PDA

View Full Version : Afghan convert 'may be released'



DaSangarTalib
03-25-2006, 01:29 PM
Afghan President Hamid Karzai is leading efforts to resolve the issue of a man facing execution for converting to Christianity.


A meeting is on in Kabul to discuss the fate of Abdul Rahman who "could be released soon" officials say.

Mr Rahman is on trial charged with rejecting Islam. He could be executed under Sharia law unless he reconverts.

The emergency meeting was called after growing international pressure on Afghanistan about the trial.


"For the sake of the national interest of 25 million Afghans, the president is trying to solve the issue," an Afghan official told the BBC.

Several countries with troops in Afghanistan have expressed their concern on the issue.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard said on Friday: "This is appalling. When I saw the report about this I felt sick, literally."

On Thursday, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice phoned Afghan President Hamid Karzai seeking a "favourable resolution" to the case.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Ansar Al-'Adl
03-26-2006, 03:10 AM
:sl:
A number of posts were removed from this thread as they violated forum policy; I request that all members take the time to review the forum rules:
http://www.islamicboard.com/faq/foru..._liforum_rules

:w:
Reply

blunderbus
03-26-2006, 03:27 AM
My question is to the posters on this board who are in favor of executing the Afghan man in question.

If a predominantly Christian country were going to execute a former Christian who converted to another religion (in this hypothetical case, Islam) would you be ok with that?
Reply

snakelegs
03-26-2006, 03:31 AM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
:sl:
A number of posts were removed from this thread as they violated forum policy; I request that all members take the time to review the forum rules:
http://www.islamicboard.com/faq/foru..._liforum_rules

:w:
when you say "a number of posts" - you mean ALL posts. they're all gone.
what rules did they violate? and surely not every single one was in violation of forum rules????????
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
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
Ansar Al-'Adl
03-26-2006, 05:01 AM
Hi blunderbus,
You raise a good question.
Originally Posted by blunderbus
If a predominantly Christian country were going to execute a former Christian who converted to another religion (in this hypothetical case, Islam) would you be ok with that?
As a side note, this has already happened, examples include the spanish inquisition. But on to your question...

First of all, the law on apostasy has been explained here and here. It is commonly taken out of context, but the point to note is that the Prophet Muhammad (saws) clarified that the one to be punished was the one who rebelled against the community. This is quite similar to state laws on treason. A state is justified in taking action against those who pose a significant threat. But the idea of setting up an inquisition to examine the beliefs of the people is against Islamic teachings, so someone who personally changes their religious convictions will be insignificant in the eyes of the state. It is the one who publically announces his rebellion, stirring civil unrest, who must be opposed. While the Christian inquisitions were bent on examining (through the use of torture) the beliefs of those Muslims and Jews who outwardly professed conversion to Christianity, in an Islamic state, someone who even outwardly professes acceptane of Islam is left alone because they cause no harm to society, and the Islamic state is only interested in the security of its society.

Regards
Reply

blunderbus
03-26-2006, 10:12 AM
Thanks for your reply, but I must admit I'm still a bit confused.

Muslims build mosques and actively preach their religion and try to win converts in non-muslim lands. Would you understand if a modern (2006) country were to ban Islamic prosyletizing (sp?) with the idea of maintaining order in the non-islamic society. Including execution of vocal Islamic converts? Would that be considered an internal matter not worth much outside attention?

Basically what I'm getting at is this; I get the impression that Muslims often demand things from non-muslims that they are unwilling to give to non-muslims. This is not meant as an insult. It's an impression not a statement of fact.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-26-2006, 02:13 PM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Hi blunderbus,
You raise a good question.

As a side note, this has already happened, examples include the spanish inquisition. But on to your question...

First of all, the law on apostasy has been explained here and here. It is commonly taken out of context, but the point to note is that the Prophet Muhammad (saws) clarified that the one to be punished was the one who rebelled against the community. This is quite similar to state laws on treason. A state is justified in taking action against those who pose a significant threat. But the idea of setting up an inquisition to examine the beliefs of the people is against Islamic teachings, so someone who personally changes their religious convictions will be insignificant in the eyes of the state. It is the one who publically announces his rebellion, stirring civil unrest, who must be opposed. While the Christian inquisitions were bent on examining (through the use of torture) the beliefs of those Muslims and Jews who outwardly professed conversion to Christianity, in an Islamic state, someone who even outwardly professes acceptane of Islam is left alone because they cause no harm to society, and the Islamic state is only interested in the security of its society.

