Islam and Apostasy

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

EDIT: This post has been moved to the beginning of the thread.

:sl:
In order to understand this issue, we need to examine the Islamic law on apostasy. Since religion is looked on as a personal affair in western society, the notion of state intervention in one's personal choice would naturally seem excessive. 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 contemplate 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 publicly declare their rejection of it, so as to destroy the confidence of the newly-converted Muslims. Thus, the Prophet Muhammad pbuh 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 pbuh 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 assassinated, nor would one who remains inside the state conforming to outward laws be tracked down and executed. The notion of establishing inquisition 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 publicly 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 pbuh 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 publicly 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.

From another of my posts:

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.

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.

:w:

_______

Material from this post has been added to this article:
http://www.load-islam.com/artical_de...conceptions#28

[Dhahabi]

how are they dealt with?according to Islam?What does the Quran say about their punishment?

please help me on this matter bros and sis.

:sl:

Assalamu alaikum

Please go to the following link:
http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=en...v=browse&dgn=4
You can do any research.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl:

The Causes of Apostasy and the Islamic Remedy

In most cases, apostasy stems from the onset of doubt in the belief of the apostate. Islam has remedied this problem in the following manner:

1. Islam, from the onset, has never compelled anyone to accept it as his or her religion. It should be safe to assume that the individual – as long as he or she is not being confronted with any material or spiritual coercion – will never accept Islam except on account of conviction. Allah says:
- There is no compulsion in faith.

- So would you (O Muhammad) then compel people to become believers?
2. Islam encourages the development of the faculty of reason, expanding its horizons to contemplate on the signs within the person’s body and the signs in the surrounding environment. It encourages researching and contemplating the Qur’ân as well as history. Allah says:
- In the Earth are signs for those who are certain, and in themselves (as well). Will they not then see?”

- Say (O Muhammad): “Behold all that is in the heavens and the Earth.”

- Say (O Muhammad): ‘Travel in the land and see how He originated Creation.”

- Have they not pondered the word?

- Do they not ponder the Qur’ân?

- Say (O Muhammad): “Travel in the land and see what was the end of those before you. Most of them were polytheists.”

- Have they not traveled through the land, and have they not hearts wherewith to understand and ears wherewith to hear?
Thus, Islam requires that conviction be built upon the results of deep investigation and contemplation into Creation, including oneself, and into life and history, as well as the Qur’ân. From this, the precision in the governance of the universe and the wonder of its creation will be revealed, as well as how this requires that Allah alone must possess divinity. In this way, conviction in Islam becomes established on the basis of these clear and obvious conclusions. This establishes the believer’s faith on the basis of evidence as opposed to blind following, and on the basis of sound arguments as opposed to conjecture.

3. Islam grants the individual an opportunity to repent. In this fixed period of time, he has the opportunity to present and freely discuss his problem so that his misconceptions can be removed and the issues that give him doubt can be clarified by rational proofs and tangible evidence. If he returns to faith – even if only with his tongue – his life will remain inviolable and his rights and honor will be upheld.

Apostasy Apostasy is defined as a Muslim making a statement or performing an action that takes him out of the fold of Islam. The punishment prescribed for it in the Sunnah is execution, and it came as a remedy for a problem that existed at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him). This problem was that a group of people would publicly enter into Islam together then leave Islam together in order to cause doubt and uncertainty in the hearts of the believers. The Qur’ân relates this event to us:
A group from the People of the Scripture said: ‘Believe in what came down upon those who believe at the beginning of the day, then disbelieve at the end of the day, so perhaps they might return from faith.
Thus, the prescribed punishment for apostasy was instituted so that apostasy could not be used as a means of causing doubt in Islam.

At the same time, the apostate is given time to repent, so if he has a misconception or is in doubt about something, then his cause of doubt can be removed and the truth clarified to him. He is encouraged to repent for three days.

Both from:
http://islamtoday.net/english/discov...&sub_cat_id=48

Although the IslamToday team provides a clear and simplistic explanation, this issue is actually deeper than this and I intend, inshaa'Allah, to provide a closer analysis of the various views in light of the Qur'an, Ahadith and 'Ijmaa of the scholars, in the future.

Other links:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...=1119503544134
http://muslim-canada.org/APOSNOFR.HTM#four
---
http://www.ymofmd.com/books/zb_mri/i...man_rights.htm

:w:

[- Qatada -]

Question.

If a Muslim leaves Islam, what do Muslims call him? And what is the Islamic prescribed sentence for the one who leaves Islam. Please send me as soon as possible. Thank you very much.


In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Dear questioner! Thank you very much for this question that reflects deep insight and true search for knowledge. May Allah grant you success in this life and the Hereafter.

It goes without saying that, leaving Islam is the ugliest and the worst form of disbelief (kufr) in Almighty Allah. It is technically called ridda (apostasy from Islam), and someone who leaves Islam is called a murtadd (apostate).

The Qur'an makes it clear that the one who leaves Islam, hinders people from the path of Allah and then dies as such will be a loser on the Day of Judgment. His eternal abode will be Hell, where he/she will suffer severe torture and endless chastisement. Allah will not forgive him/her, nor will any of his/her good deeds be accepted from him/her. Allah Almighty says: "Lo! Those who disbelieve and turn from the way of Allah and then die disbelievers, Allah surely will not pardon them." (Muhammad: 34)

Also, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, is reported to have said: "The blood of a Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah is not lawful to shed unless he be one of three: a married adulterer, someone killed in retaliation for killing another, or someone who abandons his religion and the Muslim community.''


The prescribed punishment for a murtadd:

If a sane person who has reached puberty voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be punished.‏ In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (or his representative) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.‏

No one besides the caliph or his representative may kill the apostate. If someone else kills him, the killer is disciplined (for arrogating the caliph's prerogative and encroaching upon his rights, as this is one of his duties).

There is no blood money for killing an apostate (or any expiation). If he apostatizes from Islam and returns several times, his return to Islam, which occurs when he states the two Testifications of Faith, is accepted from him, although he is disciplined.

If a spouse in a consummated marriage apostatizes from Islam, the couple are separated for a waiting period (`iddah) consisting of three intervals between menstrual cycles. If the spouse returns to Islam before the waiting period ends, the marriage is not annulled but is considered to have continued the whole time.

(Based on 'The Reliance of the Traveler, by Ahmad Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, with some amendments.)

In addressing the issue of apostasy it is important to keep in mind the time, circumstances and the conditions that existed at the time of a particular ruling or judgment. Most modern governments do not apply Shari`ah law. However, this does not justify individuals taking it upon themselves to kill people if they apostatize from Islam. If this were to happen, such reckless action would only lead to a vicious circle of murder and homicide in which case a great deal of innocent people would be injured. As it stands presently, the means for dealing with apostasy are appropriate. Muslims should know that Almighty Allah has promised the apostate a severe punishment in this life, and an even greater punishment in the next life.

You can also read:

Source of the Punishment for Apostasy

Allah Almighty knows best.

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

[Andaraawus]

As-salamu alaykum

i am gathering some information concerning the following quotation:

"It is our opnion that whovever claims the acceptability of any exsisting religion today-other than Islam-such as Judaism, Christianity and so forth is a non believer. He should be asked to repent. If he does not, he must be killed as an apostate because he is rejecting the Quran (Sheikh Muhammad as Saleh al Uthaimin. The Muslim Belief. pg 22)

now i know Allah does clearly say in his word "If anyone desires a religion other than Islam never will It be accepted of Him" (Quran 3:85)

and whoever of the Muslims deny this will become an apostate unless he turns to his Lord in repentance, but i need more information on this and just excatly how to answer this.

I am not concerned that i wont find answers by myself, but im sure there are people much expierenced here that will give satisfactory answers that i can take from and utilise ...thank you and wasalams

[Bittersteel]

the Quran says nothing about killing.I am against the killing..Its all these opinions.as for the killing for apostates the situation was different.

Sahih Bukhari:

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 794:

Narrated Anas:

Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch) camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.

[Andaraawus]

As-Salamau alaykum

I will be sure to scrutinise these and and the subject and report my findings after research, i am not proud about asking for help, its not about MY articles, infact i am trying to compile a book thats deals with such issues and i am trying to put it in the best way possible ...

please note i am a Muslim but the purpose of this post is to find answers and points and so forth ...for example i have been made aware that penal punishments such as stoning , and killing for apostasy are also valid God given laws also contained with in the Bible and Jesus clearly stated these rules were here to stay in Matthew chapter 5 verse 17 onwards.

I need more answers and points and i know the Muslims here are very clever and are good at answering satisfactorily .....so i dont want no bad reputation points for posting this ....nor would i like this thread to be edited because then i may loose out on much needed knowledge and sources to refernce on this issue.


MODERATOR'S COMMENT: YOU ARE FREE TO ASK QUESTIONS BUT PLEASE DO NOT COPY ANTI-ISLAMIC ARTICLES!

i definately need answers to the last part of this so if any of you brothers sisters feel you can contribute to this then please do so ...and thank you wasalams

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl:
Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips gives the following explanation:

Sahih Bukhari:

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 794:

Narrated Anas:

Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch) camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.

This has already been answered here:
http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#18

:w:

[Andaraawus]

:sl: what book is that from? wasaalams

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl:
The book is still in the works, but these are the notes based on his series of lectures entitled Contemporary Issues.
http://www.ilmquest.org/osc/product_...roducts_id=238

:w:

[Andaraawus]

As-salamu alaykum, i agree that was an excellent peice of quotation about capital punishment that i wont fail to use when drawing up an article about this ....if anybody has anything else to throw my way then please do ....wasalams

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

http://www.islamicboard.com/showpost...95&postcount=1

[Andaraawus]

that was an amazing answer do you mind if i run of with that one?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

that was an amazing answer do you mind if i run of with that one?

:sl: bro,
I'm glad you found it useful, alhamdulilah. In case I use it in a future article, just mention where you got my answer from if you plan to use it, inshaa'Allah.

Btw, your discussion with POBook was moved here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...h-penalty.html
:w:

[Islamicboy]

As salamalikum

Many people say that a person who left islam should not get the death penalty. Well what about these hadeeth that clearly tell us to execute the person who leaves Islam?

Sayyiduna Ibn Abbaas radhi allahu anhuma says: Nabi sallalahu alayhi wasallam said "Execute the one who renegades from his Deen." (Sahih al-Bukhariy Hadith6299, Sunan al-Nasaa’iy)

Sayyiduna ‘Uthmaan radhiyallahu anhu narrates hearing Nabi Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam as saying "……The one who changes his religion after accepting Islam must be executed." (Sunan al-Nasaa’iy Hadith4057)

Sayyiduna Abdullah radhiallahu anhu narrates Nabi Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam as saying "It is not Halaal to kill a Muslim except for 3 reason: …no.3.The one that turns away from his Deen, thereby disassociating himself from the group of Muslims."(Sahih Muslim Hadith4351)

Also the four Imams have had the same views on someone leaving islam.

Al-Hanafiyyah

Imam al-Marghinaaniy says: "If a Muslim, may Allah forbid turns away from Islam, the religion of Islam should be presented to him. If he has any doubts they should be cleared…and he should be kept under supervision for 3 days. If he reverts to Islam, he must be set free, otherwise he should be executed. (Al-Hidaya) Allamah Ibn ‘Aabideen says: "Note well! It is unanimous that a renegade from Islam must be executed" (Rasaa’il Ibn Aabideen)

Al-Maalikiyyah

Imam Maalik says: "The one who renegades from Islam to another religion and exposes it will be asked to repent from his action. If he does not repent, he must be executed." (Al-Mu’atta lil Imam Maalik)

Al-shaafi’iyyah

Imam al-Shaafi’iy says: "One who renegades from Islam will not be left alone, either he reverts to Islam or he will be executed." (Kitab al-Umm)



Al-Hanaabilah

Allamah Ibn Qudaama al-Hanbaliy says: "All the scholars are unanimous that a renegade must be executed." (Al-Mughniy with Sharh al-Kabir Vol.10 Pg.74 Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah Beirut)

Many muslims use this as there defence 2:256 There is no compulsion in religion. but the hadeeth talks about someone leaving islam after becoming muslim and the Ayat talks about someone being forced to except Islam. We cannot force a christian but when a muslim leaves his religion we should educate him about Islam but if he still does not except or revert back to islam then he should be excuted.

[sonz]

salama

chk this out

Kill the Apostate


“Whoever changes his religion (Islam), kill him” (Bukhari)


“The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas (retribution) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims." (Bukhari)

The case of the apostate facing trial in Afghanistan, with the remote prospect of being sentenced to death, has brought swift reaction from the West. It is truly amusing to see the heads of European states reacting to the possible death of one man while they find it easy to aid the murder of thousands of Iraqis. What kind of twisted moral barometer causes such a reaction in one case, but not the other?

This week we learnt that American marines murdered 15 members of an Iraqi family in cold blood, including a three year old child. No problem, say the leaders of Europe, but the trial of the Afghan apostate is too much for them. You can’t kill an apostate, but kill as many Muslims as you need to improve the balance sheet of the party donors! This is the source of their moral barometer, as the apostate case is opposing secular values of freedom of religion, while the occupation and murder of Iraqis is conforming to secular interests of spreading freedom and democracy!

Many individuals in the Secular West find it hard to understand that capital punishment prescribed for changing religion, because religion has no importance in the West, it is reduced to one of personal taste, and the principle of freedom of religion facilitates easy apostasy. Of course this is also rooted in European history, where religious intolerance by the Church was immense.

In Islam, society is supposed to be governed by religion; where apostasy is the secular equivalent of treason not a matter of personal choice for Muslims. Many Christians and Jews have jumped on the anti-Islamic bandwagon, and have joined hands with their secular colleagues, without realising that such penal codes also exists in their religions.

I wish someone would tell these Zionist-Christians and the Muslim moderates that: freedom of religion is not a religious notion, it is a secular notion. Can the God of any religion say to its subject, believe in me as long as you are happy, but if you are not happy then move over to the next religion? In that case the religion is clearly stating that it does not hold the ultimate truth. If a religion does not have conviction in its own values, its followers are certainly not going to have conviction either. Now what kind of religion is that?

As expected, the moderates have responded by giving dubious interpretations to claim that the law of apostasy is not part of Islam, and to look acceptable, they promote the idea that Muslims have freedom of religion. Do they? I thought once you subscribe to Islam you are bound by the laws of Islam, so where is the freedom. The world is divided between the sick moderates and healthy radicals. These sick moderates work hard to make Islam appealing to non-Muslims, in such a manner that it becomes fully compatible with liberal democracy. What is the significance of Islam, if it is interpreted to make it compatible to everything else?

Their (moderates) view is not shaped by Islam but as a result of the media onslaught; for them the problem of negative representation of Islam can only be solved by representing it correctly, which translates to satisfying the hostile critics. So they ‘reinterpret’ the Quran, which in turn is used to remove and/or reinterpret the clear evidences from the Hadiths, hoping they would arrive at a point, when the attack from the West would cease. Not true, the west does not need an excuse to attack Islam and Muslims, as the recent cartoon incident showed, and they need even less of an excuse to murder Muslims, as the murder of the Iraqis continues to demonstrate. In fact the West has been demonising Muslims, for centuries, and it has nothing to do with the conduct of the Muslims or even the values of Islam.

Unable to defend the Islamic penal code, moderates start to deny sound evidences from Hadiths, take selected verses out of context and offer an explanation that negates centuries of scholarship, going back to the companions of the Prophet (SAW). The majority view of the Scholars (Ulemas) is that: apostasy is punishable by death, but there is a minority view which says it is only punishable by death, if the apostate has committed actions of a belligerent nature against the Islamic state and the Muslims.

The moderates raise the Quran, as evidences from the examples (Sunnah) of the Prophet (SAW) are very clear on this issue, as is the early examples of His companions. So let us look at how they provide a false interpretation using the Quran, with a few examples.

They selectively quote the verses and one of the most popular one is from the Chapter of Baqarah: “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256, AL-Quran). But if they looked further they would also see the verse: “Whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him, he will be the looser in the hereafter” (3:85, Al-Quran). One of the basic rules in interpreting Quranic verses is that you must take into account all the verses on the same theme, so that they synchronise and are consistent, and not contradictory.

If Muslims have freedom of religion to apostasise according to the first verse (2:256), as the moderates argue, but clearly they do not according to the second verse (3:85). This verse clearly states that by apostatising they would be the losers, meaning they will be in hellfire, punished. Hence to apostasise is an illegal act (Haram).So how does Allah (SWT) say in one place you are free to choose any religion and then tells the Muslims if you choose another religion you will be punished, surely that would be a contradiction? You can not be free to choose if the only choice you have is Islam!

Of course many would have deduced that the two verses, are not addressing the same category of people, or addressing the same subject. The first verse (2:256) is in only addressing the non-Muslims as rationally only they have the choice to accept or reject Islam but not the Muslims. But once the non-Muslims accept Islam, they are bound by its rules and the verse 3.85 becomes applicable to them. Just like you are free to join the army but once you join you can’t walk out freely, you are bound by the rules.

The moderates partially cite verses where Allah (SWT) is informing that we are ‘free’ to do what we like on earth, while they omit that we will be held accountable for our actions because our choice is supposed to be exercised in a particular way - well in that case there is no real freedom. In this sense neither Muslims nor non-Muslims are free to choose anything other than Islam. As verse (3:85) clearly states, no choice except Islam. In fact even according to the verse (2:256) the non-Muslims they only have a choice because Allah (SWT) has not compelled them through the Sharia laws to become Muslims, they should enter Islam willingly. As the sentence after “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256), states: “truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Taghout and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.” clearly pointing out, if they do not choose Islam they will be accountable and face the consequence in the hereafter.

The moderates in fact make the confusion between freewill and having the freedom to choose legally per the Islamic law, i.e. a legal permit. They selectively cite verses like 2:256 and this: "Say (Muhammad it is) truth from Lord of all. Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve." [18:29] to claim that we have freedom of religion as Muslims. Nope, we are not free to choose we have the ability to choose! The idea of freedom in the verse 18:29 is clearly referring to freewill; it is a description of the reality that we have been given the ability to exercise our freewill; this ability to exercise freewill is not a legal permit. Hence, it is not evidence of permission from Allah (SWT), for Muslims to apostasise using the bogus claim that Islam caters for freedom of religion!

If the Muslims had the right to apostasies by making dubious interpretations of selected verses, and proclaiming freedom of religion, then they would have the right to do anything else, by that same argument. Therefore, we can take another example, we as Muslim have the ability to use our sexual organs in anyway we please as Allah (SWT) has given us the ability and free will (not the right) to use it in any way we please and commit fornication. But clearly we do not have the right from Islam to do that, as Allah (SWT) has prohibited adultery.

Apostasy is one thing, trial and execution of the apostate is another matter entirely. This can only be done by a legitimate Islamic State, the Caliphate. The defendant has to be brought and tried by an Islamic court. Clearly in the absence of the Islamic state, this is neither possible, nor permissible. For sure if a genuine Islamic state existed, the Afghani apostate would not have returned as an apostate from Germany, as he would know the consequence.

The whole episode is nothing more than a tragicomical theatre piece!

