hungry, but their wealthy Muslim neighbors did not care although they had many foods. Those wealthy Muslims did not help those poor Muslims although those poor Muslims begged for it. It made those poor Muslims lost their faith, and they then moved to other religion because people from this other religion promised them to help.

Who should be punished in this case?. The poor who left Islam to save their life from die from starvation?. Or the wealthy Muslims who neglected prophet Muhammad (saw) command to always care to their neighbor and not let their neighbor hungry?. Remember what I've said that what is higher than law is justice. And justice is one thing that I've learned from Islam.

I know, there are Muslims who say that those who leave Islam should be punished. But I hope they know too that punishment for apostasy is not always implemented automatically. Those apostates can be given a chance to back to Islam, and the Muslims should make the door of Islam always opened.

But unfortunately, there are people outside Islam who try to convince other people that if someone leave Islam, then he/she would be killed. Actually it's to make people who interested to accept Islam feel scared. No, no, I don't accuse you try to spread rumor like this too. I know you have heard about this, and you feel curious. That's why you made this thread. And I very appreciate it.

:)

Thank you Sir. Yes, the law exist to met out justice but God doesn't desire only justice, He wants us to exercise compassion, mercy and love. God is love, and mercy and compassion comes from Him.

I wish there were more who think like you. God bless you.

[daveyats]

What I see is that the majority's stand is on 'treason'. SOme people are for 'public caning' in schools and some are not. Who is right?

That depends, you see Apostasy is an offence against God so you have to refer to the religious text to know what is the correct and appropriate response. In this case you'll have to refer to the Koran. and I pointed out again and again, if one muslim interprets the appropriate punishment for apostasy to be death and another interprets the death penalty as appropriate only if the apostate commits treason, both of them cannot be correct at the same time. At least more right/closer to the truth than the other.

personally I can find many more problems with the justification that the death penalty should be given to apostates who commit treason but i'll just leave it as that...

[greenhill]

personally I can find many more problems with the justification that the death penalty should be given to apostates who commit treason but i'll just leave it as that...

That is right, 'personally' you find. Everybody also 'finds'... hence we have many findings. Ultimately, what is the fear? That a person cannot leave the deen? That is between himself and the All Mighty God. There have been prophets who have had children and wives destroyed in calamities. They could could determine the destiny of their own families. What right have we got to determine the destiny of others? If a person choses to 'murtad', depending on his circumstances the outcome can be different.

Coming back to the topic, perhaps it won't be first time offenders, etc... but for people who seriously incite unrest via religious misinterpretations etc. (citing examples here, not specifics). Islam is for peace. Religious freedom was always a key element in any islamic society. But when people openly (or secretly) spread malicious lies and cause disharmony and distrust amongst a community then, I believe the punishment for these kinds of people should not be an easy death! But that is an extreme proposition. Really I don't want to have any body killed. Allah is the best of meting out retribution. But we cannot really allow rapists to roam the streets.

Peace :shade:

[Muhammad]

This issue seems to be causing confusion for both sides. For anyone who wishes to research the matter, it is best they refer to what the scholars and people of knowledge have said, as is the teaching of Islam. Unfortunately there are some very odd statements that have been made in this thread, perhaps due to us speaking without knowledge and placing our intellect above the sacred texts of Islam. The punishment for the apostate is something that has been explicitly mentioned in the Sunnah, something that was implemented by the Companions, and scholars have quoted a consensus on the issue. Sadly, some Muslims approach the issue seeking to appease western mindsets and others adopt modernistic methods so that they re-interpret what the Ummah has agreed on for centuries. What some contemporary writers may have said does not invalidate the established consensus.

A few specific points need to be noted:

1.
(a) When deriving rulings, the Qur'an and Sunnah must be considered together, never exclusively. A person cannot use a verse of the Qur'an to derive a conclusion by which he then judges the hadeeth. There is no distinction between the Qur'an and the Sunnah in terms of legality, for the Prophet :saws: said, 'I have indeed been given the Qur'an and something similar to it besides it...' [Abu Dawud]. He :saws: also said, '"Lo! Soon a Hadith from me will be conveyed to a man, while he is reclining on his couch, and he says: 'Between us and you is Allah's Book. So whatever we find in it that is lawful, we consider lawful, and whatever we find in it that is unlawful, we consider it unlawful.' Indeed whatever the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) made unlawful, it is the same as what Allah made unlawful."' [Jaami' at-Tirmidhi Vol. 1, Book 39, Hadith 2664].