Regards

Ansar, what you say here is simply rediculous. You can't compare the inquisition 500 years ago to what is happening today in modern Islam. Please... If you wanna compare the death sentence of this afghan convertitt to anything, it must be to a death sentence made by a christian society today against a muslim convert. And you can't, because it doesn't happen anymore. I am really tired of muslims defending modern islamic crime by stating that "christians did the same thing"... Only it happened long before any of us existed...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapc...ert/index.html
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 02:24 PM
Christian_dove, is there any christian state in world that u are talking about execution of a muslim convert from christianity? but remember Allah swt says that provoking is worse than killing,and that is what is done to us (muslims) right now in world !!!.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-26-2006, 02:58 PM
Hello blunderbus,
Originally Posted by blunderbus
Muslims build mosques and actively preach their religion and try to win converts in non-muslim lands. Would you understand if a modern (2006) country were to ban Islamic prosyletizing (sp?) with the idea of maintaining order in the non-islamic society.
It seems we are not talking about execution of converts anymore? Let's finish one question before moving on to another, please.
Including execution of vocal Islamic converts? Would that be considered an internal matter not worth much outside attention?
If someone poses a threat to a state's security, then they are justified in taking action against them. But if someone changes their personal religious views, then it is quite extreme for the state to attempt to pry into the hearts of its citizens to determine their faith and punish them.

Christian Dove,
Ansar, what you say here is simply rediculous. You can't compare the inquisition 500 years ago to what is happening today in modern Islam.
Well you'll notice that I did not justify the apostasy law based on what was done in the inquisition. I mentioned the inquisition as an aside.
Please... If you wanna compare the death sentence of this afghan convertitt to anything, it must be to a death sentence made by a christian society today against a muslim convert.
Well the problem is, after the seperation of Church and state, there is no Christian society. If there was, we would find plenty of examples.

Regards
Reply

Christian_dove
03-26-2006, 03:09 PM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl

Christian Dove,

Well you'll notice that I did not justify the apostasy law based on what was done in the inquisition. I mentioned the inquisition as an aside.

Well the problem is, after the seperation of Church and state, there is no Christian society. If there was, we would find plenty of examples.

Regards

In Norway, we haven't separated the church and the state.... There is an ongoing discussion if we should do so, but it hasn't happened yet.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-26-2006, 03:14 PM
Originally Posted by vpb
Christian_dove, is there any christian state in world that u are talking about execution of a muslim convert from christianity? but remember Allah swt says that provoking is worse than killing,and that is what is done to us (muslims) right now in world !!!.
Yes, but in this case, which we are discussing now, a muslim became a christian and is sentenced to death for it. He didn't provoke anyone, but the problem is, some fanatic muslims are provoked by anything just as long as they think is not from the book... Here we have exaples of muslim leaders incuridging their followers to kill this man. Tear him into little pieces, as they say... For me as a christian ,THAT is provoking...
Reply

strider
03-26-2006, 03:28 PM
Assalamu alaikum

Live and let live; judgement should remain solely with God. La ikrana fee deen. Period.

The guy is free now.

Ma'assalama
Reply

Christian_dove
03-26-2006, 03:32 PM
Originally Posted by strider
Assalamu alaikum

Live and let live; judgement should remain solely with God. La ikrana fee deen. Period.

The guy is free now.

