Afghan Man Faces Death for Allegedly Converting to Christianity

  • Thread starter Thread starter knuckles
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 166
  • Views Views 17K
~Mu'MiNaH~ said:
No... i don't like half-baked shari'ah... it is like saying 'Oh Allah, i agree with this point you have made, but i think i know a lil bit more than you on this subject'.
I find it quite insulting... and i hate the government of countries like saudi occupied arabia more than the US government. Grrrrr.... dogs! (and that is being polite).
Click to expand...

Except surely you would agree it is a responsibility on all Muslims to think hard about how to best implement Sharia? I agree with you about rulers who make it up as they go along to suit their convenience. I was told once that it used to be banned to accept money to teach the Quran. But then there were not enough teachers so Abu Bakr allowed it. Isn't that a sensible change that more accurately reflects what Islamic law ought to be about?
 
I understand that the Quran says that only those who are "violent" in their disbelief Allah has a problem with.

3:90 "Those who disbelieve after their belief, and afterward grow violent in disblief: their repentance will not be acepted. And such are those who go astray.

Furthermore, I am really not sure how the charge of "treason" can be applied to this man.
 
The mere fact this man is even on trial has a negative attitude placed at Islam. All the good work moderate muslims do all goes to waste over stupid faith trials such as this, It places Islam under a very bad light indeed.
 
mahdisoldier19 said:
My friend michael Since yoru religion is so peaceful why dont you look at what happen to the christians that converted to judaism during the middle ages? They didnt even get trials.!
Click to expand...

My friend, I do not gloss over the fact that atrocities have been perpetrated by some who call themselves Christians. Certainly terrible things happened during the Crusades and the other times by some who professed Christianity but were more interested in political power than the Gospel of Christ. Sadly, it still happens today.
But those who practice such behavior are distorting the Gospel of Christ, which is about individual salvation and not about state power in this world.
If someone steals your clothes and commits a robbery, is it fair to brand you a robber when you are innocent and had nothing to do with the crime?
I also note that the atrocities you referred to — persecution of Jews by some who called themselves Christians in the Middle Ages — happened many, many years ago. I was not alive then and had absolutely nothing to do with shedding the blood of Jews. My Savior walked the earth as a Jewish carpenter, as a matter of fact.
The trial of this Afghan man is happening today, and his conversion to Christianity seems to be a crime against the state where he lives.
How is it that a religious faith needs the threat of death to keep its followers in the fold? You ignored the central issue I brought up in this debate.
 
HeiGou said:
Except surely you would agree it is a responsibility on all Muslims to think hard about how to best implement Sharia? I agree with you about rulers who make it up as they go along to suit their convenience. I was told once that it used to be banned to accept money to teach the Quran. But then there were not enough teachers so Abu Bakr allowed it. Isn't that a sensible change that more accurately reflects what Islamic law ought to be about?
Click to expand...
Accept the prophet (SAW) said to follow his sunnah and the sunnah of the rightly guided predecssors. Since we do not have as great an understanding as his best friend, I don't think we are in any position to make any innovations.
 
Michael Samuel said:
My friend, I do not gloss over the fact that atrocities have been perpetrated by some who call themselves Christians. Certainly terrible things happened during the Crusades and the other times by some who professed Christianity but were more interested in political power than the Gospel of Christ. Sadly, it still happens today.
But those who practice such behavior are distorting the Gospel of Christ, which is about individual salvation and not about state power in this world.
If someone steals your clothes and commits a robbery, is it fair to brand you a robber when you are innocent and had nothing to do with the crime?
I also note that the atrocities you referred to — persecution of Jews by some who called themselves Christians in the Middle Ages — happened many, many years ago. I was not alive then and had absolutely nothing to do with shedding the blood of Jews. My Savior walked the earth as a Jewish carpenter, as a matter of fact.
The trial of this Afghan man is happening today, and his conversion to Christianity seems to be a crime against the state where he lives.
How is it that a religious faith needs the threat of death to keep its followers in the fold? You ignored the central issue I brought up in this debate.
Click to expand...


To make sure he recieves the punishment in this life rather than face a Terrible extensive hellfire
 
mahdisoldier19 said:
To make sure he recieves the punishment in this life rather than face a Terrible extensive hellfire
Click to expand...
If the threat of death is the only thing that keeps a muslim a muslim, then is he really a muslim?
In other words, if his heart is not in it, and he is being forced, doesn't god know what is in his heart anyway?
 
This question has been bothering the day i reverted back to Islam. What happens to the kafirs who were righteous do they recieve the same punishment of the hellfire of the wrong doers?
 
This is sooooooo Hilarious......

I can't believe this!

If a man chooses that then that's his option...no1 should stop him as Allah says:

"there is no compulsion in religion" (surah Baqarah)

Whcih means, there is no FORCED RULE that someone has to be a muslim!
 
Iqram said:
This is sooooooo Hilarious......

I can't believe this!

If a man chooses that then that's his option...no1 should stop him as Allah says:

"there is no compulsion in religion" (surah Baqarah)

Whcih means, there is no FORCED RULE that someone has to be a muslim!
Click to expand...

Brother, it is only if the person cannot justify why is Islam is false. This is part of shari'ah. And that ayah refers to forcing people to convert.
And Allah knows best.
:w:
 
I suppose so....

As i remembered, by the Shari'ah, it shud b given 3 days for the person to return, but if not then he must be bought and killed.
 
^^If the person cannot justify their claims. He must be debated with first. This is what I have been taught.
:w:
 
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7BB654F1-7D5C-4E7D-B251-28A6E20A461D.htm

Afghan convert's trial put in doubt

Wednesday 22 March 2006 11:30 AM GMT


An Afghan man facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor has said.


Abdul Rahman has been charged with rejecting Islam, a crime under Afghanistan's sharia or Islamic law.

His trial started last week and he confessed to becoming a Christian 16 years ago. If convicted, he could be executed.

But Sarinwal Zamari, a prosecutor, said questions have been raised about his mental fitness.

"We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person," he told The Associated Press.

Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, said Abdul Rahman would undergo a psychological examination.

Medical examination

"Doctors must examine him," he said. "If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped."

It was not immediately clear when he would be examined or when the trial would resume.

Some media reports suggest he may not have a lawyer.

A Western diplomat in Kabul and a human rights advocate - both of whom spoke on condition of anonymity - said the government was desperately searching for a way to drop the case because of the reaction it had caused.

Earlier, Gianfranco Fini, the Italian foreign minister, whose country is one of four Nato members with troops in Afghanistan, told Italian television late on Tuesday he had indications the Islamic punishment for apostasy would not be imposed on Abdul Rahman.

No death sentence

"From what I've been told, and I have no reason to doubt it, the death sentence will not be carried out," said Fini, whose ministry had summoned the Afghan ambassador in Rome on Tuesday to discuss the case. He gave no other details.

The ruling caused a series of protests in Western states more sensitive to the role of religion in international affairs after the Prophet Muhammad caricatures in a Danish newspaper triggered violent protests and demands for an apology in the Muslim world.

The US, which counts Karzai as an ally, has raised the issue with Abdullah Abdullah, the Afghan foreign minister, urging Kabul to uphold the constitutional right of Afghan citizens to choose their faith.

Nicholas Burns, a senior US State Department diplomat, said at a news conference with Abdullah: "We hope that the Afghan constitution is going to be upheld and in our view, if it's upheld, then of course he'll be found to be innocent."

International concern

Abdullah said the US embassy in Kabul had received "hundreds of messages" from Americans and added: "I know that it is a very sensitive issue. I hope that through our constitutional process, there will be a satisfactory result."

Italy, Germany and Canada all expressed their concern. Germany's top Catholic prelate, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, said Christians should enjoy the same religious freedom in Islamic countries as Muslims did in the West.

The case is believed to be the first of its kind in Afghanistan and highlights a struggle between religious conservatives and reformists over what role Islam should have there four years after the removal of the Taliban.
Click to expand...
 
Iqram "This is sooooooo Hilarious......". I don't suppose it is "hilarious to the fellow in question even a little bit. I bet if it was you it would be even a little bit funny to you.

If a person is only exposed to one faith in life and all other choices are squelched, then that person CAN NOT make an informed decision.

If you CAN'T make an informed decision because you don't have access to all the available information then you can not be held accountable.

I bet you that if it was the Sun Moonie folks deciding to kill your son because the only teachings he recieved was at the air-port and he accepted it and later rejected it, you would be shouting for someone to do something.

A basic truth.............................................. If you don't allow an informed decision................... the any decision is compulsury.

Deny it..... but you can't disprove it.

Thanks
Nimrod
 
All i can say is Atleast the Muslims are giving him a trial Unlike the christians in the middle ages. And yes i will bring up the past why? because muslims will allways remember why we are persecuted and hated because of the truth. God did not father no son He is Unique the omnipotent most merciful
 
mahdisoldier19 said:
All i can say is Atleast the Muslims are giving him a trial Unlike the christians in the middle ages. And yes i will bring up the past why? because muslims will allways remember why we are persecuted and hated because of the truth. God did not father no son He is Unique the omnipotent most merciful
Click to expand...

Salaam

Well said
 
All i can say is Atleast the Muslims are giving him a trial Unlike the christians in the middle ages. And yes i will bring up the past why?
Click to expand...

Because... let's see here... muslims have no one to blame but themselves these days. By deferring to past injustices you hope to build your sense of victimhood, thus bolstering your justification for "struggling against the oppression of my people". Great stategy!

God did not father no son He is Unique the omnipotent most merciful
Click to expand...
A vast majority of the world would, and always will, disagree with you. And always will. Full Stop.
 
Knut Hamsun said:
Because muslims have no one to blame but themselves these days. By deferring to past injustices you hope to build your sense of victimhood, thus bolstering your justification for "struggling against the oppression of my people". Great startegy!




A vast majority of the world would, and will, disagree with you. And always will. Full Stop.
Click to expand...

Salaam

They wont on the day of judgment
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top