(b) The clear/specific texts are the ones which are used to interpret the ambiguous/general, not the other way round.

(c) We do not cast doubts on hadeeth simply on the basis that they don't sit well with our feelings. I am surprised that a suggestion was made that hadeeth in Sahih Al-Bukhari can be considered 'weak'. Did we totally forget what Imam al-Nawawi :rh: said: The ummah is unanimously agreed that these two books are saheeh and it is obligatory to follow their ahaadeeth. [Tahdheeb al-Asma’ wa’l-Lughaat (1/73)]. And Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: 'There is no book beneath the canopy of heaven that is more sound than al-Bukhaari and Muslim, after the Qur’aan.' [Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (18/74)].

2. What we believe to be an objective of Shari'ah cannot be used to wipe out a ruling. What is true justice and mercy is that which is outlined by Allaah :swt: through His divine revelations, not our intellect.

3. We must be cautious when discussing the wisdom behind the ruling of apostasy. Jamal Zarabozo writes:

...the complete reasoning why an apostate should be killed is not explained in the text (other than the specific case in the other hadith of abandoning the community). Hence, any discussion of the reason behind the act can be considered no more than speculation and conjecture. This is a very important point because some people try to “defend” this law by deriving reasons behind it, such as the commonly heard argument that apostasy is a threat to the state and is therefore tantamount to treason; thus the state has the right to kill said individual. This rational argument is sometimes answered simply by saying, “I do not think that an individual’s apostasy is a threat to the state.” The fact is that the complete wisdom behind this ruling is not explained to humans in the texts of the Quran or Sunnah. For example, it could possibly be the case that if someone has grown up and is living in an Islamic state, there is no rational excuse for him to give up the religion of Islam and become an apostate. Perhaps such an act by such a person is so grave that God, his Creator, deems that he is no longer deserving of life. This would definitely be God’s prerogative from an Islamic perspective. Again, this author is not stating that this is the wisdom behind the law of apostasy but is only saying that the real wisdom behind this law is not explained in the text and one must be cautious about stating what the reasoning is.

4. We must also be cautious about saying the punishment of apostasy is only applied to those who actively wage war against Islam. This is not how the hadeeth on the topic were understood. In fact, there are hadeeth about apostates being killed who did not fight or cause mischief.


5.

In terms of Islam being perfect. Do you think the relevant hadith about apostasy is perfect ?

Of course we do. Standing firm upon the principles and rulings of Islam is the source of our survival, success and salvation. It is a great pity that people like yourself have failed to follow laws written in your own Book and ascribe imperfection to God by denying He could put forth such laws (even though they are clearly written). The only arguments that people have put forward against the law of apostasy are emotional and subjective views, nothing intellectual.

6.

If truth is absolute, this question should be asked. Muslims believe in absolute truths because you believe absolutely that Allah is the true God. So why is there an inability to be absolute about this subject?

Firstly, not every issue is absolute. There are foundational matters in Islam which are absolute, like the example you gave that there is only One God being worthy of all worship. But there is also room for different opinions on other issues like jurisprudential matters. The core message of all the Prophets since the beginning consisted of one unchanging message relating to creed. But they also had different laws for their people, depending on what God saw fit for that time and place.

Regarding the differing views in this thread, it comes down to the fact that you've asked us lay people. As I mentioned before, you would be better placed to ask the people of knowledge to get a clearer answer.


I don't see any purpose in continuing this thread, which only seems to be going in circles and creating confusion. I'd like to end by mentioning the advice of another brother:

I advise myself and others to be cautious and let not the approach of "beautifying the picture of islam in the eyes of the west" drive us away from its core and lead us to compromise facts and principles that are agreed on. Islam is beautiful without the need of people's opinion on it. In addition, the approach of da'wa that was implemented by the Prophet :saws: and His companions was always initiated on the principles of Islam as Islam views them and not as people would like to view them.

May Allaah :swt: guide us all to what is correct and forgive us for any wrong we may have said, Aameen.