Ma'assalama
Well, he was freed from the authorities (because of political pressure from the west...), but that doesn't help much as he is allready condamned to death by the religious leaders in Afghanistan... His only chance of survival is to apply for asylum in Europe or the US. Sad, but thats how it is.
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 03:37 PM
when I was talking about provoking, I meant, that people used to kill before, but now they have changed their'way to 'Provoking' which is worse than killing. and myself I don't agree killing a person just because he changed his religion to other than Islam, and Allah swt will judge him ! We have to be patient :) His change would not cause doubts to a true Muslims believer :)
Reply

Christian_dove
03-26-2006, 03:40 PM
Originally Posted by vpb
when I was talking about provoking, I meant, that people used to kill before, but now they have changed their'way to 'Provoking' which is worse than killing. and myself I don't agree killing a person just because he changed his religion to other than Islam, and Allah swt will judge him ! We have to be patient :) His change would not cause doubts to a true Muslims believer :)
You mean that provoking is worse than killing? How?
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 03:44 PM
because provoking pushes and pushes you to something that you don't like to do, and actually it is a mental pressure where you come to a point that you can't hold it anymore,and when you do it, it makes you look bad so they can have arguments that you are a bad person, and nobody knows that you suffered from those things, and everybody think that the provoker is the good man.
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 03:46 PM
it actually makes you kill yourself with your own hands
Reply

Christian_dove
03-26-2006, 03:48 PM
Originally Posted by vpb
because provoking pushes and pushes you to something that you don't like to do, and actually it is a mental pressure where you come to a point that you can't hold it anymore,and when you do it, it makes you look bad so they can have arguments that you are a bad person, and nobody knows that you suffered from those things, and everybody think that the provoker is the good man.
Provoking is not the same as killing someone. If you do bad things (even when provoked) you are a bad person. Period.
Reply

mahdisoldier19
03-26-2006, 03:51 PM
Well i know 100 percent That he is not going to stay in Afghanistan because he knows what will happen to him.
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 03:53 PM
we are not talking here about provoking from parents "hey son, I heard you have a C grade on math" when they have not even seen the grades, we are talking here about provoking nations that is causing death to many people. And I dont like the provoked people either who fall on the plot, bc we know we have to be patient, and act with calmness like the prophet Mohammed a.s did, and analyze the situtation and try to solve it throught peaceful meaning, and that is why I am saying that many muslims are falling on a plot like the gu y in the last thread that made a kamikaze, bc we have to act smarter like the one who provoke us, cuz we're the one that we have the true knowledge(the truth).
Reply

Malsidabym
03-26-2006, 04:31 PM
If anyone converts to another religion from Islam, they should be killed.
This view of islam then can be compared to a trap. A person could look for God in islam and if he does not find God, he is stuck and cannot continue his quest to find God.
If someone has found God, he would not leave. Why would he? Clearly this man did not choose to turn his back on God, he was still searching, and found God in christianity. It may seem wrong to a muslim because you feel you have found God in islam, but that is you. It wasn't right for him. It isn't right for everybody, just as muslims feel christianity isn't right for them.
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 04:34 PM
Malsidabym, Christian believe his choice is right , we believe it is wrong, it is a normal thing, everybody has his/her own opinions.

"Wait , because we are waiting with you " :)
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 04:36 PM
as far as I can see, Mohammed a.s meant to kill the ones who convert from Islam to another religion and then start fight against muslims on battles. I dont think Mohammed a.s would kill a person just bc he changed his religion for his own individual reasons.

Peace
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-26-2006, 04:42 PM
Since people seem to be ignoring the explanation I have given for apostasy, I'll paste it again into this thread:


However, from the Islamic perspective, a number of points must be observed with regard to apostasy:
1. Islam has never compelled anyone to accept the religion. Anyone who becomes a Muslim does so purely through objective study of the religion. As Allah has informed us in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion in religion.
10:99 So would you (O Muhammad) then compel people to become believers?


Likewise, Islam encourages its followers to reflect and contempate upon the universe around us and to ponder over the beauty of the Qur'anic message:

47:24 Do they not ponder over the Qur'an or are their hearts locked up?

51:20-21. And on earth are signs for those endowed with inner-certainty; and [likewise there are signs] in yourselves, do you not observe?

29:20 Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.


Thus, Islam requires that one's faith be constructed upon logical investigation and study of the universe in which we live. Through logical contemplation, one realizes the supreme authority of the Creator and the veracity of Muhammad's (saws) claim to prophethood. Thus we find that, in the history of Islam, no knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam. The only cases we find of former Muslims are people who were never practicing Muslims in the first place, nor did they ever have a good understanding of Islam. Yet on the other hand, the list of educated converts to Islam is immense, and it includes educated leaders such as priests, rabbis and atheists.