Yamin Zakaria (www.iiop.org)

London, UK

[Truth_Seeker]

Ansar, i'm a bit confused by your post

You say it's often taken out of context, but then why do soo many scholars have so many disagreements about this, surely Qur'an and Islam is clear, and they should all have come to the same opinion. look at Jamal Badawi's answers here

http://www.islamonline.net/livedialo...GuestID=Gz9HCK

So what is your view on the case in Afghanistan, should he have been tried, is he rebelling and comitting treason?


this is what Sonz posted

“Whoever changes his religion (Islam), kill him” (Bukhari)


“The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas (retribution) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims." (Bukhari)

now it is quite clear here that it doesn't mention anything about the context, it simply says kill him. It doesn't say if he does it in private, or whether he makes it public. Why is it so unclear? I thought Islam was clear, but yet there are always these different opinions, and these differences too amongst scholars who are supposed to have the most knowledge. why didn't the Prophet PBUH make it clear, and leave it so open

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.

Now come on this is such a biased view, what about the other reason that they simply did not think it was the truth, and honestly thought another way of life was better

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.

Number 1, of course it's going to become public. If they are not seen to be praying, fasting or all this other stuff and instead start going to church, just simply following fundamentals of another religion, then it's bound to become public.
Number 2 Now you're saying if it is to become public, which as i've said above is inevitable, then they'll be reasoned with??? What if their arguments stand firm, and they logically answer everything thrown at them. Just as non-muslims who upon given "proofs" of islam and "refutations" of so so so many misconceptions, and still reject islam, why can't the same be done with muslims? Why can't it simply be said to you is your way, to us is ours, or there is no compulsion in religion.

So what will be their fate then if they still decide to leave islam?

Now i don't the answer for sure but i'm pretty certain that if they still decide to leave islam, despite the "refutations" to the hundreds of misconceptions of a clear religion, then they will be executed. Please correct me if I am wrong

Now what does that mean

1) If someone leaves Islam it is bound to become public
2) If he holds strong to his arguments for reverting, just as non-muslims here do for not becomin muslims, then he'll be executed for not repenting?

Where is the freedom of religion?

[Islamicboy]

salamlikum
lets not forget leaving the american military at war time could result in death penalty or life in prison. But the same country is making a big fuss over a person getting executed for leaving Islam.

[HeiGou]

lets not forget leaving the american military at war time could result in death penalty or life in prison. But the same country is making a big fuss over a person getting executed for leaving Islam.

1. You can leave the US military without dying

2. We are not at War

3. Can does not mean always does - the whole of WW2 the Americans shot one guy and he not only deserted, he raped a girl too.

4. A religion is not the same as a country

5. Adults join up. Children get born into Islam

But above all 6. If you insist on drawing the analogy with treason, people are going to draw it back. If you do not feel you are a member of a Western community in time that community will decide you are not a member of it. This is the Israeli solution - all the Muslims on one side of a fence, all the rest on the other. Is this what you want?

[Islamicboy]

1. You can leave the US military without dying

2. We are not at War

3. Can does not mean always does - the whole of WW2 the Americans shot one guy and he not only deserted, he raped a girl too.

4. A religion is not the same as a country

5. Adults join up. Children get born into Islam

But above all 6. If you insist on drawing the analogy with treason, people are going to draw it back. If you do not feel you are a member of a Western community in time that community will decide you are not a member of it. This is the Israeli solution - all the Muslims on one side of a fence, all the rest on the other. Is this what you want?

1 then why do american troops take refuge status in canada after leaving there post?

2 we are not at war excuse me what is Iraq? i thought this is war on terror is it not?

4 ofcourse a religion is not as same as country yet leaving american military is death or life in prison but people and the human rights dont care about that howcome?

5 We cannot execute someone without teaching them islam and after we show islam to any person its impossible for them to still reject but if they still do then we execute them.

I will not compromise Islam becuase the kuffar cannot except it ok and bro lets not forget even the non muslims knowing this islam is still the fastest growing religion on earth today Alhumdillaah Allaahuakbar.

[HeiGou]

1 then why do american troops take refuge status in canada after leaving there post?

Because they don't want to do their pathetic five months in jail for going AWOL or whatever the military imposes. Mostly they want to live in Canada I think.

2 we are not at war excuse me what is Iraq? i thought this is war on terror is it not?

We as in the Muslim world and the Kafir world. The Americans are not at war either but that is a different argument. You all divide the world into Muslims and non-Muslims, say that the former are at war with the latter, and then you complain because people behave accordingly?

4 ofcourse a religion is not as same as country yet leaving american military seems to be more server den leaving Islam.

They execute you in Islam. They don't even bother to come find you, most of the time, in the American Army. How is it more severe?

5 We cannot execute someone without teaching them islam and after we show islam to any person its impossible for them to still reject but if they still do then we execute them.

Big of you. I understand the process.

I will not compromise Islam becuase the kuffar cannot except it ok and bro lets not forget even the non muslims knowing this islam is still the fastest growing religion on earth today Alhumdillaah Allaahuakbar.

I would not want you to compromise your religion. Islam is not the fastest growing religion in the world today.

[Islamicboy]

ok bro lets just stop this right now you are not willing to understand you reject the truth And yes islam is the fastest growing religion today alhumdillaah

[HeiGou]

ok bro lets just stop this right now you are not willing to understand you reject the truth And yes islam is the fastest growing religion today alhumdillaah

Jedi has gone from nothing to a statistically significant religion in the last few years. Wicca is growing at a huge rate. 30 years ago Falun Gong did not exist. It now claims 100 million members. Islam is not the fastest growing religion.

I understand. I have no problems understanding. Your arguments are just not very good ones.

[Islamicboy]

First of we are right now off topic and our debate is becoming pointless
o yeah muslims are 1.5 billion alhumdillaah

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

You say it's often taken out of context, but then why do soo many scholars have so many disagreements about this, surely Qur'an and Islam is clear

I've already explained the correct understanding in my last post.

So what is your view on the case in Afghanistan, should he have been tried, is he rebelling and comitting treason?

It is the duty of the Islamic state to do what is in the best interests for their country. In this case, the man was already a Non-Muslim before entering the country, he did not publically renounce the faith within the country, and he did not pose a threat to the state. On the contrary, by attempting to try him in court, more harm was done to the Muslims not just in Afghanistan, but across the globe. The Islamic state must always be cognizant of the far-reaching consequences of its actions. We find in the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh that their were some people who were known by the Prophet pbuh and the companions to be hypocrties and when they committed an act of treason, the companions suggested that they be executed but the Prophet Muhammad pbuh refused because he knew that the harm of killing them would be far greater than the harm they could cause, as he said, I do not want people to say that Muhammad is killing his own companions. So he was always concious of how others would see the actions taken by the state.

now it is quite clear here that it doesn't mention anything about the context, it simply says kill him.

Brother, I already explained this in my post; the other ahadith and historical narrations clarify this for us.

I thought Islam was clear, but yet there are always these different opinions

Islam is not unclear, if you read the information I posted you would see that this issue has been clarified by other information.

Now come on this is such a biased view, what about the other reason that they simply did not think it was the truth, and honestly thought another way of life was better

Brother, in the history of Islam there has not been a single knowledgeable Muslim who has left Islam.

Number 1, of course it's going to become public. If they are not seen to be praying, fasting or all this other stuff and instead start going to church, just simply following fundamentals of another religion, then it's bound to become public.

As for praying and fasting, the acts of worship are not an outward aspect - no one is with you all the time to know if you are fasting or praying. As for attending the church or other religious practices, I pointed out the flaw in reasonign when one says, on one hand, that religioin is a private personal affair that should be free of state interference. and then on the other hand suggest that one needs to practice their religion publicly as part of a greater community. You cannot use both arguments at the same time - if you believe that religion is a public and communal affair, then it does fall under state jurisdiction. If you believe it is a private and personal affair, then it does not.

What if their arguments stand firm, and they logically answer everything thrown at them.

There is not a single attack against Islam which has not been refuted. In my experience of debating, every single allegation I see has already been answered before.

:w:

[Ayesha Rana]

They execute you in Islam. They don't even bother to come find you, most of the time, in the American Army. How is it more severe?

Just because they don't bother finding you doesn't alter the fact that they are supposed to.
Besides remember what the Americans did to John Walker when he 'apostated' from the Americans side? They didn't kill him they tortured him and shamed him publicly by shaving off his beard and so on to set an example to anyone else.
When someone joins the army, they sign a contract in which they are fully aware of the consequences of apostating. By accepting Islam you are making a contract with God. If you accept Islam as the truth you are under obligation to live by its laws. So you see Bro it's the persons own fault and a religious contract is much stronger than a man-made one.

[HeiGou]

Just because they don't bother finding you doesn't alter the fact that they are supposed to.

Just because there is a penalty for deserting the US and another for apostacy from Islam doesn't alter the fact that the two are nothing alike.

Besides remember what the Americans did to John Walker when he 'apostated' from the Americans side? They didn't kill him they tortured him and shamed him publicly by shaving off his beard and so on to set an example to anyone else.

I am sorry? John Walker was caught fighting, with gun in hand, the American Army after not renouncing his American citizenship. A clear case of treason. And what did they do with him - not execute him that's for sure? He shaved off his beard on orders of his lawyer. What example? Americans do not think of that as a shameful thing and so would not be deterred.

When someone joins the army, they sign a contract in which they are fully aware of the consequences of apostating. By accepting Islam you are making a contract with God. If you accept Islam as the truth you are under obligation to live by its laws. So you see Bro it's the persons own fault and a religious contract is much stronger than a man-made one.

Actually that is not the case. Only in a few places are you obligated to live under Islamic laws. Nor do most Muslims voluntarily sign up for anything. They are born into the faith. They do not make a clear adult decision to join. It is not my fault if I belong to the religion of my parents.

[nimrod]

"we show islam to any person its impossible for them to still reject but if they still do then we execute them."

LOL LOL what a concept lol.

Good Grief.

Thanks
Nimrod

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi Nimrod,
Have you read the explanation I've given on apostasy?

[Skillganon]

Brother's, Sisters of every faith and non-faith.

I am going attemp an article on apostasy where I can ost here and keep one for future reference. Any further argument for it and agaist it will be helpfull.
Any primary sources will also be helpfull.

Thank You.

[Skillganon]

Here's a question,
1. If their is no compulsion in Islam, than is it the same thing if a person is compelled to remain in his faith an act of compulsion?

2. How would you justify, supposing in a christan country who has a same law for apostasy, which this is evident in the bible, for exacting the same punishment for a person leaving christianity for Islam?

Peace be upon you!

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl: Skillganon,
Both your questions have already been answered in this thread, in this post:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html

:w:

[Skillganon]

:sl: Skillganon,
Both your questions have already been answered in this thread, in this post:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html

:w:

Thank's. I will ask more Question's

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-'Adl yes I read your link. I had read it before when you posted it.
I am doing my best to understand Islam and a person should read links provided by a peoples he is trying to understand.

What I found wrong about the information contained in the link is first and fore-most:

"Anyone who becomes a Muslim does so purely through objective study of the religion".

That statement is so wrong I don't even know where to begin.

HOW does a Muslim child objectively study Islam and then decide to become what his parents hope he becomes, a Muslim?????????

HOW does an adult objectively decide on Islam when other choices are suppressed?????

A lack of compulsion is ONLY given when all opposing points of view are given without any reprisials<sp> and protected by the state.

No, on this issue modern Islam loses.

Thanks
Nimrod

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Nimrod,
Thanks for your post.

What I found wrong about the information contained in the link is first and fore-most:

"Anyone who becomes a Muslim does so purely through objective study of the religion".

I was referring here to people who convert into the religion as opposed to those who were already raised as Muslims. But even in the latter case one is supposed to study their religion and embrace it for themselves, not because their parents were Muslims, but because they sincerely believe it to be the truth.

There are many Muslims living in Non-Muslim countries who were raised as Muslims but if they chose not to follow Islam anymore, no one could stop them. But there has never been any knowledgeable Muslim who has done that.

Regards

[Ayesha Rana]

Assalamu-alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatu

Perfect answer Brother, nice to see it's settled. And remember nimrod it is only after the age of maturity that a person is accountable for his/her deeds by which time they have enough sense to judge right and wrong for themselves.

[HeiGou]

There are many Muslims living in Non-Muslim countries who were raised as Muslims but if they chose not to follow Islam anymore, no one could stop them. But there has never been any knowledgeable Muslim who has done that.

I think that depends on what you mean by "knowledgeable". Patrick Sookhdeo is a British-based Christian who was born in Guyana, and I think studied at an Islamic school, but converted. He is now what you might call Islamophobic.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

I think that depends on what you mean by "knowledgeable". Patrick Sookhdeo is a British-based Christian who was born in Guyana, and I think studied at an Islamic school, but converted.

I'm talking about an educated Muslim who has more than an elementary school education on Islam. If Sookhdeo is the best example you can give me, than my point is well-established. There are [unfortunately] many kids who immigrate with their families to a non-muslim country and lose their religion; Sookhdeo was only 10 years old when he came to England, and by the time he was in his twenties he had lost his religion completely. Having a fourth grade education is not what I meant when I said, "knowledgeable Muslim". And someone who believes that the Qur'an openly commands Muslims to slaughter all Christians and Jews is no better than the ignorant racists who spout such hateful drivel on the internet.

He is now what you might call Islamophobic.

An understatement, if I ever saw one.

Regards

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-'Adl somehow I highly suspect that the Muslim growing up in Saudi Arabia isn't given an equal opportunity to study the Christianity faith un-impeded.

How about Afghanistan?

I will bet you $100 to $1 that if Islam was restricted in those two countries like the Christian faith is, you would NOT be standing by what you have posted.

I know…..what is going on in those countries isn’t Islam…. I have read it time and time again.

It is real life though, would you agree, that until there is a truly Islamic (according to your definition of Islam) State, that there should be a ban on any killing of converts from Islam?

Thanks
Nimrod

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi Nimrod,
Thanks for your post. :)

Ansar Al-'Adl somehow I highly suspect that the Muslim growing up in Saudi Arabia isn't given an equal opportunity to study the Christianity faith un-impeded.

How about Afghanistan?

I'm sure you understand that I have no interest in discussing, much less defending, what goes on in this Muslim country or that Muslim country. I am only interested in expounding the true teachings of Islam as given in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

As far as studying other religions is concerned, there has always been a large motivation for Muslims to study comparative religion since Muslim scholars till today have always been very active in dialoguing and debating with people of other faiths.

It is real life though, would you agree, that until there is a truly Islamic (according to your definition of Islam) State, that there should be a ban on any killing of converts from Islam?

I would agree that the punishment for apostasy should only be done within the parameters of the Shari'ah law, which would eliminate any problems.

However, I would also agree with you that there is a serious need for reform amongst Muslim countries in order to better implement the Islamic laws. How we go about reforming is quite a large topic of discussion beyond the scope of the current thread, but the key point here is education.

Peace

[nimrod]

Thanks for an interesting post Ansar Al-'Adl.

I would like to ask how that helps the poor Christian recently in the news from Afghanistan though.

After all for that poor soul, Islam is what it is.

Are you agreeing that if it can’t be done in the right way it shouldn’t be done?

If not then what?

Kill the fellow even though his killers are as wrong as him according to Islam?

I am sure he and his family would take comfort in that.

An interesting concept there.

Thanks
Nimrod

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Are you agreeing that if it can’t be done in the right way it shouldn’t be done?

Yes. I commented on the Afghan situation in this post:
http://www.islamicboard.com/235493-post42.html

I am sure he and his family would take comfort in that.

His family is the one that called for his execution. If it weren't for his family, his case would never have even reached the government.

Regards

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-'Adl you are most likely correct "His family is the one that called for his execution".

I don't recall his children calling for his execution, I may have missed it though.

Thanks
Nimrod

[i_m_tipu]

His family is the one that called for his execution. If it weren't for his family, his case would never have even reached the government.

LOL :thankyou:

[HeiGou]

Ansar Al-'Adl you are most likely correct "His family is the one that called for his execution".

I don't recall his children calling for his execution, I may have missed it though.

I think the news reports said that he was involved in a custody dispute with his wife and family. So they settled it by denouncing him.

[hidden_treasure]

Assalamu alaikum,

The penalty is death....there is plenty of sahih hadeeth on this topic.
Unfortunately i cannot copy and paste them (it wont let me).
Let me type one...
Narrated by abdullah : Allahs apostle said "the blood of a muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that i am his apsotle cannot be shed excpet in three cases 1. Qisas for murder. 2. a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse. 3. and the person who reverts from islam and leaves the muslims.

(sahih bukhari.volume 9. book 83 blood money..hadeeth 017).

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Does free will....only apply to people who were not born into a Muslim family?

Free will applies to everyone, please see my earlier posts.

Regards

[Goku]

:sl:
Osama Abdalla, author of Answering-Christianity.com, is not a scholar of Islam. He has not studied the extensive proofs quoted previously in the articles I pasted earlier. The authentic view is that the apostate has committed treason against the Islamic state (bear in mind that all Muslim citizens pledge allegiance to the head of state, therefore this is treason) and is punishable by capital punishment if the person will not be reasoned with even after he dialogues with Muslims for a certain period of time.

:w:

Are you sure? Just think about it, the True Religion of God killing those who leave it, shouldnt we leave the punishment to Allah?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Are you sure? Just think about it, the True Religion of God killing those who leave it, shouldnt we leave the punishment to Allah?

:sl: Goku,
Please read this post where I explained the punishment for apostasy in context:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html

:w:

[wilberhum]

To take any action against any one for Apostasy is to deny another human “Freedom of Speech”, “Freedom of Religion”, and “Freedom of Thought”. May god punish any one who takes away the freedoms that he has given us.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

To take any action against any one for Apostasy is to deny another human “Freedom of Speech”, “Freedom of Religion”, and “Freedom of Thought”. May god punish any one who takes away the freedoms that he has given us.

Hi wilber,
Please read this post where I have explained the punishment for apostasy in context and provided the justification in light of humanitarian values:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html

Regards

[wilberhum]

Again "To take any action against any one for Apostasy is to deny another human “Freedom of Speech”, “Freedom of Religion”, and “Freedom of Thought”. May god punish any one who takes away the freedoms that he has given us."
In any context. Leave god's punishment to god. If you think he needs your help, you need a new god.

[Issa]

:sl:





Both from:
http://islamtoday.net/english/discov...&sub_cat_id=48

Although the IslamToday team provides a clear and simplistic explanation, this issue is actually deeper than this and I intend, inshaa'Allah, to provide a closer analysis of the various views in light of the Qur'an, Ahadith and 'Ijmaa of the scholars, in the future.

Other links:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...=1119503544134
http://muslim-canada.org/APOSNOFR.HTM#four
---
http://www.ymofmd.com/books/zb_mri/i...man_rights.htm

:w:

:sl: ,

Would this mean that if one person wanted to leave Islam or convert to another religion (not to bring doubt to others but because he decides Islam isn't right for him) is he an apostate?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Again "To take any action against any one for Apostasy is to deny another human “Freedom of Speech”, “Freedom of Religion”, and “Freedom of Thought”. May god punish any one who takes away the freedoms that he has given us. In any context."

Dear Wilber,
First you ignored the explanations in this thread and posted this comment and then even when I kindly asked you to refer back to my post you still refuse to read my explanation? With all due respect, such an attitude is not befitting of one who wishes to engage in intellectual discussion. If you don't want to read others views then why bother posting here?

Here the link is AGAIN:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html
You can go back and read where I explained when a state is or is not justified in taking action against an individual. If you don't want to learn the Islamic perspective, then don't bother discussing. I am not going to waste my time re-typing out my entire explanation.

Please respond to what I have already written, otherwise do not waste my time and your time!!

Yes, a state Leave god's punishment to god. If you think he needs your help, you need a new god.

Did I say the punishment is designed to help God out? Not only do you ignore my explanations but now you start attributing absurd ideas to me. Please go back and read the explanation I have already provided. If you don't like it or think it is flawed, then feel free to expose the flaw in my judgement or reasoning. Don't ask for a discussion if you won't even bother to listen to the other person's views.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl: ,

Would this mean that if one person wanted to leave Islam or convert to another religion (not to bring doubt to others but because he decides Islam isn't right for him) is he an apostate?

:sl:
From my previous explanation:

However, one who personally abandons the faith and leaves the country would not be hunted down and assassinated, nor would one who remains inside the state conforming to outward laws be tracked down and executed. The notion of establishing inquisition 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 publicly 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.

...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 publicly 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.

:w:

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl:
It is really frustrating and upsetting for me when I take the time to provide an -in-depth explanation of such issues for both Muslims and Non-Muslims and then people continue to raise the same questions in this thread without bothering to look back at my post. Anyone who browses through the thread can see how many times I have had to refer people back to my other post, which is absolutely ridiculous. I don't mind if anyone wants to discuss the issue in more detail or comment on what I have previously written, but when people just ignore the explanation I provided and persist in raising the same questions/comments, that is totally preposterous.

:w:

[wilberhum]

It is really frustrating and upsetting for me when people use ANY justifications to deprive people of there Freedoms. There are items in each and every religion that I find offensive, but I find this to be the second most offensive concept within any religion. Every religion claims the truth. Ever religion claims they are right. Every religion claims that every other religion is wrong. But your religion should be between you and god. There is an old atheist saying, ‘Religion does not make a good person do good things. Religion does not stop evil people from doing evil things. But it does take religion go get good people to do evil things”. Men deciding that they have the right to enact there version of “Gods Punishment”, are to me, the foulest of evil. Little OBL’s. I think that the evil we do in the name of god is the most evil of all. And I conceder any one that denies freedom and equality to everyone, in the name of god, is a bigoted and evil person. I don’t know how I can make it any clearer.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

It is really frustrating and upsetting for me when people use ANY justifications to deprive people of there Freedoms.

Islam doesn't deprive anyone of freedoms. Like every other civilized society in the world (without exception), Islam balances individual freedoms with the protection of society. Please wilber, why don't you learn about the issues instead of restating the misconceptions that I have already debunked? I'm afraid this is the final opportunity I can give you to engage in a productive dialogue on this topic and actually consider what the other side is saying.

Since you persistently refuse to use the link I am pasting my previous response here for your convenience. Please READ it.

Since religion is looked on as a personal affair in western society, the notion of state intervention would naturally seem excessive. 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 contemplate 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 publicly 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 assassinated, nor would one who remains inside the state conforming to outward laws be tracked down and executed. The notion of establishing inquisition 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 publicly 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 publicly 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.

If you do not respond to the points I have already made on this issue then I am afraid we can no longer entertain your comments in this thread since you clearly are not here for open discussion and learning about the views of others. I seriously hope you will reconsider your attitude so that we can have a productive dialogue without ignoring the views of the other person.

Regards

[nimrod]

Just a minor point, "Islam doesn't deprive anyone of freedoms.", ALL "order" restricts someone's freedoms.

Even Wilber Hum's choice of "order"

Thanks
Nimrod

[i_m_tipu]

:salamext:
Brother Ansar

http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...ost232188.html
this is beneficial :thankyou:
specially

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 publicly 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.

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.

Do u mean knowledgeable Muslim will never left Islam.

Than I have 1 question
Does it ur personal view
Or
the Qur’an or Authentic Hadis support it

I also never saw any knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam

But I m afraid
I m not believe that knowledgeable Muslim will never left Islam

* If any knowledgeable Muslim have weak heart and His mind is not strong
* He lives in, where almost every one against him or confused him
* live in such culture (like so called modern or ultra modern culture of the world is so delicious.) where Weak hearted Muslim (can be knowledgeable) could be blinded totally. {many more.......}
(I wonder what else one can not do on that culture. Every naked thing is supported and inspired. People enjoy and encouraged in bad thing while good and noble thing discouraged or banned i.e.; “wearing hijab is discouraged or banned. Really hard to believe”)

I think above situations together could destroy any one

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Just a minor point, "Islam doesn't deprive anyone of freedoms.", ALL "order" restricts someone's freedoms.

Even Wilber Hum's choice of "order"

Excellent point, nimrod.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:salamext:
Brother Ansar

http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...ost232188.html
this is beneficial :thankyou:
specially

Alhamdulilah.

Do u mean knowledgeable Muslim will never left Islam.

Than I have 1 question
Does it ur personal view
Or
the Qur’an or Authentic Hadis support it

This observation has been noted by many Muslim scholars and it relates to the Qur'an's description of the faith of the believer as 'firmly rooted'.

But I m afraid
I m not believe that knowledgeable Muslim will never left Islam

* If any knowledgeable Muslim have weak heart and His mind is not strong
* He lives in, where almost every one against him or confused him
* live in such culture (like so called modern or ultra modern culture of the world is so delicious.) where Weak hearted Muslim (can be knowledgeable) could be blinded totally. {many more.......}
(I wonder what else one can not do on that culture. Every naked thing is supported and inspired. People enjoy and encouraged in bad thing while good and noble thing discouraged or banned i.e.; “wearing hijab is discouraged or banned. Really hard to believe”)

I mean a knowledgeable, practicing devout Muslim. In Islam, knowledge and the application of knowledge go hand-in-hand.

:w:

[wilberhum]

I have been accused of not reading and not understanding. I assure that neither is correct. I am not finished going through everything yet, it is not a small job. I will continue working on it. I will spend so much time on this because it is a subject that hits close to home. I’m a Catholic apostate. It was not a decision that I took lightly. I did a lot of soul searching, thinking, and studying before the decision was made. As someone who has gone through the process, I am mortified that anyone would conceder killing me or anyone, because of that decision. I, as you, was told my religion was right and all others were wrong. Living in the real world there is nothing unique about this. All religions say the same thing. That is only logical. Why would anyone believe in a religion that says they are wrong? Religion has always used Fear as a way to keep people in line. Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam. Christians called it heresy and burned you at the stake for it, but Christianity got over it. It is now for Islam to leave the 14 centaury. I am not one of them, but there are many that hate Islam. Killing people for exercising freedom of speech, religion, and thought is not a small part of what makes them fear and hate Islam. I want to see an end to that hate and fear and I also want to defend freedoms.
I have copied statements from prior posts (Red) and commented on them.
I will continue on reading, researching, and commenting, but this is all that I can do today.

The original question was: How are they dealt with? According to Islam? What does the Quran say about their punishment?
Additional Statements and comments:
Islam, from the onset, has never compelled anyone to accept it as his or her religion.Of course there are many occurrences where there was not war and people freely and openly converted. But when there was war, and there was a lot of it, it was converting, die, or pay extensive taxes. Many chose conversion, not out of faith, but because of the conquinces. How else do you logically come to instant conversion after just being conquered?
Islam grants the individual an opportunity to repent.If a person has truly followed there conscious, there is nothing to repent.
So that his misconceptions can be removed
You assume that if there is no misconception no one would leave Islam. Obviously a misconception on your part.
Issues that give him doubt can be clarified by rational proofs and tangible evidence.I just love “Rational Proofs”! There is no such thing. Any one not wearing “Faith Blinders” knows that when it comes to religion, there is no proof. No one can even prove god exists so anything dealing with god is impossible to prove.
The punishment prescribed for it in the Sunnah is executionThere are some that deny this but most acknowledge this and no small number want it enforced.
It came as a remedy for a problem
Any solution to any problem will create another problem. The solution for the problems that apostasy creates is to deny people freedom of religion, speech, and thought. Now maybe you like that solution, but I conceder it evil.
In order to cause doubt and uncertainty in the hearts of the believers.So they made people think? Right? If there faith is weak, it should be tested. That is how you honestly make up your mind. Not a capital offence in my book or most of the world.
(To be continued)

[extinction]

I just want to say what are the laws and punishments for treason? a person who once accepting islam and then leaves is basically doing treason........
trea&#183;son (trzn) KEY

NOUN:

Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.

[extinction]

i will add to my last post..when he says the kalima he has know taken a trust..by leaving that he has betrayed that trust when accepting Islam he is immediately bounded by Islamic laws...kind of like when a person says I do in a marriage he has only said two words (qabil tuha) in arabic..he is bound by the laws of marriage he may not sleep with other women..he has a right to look after his wife...am I making sense??

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,
Thank you for your post.

I have been accused of not reading and not understanding. I assure that neither is correct.

Yet it is very easy for someone to think otherwise when you simply restate the misconceptions that were previously debunked, without commenting on the explanation. Looking at your post, you've begun to respond to points in this thread, which is good, but you've missed the most important post which I continually refer you to:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html
Please respond to that post. In that post I have included all relevant information from previous posts so if you read that one you will be up to speed with the issue.

As someone who has gone through the process, I am mortified that anyone would conceder killing me or anyone, because of that decision.

No one would kill you for your personal decision. The Islamic state is not interested in the personal affairs of people. The Islamic state is interested in the protection of society and the establishment of law and order within society. It is only when an individuals actions pose a threat to the general society that a state will take action.

I, as you, was told my religion was right and all others were wrong.

Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. The Qur'an does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. Neither did the Prophet pbuh. Instead Islam calls all human beings to use their intellect which God has blessed them with and reflect on the universe so that they may realize that the only true path in this life is submission to the One True God who created everything. That is exactly what Islam is. It is incorrect to suggest that Islam is one religion of many since the meaning of Islam is submission to God and this is the only path for those who acknowledge the existence of God.

Religion has always used Fear as a way to keep people in line.

Non-muslims often misquote the Islamic concept of fear as you've done above. In Islam we worship God with the utmost devotion which reflects three aspects - Hope in His Mercy, Fear of displeasing Him, and Love of God. Anyone who focuses on only one aspect will be deficient in their worship.

Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam.

False. Islam is against coercion and compulsion. The Islamic state is only interested in the protection of society, as you would know if you went through the post I linked. If by physical fear you are referring to state punishments then the blame rests on every single civilized society in the modern world. Every single civilized society in the modern world keeps its citizens in line by using fear. Fear of the legal consequences that may follow from one's actions is a major factor in preventing crime (although it is not the sole factor). So your notion that physical fear is something characteric of primitive religious traditions is evidently false in light of the necessity of law enforcement in modern society.

It is now for Islam to leave the 14 centaury.

Islam never was and never will be bound to one time era. The use of punishments for the protection of society is something that we find in all modern societies.

Killing people for exercising freedom of speech, religion, and thought is not a small part of what makes them fear and hate Islam.

Never does Islam punish, let alone kill anyone for simply excercising freedom of speech, religion or thought. This is your misconception. Islam, like every modern society, balances individual freedoms with the rights and safety of the society. If you are inciting hatred in a western society you will be punished because there are limits on your freedom of speech. If you implement a religious practice that violates the law, such as those relating to the use of drugs, you will be punished because there are limits on your freedom of religion. Every society places reasonable limits on the freedoms of the individual in accordance with the protection of society.

Additional Statements and comments:
Islam, from the onset, has never compelled anyone to accept it as his or her religion.Of course there are many occurrences where there was not war and people freely and openly converted. But when there was war, and there was a lot of it, it was converting, die, or pay extensive taxes.

Evidently you need to study Islamic history more closely, as well as Islamic law since you have misconceptions concerning Jizya:
http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13

Let me correct this misconception of 'extensive taxes' briefly by pointing out that Abu'l-Hasan Al-Mawardi (d. 1058CE), a leading Muslim judge, states that the amount of taxes should be something negotiated and fixed to the satisfaction of the leaders of those being taxed (Al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah, Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd. 1996, pp. 209-210).

Many chose conversion, not out of faith, but because of the conquinces.

I tried to think of a possible meaning for 'conquinces', but at any rate the Islamic government has never pressurized the non-muslims to accept the faith.

How else do you logically come to instant conversion after just being conquered?

Which instant conversion are you referring to?

Islam grants the individual an opportunity to repent. If a person has truly followed there conscious, there is nothing to repent.
So that his misconceptions can be removed
You assume that if there is no misconception no one would leave Islam. Obviously a misconception on your part.

If you had followed my discussion with Sharvy you would know that there has never been a case in the history of Islam where an educated Muslim, without any misconceptions, has abandoned Islam because they feel the religion is inadequate or flawed. As demonstrated by historical fact, apostasy has only ever occured due to social or political circumstances; never has anyone with a good understanding of the religion abadoned it because they feel it is flawed.

Issues that give him doubt can be clarified by rational proofs and tangible evidence.I just love “Rational Proofs”! There is no such thing.

Your personal opinion. There are of course many rational proofs (as I have shown constantly dialoguing with non-muslims on the forum) which explain Islamic teachings and refute allegations against Islam. In addition to that, there are rational proofs for the validity of the religion itself. If you haven't seen them, that is your problem, not mine.

Any one not wearing “Faith Blinders” knows that when it comes to religion, there is no proof. No one can even prove god exists so anything dealing with god is impossible to prove.

I have had several long discussions on the existence of God with atheists on the forum which you can read in the comparative religion section. For the purpose of this thread I will briefly state that one can certainly come to the recognition of the divine through the use of their intellect.

The punishment prescribed for it in the Sunnah is executionThere are some that deny this but most acknowledge this and no small number want it enforced.

Read my post for the explanation:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...tence-god.html

It came as a remedy for a problem
Any solution to any problem will create another problem. The solution for the problems that apostasy creates is to deny people freedom of religion, speech, and thought.

False. Islam does not deny these freedoms, but like all mdoern societies individual freedoms are subject to reasonable limitations and balanced with the rights of the society.

In order to cause doubt and uncertainty in the hearts of the believers.So they made people think? Right? If there faith is weak, it should be tested. That is how you honestly make up your mind. Not a capital offence in my book or most of the world.

Not making people think they were playing a poor game of deception, trying to pretend that the religion was flawed by apostatizing instead of using logical argumentation which had failed for them. it is logical argumentation which leads to the truth and causes people to think not poor games of deception.

Please go over this post and respond to my comments listed therein:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...tence-god.html

Peace

[wilberhum]

Continueing as promised:
From; http://islamtoday.net/english/discov...&sub_cat_id=48Works on the premise of “Security and stability are basic human needs” and puts no value on freedom of speech, religion, or thought. By contrast I think freedoms are basic human needs. I guess if you love not your freedoms that you could like this approach. For me, I conceder freedoms to be of high value and disagree the concept that you can’t have both.
From: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S...=1119503544134
If a sane person who has reached puberty voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be punished.‏ …., but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.‏Christians use to kill heretics. That doesn’t make it right. Hitler killed people that spoke out against him. I would like to think Islam is better than that. Just because someone made it a law does not make it a Just Law. I think it is the ultimate in arrogance to feel you have the right to deal out “God’s Justice”. I think god is quite capable of handling his own affairs’.
No one besides the caliph or his representative may kill the apostate. or his representative may kill the apostate.It seams to me since there are no longer a caliph, that the law in null and void.
http://muslim-canada.org/APOSNOFR.HTM#fourAddresses the issue as if Islam is the state government. As such, all they state is irrelevant unless it is an Islamic State under Sharia Law. Now the other day I said that the Islamic view of Apostasy was the “second most offensive concept within any religion”. Now we have reached the first, an Islamic State. In my opinion a Theocracy is second in evil only to Communism. How can you conceder setting up a government based on inequality and legalized discrimination anything but evil? This is not just a problem in an Islamic Theocracy; it is a problem with all Theocracies. There were unspeakable horrors that occurred in Europe when Christian Theocracies thrived. The same happened in Islam and current Islamic governments continue. I posted the other day some thing I titled “When we were tribes”. A lot of that applies here. If you want to create a government that legally makes you superior at the cost of those you conceder, just like Hitler did, the world will stand against you. But your dear Utopia that would make 80% of the world “Inferior” is just an evil dream and a whole other topic.
http://www.ymofmd.com/books/zb_mri/islam_and_human_rights.htm
The punishment due on apostasy as established by Hadith is not inconsistent with the religious liberty assured by IslamThen the only religious liberty within Islam for a Muslim is none. If Muslims lack freedom of religion then everyone’s religious freedom is at stake.
The punishment of the apostate is because of his treasonable and deceptive conduct.How is someone deciding Allah is not god treasonable? What is deceptive about saying Allah is not god? If I can not believe in god as my conscious says, I have not freedom of religion. If I can not tell you what I believe, I have not freedom of speech.
Punishment stipulated for these apostates is meant to protect the religious liberty from being abused or misused. It will no longer be liberty but anarchy.Anarchy? Because someone chooses another religion? Protect religious liberty by denying it? Now I understand why democracy is so evil. It allows everyone to practice the religion of there choice. Believe me, I prefer the Anarchy.
Non-Muslims should not be pressurized to embrace Islam, has left them free to practice the tenets of their own religion and did not require them to practice the Islamic tenets or interfere with their practices or their religious places.That is a nice thought but is not the reality in Islamic countries.
From another post: punishing apostates just for leaving Islam conflicts with the Quran.Tell that to the poor Afghani that had to be smuggled to Italy so he would not be killed.
We can't use the story of Musylama Al-Kath-thab to prove that it is ok today to kill any person who deserts Islam.Ya for our side. It is always good to know that you are not a lone voice in the dark. I wish more felt the way you do, but I fear that we are a small minority. Or is this just an example of where it can not be used and you there are examples of where it can be used today?
Another Post: The authentic view is that the apostate has committed treason against the Islamic state (bear in mind that all Muslim citizens pledge allegiance to the head of state, therefore this is treason) and is punishable by capital punishment Well like I said, the voice of tolerance is a minority voice. It is treason because allegiance is pledged to the head of state. Kind of sounds like what the Nazis did. Stand behind the government, right or wrong. I guess we should kill everyone that wants to impeach Bush. Not only do you want to do away with freedom of religion, you want to do away with ALL freedoms. Live for the state, you would make a good communist.
Generally this ruling of allowing killing of apostates was initiated coz Jews pretended to be Muslims and caused confusion among Muslims.Boy, Muslims must be easily confused. To kill someone because they confused you. Talk about intolerance, this takes the cake.
"It is our opinion that whoever claims the acceptability of any existing religion today-other than Islam-such as Judaism, Christianity and so forth is a non believer. He should be asked to repent. If he does not, he must be killed as an apostate because he is rejecting the Quran (Sheikh Muhammad as Saleh al Uthaimin.Now that is a new one to me. The final, total, and ultimate statement of intolerance. That the problem with allowing some intolerance. Soon you will have total intolerance. It sure would cure the problem of overpopulation though.
Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.Now this is something to be proud of. Torture them to death. But that’s another subject.
The death penalty for rebellion against God.Your god not mine. So you think you got the right god. So do I. If turn about if fair play, I should be able to kill you. But then I believe in freedom and tolerance. Too bad you have bought the “I’m Superior” attitude and think you are so god like that you are qualified to enact his punishment.
No knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam.Right! Who would want to be killed? Or many be the intolerance preached is what made them leave. Of course all of this is based on the “I’m Right and You’re Wrong, and if you don’t believe me just ask me” attitude.
The only cases we find of former Muslims are people who were never practicing Muslims in the first placeI bet there are thousands. What an absurd statement. Lift the “Faith Blinders” and you will see that it has to be a totally absurd statement.
an Islamic state is certainly justified in punishing those who betray the state, committing treason and support enemy forcesIt is so far fetched to say that some one who claims Allah is not god is betraying the state, committing treason and supporting enemy forces. What a garbage statement.
(To be continued, I will answer question when I am finished)

[cool_jannah]

willberhum
have you lost your sense of reasoning?

