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.
As-salaam Alaikuum
Ansar, your claim "no knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam" just isn't true. At a university where I formerly taught, a colleague and friend of mine was a graduate of Al Azhar in Cairo. He grew up a devout, practicing Muslim, determined to devote his life to Allah, but gradually became disillusioned with all organized religion. Yet he does not hate Islam or any other religion. He recognizes the deep virtues of faith and community, but personally could not continue to believe in the supernatural. He does not proselytize his apostasy or have any wish to undermine the faith of others. When he goes home to Cairo he participates in family religious celebrations (but not in the US), because he loves his family and these family traditions. No one in Cairo, including his family knows he is murtad fitri. My friend has absolutely no reason to lie about this matter, and I know from many public situations in the US that he in fact is a scientific materialist.
But, Ansar, even though I think your claim is not literally correct, I do not see this issue as very important from the point of view of faith. So what if a few people knowledgeably reject Islam without malice or posing a threat because they find other communities and ways of life they prefer? If they will burn in hell, that is between them and Allah. There will always be sinners, right?
It is my understanding that in the Koran, the Prophet (pbuh) claims that souls continue to exist after physical death and may be either punished or rewarded in the afterlife for their past deeds and actions. If any man knowingly reads these claims of the Prophet (pbuh) and declares them false, claiming there is no human soul that persists after physical death of the body, claiming that no reward or punishment will be given to person after physical death - is that not the same as finding a mistake or error in the Koran?
Not at all - he simply doesn't believe in afterlife, not that he found an error or mistake in the Qur'an.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
Not at all - he simply doesn't believe in afterlife, not that he found an error or mistake in the Qur'an.
Dear Ansar
So claiming that the Qur'an is mistaken is not the same as finding a mistake in the Qur'an. (My colleague certainly holds that many claims in the Qur'an are false and mistaken.) Sorry, that is confusing. Can you give me a clear example of what it is to genuinely find a mistake? For example my colleague does believe in Darwin's theory of evolution and denies the Genesis account - and he doesn't believe that there was a being such as Allah that created the universe.
But even if technically he doesn't find fault with the Qur'an, isn't it true to say that, as the case is described, he did leave Islam? After all, he has ceased all religious practice and intends never to be a practicing Muslim again.
A flaw is a mistake, an error. According to you he didn't find that, he just became disillusioned with religion and personally could not continue to believe in the supernatural. I'm really interested to know more about his case but you're not providing any information other than essentially saying "I know someone who contradicts your claim". I maintain the same claim all along - everyone who has left Islam has done so due to sociopolitical factors or because they had an improper understanding of the religion. Your friend fits perfectly into the first category since you mentioned that he abandoned his religion after coming to the US - there are many weak Muslims who lose their religion once they become immersed in western society. Your friend didn't become any more intelligent after arriving in the US then he was before. As for spending years obtaining ijazahs, orientalists spend years studying Islam, but they don't believe in it. The more I think about it, the more absurd the claim is - no practicing sincere Muslim suddenly wakes up and says, "I can't believe in the supernatural" after they move to another society. That is indicative that they have had problems and struggles with their faith from the beginning. Unless he can bring some stunning proof that caused him to say, "This is it. This shows Islam can't be the truth." it just doesn't happen. If he has found something like that, then by all means please bring it forward and I'll be happy to discuss it. You really have not provided me with any information and that is why I was hoping to contact your friend himself, and there are a number of ways of doing that while maintaining anonymity.
Peace.
Dear Ansar,
I know many cases of religious people leaving their religion and becoming atheists. (I also personally know cases of former atheists becoming religious.) But you're right: (In general) no such person "suddenly wakes up and says" atheism is wrong or a particular religion is wrong. It is almost always a process - most often taking at least a year, and often more. However, there are many cases of practicing, sincere religious people who in the beginning, and as an adult, for many years have no doubts and no significant spiritual struggle - and my friend was one of them. In his case the conversion took several years. But once one finally reaches the conclusion that in all likelihood God does not exist, the strict logical implication is that in all likelihood Islam cannot be the truth. And that realization caused him to leave Islam. I still do not see why that does not count as "finding a flaw" in Islam. Again, can you please provide a clear example of what finding a flaw would be. For example, what would be a specific analogous case of a Christian convert to Islam finding a flaw in Christianity?