2. Those who have left Islam have historically fallen under three categories: those who left having never properly understood the religion often due to social circumstances, those who faked a conversion into Islam in order to undermine the Islamic community from within, and those who left to support opposing forces in battle against the Muslims. Because of the first category, Islam requires that the person who has chosen to forsake the religion be consulted with in order that his doubts may be clarified to him if there is any specific issue of confusion, or so that he may learn the proper Islamic teachings that he may otherwise have not been exposed to. As for the second and third category, this was the original reason behind the Prophet's statement on apostasy. The Qur'an records (3:72) that the Jews of Madinah decided to initiate the practice of pretending to accept Islam and then publically declare their rejection of it, so as to destroy the confidence of the newly-converted Muslims. Thus, the Prophet Muhammad (saws) ruled that a punishment should be announced so that those who decide to accept Islam do so because of a firm conviction not in order to harm the Muslim community from within.

3. Coming to the actual law of apostasy, the Prophet Muhammad (saws) did say, in the above historical context, "Whoever replaces his religion, execute him" (Bukhari, Abu Dawud) but how exactly do we understand this statement and does it conflict with the principles of freedom? The Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself clarified this statement in another hadith narrated in Sahih Muslim where he mentioned that the one who was to be fought against was the one who "abandons his religion and the muslim community. It should be noted that every country has maintained punishments, including execution, for treason and rebellion against the state (See Mozley and Whitley's Law Dictionary, under "Treason and Treason Felony," pp. 368-369). Islam is not just a set of beliefs, it is a complete system of life which includes a Muslim's allegiance to the Islamic state. Thus, a rejection against that would be akin to treason. Rebellion against God is more serious than rebellion against one's country. However, one who personally abandons the faith and leaves the country would not be hunted down and assasinated, nor would one who remains inside the state conforming to outward laws be tracked down and executed. The notion of establishing inquistion courts to determine peoples' faith, as done in the Spanish Inquisition, is something contrary to Islamic law. As illustrated by the historical context in which it was mandated, the death penalty is mainly for those who collaborate with enemy forces in order to aid them in their attacks against the Islamic state or for those who seek to promote civil unrest and rebellion from within the Islamic state. When someone publically announces their rejection of Islam within an Islamic state it is basically a challenge to the Islamic government, since such an individual can keep it to themselves like the personal affair it is made out to be.

4. From Islamic history, we can gain a better understanding of how this law has been implemented. Although the Prophet Muhammad (saws) threatened the death penalty in response to the attempts against the Muslim community, no such executions took place in his time (Imam Shawkani, Nayl Al-Awtar, vol. 7, p. 192) even though there is a report that a bedouin renounced Islam and left Madinah unharmed in his time (Fath Al-Bari vol. 4, p.77 and vol. 13 p. 170; Sahih Muslim biSharh An-Nawawi, vol. 9, p. 391). Thus, we find that context plays an important role in determining how to deal with apostates. The case of one who enlists nations to fight against the Islamic state is more serious, for example. That is why the scholars of the Hanafi school of thought felt that the punishment only applies to the male apostate and not the female apostate because the latter is unable to wage war against the Islamic state. If someone simply has some doubts concerning Islam, then those doubts can be clarified.

So an Islamic state is certainly justified in punishing those who betray the state, committing treason and support enemy forces. As for anyone else, if they do not publically declare their rejection of Islam, the state has no interest in pursuing them; if their case does become public, however, then they should be reasoned with and educated concerning the religion so that they have the opportunity to learn the concepts they may not have understood properly and they can be encouraged to repent.
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 04:48 PM
Ansar, thank you for your posting :) May Allah swt reward you :)
Reply

------
03-26-2006, 04:50 PM
Yep. Jazakallah.
Reply

Bittersteel
03-26-2006, 04:56 PM
Christian missionaries are trying to win more converts in Afghanistan and also in Iraq.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-26-2006, 05:10 PM
Hello Snakelegs,
Originally Posted by snakelegs
when you say "a number of posts" - you mean ALL posts. they're all gone.
what rules did they violate? and surely not every single one was in violation of forum rules????????
Some were off-topic, some were hateful, some were in response to those that were off-topic and hateful. It was easiest to remove them all.