According to your Bible...for a person who speaks blasphemy against God is supposed to be CERTAINLY PUT TO DEATH.
For the non-muslims, religion is a joke. Their desires is their Lord and thats what they worship and obey and bow down to.

If you had any sense of certainty that your religion is the truth, you would have applied that punishment to the disbelievers since it is a command from your Lord.

and what is humane? the filth that you guys are into? dis-believing in the Oneness of God is the worst crime a person can commit.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Continueing as promised:

Did you completely miss my last resposne to you???
http://www.islamicboard.com/267316-post101.html

You haven't responded to any of my points to you, nor my request to read the following response of mine:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html

You continue to repeat the same issues that I've already answered. I'll answer the new points in this post, but for my responses to the others refer to the previous post from me.

Works on the premise of “Security and stability are basic human needs” and puts no value on freedom of speech, religion, or thought.

Wrong. Individual freedoms are balanced with the security of the society in EVERY modern society.

In my opinion a Theocracy is second in evil only to Communism.

The Islamic government is not a theocracy, which is purely western term.
Read about the Islamic concept of government here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...-analysis.html

That is a nice thought but is not the reality in Islamic countries.

We are talking about the laws of the Islamic state, not the malpractice of Islam in some countries with Muslim majority.

Well like I said, the voice of tolerance is a minority voice.

Everything is a silent voice if you won't bother to listen to what I am trying to tell you! When are you going to start responding to my posts??

Now this is something to be proud of. Torture them to death. But that’s another subject.

This is a seperate issue altogether and it is dealt with here:
http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#18

No knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam.Right! Who would want to be killed?

Finally you've gotten to my post, but you're still ignoring what I've already said:

There simply have never been educated and devout Muslims who have later rejected the religion, though they have had the opportunity and often pressure to do so, especially in Non-Muslim countries. As Dr. Laurence Brown MD writes

The question pops into the average Western mind, “Why do some scholars of Christianity and Judaism embrace orthodox (Sunni) Islam?” There is no pressure upon them to do so, and a world of fleshy reasons not to -- things like losing their congregation, position, status, friends, family, job, retirement pension, etc. And why don’t Islamic scholars turn to something else? Other religions are much more permissive of worldly desires, and there is no enforcement of a law against apostatizing from Islam in Western lands.

So why have many Jewish and Christian scholars embraced Islam, while educated Muslims remain firm in their faith? Muslims suggest that the answer returns once again to the definition of Islam. The person who submits to God and not to a particular ecclesiastical belief will recognize a divine sense to revelation. The Muslim presents a continuum between Judaism, Christianity and Islam which, once recognized, sweeps the
sincere seeker down the smooth flow of revelation. The claim is that once a person sees past Western prejudices and propaganda, doors of understanding open. (Brown, The First and Final Commandment, p.33)

Dr. Brown was an atheist who converted to Christianity and finally to Islam.

...First, as Dr. Brown mentioned, there is no law against apostasy in the western countries. Second, the Muslim community doesn't care about someone who is not harming them or propagating a negative image of Islam. Christian priests who convert to Islam only praise Islam in their speeches but they usually don't go around throwing mud at Christianity. If an educated and devout Muslim became a Christian or Atheist, especially in a western country, and didn't bother himself with attacking Islam, he would not be bothered by the Muslim community. But if he publicly began attacking Islam and propagating a negative image of Islam in the media, that is when he might expect a negative reaction. So this really isn't an excuse because a knowledgeable Muslim could easily have the opportunity to leave Islam without any negative consequences, yet such an occurance has never happened.

The only cases we find of former Muslims are people who were never practicing Muslims in the first placeI bet there are thousands. What an absurd statement. Lift the “Faith Blinders” and you will see that it has to be a totally absurd statement.

Don't just tell me my statement is absurd, provide evidence. Try to refute what I've said. There has never been a case of an educated practicing Muslim leaving Islam.

an Islamic state is certainly justified in punishing those who betray the state, committing treason and support enemy forcesIt is so far fetched to say that some one who claims Allah is not god is betraying the state, committing treason and supporting enemy forces. What a garbage statement.

Did I ever say that?! Don't put words in my mouth and then call it garbage! I said the punishment is for those who betray the state. I NEVER said that someone who changes their personal belief is committing treason!! Not only do you ignore my explanations, but whenever you do reply, you misquote my statements to further your own close-minded bigoted and intolerant view of Islam. If you don't change this attitude, then dialoguing with you is utterly hopeless.

Wilber, I'd really like to give you one more opportunity to discuss this issue, but you need to start responding to my explanations and stop misquoting me. Please respond to this post:
http://www.islamicboard.com/20595-post1.html

Regards

[wilberhum]

Ansar Al-‘Adi
I truly planed on going through all the posts. But alas, there is too little time and too many posts. Besides the only one that really responded was you. So here it is and this one is for you.
No one would kill you for your personal decision. True, kind of. But if anyone’s religious freedom is threatened, then everyone’s freedom is threatened. I believe everyone should share the same freedoms. Do you believe that not every one should have the same basic freedoms? Should freedoms differ from one country to another? Shouldn’t basic freedoms be universal? Is freedom of religion not a basic freedom?Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'.You dance around the statement but in fact Islam clams “There is no God but Allah”. So you claim that you are right and everyone else is wrong. But again, I have no problem with that; it is the basis of each and every religion.
In your response to “Religion has always used Fear as a way to keep people in line.” You state “Fear of displeasing Him”. That is exactly my point. I never said that fear was the only instrument used to keep people in line.
To “Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam.” You responded “False” but that is exactly what killing apostates is. This is only one example; there are thousands of other examples. Of course there is always the clam that they do not represent Islam. They may not but they do impact your image in the mind of the non-Muslims and the lack of condemnation of them also has a major impact. When you add justification for killing people for exercising there freedoms, it only gets worse. But maybe you don’t care. So I ask the question, do you care what the image of Islam is to the non-Islamic world?From http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13
The Islamic State is not permitted to attack non-Muslims who are not hostile but they did. Now of course you can always say that all 80+ attacks were all self defense. You may even believe that. But the history that I read tells a totally different story. It is a little illogical to assume that every non-Muslim tribe was hostile. Unless you just say they were hostel to being invaded.
The amount of taxes should be something negotiated and fixed to the satisfaction of the leaders of those being taxed. You make it sound like an equal negotiation. A surrendering partner is not an equal partner. They would agree to do what ever they had to do to stay alive. I, as most, would prefer massage taxation to death. Not a tough choice.
I tried to think of a possible meaning for 'conquinces', but at any rate the Islamic government has never pressurized the non-Muslims to accept the faith. There were many consequences for being a non believer. Massive taxation is only one, and it is truly one.
Which instant conversion are you referring to? I’m referring to everyone who instantly after surrendering chose Islam over death or taxes.
You would know that there has never been a case in the history of Islam where an educated Muslim, without any misconceptions, has abandoned Islam because they feel the religion is inadequate or flawed. Dream on. No open minded intelligent person could ever make such a statement.
There are of course many rational proofs. You seriously need to consult a dictionary. You can make a rational choice, but it proves nothing.
One can certainly come to the recognition of the divine through the use of their intellect. This one you got right, kind of. You can use your intellect to come to a conclusion that god exists. I did. But that is not proof that god exists. You even say “I don't believe someone can 'prove' the existence of God “. So what is your point?
Islam does not deny these freedoms. Come on man. Some one exercises freedom or religion, speech and thought, they he is killed, depriving him the greatest freedom of all, the freedom to live.
Did you completely miss my last response to you? , I said “I will answer question when I am finished”. Obviously you completely missed what I said. Any way here I am. At it again.
Again you obviously don’t read. Go back and read http://islamtoday.net/english/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=48He never gives any value to Individual freedoms of religion, speech of thought. He only places value on Security and stability. In every post you accuse me of not reading. I have proved that I do read. You have proved that you do not.
The Islamic government is not a theocracy, which is purely western term. Again you need to consult a dictionary. It may be a “Western Term” but it is a term that accurately describes an Islamic government.
We are talking about the laws of the Islamic state, not the malpractice of Islam in some countries with Muslim majority. I think this is about the 50 time I have heard this excuse. So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist? I talking about life, the way it is, not some Picasso version of it. Do you want to discuss reality of fiction?Again the stupidity of “There has never been a case of an educated practicing Muslim leaving Islam.” If you truly believe that, than I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
Did I ever say that? You assume that everything I posted was in response to you and only you. Wrong again. I was responding to many different posts. I did not keep track of who posted what. But this on is for you. I have only responded to you.

Wilber

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,

No one would kill you for your personal decision. True, kind of. But if anyone’s religious freedom is threatened, then everyone’s freedom is threatened. I believe everyone should share the same freedoms.

Like I already said, individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society.

Do you believe that not every one should have the same basic freedoms? Should freedoms differ from one country to another? Shouldn’t basic freedoms be universal? Is freedom of religion not a basic freedom?

Yes, I believe that everyone has the same basics freedoms, however freedom is not absolute, it has reasonable limits depending on the proportionality test. And freedom is restricted by context too; sometimes ones actions can be more dangerous in one context than in another, hence restrictions vary accordingly.

[/B]Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'.You dance around the statement but in fact Islam clams “There is no God but Allah”. So you claim that you are right and everyone else is wrong.

Did you ignore the rest of what I wrote?!

Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. The Qur'an does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. Neither did the Prophet pbuh. Instead Islam calls all human beings to use their intellect which God has blessed them with and reflect on the universe so that they may realize that the only true path in this life is submission to the One True God who created everything. That is exactly what Islam is. It is incorrect to suggest that Islam is one religion of many since the meaning of Islam is submission to God and this is the only path for those who acknowledge the existence of God.

To “Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam.” You responded “False” but that is exactly what killing apostates is.

Will you try to understand the issue of killing apostates?! You continue to ignore my explanation and then keep bringing up the same issue!

You think that if a Muslim changes their personal beliefs they get executed just for that, right? WRONG.

Let me make this very clear to you - if someone changes their personal beliefs - no punishment from the Islamic state. If someone poses a threat to society, then there is action from the Islamic state.

They may not but they do impact your image in the mind of the non-Muslims and the lack of condemnation of them also has a major impact.

False claim. See the end of my post here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/176386-post34.html

When you add justification for killing people for exercising there freedoms, it only gets worse.

I never justified killing people for excericising their personal freedom because Islam doesn't do that in the first place.

NO ONE IS KILLED SIMPLY FOR EXCERCISING PERSONAL FREEDOM. PUNISHMENTS ARE ONLY GIVEN BY THE ISLAMIC STATE WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL POSES A THREAT TO SOCIETY.

Are you clear on this point? Someone is not killed simply because they change their personal beliefs. Someone is only punished when they pose a threat to society.

From http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13
The Islamic State is not permitted to attack non-Muslims who are not hostile but they did.

You've committed the logical fallacy of confusing the actions of a few sinful Muslims with the Islamic teachings. Why not bring an example?

But the history that I read tells a totally different story.

From your post it is evident that you are not only unaware of Islamic history but Islamic teachings in general. What makes matters worse is that you show no desire to seek to understand the other perspective.

The amount of taxes should be something negotiated and fixed to the satisfaction of the leaders of those being taxed. You make it sound like an equal negotiation. A surrendering partner is not an equal partner. They would agree to do what ever they had to do to stay alive. I, as most, would prefer massage taxation to death. Not a tough choice.

Can you provide ANY evidence that the Islamic state is to threaten the non-muslim citizens with death?!

The Prophet Muhammad pbuh said concerning non-muslim citizens of the Islamic state:

The one who wrongs him or impairs his right or overworks him or forcibly takes something from him, I will be his prosecutor on the Day of Judgment. (Sunan Abi Dawud, Sunan An-Nasa'i)

Massive taxation is only one, and it is truly one.

There is no such thing as massive taxation in Islam. I already debunked your misconceptions on Jizyah so why do you repeat them??

I’m referring to everyone who instantly after surrendering chose Islam over death or taxes.

No one suddenly converted to Islam after conquest! Besides, any such conversion would be invalid. Islam does not accept the conversion when it is forced.

And is there any country that doesn't punish citizens who do not pay tax? Please tell me, I'd love to see this place.

You would know that there has never been a case in the history of Islam where an educated Muslim, without any misconceptions, has abandoned Islam because they feel the religion is inadequate or flawed. Dream on. No open minded intelligent person could ever make such a statement.

Are you incapable of refuting my statement?

I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVIDE ME WITH EVEN ONE EXAMPLE OF A WELL-EDUCATED MUSLIM LEAVING THE RELIGION AFTER FINDING IT FLAWED OR INADEQUATE

That is my challenge to you. Let's see if you are capable of answering it.

There are of course many rational proofs. You seriously need to consult a dictionary.

rational based on or in accordance with reason or logic.
proof evidence or argument establishing the truth of a statement.

I repeat "there are of course many rational proofs".

Islam does not deny these freedoms. Come on man. Some one exercises freedom or religion, speech and thought, they he is killed, depriving him the greatest freedom of all, the freedom to live.

Listen man, this is the umpteenth time I'm having to tell you, no one is killed simply for excercising freedom. The state only takes action against those who pose a threat to society.

-case 1: some guy changes his personal beliefs and wakes up one day and decides there is no God - does the Islamic state hunt him down and execute him? NO.
-case 2: some guy leaves the religion and publicly begins to incite civil unrest - does the Islamic state take action? Yes.

He never gives any value to Individual freedoms of religion, speech of thought.

WRONG. Individual freedoms are balanced in every modern society with the rights and security of the public. I've said this at least a thousand times, which makes it more than evident who isn't reading.

The Islamic government is not a theocracy, which is purely western term. Again you need to consult a dictionary. It may be a “Western Term” but it is a term that accurately describes an Islamic government.

You need to read up on the links I give you:
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...-analysis.html

We are talking about the laws of the Islamic state, not the malpractice of Islam in some countries with Muslim majority. I think this is about the 50 time I have heard this excuse. So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist?

You've just negated your entire argument here. Your problem is not with Islam, but the malpractice of some Muslims. I'm discussing Islamic law here, and now you have just admitted that you have no objections against Islamic law. Thank you for falsifying your own argument.

Again the stupidity of “There has never been a case of an educated practicing Muslim leaving Islam.” If you truly believe that, than I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

So instead of refuting my statements with evidence, you call me stupid. Wonderful; you really are an opne-minded individual, aren't you wilber?

Did I ever say that? You assume that everything I posted was in response to you and only you.

That was from one of my posts.

Unfortunately Wilber, this post is not much better than your last one. You continue to advance your misconceptions about Islamic law, calling others stupid, while ignoring the explanations they give you. I'm afraid that I have given you too many opportunities wilber. If you continue with this close-minded attitude then your stay on the forum will be short-lived.

Regards

[wilberhum]

Ansar Al-‘Adi
Like I already said, individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society. Yes I know that is what you said, that is not what http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13 Says. So there is a difference between what they say and what you say. So who is the authority? Whose opinion is most accurate?
Yes, I believe that everyone has the same basics freedoms, however… Then you go on to explain how basic freedoms are not universal. I guess that is something that we can only agree to disagree about. I strongly believe that everyone has the same freedoms and they are will covered in the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. Have a read. You won’t see vague exceptions or except when, statements. If you have a problem with what is contained in the declaration, then you have a problem with human rights and equality. Why not have a read and tell me where the 48 nations that signed it went wrong.
It is incorrect to suggest that Islam is one religion of many since the meaning of Islam is submission to God and this is the only path for those who acknowledge the existence of God. Just another way of saying “My religion is right therefore all others are wrong”. But it is a mute point, at least with me, because I think they all got it wrong.
Will you try to understand the issue of killing apostates?! You continue to ignore my explanation and then keep bringing up the same issue! I understand the issue. What makes you think I don’t understand? Is it because some say it is wrong, while others say it is right, while some give sad excuses and non relevant reasons on the matter? It is not confusing at all. All Muslims don’t agree on everything. Like all groups of any kind, you will always get a variance in attitudes, assumptions and understandings.
If someone poses a threat to society, then there is action from the Islamic state. Now all you have to do is define a” threat to society”. According to http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13, an apostate is. Any one not pulling the party line could be considered a threat and the list goes on and on.
The lack of condemnation is a general statement and not directed at you personally. If you interoperated it as a direct comment about you, I apologize and am sorry. So let me make it clear. I personally see, what I conceder, a great lacking in condemnation against the individuals and groups that Muslims clamed to have hijack there religion from the Muslim community at large. I seldom see condemnation of those that preach and teach hate in the name of Allah.
You've committed the logical fallacy of confusing the actions of a few sinful Muslims with the Islamic teachings. So if it is bad, it is “a few sinful Muslims”, if it is good then it is Islam. My only problem with this is that I here Muslims quoting from the Quran to justify actions that I conceder evil. So is there nothing wrong with Christianity? Only a few sinful Christians? So no condemnation of Christianity for the Crusades? Just condemnation of a few sinful Christians?
From your post it is evident that you are not only unaware of Islamic history. Not true, I have read a lot about your history. But for historical sources, I use sources whose purpose is to provide historical information. I don’t use sources whose purpose in to promote or condemn Islam.
What makes matters worse is that you show no desire to seek to understand the other perspective. I think I have a good perspective about people who want to deprive others of there freedoms. The history of mankind is filled with examples and reasons.
Can you provide ANY evidence that the Islamic state is to threaten the non-Muslim citizens with death?!If we continue, I will. But first give me names of countries that you conceder to be an Islamic state. There is no point in researching only to be tolled “That’s not an Islamic State, that’s just a country with a majority of Muslims”
There is no such thing as massive taxation in Islam. I already debunked your misconceptions on Jizyah so why do you repeat them??Debunked, no; denied, yes. I read once that the standard Jizyah tax doubled the tax on the non-Muslim community. It was to be enough to cause humiliation. And it was substantial enough that the rest of the world demanded its repeal with such fervor that the Islamic governments gave in.
No one suddenly converted to Islam after conquest! Besides, any such conversion would be invalid. Islam does not accept the conversion when it is forced. There are always differences between what should be done and what is done. There is frequently a difference in how a law was intended to be used and how it is/was used. The world is full of examples.
I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVIDE ME WITH EVEN ONE EXAMPLE OF A WELL-EDUCATED MUSLIM LEAVING THE RELIGION AFTER FINDING IT FLAWED OR INADEQUATERemember: MODERATOR'S COMMENT: YOU ARE FREE TO ASK QUESTIONS BUT PLEASE DO NOT COPY ANTI-ISLAMIC ARTICLES!I would be required to go to an anti-Islamic web site and copying people’s reasons for leaving Islam. That would truly be a violation of the comment. Besides, I detest all places whose purpose is to promote hate. I do not frequent them or reference them. So for several reasons, I decline the challenge and leave it to intelligence to answer the question.
I repeat "there are of course many rational proofs". An example would be nice. Got one?Some guy leaves the religion and publicly begins to incite civil unrest - does the Islamic state take action? Yes. So then apostasy has nothing to do with is? The crime is inciting civil unrest. So why are there apostasy laws? Inciting civil unrest laws should cover the problem. What civil unrest was the poor Afghani man causing? The clerics were not calling for his head because he caused civil unrest. Your claim does not match the facts.
Again and Again you obviously don’t read. Go back and read http://islamtoday.net/english/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=48 Don’t tell me it is balanced; show me where it is balanced. Remember this is a site that YOU pointed me to. So show me where it places any value on Freedom of Religion, Speech, or Thought. Are you going to go read or are you just going to continue to deny what is not contained there?
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...-analysis.html is quite a read, interesting too. But it does not change the fact that it is a theocracy, at least in the real world.
Your problem is not with Islam, but the malpractice of some Muslims. That’s an answer to “So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist?” Would you mind answering the question?So course there is the underlining implication of how I feel about Islam and Muslims. So let me make my feelings clear. I have never met a Muslim I did not like. I think there are good and bad Muslims as there are good and bad people in every group. I think Islam is like all religions. You can use it to make you better or you can use it to justify your evil. I think that people that use religion to justify restrictions on human rights and equality, fall into the later group.
I'm discussing Islamic law here. And where is this law practiced? In Utopia? Are we talking about laws that are not enforced anywhere in this world? If they don’t exist anywhere, why the discussion? I don’t sight any of the laws that were to be enforced in Utopia.
You really are an open-minded individual, aren't you Wilber? I call a spade a spade; I don’t call it a shovel. I’m fully open to intelligent statements. I don’t accept little green men on Mars either. If that makes me closed minded, then I guess I am.
If you continue with this close-minded attitude then your stay on the forum will be short-lived.And now threats. Kind of though defending the party line with some one that will not toe the party line? You have the right and you have the power.