Someone might realize that the All-powerfull God would not have offspring. He is The One The Only.
exactly-if you give God partners (astaghfirullah) then u are dividing His power-so how can He be seen as all-powerful then? it's against the very nature of God.
Someone might realize that the All-powerfull God would not have offspring. He is The One The Only.
Fine. So if someone believes or claims that Mohammed (pbuh) is not a true prophet of Allah, though he or she is mistaken, they are nevertheless *claiming* to find a flaw in Islam - right? If a Muslim becomes an atheist and leaves Islam because they *think* that many or most of the claims in the Qur'an are untrue or mistaken, then, misguidely or not, they are leaving Islam because because they *believe* or personally find it is flawed - right?
:
And what you said was that he gradually became disillusioned with organized religion [becoming an atheist], not that he found a flaw in Islam. If he has found a flaw in Islam please ask him to mention it and we can discuss it. I stand by my assertion that there has never been a properly educated devout Muslim who believed in the religion and then left it, because they felt there was a flaw in it.
Ansar
Your example of a Christian who converts to Islam because they find a flaw in Christianity:
Someone might realize that the All-powerfull God would not have offspring. He is The One The Only.
According Ansar's reasoning: you can't say the Christian in this case converted because he found a flaw in Christianity, you can only say that he became a Muslim because he came to believe that God cannot be divided and He can't have offspring - a fundamental tenant of Islam. So this is simply a case of someone coming to agree with Islam and not a case of someone rejecting Christianity because they feel it is flawed or mistaken.
At least that seems to be the logic in Ansar's response to me. Please show me why I am confused.
So claiming that the Qur'an is mistaken is not the same as finding a mistake in the Qur'an.
No; one can simply choose not to believe in God, but that doesn't mean they have found a mistake in the concept of God. They just don't accept it. If I tell you that last week I had a headache, you can choose to accept the claim or not, but not accepting it does not mean that you have found a mistake in my claim.
Can you give me a clear example of what it is to genuinely find a mistake?
There are a rumber of errors that could count. For example, logical contradictions in the doctrine of the religion. For example (it's a poor example, but I'm in a hurry), if the religion says that salvation requires one to sincerely and fully be convinced that they will not recieve salvation - a logical contradiction. There are many types of contradictions and errors, mathematical, scientific, historical, practical and so on.
For example my colleague does believe in Darwin's theory of evolution and denies the Genesis account
Genesis is from the Bible not the Qur'an.
and he doesn't believe that there was a being such as Allah that created the universe.
You've already mentioned that. What I am trying to find out from you, and so far have been very unsuccessful in doing so, is WHY. What are his reasons for thinking that God can NOT possibly exist. Because if he was initially a believer and had faith in God, it would mean that for him to leave intellectually he must have found a reason that proves that God can NOT exist. What is that reason? I am familiar with the common atheist objections - problem of evil, omnipotence, predestination, etc. And I can respond to all of them, but I first need to know what your friends objections are.
But even if technically he doesn't find fault with the Qur'an, isn't it true to say that, as the case is described, he did leave Islam?
Yes he has left Islam from what you describe. I'm not concerned with that. I've been repeatedly asking WHY, but I'm not getting a response.
However, there are many cases of practicing, sincere religious people who in the beginning, and as an adult, for many years have no doubts and no significant spiritual struggle - and my friend was one of them. In his case the conversion took several years.
You're telling me that he had no spiritual struggles or problems with his faith and then he moved to a western society and gradually lost his religious commitment and now no longer believes in Islam. If that's the case then I would like to know his reasons, since obviously he must have a good reason why he feels that God cannot exist.
Again, can you please provide a clear example of what finding a flaw would be. For example, what would be a specific analogous case of a Christian convert to Islam finding a flaw in Christianity?
One example would be the trinity, because they found it to be logically incoherent. Now many Christians would contest that point, and I can discuss it in a seperate thread, but for the purpose of this thread I am mentioning it as an example. If your friend has a similar example of a doctrine he thinks is self-contradictory in Islam, I would be happy to discuss it in another thread.
According Ansar's reasoning: you can't say the Christian in this case converted because he found a flaw in Christianity, you can only say that he became a Muslim because he came to believe that God cannot be divided and He can't have offspring - a fundamental tenant of Islam.
Not quite - the idea here is that the view that a God can have offspring is illogical and self-contradictory, hence a mistake/flaw/error. Again, if your friend has a similar example of a doctrine he thinks is self-contradictory in Islam, I would be happy to discuss it in another thread.
