Proselytizing in an Islamic state

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Re: Afghan convert 'may be released'

Hello Cloehadi

From what I've read in response to this question, I gather the following:
1. It's ok to explain a religion other than Islam (in non-islamic countries).

2. If a muslim likes the "explanation" of the other religion, they are not allowed to adopt that religion

Is this correct?

we're bouncing back and forth between two different issues. Initially blunderbus asked about the question of apostasy which you have just asked now and I answered it for him. Then he asked about proeslytizing so I made this seperate thread and answered it here for him. Now you're going back to apostasy, so I'm going to refer you to my previous answer:
http://www.islamicboard.com/20595-post1.html
To see blunderbus's question and my answer, please scroll to the end of that post. After you've read that, if you have further questions please let me know.

Hello mirage,
In response to my list of arguments you wrote:

Disallowing someone to preach against Islam or convert to another religion is not a "reasonable limit" it does not harm society as a whole.

Considering the fact that you are unable to distinguish between freedom of conscience and freedom of expression, as I demonstrated in this post, I think we will take your views on 'reasonable limits' with a grain of salt!

Yes, limiting others from attacking Islam is a reasonable limit. If they feel their arguments against Islam are strong and convincing then they can express them in the format of a respectful debate.

Making people watch a stoning harms society

For someone who is supposed to have known about Islam, you display even more myths concerning Shari'ah law than I find in non-muslims who's only understanding comes through TV!

Do yourself a favour and learn about the hudud and ta'azir on unlawful relations.

your average Ahmed, Ali or Yusuf accepting a new god harms no one

If it's their personal choice, you're right it harms no one but themselves, so since the Islamic state's function is the protection of society, it takes no action against such people.

Those aren't reasonable limits based on sound reasons

Sound reasons? Like how you responded to my absolute refutation of your 'silver bullet'? You couldn't even touch my answer so you resorted to immature attacks on Muslims:
http://www.islamicboard.com/271758-post27.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/271772-post31.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/271800-post42.html

 

[sardab]

Islamic social structure is like a clock, every piece is crucial. When a single part malfunctions, the whole process is at risk.

Muslim family maintains close ties, unlike the western family. Muslim parents has the task of teaching their children their religion. If one someone changes religion, his/her relations poses a threat to the health of the society. A Muslims childe cannot be trusted to non-Muslim parents.

So basicly if someone converts to other religions, Islam cannot allow him maintain his relations, since he might carry others to the same mistake, especially weaker ones, like children. So if he does not hide his religion or leave the society by his will, he should be forced to come back to Islam or be removed from the society.

A comparision between Muslim countries and Western countries is wrong, since their society and culture depends on sperate values. But it might be hard for westerners to understand this. They are in a Catch 22 position. If they do not allow Muslims in their countries, then they would be rejecting the foundations of their liberal culture, and will invite serious internal inconsistencies and problems. But there's no reciprocity either, which is clearly hard to accept. But this is the case.

 

[Nicola]

Or moving into areas where there are impoverished and ill Muslims, and attempting to win easy converts there, not through fair discussion but through some of the tactics posted by br. Abrar

a few points to this statement ...why aren't Muslims helping these poor people. Instead of leaving it to Christian missionaires.
Also it doesn't really matter if they try and win converts this way, because if they aren't born-again... then they aren't really Christian...saying your a Christian is totaly different than really being one.

And lastly at least they are being fed and clothed, which is a major concern for them and their children I should think.

No matter how you look at it...both the two main religions in this world contradict each other...both say the other will go to hell. Both are insulting to the other..though in Christianty we don't force someone to stay by threats of death etc. What is the point if their heart isn't in it. Thats what Christianity is all about freewill and freedom.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Nicola,

a few points to this statement ...why aren't Muslims helping these poor people

Some Muslims are some Muslims aren't. You can't make sweeping generalizations like that. Those that aren't helping are committing sins.

Instead of leaving it to Christian missionaires.

We would like to believe that others would help the impoverished becuase they are fellow human beings without the vested interest in trying to change their religion.

Also it doesn't really matter if they try and win converts this way

Maybe not to Christians! Would it be acceptable to you if you had a young child and other people were trying to change his/her religion while they had not yet learned their faith properly. It is one thing for a missionary to debate religion with a Muslim da'ee, it is another for a missionary to do so with an uneducated child.

And lastly at least they are being fed and clothed, which is a major concern for them and their children I should think.

Why should one's food and clothing be at the expense of their religion?

The issue of apostasy has been discussed in the other thread.

Regards

 

[nimrod]

pros•e•ly•tize
v. pros•e•ly•tized, pros•e•ly•tiz•ing, pros•e•ly•tiz•es
v. intr.
1. To induce someone to convert to one's own religious faith.
2. To induce someone to join one's own political party or to espouse one's doctrine.

v. tr.
To convert (a person) from one belief, doctrine, cause, or faith to another.


Ansar Al-‘Adl, some of your replies have left me very confused:
“Non-muslims are free to set up their own religious institutions and websites where they explain their religions and seek to clarify them”.

Jesus taught that anyone who doesn’t accept him as Lord will be cast out where there is wailing and gnashing of the teeth. He also taught that the other name for that place is Hell.

Mirage used the example of what the bible teaches “the Christ was the lord, the only way and you must convert and accept Christ to be saved or damned in hellfire” as an example teaching what Jesus taught.

Your reply “Like I said before, they are perfectly free to expound their beliefs but attacking others as being damned in hellfire for following Islam is absolutely not allowed”.

I am completely confused.

I am also confused as to whether or not the topic in the thread title was ever answered:

Proselytizing in an Islamic state

“How do Muslims reconcile the fact that they do not allow non-Islamic religious recruiting in their countries”

I don’t understand how a person can be free to explain their beliefs when they are restricted from stating one its most fundamental tenets. For Christians the belief that Jesus was the Son of God on Earth and that rejecting him as such results in being condemned to Hell is as fundamental as it gets.

Thanks
Nimrod

 

[nimrod]

I am also confused about how there is no compulsion in religion yet one faith would be free to explain how a person who rejects it is condemed by God, yet other faiths are not free to make the same claim as freely and as publicly as the first.

Probably a different topic though.

Thanks
Nimrod

 

[nimrod]

I am also confused as to whether explaining to a Jewish person that if he doesn't accept Christianty, he is condemed as well, is viewed the same by Islamic teachings.

Thanks
Nimrod

 

[nimrod]

Is this not the same sort of Islamic teaching "shirk in one's worship of Allah. Allah the Most High has said, "Verily Allah does not forgive that partners be ascribed to Him, while He forgives what is less than that for whomever he wants." And He, the Most High, has said, "Verily whoever ascribes a partner to Allah, then Allah has made Paradise haraam(impermissible) for him(i.e. He will never enter it), and his abode is the Fire."?

Thanks
Nimrod

 

[NJUSA]

Perhaps Muslims should work to have religious freedom respected everywhere- it benefits Muslims, b/c they can be Muslims the world over, and if Muslims decide to exercise their freedom by leaving the faith, that is their choice, and may God guide us all.

 

[sardab]

Perhaps Muslims should work to have religious freedom respected everywhere- it benefits Muslims, b/c they can be Muslims the world over, and if Muslims decide to exercise their freedom by leaving the faith, that is their choice, and may God guide us all.

Hi.. There is religious freedom in Islam. But proselytizing is a different issue. Centuries before social contract of Rousseau, Prophet of Islam declared all Muslims brethren and united them under one ummah. That is in a way social contract. One cannot just say "I'm not Muslim and no more binded by this contract," given the extend of his relationships. He is no more a single point in society, he is a working part of the Islamic society. He cannot be allowed to continue his role. So he'd better choose a voluntary exile.

 

[sardab]

I'm talking more about apostasy, but we cannot understand why proselytizing is not allowed withour understanding how Islam deals with apostasy first.

 

[HeiGou]

Perhaps Muslims should work to have religious freedom respected everywhere- it benefits Muslims, b/c they can be Muslims the world over, and if Muslims decide to exercise their freedom by leaving the faith, that is their choice, and may God guide us all.

Perhaps, and I am actually serious if I think about it, non-Muslims ought to work to have religious freedom restricted everywhere. Let's execute anyone who leaves any religion except for the official religion of the country. Or at least let's execute anyone who converts to Islam outside the Islamic world.

That would not achive much but it would be equality.

 

[Nicola]

Perhaps, and I am actually serious if I think about it, non-Muslims ought to work to have religious freedom restricted everywhere. Let's execute anyone who leaves any religion except for the official religion of the country. Or at least let's execute anyone who converts to Islam outside the Islamic world.

That would not achive much but it would be equality.

I believe it is going to come to that, but it won't be the governments doing..but done by non-religious people taking things into their own hands in their own countries.
I know this happens in Muslim countries already with or without the governments laws, but I think it will begin to happen in western countries.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hey Nimrod,
It's a little bit easier for me if you use one post instead of four next time, but no matter.

Jesus taught that anyone who doesn’t accept him as Lord will be cast out where there is wailing and gnashing of the teeth. He also taught that the other name for that place is Hell.

Mirage used the example of what the bible teaches “the Christ was the lord, the only way and you must convert and accept Christ to be saved or damned in hellfire” as an example teaching what Jesus taught.

Saying that Christians believe that non-christians and muslims will go to hell-fire is very different from saying to a specific Muslim, convert to Christianity or you will burn in hell.

I don’t understand how a person can be free to explain their beliefs when they are restricted from stating one its most fundamental tenets. For Christians the belief that Jesus was the Son of God on Earth and that rejecting him as such results in being condemned to Hell is as fundamental as it gets.

They can certainly expound such fundamentals but the issue is when they are directly calling for Muslims to abandon their religion.

I think this answers your other points too. As for whether this applies to other religions too, I think this is subject to opinion.

Some members are brining up the issue of apostasy again, which is being discussed in this thread:
http://www.islamicboard.com/refutations/4738-islam-apostasy.html

We can continue that discussion there.

Regards

 

[NJUSA]

Perhaps, and I am actually serious if I think about it, non-Muslims ought to work to have religious freedom restricted everywhere. Let's execute anyone who leaves any religion except for the official religion of the country. Or at least let's execute anyone who converts to Islam outside the Islamic world.

That would not achive much but it would be equality.

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind- Gandhi.

 

[nimrod]

HeiGou “I am actually serious if I think about it”. Surely you don’t mean that.

Thanks
Nimrod

 

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-‘Adl “Saying that Christians believe that non-Christians and Muslims will go to hell-fire is very different from saying to a specific Muslim, convert to Christianity or you will burn in hell”.

I would assume that if I said publicly in an Islamic country (Assuming one did currently exist for the example):

Christians believe that anyone who rejects Jesus as Lord will burn in Hell.
The likely reply would first be “well you are wrong, let me explain why”.

The exchange would most likely go back and forth till the question was posed.

Well what about me, are you saying that if I do not convert to Christianity, I will burn in Hell?

If I answer “Yes you will”, then that would not be allowed?

A second question, if you don’t mind:

Are outdoor public rallies (Or revivals) allowed?


Thanks
Nimrod

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi Nimrod,
Thanks for your post

I would assume that if I said publicly in an Islamic country (Assuming one did currently exist for the example):

Christians believe that anyone who rejects Jesus as Lord will burn in Hell.
The likely reply would first be “well you are wrong, let me explain why”.

The exchange would most likely go back and forth till the question was posed.

Well what about me, are you saying that if I do not convert to Christianity, I will burn in Hell?

If I answer “Yes you will”, then that would not be allowed?

Context is very important. Since this comment takes place within the context of a dialogue, this is only explaining religious beliefs. Dialogues and debates with non-muslims were something the Muslim scholars used to engage in, throughout Islamic history.

A second question, if you don’t mind:

Are outdoor public rallies (Or revivals) allowed?

For the most part, yes. But in every country, muslim or non-muslim, you will find that such activites will depend on a variety of things and it can sometimes be subjective. Sometimes rally leaders will unintentionally end up going too far in their comments against other societal groups or the government, for example. Sometimes a rally is really more of a riot. It is always looked at by exmaining harm caused to society.

I've moved and answered your other question in the apostasy thread.

Regards