No need for threats, just ask me to go away and I will. If you block me, I will conceder you a coward. If you just ask me to stay off the form, I will respect you and comply with your request.

Wilber

[Syed Nizam]

Wilbur,

About Jizya, may i asked u where u get ur information on it? Whatever sources that u may have used to learned about Jizya, please compare the information with the one provide in this websites. Hopes it helps....

Islam Online - Fatwa

Clearly then u must know that in within an Islamic country with Sharia Law, the muslims have to pay Zakat & the non-muslim have to pay the Jizya. And i do believe that the ratio between those two are the same (correct me if i'm wrong). So, where DOES that differs in any way from the modern taxes system being implemented in the current world where muslims or non-muslims are concerned?

[Syed Nizam]

Quoted from:
Islam - Faith and Democracy: Glossary -- Jizyah

Glossary -- Jizyah
A tax paid by non-Muslims living in a Muslim state.

Since the non-Muslims are exempt from military service and taxes imposed on Muslims, they must pay this tax to compensate. It guarantees them security and protection. If the state cannot protect those who paid jizyah, then the amount they paid is returned to them.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,

Like I already said, individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society. Yes I know that is what you said, that is not what http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13 Says. So there is a difference between what they say and what you say. So who is the authority? Whose opinion is most accurate?

Good grief, Wilber! I wrote the article!

Please quote me specifically what I said in the article that you feel contradicts what I said now that individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society. I am amazed at the lengths you will go to to evade my arguments claiming that they are negated by my own article!

Yes, I believe that everyone has the same basics freedoms, however… Then you go on to explain how basic freedoms are not universal.

ABSOLUTE. Basic freedoms are not absolute.

If you have a problem with what is contained in the declaration, then you have a problem with human rights and equality.

Is it not bigoted to think that one's interpretation of human rights is correct and all others are incorrect?

Just another way of saying “My religion is right therefore all others are wrong”.

You're not thinking about what I wrote. You believe in God, right? Tell me, is there any way of life that can be acceptable to God other than submission to Him? Obviously the answer is that if there is a God, submission to Him is the true path. That is what Islam means - submission to God.

2:130-131. 130. And who turns away from the path of Abraham except one who befools himself? Truly, We chose him in this world and verily, in the Hereafter he will be among the righteous. When his Lord said to him, "Submit (Ar. Aslim*)!" He said, "I have submitted myself (Aslamto*) to the Lord of the Universe.

*The verb for Islam; submission

For one who acknowledges the existence of God, can there be any other path except submission to God?

I understand the issue. What makes you think I don’t understand?

Your comments.

If someone poses a threat to society, then there is action from the Islamic state. Now all you have to do is define a” threat to society”.

Good! :) This is what I intended, but you haven't allowed the discussion to progress because you continually kept going back to pt. 1.

Now that we have understood that the Islamic society takes action against those who pose a threat to society, we can progress to the next level of the discussion (finally!) where we can discuss who qualifies as a threat.

According to http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13, an apostate is.

That's my article. Please point out to me where I said in the article that someone who merely changes personal beliefs without disturbing the public society is considered a threat.

I personally see, what I conceder, a great lacking in condemnation against the individuals and groups that Muslims clamed to have hijack there religion from the Muslim community at large. I seldom see condemnation of those that preach and teach hate in the name of Allah.

First of all Wilber, thank you for your change in attitude, which makes it a lot easier to discuss with you.

The problem here is what we call the spotlight fallacy. Individuals construct their generalizations on what has been reported in the media. But as I pointed out in another thread:

but I find that when we have 1 nutcase calling for terrorist attacks, and 1000 Imaams condemning such a person, the media will focus on the 1 nutcase. For example, how many people heard about Yusuf Islam who recieved the Man of Peace award 2004?

To give another example, when the London Bombings occurred, a Muslim organization in North America immediately gathered dozens of Imaams from all over the country and they issued a joint statement condemning the bombing. The only media coverage of this was a single quotation in a local newspaper who sought to 'balance' this feedback by quoting one extremist and one anti-islamist.

Another example - the RIS conference that occurs in Toronto in the winter gathers tens of thousands of Muslims who attend lectures from various Muslim leaders from all over the globe, all voicing strong condemnation of such violent acts. I have seen barely any coverage of such events in the media, yet if we have even 1 person calling for violent attacks they appear on the front page.

So the problem here is that the condemnation doesn't getr through to the general public. Virtually every Muslim scholar has condemned the terrorist attacks around the world but the general public in the west are aware of that, since it doesn't come through in the media.

So if it is bad, it is “a few sinful Muslims”, if it is good then it is Islam.

No, if it has its basis in the Qur'an and the Sunnah then it is Islam. If it is just some actions done by some Muslims, it is not.

So is there nothing wrong with Christianity? Only a few sinful Christians? So no condemnation of Christianity for the Crusades? Just condemnation of a few sinful Christians?

I wouldn't blame the religion of Christianity for the crusades, that isn't fair.

What makes matters worse is that you show no desire to seek to understand the other perspective. I think I have a good perspective about people who want to deprive others of there freedoms.

Dear Wilber, I already told you that Islam does not deprive or remove freedoms but like ever modern society it balances them with the welfare of the society. If you are already satisifed with your negative perception of Islam and are not willing to learn the perspective of Muslims, then why bother coming here? Seriously, this forum is for dialogue, not advancing one's own negative perceptions about others. Here we have to share views, not just force ours upon others without listening to what they have to say.

If we continue, I will. But first give me names of countries that you conceder to be an Islamic state.

There is no country today which qualifies as an Islamic state; the Islamic state is a khilafa.

Debunked, no; denied, yes. I read once that the standard Jizyah tax doubled the tax on the non-Muslim community. It was to be enough to cause humiliation.

First of all, if you are satisfied with the negative distortions of Islamic teachings you hear from others and don't wish to learn the real deal from Muslims as to what Islam teaches, then why bother dialoguing? Secondly, you are again assuming that any Muslim action equals an Islamic teaching. I quoted the juristic evidence which clarifies that the Jizyah tax is to be taken is consideration with the means of the non-muslim citizens and it should be negotiated with them. I also quoted you a statement from thje Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself where he said concerning non-muslim citizens of the Islamic state:

The one who wrongs him or impairs his right or overworks him or forcibly takes something from him, I will be his prosecutor on the Day of Judgment. (Sunan Abi Dawud, Sunan An-Nasa'i)

Muslims are not allowed to abuse or oppress the non-muslim citizens of an Islamic state.

I would be required to go to an anti-Islamic web site and copying people’s reasons for leaving Islam.

Anyone can write whatever they want on the internet. I personally have seen some non-muslims confessing to fabricating apostasy stories, and others lying about their religion. Even on this forum we've had some non-muslims who pretend to be Muslims in order to malign Islam with their comments.

But like I said we see many Priests, Rabbis, and other educated leaders converting to Islam but we have never seen educated practicing Muslims leaving their religion in the same way.

An example would be nice. Got one?

Sure. Someone might think that there is no soul because science can explain all human faculties; all you need to do is point out otherwise with the example of coherent reasoning (see the latest posts in the thread entitled 'Atheism' in the comparative religion section for more info).

So then apostasy has nothing to do with is? The crime is inciting civil unrest.

You're right that the issue is not really the change in the person's personal belief but the harm they are causing to the stability, security or morality of the society. That is what I have been trying to explain to you all along. Calling it just an 'apostasy law' can be misleading; it needs to be explained in the context of civil unrest, rebellion and treason. I tried to present this context to you but you refused three times to listen to it. That is why it has taken so long to convey this simple point.

The Islamic law relating to the issue of apostasy has to do with civil unrest, rebellion, and treason not a private change in conviction.

What civil unrest was the poor Afghani man causing?

I've commented on the Afghani case earlier in this thread. Remember, actions of some Muslims do not equal Islamic law.

Again and Again you obviously don’t read. Go back and read http://islamtoday.net/english/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=48

What would ylou like to discuss with regard to the above article?

That’s an answer to “So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist?”

I wanted to talk about the Islamic system as it is. And yes it has existed for centuries. As for what will happen in the future, that is up to God, not you.

And now threats.

It is not a threat it is a kind request for you to either engage in respectful open-minded dialogue which involes listening to the views of others, or to leave and propagate these negative misinformed perspections of Islam elsewhere.

Regards

[Syed Nizam]

Wilbur,

Basic freedoms are CERTAINLY not universal. And ur reference to the romantiscms of the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” is debatable. Consider this:

1. Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

2. Article 9
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

3. Article 11
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

4. Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Honestly Wilbur, has it been achieved in the REAL world? By the UN or by the US who are the self-declared champions of democracy & human rights? Just study the history of the UN to answer that for yourself. Need I say more?

[wilberhum]

Syed Nizam
I got my information about Jizyah from multiple places at multiple times. I do a lot of reading about a lot of things. Yesterday I tried to get some specific information to back up my statement. I was unable to fine any real information (Not information from bigoted sites) but was not successful. For that, I feel a bit embarrassed. I would like to look further and debate you, but first I would like to make sure were using the same definitions. I would like to avoid the debacle with my last discussion.

When I talk about an Islamic State, I’m talking about countries that conceder themselves Islamic and the world at large conceders them Islamic. I’m not talking about some mythological state that does not and did not exist.

When I talk about the excessive taxes laved or any other item that I conceder discriminatory, I’m talking about what was practiced, not what is prescribed.

When I talk about Suria Law, I’m talking about how it is implemented and used, I’m not talking about legal knowledge that takes years of studying to understand, and not am I talking about how it would affect some mythological society.

So if you want to talk about the “Real World” and not “Fantasy Land”, I would enjoy the challenge.
Waiting to here from you,
Wilber

[wilberhum]

Syed Nizam
About the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. Of course it has never been achieved, and it never will be. As there are evil people, there are evil nations. Even generally good people do bad things and generally good nations do bad things. There are many problems with the UN and there are many things wrong with the US. There are multiple things that I am at odds with my government about. Iraq, Israel and Guantanamo are just a few. Because we have problems there are more reasons to try to improve. I defend what is good about my country and I’m critical what I feel it is wrong and try to do my little bit to make it better. I don’t support my country, right or wrong. Do you think we should abandon all efforts to improve the world because it will never be perfect? Did you list the specific articles because they are bad and should be removed or because we haven’t achieved them? I guess I just don’t understand where you are coming from.
What are you trying to say?
Wilber

[Syed Nizam]

Wilbur,

I'm not saying that everything about the USA are BAD, & i'm not even implying that everything about the muslims are GOOD. Never will i fall into that narrow kind of prejudice view.

And even now, i dont even consider my expressing of views as a form of debate.....

[Syed Nizam]

Do you think we should abandon all efforts to improve the world because it will never be perfect? Did you list the specific articles because they are bad and should be removed or because we haven’t achieved them? I guess I just don’t understand where you are coming from.
What are you trying to say?
Wilber

.....NO, i do not believe that we all should abandon all efforts to improve the world at large either. I'm merely listing the specific articles just to show you that there are no such things like a PERFECT plans, the best there are only PERFECT intentions.

[wilberhum]

Syed Nizam
There are no such things like a PERFECT plans, the best there are only PERFECT intentions. I like that! Kind of sorry that you don’t want to debate. I find it an interesting and informative process. But surly it is not every one’s desire to engage.
Wishing you the best,
Wilber

[Syed Nizam]

Islamic Kuri, honestly do u ever think that ur statement should ever be considered as being Islamic? I do believe that the question whether the Apostates should be put to death have been answered in the previous message in this thread. However, just for a matter of thought, please consider this:

1. The Prophet (pbuh) have NEVER EVER put any Apostates to death in his life time. Surely, he has all the power in his hands if he surely believes in that kind of judgement. So, why dont he?

2. There are even various verses in the Quran which clearly stated that all of us should not ever asked for speedy doom for the Apostates.

046.035
Therefore patiently persevere, as did (all) messengers of inflexible purpose; and be in no haste about the (Unbelievers). On the Day that they see the (Punishment) promised them, (it will be) as if they had not tarried more than an hour in a single day. (Thine but) to proclaim the Message: but shall any be destroyed except those who transgress?

074.011
Leave Me alone, (to deal) with the (creature) whom I created (bare and) alone!-

003.085
If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good).

003.086
How shall Allah Guide those who reject Faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Messenger was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them? but Allah guides not a people unjust.

003.087
Of such the reward is that on them (rests) the curse of Allah, of His angels, and of all mankind;-

003.088
In that will they dwell; nor will their penalty be lightened, nor respite be (their lot);-

003.089
Except for those that repent (Even) after that, and make amends; for verily Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

But, SURELY the MOST COMPELLING revelations is REVEALED in the following verse:

003.090
But those who reject Faith after they accepted it, and then go on adding to their defiance of Faith,- never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have (of set purpose) gone astray.

003.091
As to those who reject Faith, and die rejecting,- never would be accepted from any such as much gold as the earth contains, though they should offer it for ransom. For such is (in store) a penalty grievous, and they will find no helpers.

How could the Verse 003.090 be possible if the punishment of those Apostates are a certain death? Those who rejects faith, then repented, then goes on rejecting the faith for the second time? I think I do have to the earlier posts in this Thread that death sentences for Apostates is only permissible within some limit only if some preconditions existed (such if they poses a threat to the ummah in general etc.).

I do believe when the prophet reminds us in his last summons on the reference to the Quran & As-Sunnah should be made precedence above all.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi Wilber,
This isn't for me, but it contains relevant points. If you want to reply to my present post, please do so after replying to the previous one.

When I talk about an Islamic State, I’m talking about countries that conceder themselves Islamic and the world at large conceders them Islamic.

Muslims are all agreed that there is no state in the world that can be described truly as an Islamic state, because we know that the Islamic state is a khilafa. I already said this in my last post.

I’m not talking about some mythological state that does not and did not exist.

As I already told you the Islamic state has existed for centuries; it was after the Muslim lands were ravaged and destroyed by invading forces that the Muslim world fell into chaos and disarray.
The practices of Muslims cannot be taken as evidence against Islam unless it can objectively be demonstrated that they are founded upon Islamic teachings.
Also, every country has problems and none is perfect. It is inherently fallacious to take these problems as evidence against the specific religion or ideology behind the state. If you say that country X forbids murder can I say, "Well I don't want to talk about your mythological ideals. I want to talk about reality - the reality is murders still are committed in the country!" The comment has no relevance.

This thread is about Islamic law and what Islam says. It is not 'mythyological', it is our religion. I see that many Non-muslims like yourself have a very difficult time comprehending the plain and simple fact that we follow Islam as it was revealed in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, not how this Muslim acts or that Muslim acts. If you have a problem with a specific country you can discuss that elsewhere. From your posts in this thread I am assuming you have a problem with Islamic law and how an Islamic state is to be run. If not then please be clear - Is your objection against Islam or the malpractice of some Muslims ?

When I talk about the excessive taxes laved or any other item that I conceder discriminatory, I’m talking about what was practiced, not what is prescribed.

I quoted for you the ruling of a leading Muslim Judge in the eleventh century, speaking on what was being practiced in his time. He was the judge and he was giving the rulings, and the ruling was that the taxes were to be negotiated with the non-muslim minorities. Now if you are so closeminded that you can't accept that this was the reality of the Islamic state in that period, that's your problem. But here we have explicit historical evidence which debunks your claims that non-muslim minorities have always been oppressively taxed in the Muslim state.

When I talk about Suria Law, I’m talking about how it is implemented and used

Then you have absolutely no understanding of Shari'ah law. Shari'ah law is based on what is in the Qur'an and Sunnah BY DEFINITION. if you are talking about the laws of a particular country, then by definition you are NOT talking about Shari'ah law. I strongly suggets you learn the definitions of the terms before you use them.

So if you want to talk about the “Real World” and not “Fantasy Land”, I would enjoy the challenge.

Please keep your insults to yourself. This forum is for respectful dialogue; your comments about Islamic law being 'fantasy land' are unwanted, unncessary and unproductive.

Kind of sorry that you don’t want to debate. I find it an interesting and informative process.

It is only such when both sides are willing to learn and correct their views. You are not an expert on Islamic law so you should be willing to law the truth and rationality behind the law rather than advancing your own negative and misinformed percpetion about Islam.

Regards

[j4763]

How can someone who leaves Islam be put to death, how does the prosecutor know that the person will not come back to Islam a few years later?

[Syed Nizam]

Yes Allah knows. But how do u know that they WILL come back to Islam? U dont!

074.011
Leave Me alone, (to deal) with the (creature) whom I created (bare and) alone!-

That is the saying of Allah, Islamic Kuri. So, can we please DONT play God here?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi j4763,
Thanks for your post.

How can someone who leaves Islam be put to death, how does the prosecutor know that the person will not come back to Islam a few years later?

You are correct; I've explained this issue in the first post in the thread - no one is immediately executed for changing their religious beliefs. Please read the first post in the thread and then if something is still unclear, feel free to ask.

Regards

[wilberhum]

Ansar Al-‘Adi
If no Islamic State exists, what is the point of any discussion?
As I already told you the Islamic state has existed for centuries. Would you provide a time frame?
If you have a problem with the term “mythological', how about “historical”? Again, I would need a time frame.
I am assuming you have a problem with Islamic law and how an Islamic state is to be run.I have no problems if we are talking about laws in a nonexistent place. There you can make any law you want and no one will be affected.
Then you have absolutely no understanding of Shari'ah law. Of course I don’t. As I said “I’m talking about how it is implemented and used”. So I would assume that no place in the world does Shari'ah law exist in its proper form. If so, then there is no discussion because the answer to every question is “They got the law wrong
“So if you want to talk about the “Real World” and not “Fantasy Land”, I would enjoy the challenge.” An Insult? I address what exists and you address what doesn’t exist. I feel insulted, deceived. You play with the rules of the game, then say you loose.
It is only such when both sides are willing to learn and correct their views. But then one needs to know what is being discussed before one can learn. If I think you are teaching me French when it is really German, what learning do you think will take place?

The actuality of the situation is I’m discussing practice and you are discussing theory. I have neither the knowledge nor desire to discuss theory. If you want to discuss what is practiced, I’m interested. I assume that you are not. So unless I here differently, I will assume that our dialog is done.

But before we drop the debate, more that anything else I really would love to have an example of one of your “Rational proofs". I experienced someone else that used that term. Repeated requests for a definition or example from multiple people were always left unanswered. So I would truly appreciate and example.
Will you provide me with one?
Wilber

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,

Ansar Al-‘Adi
If no Islamic State exists, what is the point of any discussion?

The point of discussion is to discuss what Islam teaches with regard to apostasy and what an Islamic state should implement. Your comment is like saying to someone who has a design for a new invention, "Well if none of them exist, what is the point of discussin your design?" It is a non-sequitor logical fallacy. The reason we should discuss these issues is to spread the true understanding of what Islam teaches, educate people to clear their misconceptions about Islamic law, and implement Islamic law more accurately in our Muslim countries. Wanting to only discuss what is being practiced is illogical because no one is perfect; everyone makes mistakes but that doesn't mean that we should reject the system they are trying to follow entirely.

As I already told you the Islamic state has existed for centuries. Would you provide a time frame?

Sure. The Islamic state has existed since the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh until around the 16th century - this isn't to say that all the Muslim countries throughout that period were perfect; obviously the best was the state during the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh and the four rightly guided khalifa's, but after that they always had there good points and their bad points.

If you have a problem with the term “mythological', how about “historical”?

Mythological implies that it is a figment of one's imagination. Historical means that it has existed, so obviously I would prefer the latter.

I am assuming you have a problem with Islamic law and how an Islamic state is to be run.I have no problems if we are talking about laws in a nonexistent place. There you can make any law you want and no one will be affected.

But if someone made a law that said theft is legal, I would object to the law in theory and in practice.

Then you have absolutely no understanding of Shari'ah law. Of course I don’t.

Then you shouldn't use the term to mean something that it doesn't mean.

So I would assume that no place in the world does Shari'ah law exist in its proper form.

In its complete form. In many places some aspects are being implemented others are not. There is obviously a lot of room for improvement.

I address what exists and you address what doesn’t exist.

Islamic law exists; it is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

The actuality of the situation is I’m discussing practice and you are discussing theory.

The title of this thread is Islam and Apostasy. I hope you can appreciate the difference between that and 'Afghanistan and Apostasy' or 'Sudan and Apostasy' or 'Malaysia and Apostasy' or 'Kuwait and Apostasy'. We are discussing Islam here.

But before we drop the debate, more that anything else I really would love to have an example of one of your “Rational proofs". I experienced someone else that used that term. Repeated requests for a definition or example from multiple people were always left unanswered. So I would truly appreciate and example.
Will you provide me with one?

I already did in this post:
http://www.islamicboard.com/276392-post91.html

Regards

[wilberhum]

Ansar Al-‘Adi
Wanting to only discuss what is being practiced is illogical because no one is perfect;
Now I think it is illogical dismiss what is be practiced.
Obviously the best was the state during the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh and the four rightly guided khalifa's,
I will do some research on that. That will obviously take some time, but I will be back. Either with an apology or with some unpleasant facts.
But if someone made a law that said theft is legal, I would object to the law in theory and in practice.
But what difference would it make if no government in the world recognized the law?
Then you shouldn't use the term to mean something that it doesn't mean. (Shari'ah law)
Please point out where I incorrectly used the term.
I must apologize; I missed your response about “Rational proofs”.
Since the answer is a pointer to another post that points to another post, it will take some time to digest. But as Arnold says “Ill be back”.
Wilber

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I am not sure if this has been addressed before or not.

What about the person who converted away from Islam to a different faith (Or no faith at all), who moves away to a non-Muslim area.
Are they still subject to the Islamic penalty for apostasy?

A second question, just who is allowed to carry out the punishment? Who isn’t allowed to carry out the punishment?


Ansar Al-‘Adl, I understand you are presenting your posts in light of what Islam teaches and not trying to address the state of Islam as it exists today.

That being said, is it still fair to punish folks who have never had the chance to fairly judge their choice in a faith before they chose?

Are there any provisions in Islamic teachings that allow any allowances to be made for such a case?

Say a child grows to the age of 17 and publicly makes a commitment and swears his allegiance to Islam. The child has never been more than a 100 miles from home. The country he lives in is Afghanistan and in his area there is no one to teach about what the Bible states.

Sometime later the young man meets some American soldiers and they invite him to study with them. The young man agrees to study with them.

Then, perhaps, the, now 18 year old, man decides he agrees more with the teachings of the Bible than the Qur’an and converts.

The message that really influenced the young man’s decision was the answer he received from the Christian soldier/teacher “Yes, when the Bible state’s that if you reject Jesus as Lord, you, young man, are condemned to Hell”.

Does the young man have to die if he doesn’t reject his new found faith in what the Bible teaches?

What of the one who converted the young man, is he to be punished? If yes, then what is the prescribed punishment?

Thanks
Nimrod

[syilla]

have you read the 1st thread... i think it can explain to some of your questions.

[glo]

Hi all

I have tried to read this entire thread as best I can.

I understand (I think!) what it says in the Qu'ran about apostates and death penalty.
Personally, I am appalled and deeply distressed about it! What kind of religion has to prevent it's followers from ever leaving by threatening them with death?? :heated:
(There is no need to answer that question. It is purely rhetorical.)

For now there is just one question that seems to remain unanswered in this thread (or perhaps have missed it).

I live in the UK, where the secular law clearly forbids the death penalty (as somebody has mentioned before)
So, if a Muslim living in the UK apostates, what happens then???

Do any of you know anybody like that? What happened to them after they apostated?
I would love to know - for my peace of mind!

Just as I was gettin to respect Islam for it's peaceful and caring attitude, I come across this issue ...
I am so sad!:'(

[aamirsaab]

...I live in the UK, where the secular law clearly forbids the death penalty (as somebody has mentioned before)
So, if a Muslim living in the UK apostates, what happens then???

Then his sentence is determined by the law of the land on which he lives. In the case you provided the person would be commiting no crime. However, certain "muslims" like to take matters into their own hands by trying to implement sharia law (not that sharia law is bad, no, just when it's not the law of the land and people try to enforce it on others)

Just as I was gettin to respect Islam for it's peaceful and caring attitude, I come across this issue ...
I am so sad!:'(

Care for an explanation? :)

[glo]

Care for an explanation? :)

I should probably not answer right now, because I feel really emotionally about this at the moment, and my reply may not be too rational! :X

It's just that threatening believers with death, should they ever wish to leave the faith, seems such a cruel thing to do!
If a Christian friend left the faith (or should I say 'when', because it does
happen), I would help him/her, pray for him/her and love him/her all the more!

I won't say any more on this, until I feel I can rationally deal with this.

But you haven't really anwered my question:
Sharia? What's that? Does that mean other Musim believers may take it upon themselves to kill the apostate anyway, against British law?

What if the person's life is spared? Are they cast out of the Muslim community? Divorced? Separated from their children?
:-\

[------]

Sharia? What's that?

The Islamic Law.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,

Now I think it is illogical dismiss what is be practiced.

I am not dismissing it, I am saying it is wrong and needs to be corrected so that it is in accordance with Islamic teachings.

Obviously the best was the state during the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh and the four rightly guided khalifa's,
I will do some research on that. That will obviously take some time, but I will be back. Either with an apology or with some unpleasant facts.

To help you with your research, I will provide you with some references.
There is some good introuctory material on the Prophet's life here:
Muhammad: The Man & the Message
And more detailed accounts here:
The Islamtoday.Com English section supervised by Sheikh Salman Al-Oadah
The Islamtoday.Com English section supervised by Sheikh Salman Al-Oadah

After reading the material on the websites, I would recommend that you take a look at the resources I have listed here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/educatio...resources.html

But if someone made a law that said theft is legal, I would object to the law in theory and in practice.
But what difference would it make if no government in the world recognized the law?

If they had not implemented it but there was a desire to implement it.

Then you shouldn't use the term to mean something that it doesn't mean. (Shari'ah law)
Please point out where I incorrectly used the term.

You said

When I talk about Suria Law, I’m talking about how it is implemented and used

Regards

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Nimrod,
Thank you for your post. :)

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I am not sure if this has been addressed before or not.

What about the person who converted away from Islam to a different faith (Or no faith at all), who moves away to a non-Muslim area.
Are they still subject to the Islamic penalty for apostasy?

I mentioned in the first post in this thread, that someone who leaves the country will not be hunted down by the Islamic state; he is not disturbing their society so he is of no significance to them. The Islamic state is only concerned with the protection of the society.

A second question, just who is allowed to carry out the punishment? Who isn’t allowed to carry out the punishment?

Only the Islamic state, i.e. the government, is allowed to carry out the punishment. All legal procedures must be directed by the state, no one can take matters into their own hands.

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I understand you are presenting your posts in light of what Islam teaches and not trying to address the state of Islam as it exists today.

That being said, is it still fair to punish folks who have never had the chance to fairly judge their choice in a faith before they chose?

Again, keep in mind the issue of causing harm to society, because that is when the Islamic state takes action. And then on the topic of those who leave Islam because of their doubts or confusion, they are given the opportunity to have their misunderstandings clarified and explained to them. They have the opprtunity to learn and find out which is the true path. Punishment would only happen if they are causing problems to society.

What of the one who converted the young man, is he to be punished? If yes, then what is the prescribed punishment?

There is no prescribed punishment for such actions, in Islamic law. The issue is discretionary.

Regards

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello glo,
There seems to be a misunderstanding, so I suggest you re-read the first post in this thread. The Islamic state is only concerned with the protection of the society, so someone who is not causing a disturbance to the society is not subject to state actions. And the punishments can only be implemented by the state.

[glo]

Hello glo,
There seems to be a misunderstanding, so I suggest you re-read the first post in this thread. The Islamic state is only concerned with the protection of the society, so someone who is not causing a disturbance to the society is not subject to state actions. And the punishments can only be implemented by the state.

Thank you.

That is not what people in my 'leaving the faith' thread have said!!
Clearly there are at least some people here who whole-hearted subscribe to the death penalty idea>
(I don't know how to create a link to it. It is in the basics of Islam folder)

I am still waiting to hear what reaction somebody who does apostate in the UK can expect from their Muslim community??!
I wonder why there are no replies?
Is it just a quiet day in the forum?
Or does apostasy in the UK not happen??? (I find that hard to believe)
Or do people not know what happens?
Or do people not want to say?

[snakelegs]

Just as I was gettin to respect Islam for it's peaceful and caring attitude, I come across this issue ...
I am so sad!:'(

i would urge you not to judge islam by the dominant thinking on this forum.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi glo,

Thank you.

That is not what people in my 'leaving the faith' thread have said!!

There are a number of things that you should realize. First of all, I have explained the correct Islamic view in the first thread in this post, based on what is said in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Secondly, there are numerous members on this forum who have not studied Islamic law and are speaking from hearsay, so they exhibit the same miscocneptions as Muslims. Islam is not based on the ignorant misconceptions of some people, it is based on the Qur'an and the Sunnah. I have provided the viewpoint that is in accordance with the Qur'and and the Sunnah and the consensus of Muslim scholars in the first post. I know this issue because I have studied it as opposed to the hearsay some members have conveyed to you or the teachings that have not properly been explained. Please see the first post in this thread and you will have the answer.

Clearly there are at least some people here who whole-hearted subscribe to the death penalty idea>

This is a public forum. The responses you recieved in that thread were not fatawa (religious rulings) from jurists, they were the ideas or the hearsay of some members on the forum, some of whom are very young. An opinion based upon ignorance is incomparable to the viewpoint constructed upon factual evidence and study. Please see the first post in this thread where I have explained this issue.

I am still waiting to hear what reaction somebody who does apostate in the UK can expect from their Muslim community??!
I wonder why there are no replies?

I have already responded to this; did you not see my response? Only an Islamic state can take action or punish criminals. Muslims cannot take this into their own hands. And an Islamic state only takes action against those who harm the society not the private affairs of individuals.

Or does apostasy in the UK not happen??? (I find that hard to believe)

It happens, but never has there been a devouteducated Muslim who left the religion after finding it to be flawed or inadequate. I have challenged peope to prove me wrong.

Regards

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi snakelegs,

i would urge you not to judge islam by the dominant thinking on this forum.

The issue here is not this thinking or that thinking but Islam should only be judged according to what it says, which is what is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, and non-muslims need to obtain clarification from those Muslims who have studied the Qur'an and Sunnah and are well-educated. The hearsay conveyed by some Muslims is incomparable to the educated and researched position conveyed by those who have actually studied the issues.

39:9 Say: "Are those who know equal to those who know not?"

I have explained the correct understanding in the first post.

Regards

[glo]

Thank you, Ansar Al-'Adl

I really appreciate you taking your time for such well presented replies. :)

You don't know me, therefore you have to understand that it is extremely unusual for me to react in such an emotional way.
Please allow me to ask a few more things.

Hi glo,

There are a number of things that you should realize. First of all, I have explained the correct Islamic view in the first thread in this post, based on what is said in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Secondly, there are numerous members on this forum who have not studied Islamic law and are speaking from hearsay, so they exhibit the same miscocneptions as Muslims. Islam is not based on the ignorant misconceptions of some people, it is based on the Qur'an and the Sunnah. I have provided the viewpoint that is in accordance with the Qur'and and the Sunnah and the consensus of Muslim scholars in the first post. I know this issue because I have studied it as opposed to the hearsay some members have conveyed to you or the teachings that have not properly been explained. Please see the first post in this thread and you will have the answer.

Whenever I have had discussions with other Muslims, one of their strong arguments for Islam has been that it is very clear-cut and descriptive, and that there is no room for disagreement and dispute between Muslims (unlike in Christiany, where there tends to be a lot of debate).
I see that I was misinformed, and that indeed there seems to be ample opportunity for different interpretations of the Qu'ran.
(You may disagree here)

I am still waiting to hear what reaction somebody who does apostate in the UK can expect from their Muslim community??!
I wonder why there are no replies?
I have already responded to this; did you not see my response? Only an Islamic state can take action or punish criminals. Muslims cannot take this into their own hands. And an Islamic state only takes action against those who harm the society not the private affairs of individuals.

Yes, I did read your response, and I understand that.
But did you read my question in #108?
What happens within the community/ family when a Muslim apostates?
Is he/she still allowed to be part of the community? Can he/she remain married or remain in contact with children and other family members? Etc.
I cannot put the question any clearer, so I hope you know understand what I am asking!

I am sooooo frustrated!:heated:

Thanks for your patience.:)

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello glo,
Thanks for your post.

I really appreciate you taking your time for such well presented replies. :)

I am glad you found my responses of benefit. :)

Whenever I have had discussions with other Muslims, one of their strong arguments for Islam has been that it is very clear-cut and descriptive, and that there is no room for disagreement and dispute between Muslims (unlike in Christiany, where there tends to be a lot of debate).
I see that I was misinformed, and that indeed there seems to be ample opportunity for different interpretations of the Qu'ran.

What makes you think that? The issue is very clear- we are to follow Islam as it was revealed by God in the Qur'an, explained and implemented by the Prophet Muhammad pbuh and as it was understood by his companions. We have a very clear methodology on following Islam which removes this confusion that arises from different interpetations. The differences you may see arise from ignorance as to what is in the Islamic sources or failure to distinguish between religious and cultural traditions, it is not a matter of different interpretations.

Yes, I did read your response, and I understand that.
But did you read my question in #108? What happens within the community/ family when a Muslim apostates?

That is something that has little to do with the religion but more to do with the nature of the community or family itself.

Is he/she still allowed to be part of the community?

Your question is confusing. You are asking me if someone who abandons the community is allowed to be part of the community. The Muslim community is exactly that - a community of Muslims. I am afraid I don't understand your question.

Can he/she remain married or remain in contact with children and other family members? Etc.

First, I am assuming you are referring within the context of western society. No a Muslim cannot remain married to such a person because our commitment and devotion to God is paramount in this life and someone who rejects that relationship will only damage the spiritual anbd emotional health of the family.

Regards

[snakelegs]

Hi snakelegs,

The issue here is not this thinking or that thinking but Islam should only be judged according to what it says, which is what is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, and non-muslims need to obtain clarification from those Muslims who have studied the Qur'an and Sunnah and are well-educated. The hearsay conveyed by some Muslims is incomparable to the educated and researched position conveyed by those who have actually studied the issues.

39:9 Say: "Are those who know equal to those who know not?"

I have explained the correct understanding in the first post.

Regards

my understanding is that islam (as any other religion) is not a monolith. there are differing opinions on which hadith are valid and which are not, there are various interpretations, degrees of orthodoxy and practice, etc.
even amongst religious scholars there are differences of opinion!
it would be a mistake to go to one islamic forum and conclude that this is islam, period. so i am saying do not judge islam from this (or any other) website.

[glo]

The differences you may see arise from ignorance as to what is in the Islamic sources or failure to distinguish between religious and cultural traditions, it is not a matter of different interpretations.

That may be so. But how do I know that you are the one with the true understanding, and the others the ones with ignorance? :-\
(No offence intended!!!)

Your question is confusing. You are asking me if someone who abandons the community is allowed to be part of the community. The Muslim community is exactly that - a community of Muslims. I am afraid I don't understand your question.

Yes, I am beginning to realise that the Muslim concept of community is different from my Western one.

First, I am assuming you are referring within the context of western society. No a Muslim cannot remain married to such a person because our commitment and devotion to God is paramount in this life and someone who rejects that relationship will only damage the spiritual anbd emotional health of the family.

Give me a scenario, so I can understand, please!
I am beginning to think people are avoiding my question. :heated:
Look here. Married guy with a wife and children apostates. Then what?
He has to leave his wife and children. Right?
Can he still have contact with his children? (My guess is that under British law that is his right - unless his contact is deemed inappropriate)
Will his Muslim friends, parents and wider family shun him? If so, is that their choice, or will they be forbidden (by Islamic law) to have contact with him?

You are right, Ansar Al-'Adl, I don't get your culture at all.
I have learned things about Islam in just a week or so, that I really respect, but then there are things I just don't get.
I don't think I'll even try.
In this apostast debate I see no place for compassion or forgiveness.
That confuses and saddens me. :(

[Mohammad_21]

Hi glo!!! :thankyou:

You raised some important questions.

Let me begin by saying that the posts on this thread have been very good and I think that Ansar Al-'Adl's posts are brilliant.

**********

You must understand that Muslims believe that the Quran was from God, we believe that the Prophet Muhammad (Saws) was the final Messenger, we believe in everything that he has stated, he is everything to us. As Muslims, we believe that he is the embodiment of 'goodness'. Now Shariah law has been handed down to us and we cannot change it, we cannot abandon it. That is just not possible for Muslims. It is important that everyone, even Muslims understand this point.

Now the Western World has become very liberal, materialistic and secularised (no offence), religion in the West now holds a low position (sadly), religion is always being attacked and mocked by politicians, artists, celebrities etc. The whole concept of religion is attacked by many in the West. Now in the West many questionable things are now okay, things that are Sins in any religion are now okay. (Homosexuality, fornication, pornography, sexual promiscuity) Now for people that are accustomed to and accept these things, thinking about the Muslim World would be like a bolt from the blue. Many of the concepts that most Muslims hold normal would be completely alien.

Another thing. The Shariah of Muhammad (Saws) is the middle path. As Muslims we believe that the Prophets Moses (As) and Jesus (As) came with their own laws (Shariah), now they were very different. The Shariah of Moses (As) was very 'harsh', from our sources we are told that the Believers had to give one quarter of their wealth in Zakat (Charity) and it also included the killing one's self as a form of repentance! Now the Shariah of Jesus was very laxate, the Believers then were allowed to drink, their clothes were not considered impure with filth etc. That was all permissible, there was no sin in it. Now as you are a Christian (living in the secular West), you will no doubt be accustomed to the teachings of Jesus the laws of his time and you will also be influenced by the way of life in the West now. You will no doubt feel uncomfortable when it comes to the Shariah of Muhammad and even more uncomfortable if it came to the Shariah of Moses.

I think it is important to put things into perspective.

glo, you should not feel sad. :)

I will InshAllah post more later on.

[snakelegs]

But how do I know that you are the one with the true understanding, and the others the ones with ignorance? :-\
:(

what a great question.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello glo :)

That may be so. But how do I know that you are the one with the true understanding, and the others the ones with ignorance? :-\

I'm not asking you to simply trust me and accept what I say just because I said it. The research speaks for itself. Read my posts and the arguments I have presented and judge for yourself. If anyone wishes to contest the view I have presented, they are free to do so, and we can exmaine their evidence.

Give me a scenario, so I can understand, please!

um...okay. Sister X is married to brother Y and they live in britain. Brother Y leaves the religion. Brother Y is now a negative influence for sister X's faith and the faith of her children and living with him comes at the expense of her commitment and devotion to God. Sister X is to divorce Mr. Y.

Look here. Married guy with a wife and children apostates. Then what?
He has to leave his wife and children. Right?

Yes.

Can he still have contact with his children? (My guess is that under British law that is his right - unless his contact is deemed inappropriate)

I think your statement of british law is correct.

Will his Muslim friends, parents and wider family shun him? If so, is that their choice, or will they be forbidden (by Islamic law) to have contact with him?

If he is openminded and still caring towards his family they should try to discuss matters with him and find out what upset him to cause him to abandon his religion. Sometimes when an individual's religious commitment is down they need family support to bring them back again. But again it all depends. If he turns virulent and hateful, then perhaps his behaviour is best denounced through rejecting him. Either way, it remains at the family's discretion to do what they feel is best and will not increase the damage. That is my understanding of the situation.

In this apostast debate I see no place for compassion or forgiveness.

There seems to be a misunderstanding here. Islam provides absolute forgiveness. God almighty informs us that He forgives all sins (Qur'an 39:53) and no one can close the gates of God's mercy on someone. Everyone can always repent and come back to God.

Regards

ps. JazakAllah khayr br. Mohammad_21 for your kind comments; it is always nice to get positive feedback.

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-‘Adl, thanks for the reply, it was informative.

I have a further question if you don’t mind.

Of those who reject Islam, is there an exception for those such as those that govern Saudi Arabia?

What about the other leaders of what the western world considers “Islamic” states? Yet Islam say's that the leaders of those "Muslim" countries have left the teachings of Islam.

I hope you understand my meaning.

Thanks
Nimrod

[nimrod]

Mohammad_21, no offense intended but “Now the Western World has become very liberal, materialistic and secularized”. Some are saying that is the same problem with some Muslim countries.

That is where I was headed with my prior post, Thanks for making the point for me.

There is more than one way to abandon one’s faith. Which group has caused more harm to Islam?

Should O.B.L. be beheaded?

Thanks
Nimrod

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Nimrod,

Ansar Al-‘Adl, thanks for the reply, it was informative.

I'm glad you found it beneficial :)

Of those who reject Islam, is there an exception for those such as those that govern Saudi Arabia?

I don't understand your question here, could you elaborate?

What about the other leaders of what the western world considers “Islamic” states? Yet Islam say's that the leaders of those "Muslim" countries have left the teachings of Islam.

We can't say that such people have become disbelievers but they are simply not implementing the Islamic teachings as comprehensively and accurately as they should.

Also, I don't think it is either relevant or useful to discuss the case of OBL in this thread; I have commented here. But I definitely agree with you about some 'muslims' causing more harm than anyone else.

Regards

[glo]

Thank you for all your patient replies.

[Mohammad_21]

Mohammad_21, no offense intended but “Now the Western World has become very liberal, materialistic and secularized”. Some are saying that is the same problem with some Muslim countries.

That is where I was headed with my prior post, Thanks for making the point for me.

There is more than one way to abandon one’s faith. Which group has caused more harm to Islam?

Should O.B.L. be beheaded?

Thanks
Nimrod

Hi Nimrod (like the name :giggling: )

I agree with what you’re saying. Many Muslim countries are becoming more liberal, materialistic and secularised. However I don’t think anyone can say that they are like Western countries, yet (no offence). I was born and bred in the West and I have great admiration for the people here, though there are certain things I don’t agree with (society) there are many, many things that I think are brilliant, things that other societies should try to do themselves.

Homosexuality, fornication, lewdness effect ALL societies however you will find that in more traditional and strict societies, (Islamic, Christian etc.) these things are kept on the ‘low’, they are swept under the rug, they are never done openly and I think that is the main difference. If I was back in Pakistan, I would not be able to walk the streets while holding the hands of a strange girl. I would not be able to kiss in public etc. That is where the secular West and other societies are different. You can see this in the dramas that are broadcasted in Islamic countries, in Pakistani dramas for example you will never see a couple kiss or even hug.

************

You are right in saying that groups have caused a lot of damage to Islam.

Should Osama Bin Laden be executed, if he stands before a court and he is found guilty then he should be. The same applies to Zarqawi, I do regard Zarqawi's group as murderers, his group has killed many, many innocent people. One thing that I will remember is how his group killed 2 Iraqi women (they might have been beheaded) for allegedly helping the Americans.

Let me give you a quote, this is from Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Bin Baz, he is regarded as the greatest Salafi scholar of the 20th Century (Most of these Terrorist groups are Salafi)

Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Bin Baz was asked, "What is the verdict concerning Jamaa'atul-Jihaad and co-operation with them?"

He answered, "...They are not to be co-operated with, nor are they to be given salutations (salaam). Rather, they are to be cut off from, and the people are to be warned against their evil, since they are a tribulation and are harmful to the Muslims, and they are the brothers of the Devil."

cassette (no. 11) recorded in the month of Thul-Hijjah 1409H (1987CE) at at-Taw'iyyatul-Islaamiyyah.

InshAllah I will be posting more soon.

[Mohsin]

Let me give you a quote, this is from Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Bin Baz, he is regarded as the greatest Salafi scholar of the 20th Century (Most of these Terrorist groups are Salafi)

Alhumdulillah thats a good point you've made actually. a lot of these terrorist attacks are blamed on wahaabis or salafis, but if you were to listen to the main salafi sheikhs of today, they totally condemn such attacks.

[Syed Nizam]

Assalamualaikum, Ansar Al-`Adl and others as well. Greetings to the non-muslims too.

This thread discuss about Apostasy and since Apostasy is the main subject, it draws to my attention on the case of Abdul Rahman, the Afghan convert to Christianity. In his case, i do believe that there are two possibilities exists.

FIRST, his conversion to christianity is strictly personal. He keeps it to himself and does not even try to DECEIVE others of converting to christianity.... or

SECOND, his conversion to christianity with a hidden agenda, that is to proselytising among the ignorance muslim. By appearance he choose to be seen as a muslim, he dressed as a muslim, he leads a way of life (at least in appearance) of a muslim where his real goals is to evangelise christianity through means of deceits....

Obviously, in my humble opinion, if he falls into the first category, there there is indeed shouldnt be any punishment for him as have been stated again & again in the Holy Quran that is there is NO Compulsion in religion. He is free to believe in whatever that he choose to believe in... But, if he falls into the later category, then i do believe that his action is certainly punishable by death.

What is ur opinion on this matter?

Thanks...

[Nicola]

Assalamualaikum, Ansar Al-`Adl and others as well. Greetings to the non-muslims too.

This thread discuss about Apostasy and since Apostasy is the main subject, it draws to my attention on the case of Abdul Rahman, the Afghan convert to Christianity. In his case, i do believe that there are two possibilities exists.

FIRST, his conversion to christianity is strictly personal. He keeps it to himself and does not even try to DECEIVE others of converting to christianity.... or

SECOND, his conversion to christianity with a hidden agenda, that is to proselytising among the ignorance muslim. By appearance he choose to be seen as a muslim, he dressed as a muslim, he leads a way of life (at least in appearance) of a muslim where his real goals is to evangelise christianity through means of deceits....

Obviously, in my humble opinion, if he falls into the first category, there there is indeed shouldnt be any punishment for him as have been stated again & again in the Holy Quran that is there is NO Compulsion in religion. He is free to believe in whatever that he choose to believe in... But, if he falls into the later category, then i do believe that his action is certainly punishable by death.

What is ur opinion on this matter?

Thanks...

From what I understood from the coverage I read, he kept it to himself but his family found out and reported him to officals.


Either way, living that kind of pretence life must have been hard for him. He would never have been safe or free living there. I'm just pleased he is now away from it all and able to enjoy the life God called him out for.

So Muslims can change from Islam so long has they don't evangelize? Is that even in an Islamic country?

I have read different on this forum.

[snakelegs]

From what I understood from the coverage I read, he kept it to himself but his family found out and reported him to officals.

i like your new avatar.
one of the worst things about this apostasy law, as well as the blasphemy laws that are in force in some muslim countries is that they are often used for motives that have nothing to do with religion. so if i have a grievance with you or want your land all i have to do is say that i heard you say something insulting about the prophet or the koran, get some witnesses to testify for me and the victim is off to jail and a possible death sentence.
so these laws lend themselves to abuse. sort of like a witch hunt.
but i agree with what you said above - if it's true that there is only a problem with the apostates if they go public then this guy should not even have been charged. but i guess it was a good way for his family to get rid of him.

[Nicola]

=snakelegs;283790]i like your new avatar.

Thanks..though I did prefer my old one but I had no choice in the matter. I was told, ever human image was to be removed. :?

one of the worst things about this apostasy law, as well as the blasphemy laws that are in force in some muslim countries is that they are often used for motives that have nothing to do with religion. so if i have a grievance with you or want your land all i have to do is say that i heard you say something insulting about the prophet or the koran, get some witnesses to testify for me and the victim is off to jail and a possible death sentence.
so these laws lend themselves to abuse.

I understand what your saying and I agree totaly...what better way to get someone out of the way you don't like them, than to spread lies they have insulted the prophet of the koran. It's really is so easy to abuse this law. I've wondered how this law came about. It seems like there is fear involved.

For instance in the Bible it tells us, if we add or take away from the book then God will deal with us basicaly...God doesn't give Christians permission to murdering someone for this..That kind of Judgement is up to God..because he is the only one who knows exactly what is in heart (We believe)...where man does not.
Yet allah in the koran now gives permission to kill people who insult their book or prophet.
Strange that Allah would now pass the judgement over to the people of this book, when they can't possibly know whats in a persons heart for sure.

sort of like a witch hunt.
but i agree with what you said above - if it's true that there is only a problem with the apostates if they go public then this guy should not even have been charged. but i guess it was a good way for his family to get rid of him

Well I guess he's better off now :) an old saying...You can choose your friends but not your family...lol at least he can have some proper fellowship now. It must have been really lonely for him. I've often wonder how many are living this kind of isolated life...and how many would leave if given that real freedom of choice.

Peace

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Snakelegs,

one of the worst things about this apostasy law, as well as the blasphemy laws that are in force in some muslim countries is that they are often used for motives that have nothing to do with religion. so if i have a grievance with you or want your land all i have to do is say that i heard you say something insulting about the prophet or the koran, get some witnesses to testify for me and the victim is off to jail and a possible death sentence.

This is utter nonsense. I am appaled that you would just fabricate such an idea - no one is allowed to be punished in Islamic law on flimsy evidence. The Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself said that the punishment is to be abandoned in the presence of ANY doubt. So the notion that you can just bribe a few people to testify against someone is a malicious lie in Islam. Islam guarantees everyone a trial where the evidence against them is examined. If you say that you didn't insult the Qur'an or the Prophet, then unless they have concrete and indisputable evidence to prove otherwise then they can't punish you on the basis of someone's testimony. And the punishment against perjury in Islam is a severe enough deterrent to stop anyone from giving false testimony.

I really suggest that you try to learn what Islamic law actually states rather than advancing this ridiculous conjecture that we can kill anyone by just getting a few people to testify against them.

[glo]

Thanks..though I did prefer my old one but I had no choice in the matter. I was told, ever human image was to be removed. :?
Peace

Ohh ... will I get away with mine, I wonder? :rollseyes
Mind you, there are loads of avatars depicting people around in this forum. Why yours??? :?

Blessings,

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Nicola,

I understand what your saying and I agree totaly...

And yet you are not anymore knowledgeable on the laws!

what better way to get someone out of the way you don't like them, than to spread lies they have insulted the prophet of the koran.

Perjury is punished severely in Islam. And Islam guarantees a trial to examine all the evidence. The Prophet Muhammad pbuh forbade punishments when there is any doubt concerning the guilt of the accused, so who on earth can someone fabricate this lie that false testimonies are enough to get someone punished in Islamic law.

It's really is so easy to abuse this law.

No it is not if you study the law. But yeah, someone who is completely ignorant of the laws may indeed think they are easy to abuse.

I've wondered how this law came about.

The cure for ignorance is learning. Please read my first post where I have explained the historical context.

Yet allah in the koran now gives permission to kill people who insult their book or prophet.

BLATANT LIE. Provide me the quotation from the Qur'an that says this. If you cannot then I hope you will have the decency to apologize for this lie against Islam.

when they can't possibly know whats in a persons heart for sure.

No one is ever punished in Islam for a matter that involves their personal commitment to God. The punishments are for the protection of society and against the harm someone has caused to society.

It must have been really lonely for him.

It's alright for you to hypothesize about his case, but the truth is you don't know what he was like at all.

[cool_jannah]

Ohh ... will I get away with mine, I wonder? :rollseyes
Mind you, there are loads of avatars depicting people around in this forum. Why yours??? :?

Blessings,

Because it is strictly forbidden to depict any picture of a human being, specially of the beautiful Prophets of God:) under Islamic Shari'a

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Ohh ... will I get away with mine, I wonder? :rollseyes
Mind you, there are loads of avatars depicting people around in this forum. Why yours??? :?

Blessings,

We are implenting this rule for everyone, so yes others are being required to remove pictures of people. Nicola's avatar was a depiction of Prophet Jesus.

[glo]

Because it is strictly forbidden to depict any picture of a human being, specially of the beautiful Prophets of God:) under Islamic Shari'a

So I understand.
But if Nicola's avatar has to go, what about all the others??

Are body parts okay (see the hand on my avatar)
And is there just the faintest hint of a person in the background??! :rollseyes

Moderators, just inform me of your verdict.

Blessings,

[glo]

We are implenting this rule for everyone, so yes others are being required to remove pictures of people. Nicola's avatar was a depiction of Prophet Jesus.

:?
How do you know it was Jesus????
He looked like a guy with a sense of hunour to me! ;D

[snakelegs]

Hello Snakelegs,

This is utter nonsense. I am appaled that you would just fabricate such an idea - no one is allowed to be punished in Islamic law on flimsy evidence. The Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself said that the punishment is to be abandoned in the presence of ANY doubt. So the notion that you can just bribe a few people to testify against someone is a malicious lie in Islam. Islam guarantees everyone a trial where the evidence against them is examined. If you say that you didn't insult the Qur'an or the Prophet, then unless they have concrete and indisputable evidence to prove otherwise then they can't punish you on the basis of someone's testimony. And the punishment against perjury in Islam is a severe enough deterrent to stop anyone from giving false testimony.

I really suggest that you try to learn what Islamic law actually states rather than advancing this ridiculous conjecture that we can kill anyone by just getting a few people to testify against them.

i am only repeating what i've read in the pakistani english press, as well as what i've been told by pakistanis. to me, if you think about it, it just makes sense. you may well be right about islamic law - i am just talking about what sometimes actually happens - in this case it would be a wrong implementation of the shariah.
actually, no one has been put to death for blasphemy in pakistan (though it is legally possible), but many rot in jails.
in the u.s. for example, the constitution is not always followed, in which case one can appeal to the supreme court. the soviet union had a lovely constitution, but it was not followed in practice.

[Nicola]

[QUOTE=Ansar Al-'Adl;284083]Hello Nicola,

And yet you are not anymore knowledgeable on the laws!

Did I say I was?

Perjury is punished severely in Islam. And Islam guarantees a trial to examine all the evidence. The Prophet Muhammad pbuh forbade punishments when there is any doubt concerning the guilt of the accused, so who on earth can someone fabricate this lie that false testimonies are enough to get someone punished in Islamic law.

But there are different kinds of perjury aren't there...e.g some lies don't count?

No it is not if you study the law. But yeah, someone who is completely ignorant of the laws may indeed think they are easy to abuse.

So no Muslim person who has ever lived, have never abused Islamic law ever?
If only life was that simple!

BLATANT LIE. Provide me the quotation from the Qur'an that says this. If you cannot then I hope you will have the decency to apologize for this lie against Islam.

I believed after seeing so many death threats to westerners because of those cartoons..this was an Islamic law because of the insults to Islam and Mohammed..also Salman Rushdie what did he do wrong according to Islamic law..it must have been something serious to be issued a death sentance, they must have been acting on some form of Islamic law for them to have issued one.. What in the koran gives them this right...I would like to know?

Or are these death sentances (fatwas)that some Muslims have issued to certain people, taken on their own backs with no Islamic ruling..and nothing at all, to do with isulting Islam or Mohammed?

If you could explain please.

No one is ever punished in Islam for a matter that involves their personal commitment to God. The punishments are for the protection of society and against the harm someone has caused to society.

Thats Islamic law...I'm talking about what happens in real life. Would be great if all people obeyed the laws of the land...etc..but people don't and never will
because they are sinful.

It's alright for you to hypothesize about his case, but the truth is you don't know what he was like at all.

From what I've read about the case I formed an opinion of what life would have been like for him living there and not being a Muslim but a secret born again Christian.
I do write with perscuted Christians in this world so I do know how they suffer for accepting Jesus has their saviour. Most people form opinions, it's natural. And it was only my opinion that it must have been lonely for him..I didn't say It was lonely for him because I don't know him personally...other people of this forums opinion have been saying he should be killed.:? Though I believe that is cruel but that is their opinion and they are entitled to it.



This applies to everything in life if your not there yourself..you don't know for sure what is true or not.

[Nicola]

Ohh ... will I get away with mine, I wonder? :rollseyes

I don't know if you will it is a human hand isn't it?...lol

Mind you, there are loads of avatars depicting people around in this forum. Why yours??? :? Blessings,

I know, even human photos of people which aren't allowed either as I understand the law so far.

God Bless

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Snakelegs,

i am only repeating what i've read in the pakistani english press, as well as what i've been told by pakistanis.

So your comments were based on hearsay and impressions conveyed by the media on what occurs in Muslim countries, not an objective study of Shari'ah law. When are we going to realize that the biggest obstacle to understanding others is to judge their way of life on the basis of the selective presentation in the media? Non-muslims need to take an objective learning approach to Islam and search for answers rather than advancing their conjecture on what may or may not occur with Islamic law.

in the u.s. for example, the constitution is not always followed, in which case one can appeal to the supreme court. the soviet union had a lovely constitution, but it was not followed in practice.

But not following the law is not the same as abusing the law. You said that the laws may easily be abused which is not true. If you mean that they may easily be abandoned, I would agree because it is easy to abandon any law.

Regards

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Did I say I was?

I said that because both her comment and your confirmation of it were not based on knowledge of the issue.

But there are different kinds of perjury aren't there

No, all perjury is perjury and it is a terrible crime. False testimony is completely prohibited in Islam.

So no Muslim person who has ever lived, have never abused Islamic law ever?

They have violated the laws and abandoned them, but that is not the same as abusing them.

I believed after seeing so many death threats to westerners because of those cartoons..this was an Islamic law because of the insults to Islam and Mohammed

So your comments were also not based on truth but on conjecture and misguided assumptions about Islam's teachings. Why don't you stop assuming negative things about Islam and try to learn about its teachings instead?

..also Salman Rushdie what did he do wrong according to Islamic law..it must have been something serious to be issued a death sentance, they must have been acting on some form of Islamic law for them to have issued one

It is a fallacy to think that everything a Muslim does must be in accordance with Islam. A fatwa is a religious ruling and there are some who are not scholars and do not have proper knowledge yet still give their own fatawa. It doesn't mean that their fatwa must be reflective of what Islam teaches.

Or are these death sentances (fatwas)

A fatwa is a religious ruling to be issued by a scholar, not a death sentence!!

Regards

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-'Adl, I for one want to offer you my thanks for taking the time to answer all the questions that you do. I am sure it takes a lot of time and it is mostly a thankless job.
I suspect at times it seems the whole western world is against you.

Your last post looked like you are starting to take some of the replies personally.

You ARE doing a great job. Don't let anything get under your skin.

Where the problem lies, I suspect, is that your replies seem to answer the questions in light of Islam, as it should be.
Islam, as it IS, is an entirely different matter.

If things were as they should be, the Middle East would be leading the way in reforming Muslim countries, instead about all the western world sees is a general condemnation of any attempt to rein in some of the excess' we see in the Muslim world (The current condemnation of the Western reform attempts in Afghanistan by many on this web-site are an example of what I am talking about).

At times it can be frustrating from both sides of the fence, if you know what I mean.

Nicola's posts are from a "real" world prospective. Your answers are from an "Ideal" world prospective.

That is why my last post to you was as it was.

We live in a world where there isn’t a single "true" Islamic state that exists. Is it still fair to execute people because they later decide they agree more with the Bible than they do Islam, in light of the world we live in today?

There is no way anyone can say that Afghanistan (under the Taliban rule) allowed things to exist so that a person had a fair chance at making an informed decision as to the choice of religious beliefs.

Ansar, I hope you understand why this issue generates so much passion. It is the life or death issue. It is not merely academic, like debating if a certain verse in the Bible has suffered rewriting or not.

In the real world this is what the Western world sees (At least in my small part of it):

Muslims are easily riled, they become violent when they get riled, they do a very poor job of policing their ranks, and they want to kill folks who get tired of it, even their own.

Ansar, I don’t intend for that last part to be insulting toward anyone, I am just trying to be plain spoken.

The bottom line for me is this, even if a person believes that converting away from Islam deserves the death penalty, before ANY state can assume the right to put the person to death, then the State must have clean hands.

Saudi Arabia has strayed so far from what Islam teaches that the leaders of that country have, for all intents and purposes, converted away from Islam and toward their own perverted system. So much so that the Islamic world declares that Saudi Arabia is a very, very, poor example of Islam (I have seen Saudi Arabia declared as such on this very web-site).

If any State is going to start executing folks for converting away from Islam then, by all means, address those who have converted/perverted Islam into what it is not as well.

There is a verse in the Bible, “Don’t condemn your fellow man for the speck of saw dust in his eye, when you have a plank stuck in your own eye” (my phrasing is slightly different than the true scripture, but I haven’t changed the meaning of the verse), that is sort of how the rest of the world sees Islam at the moment.

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I hope you will accept this post in the same light it is given in, I mean no insult or harm. I just felt there were some things that needed to be said in a plain spoken manner. After all we are talking about a life or death ruling here, such matters are more than just letters on a computer screen.

Thanks
Nimrod

[snakelegs]

Hello Snakelegs,

So your comments were based on hearsay and impressions conveyed by the media on what occurs in Muslim countries, not an objective study of Shari'ah law. When are we going to realize that the biggest obstacle to understanding others is to judge their way of life on the basis of the selective presentation in the media? Non-muslims need to take an objective learning approach to Islam and search for answers rather than advancing their conjecture on what may or may not occur with Islamic law.

But not following the law is not the same as abusing the law. You said that the laws may easily be abused which is not true. If you mean that they may easily be abandoned, I would agree because it is easy to abandon any law.

Regards

i readily admit i am ignorant about shariah. my point was not about the shariah but about how these laws get implemented in the real world.
even many muslims allow that there are no muslim countries that are following shariah completely. i am definitely not qualified to judge shariah.
yes, my opinions are based on what i read as well as what i've been told by many pakistanis - and i'm thinking about pakistan because it is the only country that i have a little knowledge of.
is the pakistani english press presenting a biased view of pakistan?
i'm not sure if i understand your point about preferring the term "abadoned" instead of "abused".
i get the impression that you use the word "hearsay" to discount any opinion expressed by either muslims or non-muslim that doesn't conform to your views.

[Syed Nizam]

From what I understood from the coverage I read, he kept it to himself but his family found out and reported him to officals.


Either way, living that kind of pretence life must have been hard for him. He would never have been safe or free living there. I'm just pleased he is now away from it all and able to enjoy the life God called him out for.

So Muslims can change from Islam so long has they don't evangelize? Is that even in an Islamic country?

I have read different on this forum.

Nicola,

I would reserved my judgement on what actually transpired and what actually have been reported by the western media. Opps, especially the western media when it comes to reporting on Islam. If you are not aware of that, let's me just say that as a muslim, i see that there are numerous occasion where Islam is being maligned or misreported by the western media.

But. personally, if this man really keep it to himself, than i'm just glad as well that he have got away to another place where he can practise his belief freely.

But, on that matters, I leave it to Allah to decide....:)

[Noora_z3]

Salam

Bro Ansar, u r doing a very good job here, Masha Allah, May Allah protect you.

I personally think all muslims at this point must understand this issue as best as possibal, it will be brought up again n again by so called "modern muslims" n non-muslims, n if we dont know our own religion then who would?! Allah wont send his angels to defend us.

Wassalam

[Nicola]

Nicola,

I would reserved my judgement on what actually transpired and what actually have been reported by the western media. Opps, especially the western media when it comes to reporting on Islam. If you are not aware of that, let's me just say that as a muslim, i see that there are numerous occasion where Islam is being maligned or misreported by the western media.

That could be said for the people who sit in Judgment of this man also and judge the man should be murdered. It should work both ways IMO.

But. personally, if this man really keep it to himself, than i'm just glad as well that he have got away to another place where he can practise his belief freely.

Yes so am I.

But, on that matters, I leave it to Allah to decide....:)

and so it should be...but some men take it on themselve to act on Gods behalf...Yes, I agree we should leave it for God to decide on judgement day, after all it is God who gives us the freewill to choose which path to follow in this life not man. :)

[Syed Nizam]

So no Muslim person who has ever lived, have never abused Islamic law ever?
If only life was that simple!

Honestly, the same can be applied towards any other religion as well. Christianity, Judaism, Hinduisms...etc. I cant see ur logic of applying it only towards the muslim? This is prejudice, ain't it?

I believed after seeing so many death threats to westerners because of those cartoons..this was an Islamic law because of the insults to Islam and Mohammed..also Salman Rushdie what did he do wrong according to Islamic law..it must have been something serious to be issued a death sentance, they must have been acting on some form of Islamic law for them to have issued one.. What in the koran gives them this right...I would like to know?

The mass simply reacted that way due to their reverence to the Prophet (pbuh). Most muslims do revered the Prophet (pbuh) more than their own lives. So, their reaction towards such a blasphemy is very well expected. To holds a rally or a mass protest is nothing wrong. But, again and again, in any mass protest things can turns out really bad. About that death threats, again, what do u means by many? About Salman Rushdie, that guy is really a nut case. I have read his book the Satanic Verses and i'm amused at his level of intellect in it.... That book contains nothing but recycled garbage..., of those people who chooses to slanders islam, the religion & the Prophet (pbuh).

[Nicola]

=Syed Nizam;284514]Honestly, the same can be applied towards any other religion as well. Christianity, Judaism, Hinduisms...etc. I cant see ur logic of applying it only towards the muslim? This is prejudice, ain't it?

Of course this applies to all religionsNo religious laws are practiced perfect by anyone..thats what I am meaning...When someone tells me that Islamic laws cannot be abused...Like I said in my earlier post...if only life was that simple! All reglious laws are abused at sometime or another...Ever single religion! Is open to abuse.

No it is not if you study the law. But yeah, someone who is completely ignorant of the laws may indeed think they are easy to abuse.

This is what I was told in the above quote...We weren't actually talking about other religions but Apostasy in Islam concering Islamic law.

But if you want to go ahead..nothing is stopping you discussing other religions..If we start debating other religions and their problems within this thread I would agree with you totally that all have people who abuse their religious laws.....I'm not the one denying it!... but it would bring this thread off topic again and then it would need to be brought back on topic..or probably need to be split.
So no Muslim person who has ever lived, have never abused Islamic law ever?
If only life was that simple!

I already know the law of God in the Bible is abused...I can see problems in my choosen religion..Though I don't live with rose tinted glasses on.

The mass simply reacted that way due to their reverence to the Prophet (pbuh). Most muslims do revered the Prophet (pbuh) more than their own lives. So, their reaction towards such a blasphemy is very well expected.

IMO this looks like a kind of idolation in it's self.

To holds a rally or a mass protest is nothing wrong. But, again and again, in any mass protest things can turns out really bad. About that death threats, again, what do u means by many? About Salman Rushdie, that guy is really a nut case. I have read his book the Satanic Verses and i'm amused at his level of intellect in it.... That book contains nothing but recycled garbage..., of those people who chooses to slanders islam, the religion & the Prophet (pbuh).

I have no problems with peacful mass protests at all, I agree with freedom of speach for all people in every country..But I do have an issue when some Muslims where calling for death to us westerners..when it was only one mans decision to publish some cartoons. Salman Rushdie deserving a death sentence over his head for something that he writes in a book...I find it a strange kind of ideology.

[Syed Nizam]

Salam

Bro Ansar, u r doing a very good job here, Masha Allah, May Allah protect you.

I personally think all muslims at this point must understand this issue as best as possibal, it will be brought up again n again by so called "modern muslims" n non-muslims, n if we dont know our own religion then who would?! Allah wont send his angels to defend us.

Wassalam

Sis Noora,

Correct me if i'm wrong. I taught that there is no such terms such as "modern muslim" or "conservative muslim". There are but only one muslim.. & that means the submission to Allah. We might not shared the same view on some issues but i'm certained that our beliefs & our convictions nevertheless are just the same.

May Allah blessed us in this life & the hereafter. Ameeen.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Nimrod :)

Your last post looked like you are starting to take some of the replies personally.

You ARE doing a great job. Don't let anything get under your skin.

Thanks for your kind comments and your advice.

Where the problem lies, I suspect, is that your replies seem to answer the questions in light of Islam, as it should be [practiced].
Islam, as it IS [practiced], is an entirely different matter.

If you add the word practiced as I did above, then I agree with the statement. The difference being that there are not multiple Islams, Islam is just what is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

At times it can be frustrating from both sides of the fence, if you know what I mean.

Absolutely.

We live in a world where there isn’t a single "true" Islamic state that exists. Is it still fair to execute people because they later decide they agree more with the Bible than they do Islam, in light of the world we live in today?

There is no way anyone can say that Afghanistan (under the Taliban rule) allowed things to exist so that a person had a fair chance at making an informed decision as to the choice of religious beliefs.

I agree that rulings must be considered in light of contemporary events and the world situation, as the Prophet himself demonstrated. There is a need for a lot of reform in the Muslim world (not Islam) and this gets into discussions on ways to reform the Ummah.

In the real world this is what the Western world sees (At least in my small part of it):

Muslims are easily riled, they become violent when they get riled, they do a very poor job of policing their ranks, and they want to kill folks who get tired of it, even their own.

I'm aware of the prevalent stereotypes and I think it results largely from the spotlight fallacy. I think we need to combat these stereotypes and help westerners understand that the problem is with some Muslims, not with Islam, and then we can all take steps towards eradicating the problems in the Muslim world.

If any State is going to start executing folks for converting away from Islam then, by all means, address those who have converted/perverted Islam into what it is not as well.

There is a verse in the Bible, “Don’t condemn your fellow man for the speck of saw dust in his eye, when you have a plank stuck in your own eye”

Agreed.

Once again, thanks for your post.

Regards

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Snakelegs,

i readily admit i am ignorant about shariah. my point was not about the shariah but about how these laws get implemented in the real world.

Right.

i'm not sure if i understand your point about preferring the term "abadoned" instead of "abused".

You said that the laws were easily abused which implies that they can be misused or they provide loopholes, etc. Either way it indicates some flaw with the statement of the law. My position was that the law simply is not being followed correctly, it is being abandoned. This does not reflect negatively on the law at all.

i get the impression that you use the word "hearsay" to discount any opinion expressed by either muslims or non-muslim that doesn't conform to your views.

I think that's an unfair generalization. I use the word 'hearsay' to encourage muslims and non-muslims to move beyond the steretypes they recieve in the media and actively seek to promote understanding in the diverse world in which we live.

Regards

[Noora_z3]

Sis Noora,

Correct me if i'm wrong. I taught that there is no such terms such as "modern muslim" or "conservative muslim". There are but only one muslim.. & that means the submission to Allah. We might not shared the same view on some issues but i'm certained that our beliefs & our convictions nevertheless are just the same.

May Allah blessed us in this life & the hereafter. Ameeen.

Bro Nizam,

Salam

I think u did notice that I said (so called) n put modern muslims between ""..I personally dont belive that there r such, there is only One Quranand One prophet. I said that sarcasticly, some ppl like to claim themselves as "modern muslims" n attack Islam.

I know this is off topic, sorry.

Wassalam

[snakelegs]

Hello Snakelegs,

Right.

You said that the laws were easily abused which implies that they can be misused or they provide loopholes, etc. Either way it indicates some flaw with the statement of the law. My position was that the law simply is not being followed correctly, it is being abandoned. This does not reflect negatively on the law at all.

i'm not sure we disagree but are using different words. when i say that a certain law is easily abused i agree this does not mean that the law itself is flawed (that's above my head) - just that it is often abused in practice, as is the case with the blasphemy laws in pakistan. i wasn't implying anything about shariah one way or the other - i don't even know the wording or the context in the shariah. i'm sure i would disagree with many aspects of the shariah, but after all, i am not a muslim. a law could be 100% just but people can find ways to misuse it or abuse it.

I think that's an unfair generalization. I use the word 'hearsay' to encourage muslims and non-muslims to move beyond the steretypes they recieve in the media and actively seek to promote understanding in the diverse world in which we live.

Regards

ok.

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I have waited several days to reply to this because I know my reply is off topic to a degree. I didn’t want to chance sidetracking the thread.

You stated “I think we need to combat these stereotypes and help westerners understand that the problem is with some Muslims, not with Islam, and then we can all take steps towards eradicating the problems in the Muslim world”.

I have to say that I think you, along with a large portion of the Islamic world, are trying to put the cart before the horse.

Wouldn’t it be great if the common news item contained reports of actions taken by, the common, Muslims against those who abuse Islamic teachings (Such as Bin Ladin)?

If Islam spent more time on the underlined, there would be much less of the other. One of these days a smart Muslim will realize that the Western world doesn’t hate Islam (As long as you keep it on your own shores); it hates what those who abuse Islamic teachings do. Then we will have a common enemy.

Thanks
Nimrod

[nimrod]

BTW, I do have a problem with any religion that allows one faith to be more promoted than another by the state and then teaches that anyone who converts away from the state promoted religion/faith is to be put to death.

Thanks
Nimrod

[IceQueen~]

BTW, I do have a problem with any religion that allows one faith to be more promoted than another by the state and then teaches that anyone who converts away from the state promoted religion/faith is to be put to death.

Thanks
Nimrod

hey!-in the west you are put to death if you 'apostate' from the army!
you have to fulfill ur contract-well i think the 'contract' you make with God is much more important than in an army...

[mizan_aliashraf]

Salam
I dont think that rally in London was such a good idea. As the sister said, there were other things we could have done (du'a, sabr). If anything, the rally caused chaos for commuters that day and this will give a more negative view of islam and muslims in the UK.
Why should we demand an apology from the danes? we know they don't like us. We are muslims. They will never like us untill we accept their way of life.
May Allah guide us all
Wassalam

[glo]

hey!-in the west you are put to death if you 'apostate' from the army!

You do?
Can I ask you where in the west this happens?

Thanks.

[mizan_aliashraf]

Peace
I've never heard of it myself, but maybe s/he was talking about the times during WW1 and WW2. Cowardice was punishable by death

[Ayesha Rana]

Assalamu alaikumwa rahmatullahi wa barakaatu

Yeah and not just the West loads of other places. Russia definitely and Marge1 can give you a nice list since the question was addressed to her. Hee hee.

[Ayesha Rana]

Yep. In WW1 British soldiers were shot because they had breakdowns due to the fear of the war. They didn't run away and scream they started to shiver and cry and if killing them isn't inhuman then what is?

[glo]

Yep. In WW1 British soldiers were shot because they had breakdowns due to the fear of the war. They didn't run away and scream they started to shiver and cry and if killing them isn't inhuman then what is?

Yes, in a war situation these things happen. I guess it's the only way to keep a losing army from disbanding.
Not that I agree with it!
In times of war the whole world goes mad! :-\

Peace.

[Ayesha Rana]

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatu

Their mental state is now referred to as shell-shock.
In Russia in 1918 the following orders were given to the Red Army by Trotsky:
Every scoundrel who incites anyone to retreat, to desert, or not to fulfil a military order, will be shot.
Every soldier of the Red Army who voluntarily deserts his post will be shot.
Every soldier who throws away his rifal will be shot.

Harsh way of putting it don't you agree?

[...]

Harsh way of putting it don't you agree?

Definitely.

[glo]

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatu

Their mental state is now referred to as shell-shock.
In Russia in 1918 the following orders were given to the Red Army by Trotsky:
Every scoundrel who incites anyone to retreat, to desert, or not to fulfil a military order, will be shot.
Every soldier of the Red Army who voluntarily deserts his post will be shot.
Every soldier who throws away his rifal will be shot.

Harsh way of putting it don't you agree?

Yes. :-\

[sharvy]

For some odd reason the last 5 pages of this thread were transferred to a new thread: "Factors in Loosing (misspelled) Faith"

So if anyone wants to follow up the continuation of the discussion please go there.

Sharvy

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Yep. In WW1 British soldiers were shot because they had breakdowns due to the fear of the war. They didn't run away and scream they started to shiver and cry and if killing them isn't inhuman then what is?

I'm not sure about this. I know soldiers could be shot for desertion, but for shell shock? Many soldiers suffering from shell shock (or neurasthenia as it was known to doctors) got taken to Craiglockhart Military Hospital in Edinburgh for treatment.

Peace

[jwgoes]

no sectarian articles - please refer to the first post for the correct understanding of this issue.

[Hijrah]

:sl:

Why did he think that females are to be spared? Female adulterers and murderers should be put to death in an Islamic State right?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl:

Why did [Imam Abu Hanifa] think that females are to be spared? Female adulterers and murderers should be put to death in an Islamic State right?

It stems from the understanding that this punishment is in reality a punishment for the protection and preservation of society. The Islamic state takes action against those who pose a threat to the security of the state, and Imam Abu Hanifah held that a woman was unlikely to pose such a threat. As such, he compared the apostate woman to the originally disbelieving woman. (Ibn Rushd, Bidayatul Mujtahid [Eng. Trans.], vol 2. p. 552)

a female apostate is not liable to the death penalty since she is not in any position to fight against Islam (Sarakhsi, Masbut vol. 10, pp. 108-110)

Whatever the case, others have stated otherwise. Please refer to the following to articles for a better understanding of this issue:
Narration 7
Apostasy and Islam