Fine. So if someone believes or claims that Mohammed (pbuh) is not a true prophet of Allah, though he or she is mistaken, they are nevertheless *claiming* to find a flaw in Islam - right?
If someone found something in the life of the Prophet which does not fit with the belief that he is a prophet that would be an example. There are a number of such allegations which we have examined and refuted in other threads.
Regards
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
What I am trying to find out from you, and so far have been very unsuccessful in doing so, is WHY. What are his reasons for thinking that God can NOT possibly exist. Because if he was initially a believer and had faith in God, it would mean that for him to leave intellectually he must have found a reason that proves that God can NOT exist. What is that reason? I am familiar with the common atheist objections - problem of evil, omnipotence, predestination, etc. And I can respond to all of them, but I first need to know what your friends objections are. ... Yes he has left Islam from what you describe. I'm not concerned with that. I've been repeatedly asking WHY, but I'm not getting a response.
I am a former philosophy professor myself - philosophy of religion is one of my specialties - so I can speak with some knowledge on this matter. There are indeed a few atheists who believe that the concept of God is contradictory or are confused and believe that "God can NOT possibly exist". But the majority of atheists believe that, while it is logically possible that God exists, it is highly unlikely - so unlikely that it is reasonable to strongly bet against His existence. For example, I am an "atheist" with regard to the existence of leprechauns (though I may be wrong), but an "agnostic" with regard to the existence of Siberian tigers - I just do not know one way or the other whether they actually exist. In general empirical knowledge does not require absolute certainty: I just spoke to my brother in Chicago and claim to "know" he is now in Illinois. But it is POSSIBLE that I am the victim of an elaborate deception - and if I am such a victim, then my claim to "know" my brother is in Chicago is mistaken - but nonetheless completely rational and justified given my evidence and information. So justifiably claiming to "know" does not imply absolute certainty. Similarly, justifiably claiming to "know" that God doesn't exist does not imply absolute certainty - and my colleague - let's call him Salim - would not claim such certainty.
You ask "why" Salim became an atheist. I know his mind well on this matter, both from his writings, but also his lectures and personal discussions. He would say it was because he developed a much deeper understanding of science, evidence, and explanation than he had living in Egypt. For example, at the time he moved to the US, he was convinced that Darwin's theory of evolution was flawed and not good science. But after studying the issue in great detail, he became convinced that it was good science - and strongly supported by the evidence. Four hundred years ago, scholars had no natural explanation or mechanism to explain the existence of biological complexity - and without such a plausible natural mechanism, it was reasonable to posit the existence of God or a Designer to account for such fine-tuned, coordinated complexity and function as found in the human eye. But Salim became convinced that as the evidence piled in over the past 150 years, it is not reasonable to suppose that the human eye was deliberately designed by some supernatural deity. But once one gives up the claim that eyes and human beings were deliberately and intentionally designed, and adopt the belief that this incredible complexity likely evolved from simple one-celled organisms over the course of several hundred million years, by entirely natural processes, (in Salim's mind) it is only a short step to general atheism. After all, the universe itself is ultimately a giant complex thing. Scientists already can explain how entirely natural processes evolved atomically complex elements such as gold, from the original simple hydrogen molecules, which was the first matter to exist after the Big Bang. Salim sees a clear pattern in the history of human knowledge: in the past, things and phenomena that humans couldn't explain by a natural means were assigned a supernatural explanation: lightening, disease, famine, even the rising and setting of the sun. So there is a clear pattern in the history of theism and the supernatural of retreat: ok, you've convinced me that Johann's disease was smallpox and caused by a germ rather than a witch's curse - but what about Gerhard over there? He sees and talks to things that aren't there, and acts evil. And we can find no germs in his blood - surely he is possessed by a demon - he exhibits all of the classic signs. Nowadays, most Catholic priests would attribute such behavior to schizophrenia and a chemical imbalance in the brain. They would treat with medication rather than exorcism. That's because medical science has developed a plausible natural model for bizarre behavior. So over and over again we see this pattern of retreat. Michael Behe, a cell biologist claims: ok, so evolutionary science can account for the existence of eyes, but it can't account for the existence of the "irreducibly complex" mechanisms of cellular blood clotting. And many theists now concede that Darwin's explanation of biological complexity is probably right - but then ask what about the existence of the universe itself and the Big Bang. When science deals with one "gap" in our knowledge, to support their belief in God, the theists move on to a gap that science has yet to adequately explain to their satisfaction. In Salim's mind, the God of theism is a "God of gaps." So Salim doesn't think the existence of God is impossible, only that there is no good reason to believe in His existence. If, without any evidence, someone claims that there is a very large pot of gold buried 30 meters in the ground at a specific spot outside my front door - I recognize that the claim is *possibly* true, but nevertheless won't believe it and won't waste time and resources digging the hole. So the claim that God created the universe and planned the evolution that resulted in human beings is possibly true - but that possibility is not a good ground for positive belief in the claim. Salim regards the argument from design as the strongest and most plausible argument for God's existence. Once he found that argument to be fundamentally flawed, he gave up his faith.