Hello Christian_dove,
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
In Norway, we haven't separated the church and the state.... There is an ongoing discussion if we should do so, but it hasn't happened yet.
Although Christianity still has a strong influence on the government in Norway, it still is becoming increasingly secular over the years, so the Church still has lost considerable power.

Hello Malsidabym,
This view of islam then can be compared to a trap. A person could look for God in islam and if he does not find God, he is stuck and cannot continue his quest to find God.
Not true at all. If a person personally changes his religious conviction and views, the Islamic state has no interest in prying into the hearts of its citizens. Likewise, if someone choose to leave the state and live elsewhere, the Islamic state has no interest in hunting them down. The process of setting up an inquisition does not occur in Islam. The penalty is for those who publically rebel against the state promoting civil unrest.

:sl: Abrar,
Originally Posted by Abrar
Christian missionaries are trying to win more converts in Afghanistan and also in Iraq.
Yep. Immediately following the wars, there were waves of missionaries moving in to take advantage of the plight of the people; they tend to be more succesful amongst the impoverished, ill and uneducated.

Regards
Reply

Bittersteel
03-26-2006, 05:19 PM
not only Muslims.Buddhists too in South East asia.
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 05:25 PM
that's what I said, his change won't cause any doubts in a true Muslim :)
Reply

------
03-26-2006, 05:26 PM
Doubts like what bro?
Reply

vpb
03-26-2006, 05:26 PM
that Islam is not the truth.
Reply

------
03-26-2006, 05:26 PM
Yep. I agree with u there.
Reply

Bittersteel
03-26-2006, 05:27 PM
http://www.christianaggression.org/i...&type=articles
Reply

mahdisoldier19
03-26-2006, 06:12 PM
First of All, Do you really consider yourself to follow a religion of Jedi?
Reply

blunderbus
03-26-2006, 06:17 PM
A Jedi I am not. But funny I thought it was, yes.
Reply

Herostratos
03-26-2006, 06:25 PM
Hehe-- you are not alone: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/nug...nk=2&Rank=1000
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2218456.stm
Reply

mahdisoldier19
03-26-2006, 06:55 PM
Oh How far has these people astrayed from the truth
Reply

snakelegs
03-26-2006, 08:47 PM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Hello Snakelegs,

Some were off-topic, some were hateful, some were in response to those that were off-topic and hateful. It was easiest to remove them all.
thanks for answering.
Reply

Knut Hamsun
03-27-2006, 03:57 AM
How do Muslims reconcile the fact that they do not allow non-Islamic religious recruiting in their countries, yet set up Mosques and try to recruit in non-Islamic countries?

Is it something along the lines of "It's ok for us to deny non-Muslims what we demand from non-Muslims because we're right and they are wrong"?
Ansar,
His question asks (i think) why this isn't allowed in current muslim countries, not the "ideal" that you imagine may someday be implimented. And it is a valid question, too, b/c whether or not these muslim countries follow exact instructions of the quoran and ahadith (meaning "whether or not you think they deserve to be called pure Islamic states"), they are still governed and inhabited by mostly muslims. So, his question stands: why the double standard?
Reply

dany
03-31-2006, 02:36 PM
Originally Posted by vpb
as far as I can see, Mohammed a.s meant to kill the ones who convert from Islam to another religion and then start fight against muslims on battles. I dont think Mohammed a.s would kill a person just bc he changed his religion for his own individual reasons.

Peace

I personally believed that is the correct interpretation. Never mind, leave him,
at least we know that he's a kafir rather than a MUNAFIQUN. As the latter is worst than the kafirs. They destroy Islam from the inside.

BEHOLD ! HELLFIRE IS WAITING TO DEVOUR THEM.......:brother: :okay: :statisfie
Reply

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-13-2013, 07:29 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-09-2011, 07:52 PM
  3. Replies: 46
    Last Post: 09-01-2006, 04:33 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-01-2006, 02:06 AM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-31-2006, 04:03 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!