I've just watched an interesting documentary broadcast by the BBC about Muslims (resident in the UK) converting to Christianity (did any body else happen to see it?). Some of the converts have been subject to violent attacks by other Muslims who disapprove with the conversion. I wonder what people thought about this given that many widely available Islamic texts actively encourage violent acts to those who apostatise.
People make a religion, so people can also change it. Where is a will, there is also a way !
This assumes something to be true about Islam and Christianity (and Judaism, too, for that matter) that no one who practices them would accept as true. Namely it assumes that they are creations of humans, rather than responses to God who has made himself known to us. Unless our concept of who God is were to change, none of us can meld with the other. And if our concept of God were to change, then the religion itself would cease to exist in becoming something different. From a secular humanist perspective that sees religion as nothing more than a social construct this might make some sense. But for those of us who still actually believe there is indeed a real God, and that his presence demands our worship of him in ways appropriate to who he is, a purely social construct religion would be a false religion.
People can grow in their knowledge of God, and they can change in what they think with regard to God, but the essence of God does not change because of that. You suggest a syncretic religion. More likely would be for us all to come to a better and fuller understanding of God, which if we all did would result in us having similar understandings of God. Then the only remaining question would not be about who is God, but how does he wish for us to worship. That I am sure could be worked out over time. (Though Catholics, Orthodox, Coptic, and Protestant Christians haven't seemed to pulled that off yet, and they are all of the same faith.) But the idea of changing our concept of God to please another human being, that is anathema to all religions.
But in reality, the faith they are leaving is NOT the faith they were raised in but one they created in their own mind that was a parallel to the one they were raised in.
sorry you have completely lost me there. the person certainly must have 'left the faith they were raised in' even if they then moved on to another Christian sect with different interpretations of scripture and so on (or their own personal interpretation) before accepting Islam as the truth. or are you saying that they had an incomplete understanding of 'the faith they were raised in' and were therefore never really a member/follower of that faith?
I have seen some Muslims converting to Christianity or simply leaving the religion.I don't care as long as they don't stop us from practising our religion or acting against our interests.
sorry you have completely lost me there. the person certainly must have 'left the faith they were raised in' even if they then moved on to another Christian sect with different interpretations of scripture and so on (or their own personal interpretation) before accepting Islam as the truth. or are you saying that they had an incomplete understanding of 'the faith they were raised in' and were therefore never really a member/follower of that faith?
Apostacy punishable by death ONLY under an Islamic state (when meeting with certain conditions), since it is treason to the state. Islam isn't just a religion. I understand you see it reduced to a religion no different than the others, but it is also state law. And Just like treason in the united states is punishable by death as it is state law, treason against Islam is punishable by death when it is state law.
This is the very distilled explanation. and I'll reference to threads written by Br. Ansar on the matter for a more comprehensive look!
cheers!
If you think saying Mohammad is not a prophet is aiding an enemy, then I suggest that someone driving a high polluting car is guilty of murder.
And as far as “State laws”, don’t forget the “Blood Laws” of Germany.
Just because it is a law doesn’t make it just.
I've just watched an interesting documentary broadcast by the BBC about Muslims (resident in the UK) converting to Christianity (did any body else happen to see it?). Some of the converts have been subject to violent attacks by other Muslims who disapprove with the conversion. I wonder what people thought about this given that many widely available Islamic texts actively encourage violent acts to those who apostatise.
we don't owe a right to those who are not muslims.
we don't owe a right to those who are not muslims.
Can I infer from your statement that you feel you do own a right to those who are Muslim? Would that go so far as giving you a right to punish Muslims who decide to leave the faith?
If you think saying Mohammad is not a prophet is aiding an enemy, then I suggest that someone driving a high polluting car is guilty of murder.
I am sorry, I am lost as to what that means?
And as far as “State laws”, don’t forget the “Blood Laws” of Germany.
Just because it is a law doesn’t make it just.
Islamic laws are made to be just, I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law. Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day. it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists. Islam protects the rights of all its citizens, as is decreed by God, even the refractory ungrateful type. You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history.
I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust.
Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration?
cheers!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Can I infer from your statement that you feel you do own a right to those who are Muslim? Would that go so far as giving you a right to punish Muslims who decide to leave the faith?
Are you implying that this person is spoksman for Islam?
I am sorry, I am lost as to what that means? I thought it was obvious. I guess not. I think it falls under the catagory of "If you don't get it, it ain't worth explaining.
Islamic laws are made to be just, Most laws in most countries are made to be just. That doesn't mean all are.
I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law. Just an example of unjust laws.
Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day. I would be interested to know how many non-Muslims think that is true. I surly have never heard anyone say anything like that.
it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists.
I know, I remember, but how this relate to killing an Apostate?
Islam protects the rights of all its citizens, True, too bad many those rights are definded by religion and gender.
as is decreed by God, Based on your religious beliefs, not mine.
even the refractory ungrateful type. I'm sure there were many.
You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history. And your thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history. So it depends if you read "History as written by the victors" or "History as written by the defeted".
I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust. Lewed acts in public Etc. equates to saying Allah isn't god how?
Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration? Yes you would.
Islamic laws are made to be just, I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law. Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day. it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists. Islam protects the rights of all its citizens, as is decreed by God, even the refractory ungrateful type. You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history.
I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust.
Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration?
cheers!
PurestAmbrosia, aside from the realities that different people may have different views with regard to what is and what is not just -- such as some might think that the limitations on freedom of speech that prohibit protesting at a funeral are unjust and others might think that subjecting a grieving family to the types of protests done by the Westboro Baptist Church are more unjust (read story here) -- aside from differing views of what exactly is just, which, in an Islamic state, you would let Allah decide, are you suggesting that Muslims and non-Muslims living in an Islamic state would all have equal protection under the law? Would that go so far as to permit that in an Islamic state a person could not only freely choose to convert from some other religion TO Islam, but also that a person would be just as free to convert FROM Isalm to some other religion different than Islam?
we don't owe a right to those who are not muslims.
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Can I infer from your statement that you feel you do own a right to those who are Muslim? Would that go so far as giving you a right to punish Muslims who decide to leave the faith?
No. I view him only as a spokesperson for himself. But he does identify himself as a Muslim, and I do wonder to what degree his view is held by other Muslims?
I also wonder to what degree if his view is held by many that it might produce actions which would put a face on Islam to the non-Muslim world? And if they did not truly represent Islam, would the Muslim world (given its vigorous protest of things such as Dutch cartoons that were seen as insulting to Isalm) also vigorously protest such actions as not being Islamic. And, on the other hand, if they were silent in the face of the actions of others who said and did things in the name of Islam, by their silence they would condone them as being, if not representative of Islam, at least tolerated within Islam.
Last edited by Grace Seeker; 10-31-2007 at 08:03 PM.
I am sorry, I am lost as to what that means?
I thought it was obvious. I guess not. I think it falls under the catagory of "If you don't get it, it ain't worth explaining.
What is the point of this exchange then?
Islamic laws are made to be just,
Most laws in most countries are made to be just. That doesn't mean all are.
There is always a law that is bound to bug you, that actually goes for all people in all soceities including the 'free world'-- I find that criminals benefit most from secularism.
I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law.
Just an example of unjust laws.
And again, I fail to see how it related to Islamic law. We didn't throw loads of people in the incinerator and we shouldn't be the one to pay the price now at the expense of making our own folks refugees in their home! Perhaps a chunk of Germany would be more suitable? after all they are the culprit, not the Muslim world..
Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day.
I would be interested to know how many non-Muslims think that is true. I surly have never heard anyone say anything like that.
I think history holds its record straight!
it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists.
I know, I remember, but how this relate to killing an Apostate?
has nothing to do with apostacy, the same I didn't think Germany had anything to do with apostacy. It has to do with unjst laws of your free world as recent as 50 yrs ago, and as recorded by history. I certainly didn't read of such absurdities happening to women of color under Islamic law!
Islam protects the rights of all its citizens,
True, too bad many those rights are definded by religion and gender.
I can't think of a better definition, although I am not sure what gender has to do with it? I think it is a the sort of statement you can get away with on an non-islamic forum. the women here will just emasculate you!
as is decreed by God,
Based on your religious beliefs, not mine.
Justice is universal, and religion based. No society of atheists sat down and made a consensus on what is appropriate but Abrahamic religions did!
even the refractory ungrateful type.
I'm sure there were many.
As are here in the good old US of A can't please everyone I guess!
You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history.
And your thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history. So it depends if you read "History as written by the victors" or "History as written by the defeted".
History written by historians who have no stake in the matter!
I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust.
Lewed acts in public Etc. equates to saying Allah isn't god how?
What does Allah isn't god have to do with jurisprudence. You want to be a christian, jew or whatever no one is holding you back. You want to be a kaffir also no one is holding you back so long as you keep it to yourself, If you want to make a defiant public declaration of it, either go live some where else where they will foster your espionage or deal with consequences. There is no point in being heroic. Further I find it humorous that the lot of you, always have to bring everything down to apostacy, or paying jizya. Get real please so the rest of us can take this seriousely too!
Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration?