There are many types of contradictions and errors, mathematical, scientific, historical, practical and so on. ...the idea here is that the view that a God can have offspring is illogical and self-contradictory, hence a mistake/flaw/error. Again, if your friend has a similar example of a doctrine he thinks is self-contradictory in Islam, I would be happy to discuss it in another thread. ... if someone found something in the life of the Prophet which does not fit with the belief that he is a prophet that would be an example. There are a number of such allegations which we have examined and refuted in other threads.
So the error that Salim finds is not a contradiction, but rather more historical in nature: He thinks that the evidence of science and history makes it probably false that the Prophet communicated with God and really was a prophet. But this is on par with someone who disputes some other historical fact about Mohammed. Hypothetically, suppose someone claims that Mohammed did not pen the Qur'an himself but set it up as a deliberate hoax with help from others (for example, there is evidence that Joseph Smith fabricated the Mormon tablets). Let's further suppose that while in error and not properly educated, this hoax proponent left Islam because he sincerely believed it was a hoax. Surely you agree, that would count as a case of leaving Islam, "because they *felt* there was a flaw" (in your words), right? In other words, the fact that he is demonstrably wrong - that you disagree with Salim or the hoax proponent, and would provide a clear-headed demonstration of the error in their views - doesn't negate the claim that Salim or the hoax proponent sincerely *feels* there is a flaw in Islam, and left Islam because of these presumably confused beliefs.
Similarly, justifiably claiming to "know" that God doesn't exist does not imply absolute certainty - and my colleague - let's call him Salim - would not claim such certainty.
Right. But the problem here is that you are claiming that Salim had certainty of Islam and its veracity and then something so dramatic happened to him that he spun around completely to the complete rejection of God, believing His existence to be unlikely.
You ask "why" Salim became an atheist. I know his mind well on this matter, both from his writings, but also his lectures and personal discussions. He would say it was because he developed a much deeper understanding of science, evidence, and explanation than he had living in Egypt.
Then if he found conflict between science and religion then I would definitely question his religious understanding. There are millions of well-educated Muslims in the west who have a sound grasp of various branches of empirical science, it's not all Muslims are ignorant people living in third-world countries. I live in the west, am well acuainted with scientific theory and yet I find no conflict between that and my religion. But a Muslim who does not know their religion very well might. And that is why such individuals should rely on scholars and go to them to seek clarification on the issues concerning which they have doubts.
For example, at the time he moved to the US, he was convinced that Darwin's theory of evolution was flawed and not good science. But after studying the issue in great detail, he became convinced that it was good science - and strongly supported by the evidence.
First, Evolution theory itself is an extrapolation based on the observations we have gathered. And contrary to the prevalent perception, scientific theories are not at all concerned or formulated in the search for truth; they are utilized on the basis of their ability to provide the most parsimonious explanation for observable phenomena. And when one analyzes the premise of the theory we find the same basic assumptions. For example, orientalists will say that based on the similarities between Islamic practices and what some of the pagan arabs did, they theorise that Muhammad pbuh simply borrowed pagan traditions. Muslims point out that one need only look at the facts the other way, in that these practices were revealed by God to Prophet Abraham and passed down through the arabs; Muhammad pbuh confirmed some of the arab practices and clarified their divine origin, while rejecting those that were innovations. So the same basic facts can be analysed in multiple ways, and that is true with any theory in science.
Secondly, the foundation of biological evolution is not in any way conflicting with Islam. To quote the Fatwa committee of Shaykh Abdul-Wahhab At-Turayri:
Therefore, with respect to other living things, the Qur’ân and Sunnah neither confirm nor deny the theory of biological evolution or the process referred to as natural selection. The question of evolution remains purely a matter of scientific enquiry. The theory of evolution must stand or fall on its own scientific merits – and that means the physical evidence that either confirms the theory or conflicts with it.
The role of science is only to observe and describe the patterns that Allah places in His creation. If scientific observation shows a pattern in the evolution of species over time that can be described as natural selection, this is not in itself unbelief. It is only unbelief for a person to think that this evolution took place on its own, and not as a creation of Allah. A Muslim who accepts evolution or natural selection as a valid scientific theory must know that the theory is merely an explanation of one of the many observed patterns in Allah’s creation.
As for the fossil remains of bipedal apes and the tools and artifacts associated with those remains, their existence poses no problem for Islamic teachings. There is nothing in the Qur’ân and Sunnah that either affirms or denies that upright, brainy, tool using apes ever existed or evolved from other apelike ancestors. Such animals may very well have existed on Earth before Adam’s arrival upon it. All we can draw from the Qur’ân and Sunnah is that even if those animals once existed, they were not the forefathers of Adam (peace be upon him). (SOURCE)
But Salim became convinced that as the evidence piled in over the past 150 years, it is not reasonable to suppose that the human eye was deliberately designed by some supernatural deity.
Then Salim should be kindly reminded about some basic facts concerning the scientific method, and perhaps the example of the Newton's (d.1727) corpuscular theory of light which remained the dominant theory amongst the scientific community for over a century (chiefly because of his intelelctual status). However, due to discoveries in the early 19th century, Huygens' (d. 1695) wave theory was revived, and soon became widely accepted. Finally, quantum mechanics caused us to return to both theories and today we affirm a particle-wave duality of light.
Coming to the specific mention of the eye, I think it is worth noting the example of Dr. Laurence Brown MD, an american ophthalmologist, who converted from atheism to Islam. Did he willingly embrace illogical beliefs about a field he had spent his life studying?
Salim sees a clear pattern in the history of human knowledge: in the past, things and phenomena that humans couldn't explain by a natural means were assigned a supernatural explanation: lightening, disease, famine, even the rising and setting of the sun.
Salim seems to forget the distinction between cause and mechanism and again the goals and intent of scientific methodology. Saying that God causes the rotation of the earth explains the cause but not the mechanism. Analyzing the centripetal force on the earth, the angular momentum, and so on is an investigation into the mechanism. Religion has never explained the mechanism, at least not in Islam, but rather explains that God is behind the mechanisms which govern our universe.
When science deals with one "gap" in our knowledge, to support their belief in God, the theists move on to a gap that science has yet to adequately explain to their satisfaction.
In addition to what I've said above, I'd like to also point out that science is not a living entity which researchs and theorises on its own. It is the scientific community which does that, comprised of individuals like you and me; human beings subject to the same societal influences and pressures as anyone else. For example, homosexuality was always classified by the scientific community as a psychological disorder until recent times when it was replaced by homophobia!
Islam does not relegate God to the yet unexplained phenomena in our universe, or 'gaps' as you call them. On the contrary, Islam points out that God is the Creator behind these mechanisms and it is He who has ordered the universe as it is. You can provide reasonable scientific explanations for almost all phenomena based on the four fundamental forces we know of, but you still haven't answered what the source, cause or origin of these forces is, or what exactly they signify. You can postulate several laws about the transfer and conservation of energy in our universe, the unchangeable decrease in order and increase in entropy, without even arriving at the question of who infused our universe with this energy and order in the first place.
If, without any evidence, someone claims that there is a very large pot of gold buried 30 meters in the ground at a specific spot outside my front door - I recognize that the claim is *possibly* true, but nevertheless won't believe it and won't waste time and resources digging the hole.
Within the context of the present discussion, I would just point out that 1. the entity in your example is inconsequential to your life and 2. in your example, Salim was already convinced and absolutely certain of the pot's existence and had been undergoing years of massive preparations and plans to uncover it, when suddenly he just abandoned it all and decided not to bother.
So the error that Salim finds is not a contradiction, but rather more historical in nature: He thinks that the evidence of science and history makes it probably false that the Prophet communicated with God and really was a prophet.
Let's further suppose that while in error and not properly educated, this hoax proponent left Islam because he sincerely believed it was a hoax. Surely you agree, that would count as a case of leaving Islam, "because they *felt* there was a flaw" (in your words), right?
Yes it would be, but look at what I said in the same sentence as the above, and what you have yourself admitted as highlighted in bold - education. Of course it is entirely possible for someone to hold an erroneous belief concerning Islam and consequently loose their faith - but this is only reflective of their own ignorance of the religion, hence my point about educated Muslims. It is foolishness for someone to leave themselves to their spiritual struggles without consulting knowledgeable scholars who can clarify their misconceptions and remove their doubts. So I maintain that in the entire history of Islam, in stark contrast from the history of other religions, those who have left the religion have done so either for sociopolitical reasons, or due to their own ignorance. Never has a well-educated devout Muslim lost the path, because once true eemaan enters the heart it never leaves.
This discussion has started to branch off into many other discussions related to philosophy and science, and even Prophethood - so I would suggest that if you wish to pursue some of those lines of discussion, we can continue this in an alternative thread and leave this thread as an explication of the Islamic law relating to apostasy.
Regards
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
This discussion has started to branch off into many other discussions related to philosophy and science, and even Prophethood - so I would suggest that if you wish to pursue some of those lines of discussion, we can continue this in an alternative thread and leave this thread as an explication of the Islamic law relating to apostasy.
It is not my purpose in this thread to defend either the theory of evolution or atheism. But you asked "why" Salim left Islam and it was necessary to introduce those issues by way of explanation.
Let's further suppose that while in error and not properly educated, this hoax proponent left Islam because he sincerely believed it was a hoax. Surely you agree, that would count as a case of leaving Islam, "because they *felt* there was a flaw" (in your words), right? (Sharvy)
Yes it would be, but look at what I said in the same sentence as the above, and what you have yourself admitted as highlighted in bold - education. Of course it is entirely possible for someone to hold an erroneous belief concerning Islam and consequently loose their faith - but this is only reflective of their own ignorance of the religion, hence my point about educated Muslims. It is foolishness for someone to leave themselves to their spiritual struggles without consulting knowledgeable scholars who can clarify their misconceptions and remove their doubts. So I maintain that in the entire history of Islam, in stark contrast from the history of other religions, those who have left the religion have done so either for sociopolitical reasons, or due to their own ignorance. Never has a well-educated devout Muslim lost the path, because once true eemaan enters the heart it never leaves. (Ansar)
Ok, so you concede that, as described, it can reasonably be claimed that Salim left Islam because he felt it was flawed, and now the issue is: is or was Salim a "knowlegeable" Muslim. Do I have this right?
It is not my purpose in this thread to defend either the theory of evolution or atheism. But you asked "why" Salim left Islam and it was necessary to introduce those issues by way of explanation.
The reason I asked was because you were attempting to use Salim as evidence that educated people have left the religion because they found it deficient. In the event of such a claim it is necessary to examine these details to determine what exactly this alleged 'deficiency' was, and how that reflects on the apostate's claim of 'education' in the religion.
Ok, so you concede that, as described, it can reasonably be claimed that Salim left Islam because he felt it was flawed, and now the issue is: is or was Salim a "knowlegeable" Muslim. Do I have this right?
We're bouncing back and forth between the two actually. What I have said and continue to maintain is that the only causes of apostasy in the Muslim community have ever been utter ignorance or sociopolitical factors - there has never been an educated faithful believer who turns around and rejects the faith. Now unfortunately, you can't have the cake and eat it too. If you claim that Salim left Islam for these doubts that we [muslims] commonly find as misconceptions of ignorant non-muslims, it means he wasn't properly educated about the religion regardless of anything else. And if he is said to not hold such misconceptions and erroneous views on Islam but simply abandoned the faith upon arrival in the different society of the US, then he falls under socipolitical factors.
Remember you said that:
He told me he had no doubts and was a firm, devout believer (i.e., no wavering doubts) upon his arrival in the US, but abandoned his belief living and studying in the US.
So he had absolutely no doubts or even the slightest of troubles with his faith upon arrival in the US. If he never had doubts it means he must have experienced a strong spiritual connection with God. If he did not, then he would most likely have questioned his faith especially in his teenage years and not have had the certainty you ascribe to him. And yet, with this absolute certainty he absolutely and totally rejects his faith after studying a few years in the US. What incredible and revolutionary scientific discovery could lead to that? His reasons I have been presented with so far could hardly form a coherent objection to the faith let alone the basis for such total rejection.
Peace.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
The reason I asked was because you were attempting to use Salim as evidence that educated people have left the religion because they found it deficient. In the event of such a claim it is necessary to examine these details to determine what exactly this alleged 'deficiency' was, and how that reflects on the apostate's claim of 'education' in the religion.
We're bouncing back and forth between the two actually. What I have said and continue to maintain is that the only causes of apostasy in the Muslim community have ever been utter ignorance or sociopolitical factors - there has never been an educated faithful believer who turns around and rejects the faith. Now unfortunately, you can't have the cake and eat it too. If you claim that Salim left Islam for these doubts that we [muslims] commonly find as misconceptions of ignorant non-muslims, it means he wasn't properly educated about the religion regardless of anything else. And if he is said to not hold such misconceptions and erroneous views on Islam but simply abandoned the faith upon arrival in the different society of the US, then he falls under socipolitical factors.
Remember you said that:
He told me he had no doubts and was a firm, devout believer (i.e., no wavering doubts) upon his arrival in the US, but abandoned his belief living and studying in the US.
So he had absolutely no doubts or even the slightest of troubles with his faith upon arrival in the US. If he never had doubts it means he must have experienced a strong spiritual connection with God. If he did not, then he would most likely have questioned his faith especially in his teenage years and not have had the certainty you ascribe to him. And yet, with this absolute certainty he absolutely and totally rejects his faith after studying a few years in the US. What incredible and revolutionary scientific discovery could lead to that? His reasons I have been presented with so far could hardly form a coherent objection to the faith let alone the basis for such total rejection.
Peace.
Dear Ansar,
I cannot directly know the deepest heart and soul of another - so I do not directly know if Salim possessed true eeman in his heart. But I do know for sure that he finds flaw is the Islamic position on the theory of evolution as set out by the Research Committee of IslamToday.net , which you quoted. Salim definitely holds that all primates, chimps and humans included, evolved from a common ancestor; and that if all humans do descend from Adam and Eve, then Adam and Eve were not created independently from the other primates. And since Salim finds the Qur'an flawed in this and other claims, he cannot accept the Qur'an as the inerrant word of Allah. I know you disagree and can present arguments to counter his view on evolution, but that is not point here. The point is that it is very clear that Salim left Islam because rightly or wrongly he felt fundamental Islamic doctrine to be flawed. Assuming this is true, I think you and I can both agree that it is impossible for Salim to ever have possessed true eeman in his heart - no matter what Salim himself thinks about that. Are we in agreement on this point?
But I do know for sure that he finds flaw is the Islamic position on the theory of evolution as set out by the Research Committee of IslamToday.net , which you quoted. Salim definitely holds that all primates, chimps and humans included, evolved from a common ancestor; and that if all humans do descend from Adam and Eve, then Adam and Eve were not created independently from the other primates.
No doubt his view would conflict with the Qur'an and Ahadith, but Salims needs to be able to distinguish between what scientific evidence has determined, and the extrapolations and interpretations we draw from that, and I have mentioned some excellent examples in my previous post concerning the scientific method.
Assuming this is true, I think you and I can both agree that it is impossible for Salim to ever have possessed true eeman in his heart - no matter what Salim himself thinks about that.
Yes, Salim's objections to the religion are at odds with his claim to have formerly been faitfully devoted to it and free of any struggles with his faith.
Peace.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
Fine. So if someone believes or claims that Mohammed (pbuh) is not a true prophet of Allah, though he or she is mistaken, they are nevertheless *claiming* to find a flaw in Islam - right? If a Muslim becomes an atheist and leaves Islam because they *think* that many or most of the claims in the Qur'an are untrue or mistaken, then, misguidely or not, they are leaving Islam because because they *believe* or personally find it is flawed - right?
Respectfullly,
Sharvy
Well bro. Their reason wouldn't have any backing up cos the Qur'an doesn't contradict itself whilst Jesus being God does.
If they have found a flaw in Islam they were probably never really muslims to begin with cos Islam has no flaws-though you won't agree-and that would make them hypocrites. And if they never understood the religion properly and were weak in their faith to begin with well then that is their responsibility.
No doubt his view would conflict with the Qur'an and Ahadith, but Salim needs to be able to distinguish between what scientific evidence has determined, and the extrapolations and interpretations we draw from that, and I have mentioned some excellent examples in my previous post concerning the scientific method.
"Assuming this is true, I think you and I can both agree that it is impossible for Salim to ever have possessed true eeman in his heart - no matter what Salim himself thinks about that." Sharvy
Yes, Salim's objections to the religion are at odds with his claim to have formerly been faithfully devoted to it and free of any struggles with his faith.
Peace.
Dear Salim,
For the sake of discussion, I want to define a phrase in a special sense. For the sake of argument, let's say "steadfast faith" means "believing a claim with an unshakeable tenacity – and never giving it up, regardless of whatever evidence is presented against it." Now I know very well that "eeman" is not the same thing as "steadfast faith" in my sense, and it's important to understand that I do not intend the two to mean the same thing. For example, it is unfortunate that many Americans apparently have a "steadfast faith" that George Bush is a competent President, despite overwhelming and obvious evidence to the contrary. And, many parents continue to have steadfast faith in the basic goodness of their children regardless of whatever wicked deeds they commit. Steadfast faith can also be a good thing: there are cases where innocent people are framed to appear to be guilty of a great crime, but the steadfast faith of a loved one sustains and ultimately saves them. Sometimes steadfast faith is justified and rational, whereas in other cases it is irrational. So people can have steadfast faith in a true claim for either good reasons or bad reasons. Whether or not it happens in practice, theoretically in my sense, a Muslim can have steadfast faith in Islamic doctrine without possessing genuine eeman. However, it is my understanding that the reverse is not true: having eeman does imply having steadfast faith in Islamic doctrine. It is my understanding that on your view, though rare, it is possible for a Muslim to have several ijazahs, and even be an imam, without possessing genuine eeman. My friend Salim is apparently a case in point. Please correct me if I misunderstand this point.
You often cite Dr. Laurence Brown as an example of a prominent Christian who converted to Islam. Now it is perfectly clear that on my definition Dr. Brown did not have steadfast faith in Christianity. Other Christians have exhibited such faith in Christianity despite intense exposure to other religions such as Judaism or Islam. But here is the question: On your view was Dr. Brown a truly "knowledgeable" Christian before he converted? And if so, what is your basis for being so sure of this claim?
It is my understanding that on your view, though rare, it is possible for a Muslim to have several ijazahs, and even be an imam, without possessing genuine eeman. My friend Salim is apparently a case in point. Please correct me if I misunderstand this point.
You said that your friend had a religious degree from Al-Azhar. I know many people with religious degrees from Islamic institutes but that in no way would make them an Islamic scholars, in fact many orientalists have university degrees on Islamic studies. And I don't recall you mentioning that your friend was an imam - do you mean that he was the imam of a mosque in egypt? As for possessing genuine eeman, I have tried to decipher your story but there are too many statements that don't fit together. You said he had no wavering doubts or any struggles with his religion upon arrival in the US but then you mentioned that he suddenly abandoned it and apparently for no good reason. And then there is the statement that he 'personally could not continue to believe in the supernatural' and that he 'gradually became disillusioned by organized religion' in contrast to the idea that he specifically found flaws in islam after becoming educated in the west. So I can't say whether your friend had eeman or 'steadfast faith', I can't say how much he knew about Islam, I can say hardly anything about him since I still have not gotten anything besides of muddled and inconsistent picture.
You often cite Dr. Laurence Brown as an example of a prominent Christian who converted to Islam.
No I did not. I said only two things about him
Dr. Brown was an atheist who converted to Christianity and finally to Islam.
Coming to the specific mention of the eye, I think it is worth noting the example of Dr. Laurence Brown MD, an american ophthalmologist, who converted from atheism to Islam. Did he willingly embrace illogical beliefs about a field he had spent his life studying?
I would agree that Dr. Brown was never fully convinced of Christianity though he studied it in detail, as is evident from his book, The First and Final Commandment.
As for examples of Christian priests and scholars who have converted to Islam you can read here: http://thetruereligion.org/modules/x...php?category=1
And there are many others not mentioned there such as Yusuf Estes.
So I still maintain what I have continuously said - in the entire history of Islam, in stark contrast from the history of other religions, those who have left the religion have done so either for sociopolitical reasons, or due to their own ignorance. As for your friend Salim, so far I can only see that he is claimed to have possesed a religious degree (though his education in Islam is severely called into question by the type of objections raised) and that he was allegedly perfectly happy with Islam but suddenly abandoned his faith for some unknown reason upon arrival in the states. Since it is impossible for me to find out the extent of Salim's knowledge or his reasons for abandoning the faith (I cannot read his writings or contact him directly), then the discussion on Salim is essentially pointless.
Regards
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks