Apostates of Islam

[Fatihah]

The bolded part was indicated to hypocrites not to apostates. Those who claim they were Muslims but when the Prophet (PBUH) asked them to emigrate they refused and showed their true colors. Like you have said, the Prophet (PBUH) wanted to know who is a true follower and who is a hypocrite. It does not deal with apostasy.



Response: Dear sister, but the verses continue to say that they were ordered to be killed. This goes to show that they were hypocrites but turned apostates. They were ordered to be killed if they reject to follow the prophet and not migrate with him. That rejection makes these hypocrites apostates. That's why the verse begins with Allah asking the muslims why they are divided regarding them because some muslims realized their evil intentions.

Quote: Proud Muslim
Brother Fatiha, i have asked a specific question in regards to your reply to sister .lava. What you have just posted is great and informative but it is not relevant to my question.

Response: Then I am confused. What haven't I addressed?

 

[ayani]

Fatihah ~

thank you. so in your reading of the Quran and the hadith, apostates should be killed exactly because they have rebelled against the Islamic community. and i can see the logic here. the Ummah is seen as its own nation, its own people within the world, united by faith and by a diverse yet in many ways common Islamic culture. leaving Islam means not just leaving a creed or worldview, but an entire people and community.

i was never clear on this, as i followed Quranic Islam, but who would be expected to do the killing of a confirmed and admitted apostate? could any Muslim kill this person if they found them, or would an appointed person have to administer the execution?

 

[.lava]

Fatihah ~

thank you. so in your reading of the Quran and the hadith, apostates should be killed exactly because they have rebelled against the Islamic community. and i can see the logic here. the Ummah is seen as its own nation, its own people within the world, united by faith and by a diverse yet in many ways common Islamic culture. leaving Islam means not just leaving a creed or worldview, but an entire people and community.

i was never clear on this, as i followed Quranic Islam, but who would be expected to do the killing of a confirmed and admitted apostate? could any Muslim kill this person if they found them, or would an appointed person have to administer the execution?

even to talk about killing a human being as if we were talking about breaking eggs, is very disturbing. you have to kill people in wars. society is not a battle field for God's sake. this is just so wrong. i find it very very hard to believe that intellect and conscience of people is able to accept this as command of all-loving, all-forgiving God. this is plain illogical and inhumane. this is not Islam written in Qur'an. Qur'an is alwas right. fact is sad but true!

28:41 And We made them Imams who call to the fire, and on the day of resurrection they shall not be assisted.

who are those Imams, those religious leaders that call to the fire?! those who invite to love others or those who invite to kill others? those who unite people with love or those who divide people with blood and hatred?

.

 

[ayani]

Lava ~

i agree 100% that the Quran is silent on many of these issues. and from a Quranic point of view, i would have found a lot of this tragic and misguided. you are right- there is much the Quran does not command or spell out which much of the Muslim world takes to be the will of Allah.

and doubtless the Quran is a beautiful and thorough text. at the same time, others might argue that any command to kill one's enemies could never come from an all-loving and all-forgiving God, regardless of whether that command came within the context of defensive warfare.

the Bible is indeed bloody and has many battles, especially within the pre-Messianic scriptures (OT). within the context of Biblical history, this can be explained and understood. sometimes God has ordered His people to kill and overthrow. yet in the promise of Messiah there is a new, expected order for peace, forgiveness, and grace. not in opposition to the previous wars, but in fulfilment of what those wars accomplished and revealed.

still, according to Quranic Islam, i see what you are saying. it *is* distressing to see that one's fellow Muslims advocate the killing of apostates. especially in light of the Quran's words on the issue.

 

[Fatihah]

Fatihah ~

thank you. so in your reading of the Quran and the hadith, apostates should be killed exactly because they have rebelled against the Islamic community. and i can see the logic here. the Ummah is seen as its own nation, its own people within the world, united by faith and by a diverse yet in many ways common Islamic culture. leaving Islam means not just leaving a creed or worldview, but an entire people and community.

Response: Not necessarily. They are not killed because of simply rebelling against the islamic community but waging a war against muslims.

Quote: ayani
i was never clear on this, as i followed Quranic Islam, but who would be expected to do the killing of a confirmed and admitted apostate? could any Muslim kill this person if they found them, or would an appointed person have to administer the execution?

Response: I mentioned this a few posts back in the thread but the Head of the Muslim State has the authority. Only they can have the say so on who performs the execution which would usually be officers of the state.

 

[ayani]

Response: Not necessarily. They are not killed because of simply rebelling against the islamic community but waging a war against muslims.

but what constitutes waging war on Muslim? clearly this needn't be a war of guns, bombs, or kidnappings.

could a former Muslim sharing their testimony or explaining how and why they left Islam be understood as waging war against Muslims? one is giving information which could cause a Muslim to doubt Islam or see it from another point of view.

i ask because in many cases, a former Muslim's declaration of leaving Islam and sharing their testimony seems to be taken as a good reason for them to be threatened or killed as enemies of Islam and Muslims.

but what is your take, and what exactly constitutes fighting Muslims, in your view?