Yes you would.
huh?
cheers!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
PurestAmbrosia, aside from the realities that different people may have different views with regard to what is and what is not just -- such as some might think that the limitations on freedom of speech that prohibit protesting at a funeral are unjust and others might think that subjecting a grieving family to the types of protests done by the Westboro Baptist Church are more unjust (read story here) -- aside from differing views of what exactly is just, which, in an Islamic state, you would let Allah decide, are you suggesting that Muslims and non-Muslims living in an Islamic state would all have equal protection under the law? Would that go so far as to permit that in an Islamic state a person could not only freely choose to convert from some other religion TO Islam, but also that a person would be just as free to convert FROM Isalm to some other religion different than Islam?
sometimes kaffirs had better rights under Islamic state than the Muslims. You should check out what happened with the Jew stole the sword of 3ali ibn abbi talib(RA), or when a woman declared that seeing omar ibn ilkhtab caused her to have a spontanous abortion. Either way.. and with all due respect to your belief and you do know that I have trmendous respect for you. If a person really belived thier God is the man Jesus, they are to practice that silently at home. There are many non-practicing Muslims who get away with it. But to publically be defiant as to cause fitnah deserves the same punishment as the U.S decrees for its private citizens who end up loving Russia more. It is that simple.
I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can give up Islam for anything else. But I believe not all people spend a life time dedicated to studying theology, if they are truly convinced they are better suited for zoroasternism, they can go visit a spot of the world where zoroasterians reign supreme and live amidst men who will at least make them understand their new found faith a bit better. What is the point of being a zoroasterian amongst Muslims? surely if you hate the state and the state law and everything to do with Islam you can either move else where or keep it to yourself don't you think?
it is like the felon who has committed a crime and instead of shutting up about it, wants to declare it to the world. Be happy with your stolen good and go either live amongst your kind or shut up about it!
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
PurestAmbrosia, aside from the realities that different people may have different views with regard to what is and what is not just -- such as some might think that the limitations on freedom of speech that prohibit protesting at a funeral are unjust and others might think that subjecting a grieving family to the types of protests done by the Westboro Baptist Church are more unjust (read story here) -- aside from differing views of what exactly is just, which, in an Islamic state, you would let Allah decide, are you suggesting that Muslims and non-Muslims living in an Islamic state would all have equal protection under the law? Would that go so far as to permit that in an Islamic state a person could not only freely choose to convert from some other religion TO Islam, but also that a person would be just as free to convert FROM Isalm to some other religion different than Islam?
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
sometimes kaffirs had better rights under Islamic state than the Muslims. You should check out what happened with the Jew stole the sword of 3ali ibn abbi talib(RA), or when a woman declared that seeing omar ibn ilkhtab caused her to have a spontanous abortion. Either way.. and with all due respect to your belief and you do know that I have trmendous respect for you. If a person really belived thier God is the man Jesus, they are to practice that silently at home. There are many non-practicing Muslims who get away with it. But to publically be defiant as to cause fitnah deserves the same punishment as the U.S decrees for its private citizens who end up loving Russia more. It is that simple.
I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can give up Islam for anything else. But I believe not all people spend a life time dedicated to studying theology, if they are truly convinced they are better suited for zoroasternism, they can go visit a spot of the world where zoroasterians reign supreme and live amidst men who will at least make them understand their new found faith a bit better. What is the point of being a zoroasterian amongst Muslims? surely if you hate the state and the state law and everything to do with Islam you can either move else where or keep it to yourself don't you think?
it is like the felon who has committed a crime and instead of shutting up about it, wants to declare it to the world. Be happy with your stolen good and go either live amongst your kind or shut up about it!
peace!
So, I take it from your reply, that the answer is "No". That, in fact, freedoms given to Muslim and to non-Muslims in an Islamic state are indeed different. Though, humanly speaking, it does not seem quite so just in mine, perhaps this is still seen as just in Allah's eyes?
So, I take it from your reply, that the answer is "No". That, in fact, freedoms given to Muslim and to non-Muslims in an Islamic state are indeed different. Though, humanly speaking, it does not seem quite so just in mine, perhaps this is still seen as just in Allah's eyes?
Dear Grace Seeker. You'd need to live in an Islamic state to understand it. I doubt very much that any reply will be satisfactory or to any non-muslim's liking on this forum. And I highly doubt as well, that all the news paper articles, all the daily doses of hatred peddled on TV will do anything to subdue or I should say nip in the bud Muslim dreams to establish what they have lost.
What is just, is what is mentioned in the Quran, and fulfilled by the righteous..
[Pickthal 2:177] It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and to set slaves free; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere.
I have nothing to say beyond that. I don't think any constitution established even 300 yrs ago had that in it!
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
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
Array
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks