apostasy in Islam, how does it affect you?

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.
"Allah gives guidance to those who seek it."
What it means is that if you sincerely seek guidance,God will reward you for your sincerity.
Secondly.
"It is almost as if they believe their own religion is valid and 100% true."
What this implies is that people generally consider that religion to be the ultimate truth,which they are taught in their childhood.
That is why,The Quran is the only book,which encourages CRITICAL THINKING.
IT does not say just believe.It says that YOU DO YOUR RESEARCH,THINK CRITICALLY,ASK CRITICAL QUESTIONS,INSPECT EVERY ELEMENT,AND THEN BELIEVE.BECAUSE SUCH PROCESS WILL LEAD YOU TO TRUTH RIGHT?AND THE TRUTH FEARS NO INVESTIGATION.
Hence,The Quran says:
" Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts?" 47:24
Here,The Quran is encouraging critical thinking.
"When it is said to them: "Follow what Allah hath revealed:" They say: "Nay! we shall follow the ways of our fathers." What! even though their fathers Were void of wisdom and guidance?" (Surah Al-Baqara, 170)

"What their forefathers can also mean,the religion in which they are born to.Since,They follow the religion of their parents and consider it to be the ultimate truth.
You mentioned "God-Shaped hole" in the heart.Then,this is your answer.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ord-study.html


I would argue that Islam does not promote critical thinking. In fact, there's heavy censorship on anything anti-islamic in the countries of egypt, Saudi, and qatar.
It even says in the quran, on

9:4: Excepted are those whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient towards you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their term. [has ended] Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [Who fear Him.]

And that's honestly okay, complete your treaty with polytheists, no harm no foul. Until the next verse

9:5: And wjen the inviolable months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you ind them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait or them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakat, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is forgiving and Merciful.

I would call this the antitheses of forgiving and merciful. I would call it blood thirst and vengeful. I can understand attacking your enemies, but attacking those who have had your good faith for a while isn't very merciful at all. I think that's the "critical thinking skills" that your religion has to offer.

In a verse addressing apostates directly, in

4:89 They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away then sieze them and kill them wherever you find them and not take from among them any ally or helper.

It continues in 4:91
You will find others who wish too obtain security from you and obtain security from their peoeple. Every time they are returned to disbelief, they fall back into it. So if they do not withraw from you or offer you peace or restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you overtake them. And thos we have made for you against them a clear authorization.

Too me, it doesn't look like your book preaches critical thinking at all. It's either, you're with us or against us. Join our religion or DIE. The reason why you have contradictory verses, like 47:20 and 4:91, is because of the change of power that happened to Muhammad and his companions. They went from peasant merchants, to rulers and kings. The quran reflects that when it starts calling for death instead of critical thinking.

- - - Updated - - -or he
Just answer my question.
Do you think that a person who goes out of the fold of Islam,even when the reasons and his arguments,which lead to his apostacy have been debunked by the scholors,is sincere and is a rational being?

I would say that they're probably asking the wrong questions about their religion. Yes, generally I would consider someone in this scenario irrational. But, the fact of the matter is that I have never been approached by a muslim, or anyone religious for that matter, with something so profound I entered the fold of the religion again.


- - - Updated - - -

I saw my post wasn't linked as a reply, so I'm making sure you got it.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.
"Allah gives guidance to those who seek it."
What it means is that if you sincerely seek guidance,God will reward you for your sincerity.
Secondly.
"It is almost as if they believe their own religion is valid and 100% true."
What this implies is that people generally consider that religion to be the ultimate truth,which they are taught in their childhood.
That is why,The Quran is the only book,which encourages CRITICAL THINKING.
IT does not say just believe.It says that YOU DO YOUR RESEARCH,THINK CRITICALLY,ASK CRITICAL QUESTIONS,INSPECT EVERY ELEMENT,AND THEN BELIEVE.BECAUSE SUCH PROCESS WILL LEAD YOU TO TRUTH RIGHT?AND THE TRUTH FEARS NO INVESTIGATION.
Hence,The Quran says:
" Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts?" 47:24
Here,The Quran is encouraging critical thinking.
"When it is said to them: "Follow what Allah hath revealed:" They say: "Nay! we shall follow the ways of our fathers." What! even though their fathers Were void of wisdom and guidance?" (Surah Al-Baqara, 170)

"What their forefathers can also mean,the religion in which they are born to.Since,They follow the religion of their parents and consider it to be the ultimate truth.
You mentioned "God-Shaped hole" in the heart.Then,this is your answer.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ord-study.html


I would argue that Islam does not promote critical thinking. In fact, there's heavy censorship on anything anti-islamic in the countries of egypt, Saudi, and qatar.
It even says in the quran, on

9:4: Excepted are those whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient towards you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their term. [has ended] Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [Who fear Him.]

And that's honestly okay, complete your treaty with polytheists, no harm no foul. Until the next verse

9:5: And wjen the inviolable months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you ind them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait or them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakat, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is forgiving and Merciful.

I would call this the antitheses of forgiving and merciful. I would call it blood thirst and vengeful. I can understand attacking your enemies, but attacking those who have had your good faith for a while isn't very merciful at all. I think that's the "critical thinking skills" that your religion has to offer.

In a verse addressing apostates directly, in

4:89 They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away then sieze them and kill them wherever you find them and not take from among them any ally or helper.

It continues in 4:91
You will find others who wish too obtain security from you and obtain security from their peoeple. Every time they are returned to disbelief, they fall back into it. So if they do not withraw from you or offer you peace or restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you overtake them. And thos we have made for you against them a clear authorization.

Too me, it doesn't look like your book preaches critical thinking at all. It's either, you're with us or against us. Join our religion or DIE. The reason why you have contradictory verses, like 47:20 and 4:91, is because of the change of power that happened to Muhammad and his companions. They went from peasant merchants, to rulers and kings. The quran reflects that when it starts calling for death instead of critical thinking.

- - - Updated - - -or he
Just answer my question.
Do you think that a person who goes out of the fold of Islam,even when the reasons and his arguments,which lead to his apostacy have been debunked by the scholors,is sincere and is a rational being?

I would say that they're probably asking the wrong questions about their religion. Yes, generally I would consider someone in this scenario irrational. But, the fact of the matter is that I have never been approached by a muslim, or anyone religious for that matter, with something so profound I entered the fold of the religion again.

It's funny, how you never replied or said anything against my assertions and/or verses that talked about death and the killing of apostates. But you still have that, "Checkmate atheist" feel to you.

It's not typical "atheist drivel" as much as it is you ignoring blatant problems with your religion, and muslims as a whole. You will ignore facts when they are right in front of your face, and aren't very concerned with the idea of discussion. It's funny how you blame atheists for that, calling them "irrational" for doing things like this, but here's an atheist RIGHT in front of you who wants a discussion. It seems very irrational of you.

Name me a fact? The competing theories from the evolutionary models, which number 6?
I would say that the most recognized theory of evolution would probably be Darwin's and that of natural selection.

The fact that you don't have a clue about the actual origins of this universe based on empiricism?
I don't think that empiricism is a a good stance for discerning the origins of the universe, since what judaic-christian religious would tell us intelligent design, but what we observe in our world isn't anything remotely close to intelligent design. It also leads to a "leap of faith" if you will on your part. First you have to assert god, then you have to actually prove WHICH god. The jump to the Ihe judaic-chritian god is just as viable as the Buddhist god.

The fact that you use linguistic gymnastics which do not even appeal to sanity in order to push theories as supposedly well established fact?
I don't use linguistic gymnastics, every question anyone has ever asked me has been answered or rebutted head on. Nail and hammer.
To further this, I would say that you've employed a lot more linguistic gymnastics than I have, especially since you can't seem to talk about those awful verses in your holy scripture.

your hubris is cute, but it's also cliche. Which makes it the same tired drivel.
I think that your constant spew of ad hominem would say more about your hubris than mine, friend

One more fact, i've clearly rattled your cage for you to join here with an handle like "AntiScimitar" you got my attention, but i'm disappointed in your rhetoric!
No, I chose the moniker AntiScimitar because I figured it would be the best way to get your attention. Put something up in your face that you honestly can't ignore. Seems to be working.

Darwin himself didn't believe in his own theory Whether or not darwin believed in god, doesn't have anything to say about his theories.

But let's put that to the side for now and investigate the fallacy which is called dawrinism
Is that why it took you so long to reply? Because you had to look through a two hour video to it? For your red herring too? Nah. But, I will watch it when I have two hours down time.

We don't even claim that, you got it wrong. Our position is axiomatic. God exists and we know this! Simple. We don't have to use any method to prove God exists, when there are signs all around us but only discernible to those who have a sound intellect. Not trying to belittle your one trick pony argument, but your hubris remains highly unjustified by the bar you yourself set as someone who holds "science" as his method for understanding his existence. The fallacy appears in the fact that before the revival of the scientific method, you would claim no one could work out their reason d'etre. Funny thing is, I don't see an example of this from history because people were not having existential crisis due to their investment in their belief in God.

Like, I said earlier, saying that god is self evident isn't a good position at all. I think that you think your position is axiomatic, as a direct result of the world and how it's evolved around you. You say, "Look it's so perfect! Must be god." This train of thought doesn't lead to any questions. That's my problem with it. It leads to a self-evident fallacy.

It's not interested in looking for the actual origin, you'll just end up stuck on god. Also, you who identifies as a Muslim HAS to believe in the Judaic-christian god, while others can claim their own personal god. While the assertion of an axiomatic world only inserts, "God."

I think I would argue that the scientific method is a separate entity from d'etre. Since d'etre by definition is a reason to live, and the scientific method is a tool used to align your experiments. Science is a tool to discern the truth, it isn't interested in things like a reason to live.

Your cute little thought revolution video is nice, but it's an appeal to consequences. Meaning, that it doesn't actually discuss the validity of your position, rather it quite simply talks about it's desirability. Therefore, it's rejected.

You're about to claim ad hominem aren't ya? I can see it, because you are a typical misotheist. That's no ad hominem, that's a factual observation! You don't have to like it, but the truth is never convenient. I would know, I used to be an apostate and atheist in my late teens to mid twenties!
I think you probably thought this looked nice, but you can't say, "CALLED IT" on a forum, since you have to actually READ before you can make a response. I would call Ad Hominem on things such as saying that I'm full of hubris, saying that I spew drivel, ect. Attacks on character and not the actual arguments themselves basically.

Let me explain, for the purpose of clarifying to you, what a misotheist is - it's someone who claims he or she is an atheist, but actually beleives God exists yet hates God - thus, they spend their time attempting to refute the reason for God.

What's cute, is the fact that you can't admit this

I know what a misotheist is, but I wouldn't call myself one. Quite simply, because I genuinely don't spend my time of the day, going to every single Islamic forum on the internet refuting god. I happened to stumble across this one, I decided to make my stances known, and I'm generally having a lot of fun doing it. But sadly, this is also another red herring since it doesn't actually have anything to do with your position on an axiomatic world.


Yeah, you got my attention, but it was short lived - now you're just boring me!

Bring me a fresh argument, something that hasn't been debunked already! If I respond, it will be because I got excited - but if I don't, know this - you didn't try hard enough!
I have a feeling that you're going to respond. Quite simply because you don't like the idea of someone having an opinion contrary to yours.

Wait, I thought if I bore you, you weren't going to reply? Called it.
And am I the one trying to sound smart? When the minute your weak argument falls apart, you claim that I'm boring you? Telling me to, "Get Educated" seems to be advice you should apply to yourself.
But of course, you could prove me wrong by actually tying to have a discussion.

And no, under no circumstance will I ever believe in god. Me being an atheist/misotheist isn't relevant to this discussion whatsoever.


- - - Updated - - -

No, it's fine. I'm moving out in March actually, back to a country where I'm TOTALLY free to be an apostate.

So when are you two annihilating each other?

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيم

format_quote Originally Posted by AntiScimitar

I'm saying that people don't do things that animals do, because we are humans. Our societies have RULES, through many years of social selection. Criminals are "selected" out by going to jail (or whatever punishment is due in your society.) It even adds as incentive to not do, "Bad" things. You certainly don't need a religion to tell you right from wrong buddy.

People do things that animal do!

You claim that our societies have rules, are you sure it's our? societies have different opinions about rules, every society is likely to have differences of opinion in categorizing what is good and what is bad. For us, religion is the chosen rules of our society, so your rules is your rules while ours is ours, and you can't tell us why we should not follow what we think is right.

format_quote Originally Posted by AntiScimitar

You are very right, we follow morals set by our society and/or worldview. Because it's a social construct.
I don't "follow" science. Science is a tool to explain the natural world, but it can't explain how you'll chose to live your life.
To clarify, there are things I know and believe (Like how the earth orbits around the sun) because it's backed by EVIDENCE. That doesn't mean that I "follow" science it just means that it's a tool that explains the world around me. It's entirely up to me to make my own assertions.

My main contention with you, thus far, is the idea that you need to, "Follow" something. Make your own choices about life.

The statement that, "Science is essentially a contradictory and ever changing amalgamation of theories and hypothesis which do nothing have any factual basis." is entirely false. Plain and simple. Science aims for measurable results through testing and analysis.
The fact is, unlike religion, science doesn't make assertions without EVIDENCE.
A lot of theists toss around, "theory" and "hypothesis" interchangeably, but a theory is one of the highest honors something can receive in the scientific world, that's because "theories" are only found through constant testing and observation. In fact, the scientific method calls for repeated experimentation until the observation is indistinguishable from the theory.

Theist scientists in nature are biased. It's not a scientist's JOB to tell you whether or not you should believe in your god. It's a scientist's job to inform others so they can understand, and make conclusions of the natural world. That being said, a theist scientist first and foremost will always try to prove their god. This of course leads to discrepancies that can be contended.

It's statements like, this above me. Is why I'm here. For one, "Atheist Science" is simply "Science". That's because Science's job isn't to prove or disprove your god. Atheists USE science as a way to gain understanding of their natural world, and therefore the validity of claims produced by a religion. The "lies" you claim are simply observations of our natural world.

What I would call a, "lie" is the entire, "anti-science" agenda that theists tend to have. Especially since your religion attempts, a cute but albeit futile, attempt to prove itself. It's almost like you'll only use science when it supports your agenda and muslim worldview.

Agree with you that science is just a 'tool', so there should be no Atheist tools (Atheist math?), scientist have different opinion whether there is a Creator of this world or no, one side don't believe because it simply can't be proven with the current tools and claim that this is natural, and the others believe that there should be a cause for everything, world just exists out of nowhere is not acceptable something Super should exists but they don't have the right tools for measuring it or the current tools simply is not capable. So science is not simply Atheist Science.

We even haven't capable to explore all stars in the universe, or go the deepest of ocean, yet claim the Creator is not exists?

Don't wasting your time telling us our believe is a 'lie', for us something can't be proven is not a 'lie', it's questionable. We believe the correct tools for knowing the Creator is exists with eeman, signs, and the Holy Qur'an, while you are limiting your tools.

People do things that animal do!

You claim that our societies have rules, are you sure it's our? societies have different opinions about rules, every society is likely to have differences of opinion in categorizing what is good and what is bad. For us, religion is the chosen rules of our society, so your rules is your rules while ours is ours, and you can't tell us why we should not follow what we think is right.
No, if you actually read what I've said, I said that morality is a social construct. You've basically just described that. Your in Islam follow a judaic-christian sort of morality, eye for eye. Tooth for tooth, ect

Agree with you that science is just a 'tool', so there should be no Atheist tools (Atheist math?), scientist have different opinion whether there is a Creator of this world or no, one side don't believe because it simply can't be proven with the current tools and claim that this is natural, and the others believe that there should be a cause for everything, world just exists out of nowhere is not acceptable something Super should exists but they don't have the right tools for measuring it or the current tools simply is not capable. So science is not simply Atheist Science.

It's all honestly a difference of opinion. Some scientists have faith, and other scientists say that faith has nothing to do with a religious setting.If you ask about the world popping into existence, I could just as easily ask about god popping into existence, but the fact of the matter is that you can't have infinite regress, on either side. That's why atheists, like myself, would just say they don't know. That being said, there isn't a cause for everything. An Intelligently designed world would LOVE for you to believe that their is, but, you have an entire set of organs in your body that have lost their evolutionary function, they have no cause whatsoever.

We even haven't capable to explore all stars in the universe, or go the deepest of ocean, yet claim the Creator is not exists?
I don't think that actually matters, we're not going to suddenly "run" into god. So far, a "creator" hasn't done anything to reveal himself.

Don't wasting your time telling us our believe is a 'lie', for us something can't be proven is not a 'lie', it's questionable. We believe the correct tools for knowing the Creator is exists with eeman, signs, and the Holy Qur'an, while you are limiting your tools.

I'm not telling you to believe in anything, what you want to believe in is entirely up to you. I just think your "tools" are a bit faulty. You have what? A god that doesn't show up. Signs that never happened, self-fulfilling prophecies, and a book that's pretty flawed. But yeah, I'm totally limiting my tools.

I have a mental disorder that I didn't understand so well and so I would say words of disbelief to myself all because I had some sort of mental fear
So I don't know how Islam would deal with me
I would get upset and say things like I am Christian!