 

[Fatihah]

but what constitutes waging war on Muslim? clearly this needn't be a war of guns, bombs, or kidnappings.

Response: Well that would be to do anything that would cause death. Whether it be with a gun or a swords. Any attempt to kill a person is waging war on them.

Quote: ayani
could a former Muslim sharing their testimony or explaining how and why they left Islam be understood as waging war against Muslims? one is giving information which could cause a Muslim to doubt Islam or see it from another point of view.
Response: Not at all. The qur'an is no different than the old testament when it says life for a life, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. (Ch.5:45 of the qur'an). So if someone is trying to take my life, I have a right to take theirs in self-defense if necessary.

Quote: ayani
i ask because in many cases, a former Muslim's declaration of leaving Islam and sharing their testimony seems to be taken as a good reason for them to be threatened or killed as enemies of Islam and Muslims.

but what is your take, and what exactly constitutes fighting Muslims, in your view?

Response: We are ordered to fight those who fight us. Fighting can have many definitions. In an argument, the two people involved are putting up a fight. Martin Luther King would also "fight" for his rights. So the word "fight" or "fighting" depends on it's context.

 

[Alla Prima]

Fatihah ~

thank you. so in your reading of the Quran and the hadith, apostates should be killed exactly because they have rebelled against the Islamic community. and i can see the logic here. the Ummah is seen as its own nation, its own people within the world, united by faith and by a diverse yet in many ways common Islamic culture. leaving Islam means not just leaving a creed or worldview, but an entire people and community.

This really deserves a so what? I mean really - who cares if someone of the community leaves the community? Are you all so insecure you can't handle rejection from a handful (or more) of your 'people'? I think we need to mature a little bit here people.

 

[.lava]

I think we need to mature a little bit here people.

seems like at last you laid your master piece here, wow


.

 

[ayani]

This really deserves a so what? I mean really - who cares if someone of the community leaves the community? Are you all so insecure you can't handle rejection from a handful (or more) of your 'people'? I think we need to mature a little bit here people.

Alla ~

i write this coming from a very welcoming, knit, and dear Muslim community. i did leave them, and if Christian faith were less important to me than their approval, i would still be with them, and a practicing Muslim.

i do care, Alla, because this thread pertains very much to me, and to my possible future safety. i find it interesting and worthwhile to discuss generally, and also because of where i come from.

Fatihah ~

i don't think i've worded myself very clearly.

you mention that a former Muslim may deserve death if they fight Muslims. what i want to know, is whether sharing one's testimony with Muslims and defending one's new faith in light of Muslim beliefs amounts to "fighting Muslims" or "fighting Islam".

in other words, according to Islam, can i or ought i be killed for sharing how and why i became a Christian with interested Muslims, and sharing what i've found in Christian faith that i did not find in the deen? should a former Muslim be executed for speaking out from their current point of view, as opposed to the Islamic view of things?

 

[Alla Prima]

Alla ~

i write this coming from a very welcoming, knit, and dear Muslim community. i did leave them, and if Christian faith were less important to me than their approval, i would still be with them, and a practicing Muslim.

i do care, Alla, because this thread pertains very much to me, and to my possible future safety. i find it interesting and worthwhile to discuss generally, and also because of where i come from.

I care about this thread Ayani because I care about the people who are threatened by Islam for simply leaving Islam and of course people's freedom to do so. What I don't understand is why Muslims are so upset about fellow Muslims leaving Islam.

 

[Alla Prima]

seems like at last you laid your master piece here, wow


.

Truth hurts huh Lava.

 

[Fatihah]

Fatihah ~

i don't think i've worded myself very clearly.

you mention that a former Muslim may deserve death if they fight Muslims. what i want to know, is whether sharing one's testimony with Muslims and defending one's new faith in light of Muslim beliefs amounts to "fighting Muslims" or "fighting Islam".

in other words, according to Islam, can i or ought i be killed for sharing how and why i became a Christian with interested Muslims, and sharing what i've found in Christian faith that i did not find in the deen? should a former Muslim be executed for speaking out from their current point of view, as opposed to the Islamic view of things?

Response: If peace is what you want, peace is what you'll get. No execution is necessary unless you choose war with the muslims in which muslim lives are in jeapordy. Otherwise, peace should be granted to you.

 

[ayani]

Response: If peace is what you want, peace is what you'll get. No execution is necessary unless you choose war with the muslims in which muslim lives are in jeapordy. Otherwise, peace should be granted to you.

then why, Fatihah, are so many converts from Islam to other faiths threatened with death? why to Muslim leaders sometimes call for the execution of apostates, who do nothing to harm Muslims, only change their faith and say so publicly?

it would seem that theory and practice are very, very different.

and that many former Muslims who chose to not only declare but share their new faith face very real threats, violence, and sometimes death on account of widely accepted interpretations of the Quran and hadith.

 

[Fatihah]

then why, Fatihah, are so many converts from Islam to other faiths threatened with death? why to Muslim leaders sometimes call for the execution of apostates, who do nothing to harm Muslims, only change their faith and say so publicly?


it would seem that theory and practice are very, very different.

and that many former Muslims who chose to not only declare but share their new faith face very real threats, violence, and sometimes death on account of widely accepted interpretations of the Quran and hadith.

Response: Well this is probably due to the cruelty that muslims themselves have to face. You see, throughout history, this was the tactic of non-muslims. In order to destroy the muslim community and create havoc in the land, they pretended to be muslims. This made it easier for them to hurt the muslims because they're able to work from the inside out instead of challenging the muslims head on. Then they would denounce the religion (become apostates) and attack. So the attitude since the early days of islam is to kill them before they kill you.

Then we must add the simple fact that the propaganda against islam is extreme. The non-muslims never want to acknowledge their own role in what plays out in the muslim countries and on top of that they add propaganda. All of this has created much hostile attitudes towards non-muslims from muslims. We must also add that the present muslim countries are all countries who were just freed from oppression from non-muslim countries. Under oppression, the knowledge of islam was lost. The sources are there but we have to basically re-educate ourselves as to what the religion is. Think of the African-Americans in America. Most have no idea what their history is because of 400+ years of slavery. So this is why there are muslims with many different interpretations, including those considered scholars.

 

[YmirGF]

Response: Well this is probably due to the cruelty that muslims themselves have to face. You see, throughout history, this was the tactic of non-muslims. In order to destroy the muslim community and create havoc in the land, they pretended to be muslims. This made it easier for them to hurt the muslims because they're able to work from the inside out instead of challenging the muslims head on. Then they would denounce the religion (become apostates) and attack. So the attitude since the early days of islam is to kill them before they kill you.

Forgive my interjection, Fatihah, but doesn't the above explanation sound more than just a bit paranoid? Using this kind of thinking, shouldn't "western" countries be killing citizens who convert to Islam just in case they are plotting against their homeland?

 

[ProudMuslim]

What is so difficult to understand from Fatiha's posts?

He is saying if the apostate choose to leave Islam and stayed peaceful (as in opposite of the likes of Wafaa Sultan) then he/she shall be protected from any harm. If the apostate left Islam and chose to become an enemy by attacking Islam using tangible means that is a different story.

What is so difficult to understand about his stance? "But why would they attack..? why would they wage wars against Muslims and Islam..."? We don't know why, but it happens sometimes. Yes Ayani is an example of a peaceful apostate, someone who was looking for a spiritual comfort and found hers in Christianity, period. Not every apostate is like that. Take Wafaa Sultan who declared Islam is her enemy and that she will fight Islam. Not "radical" Islam (as some try to label it) but Islam as a whole and how it need to be crushed. Yes she only spoke. But i wouldn't be surprised if she took that hostility and translate into into tangible means to fight Islam. There are many othere examples of apostates turning violent and extremely hateful to Muslims. Please spare me the "because of what they have experienced", well they have left Islam, they have "gained" their freedom and two wrongs dont make a right. The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful and rational people and there is no justification to lump the majority with the few violent who by the way exist in every belief system.

 

[YmirGF]

Take Wafaa Sultan who declared Islam is her enemy and that she will fight Islam. Not "radical" Islam (as some try to label it) but Islam as a whole and how it need to be crushed. Yes she only spoke. But i wouldn't be surprised if she took that hostility and translate into into tangible means to fight Islam.

Do you think that Wafaa Sultan should be killed for what she says?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

There is no way I can possibly respond to the people I was originally talking to...way too many posts.

ProudMuslim,

There is nothing difficult for me in understanding Fatiha's argument, or maro's or eselam's arguments. I understand the argument very well; it is precisely because I understand it that I reject it as not reasonable or humane.

I can accept almost everything Fatiha said. I can accept that Muslims have been mistreated, dominated, colonialized by Western powers. I can accept that Muhammad and his followers were persecuted. I can accept that apostates who openly express themselves are likely to draw some people away from Islam.

None of this justifies the final conclusion that it is okay to murder people for expressing their beliefs. It is that conclusion that is at issue, this jump to "therefore, we have the right to murder them".

What is so difficult to understand about his stance? "But why would they attack..? why would they wage wars against Muslims and Islam..."? We don't know why, but it happens sometimes.

Or it is propaganda which serves to justify oppression and restriction of free speech.

Please spare me the "because of what they have experienced", well they have left Islam, they have "gained" their freedom and two wrongs dont make a right.

Fair enough, I absolutely agree, two wrongs don't make a right. But in fairness, tell that to Fatiha. He didn't apply this logic when he said "Well this is probably due to the cruelty that muslims themselves have to face" and spoke of the recent independence of many countries from colonial rule. It's a fair point, but it should be followed in the end by: "But, Muslims (like everyone) have to take responsibility for their own actions, because two wrongs don't make a right". Exactly as you said here.

 

[gnostic]

If the apostate left Islam and chose to become an enemy by attacking Islam using tangible means that is a different story.

What do you mean by "tangible means"?

Carrying guns?

Or do making war on Islam through newsletters or posted on Internet, criticising Islam?