Death for Apostacy in Islam discussion

[Clara Tea]

Killing for apostacy is against Quran. | Religious Forums

The few who do think that killing for apostacy is just should not be considered the norm. We must treat everyone with respect until we know that their intentions are foul (if they ever are).

 

[Clara Tea]

How can one have freedom of religion if one is to be executed if one wants to leave Islam?

Freedom to choose, but not freedom to change one's mind.

 

[Birdnest]

President George W. Bush was confronted by the stubborness of he United Nations. He thought that since the US was paying the majority of the money to run the UN, they should side with the US. But that was not the case. There are many nations in the Middle East, and they banded together in unison to craft their own idea of how the UN should proceed. They convinced many other nations that Israel must go.

President W. Bush figured that he didn't need the UN, and could proceed with the agenda of the United States. Later, after calling the UN redundant, he tried desperately to get the UN to bail him out of the war in Iraq. He even tried to install Mohammad Al Sodr as a leader of Iraq (remember, Sodr City was named after him because he was considered a terrorist). So, obviously the solution is not to put a terrorist in charge of a nation. We have enough trouble with terrorism without doing that.

The problem is that the US entered the war in Iraq (part 2 of the war) without an exit strategy. That is why the US stayed so long and only ended up riling the citizens and surrounding nations. President Biden has finally ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (leaving much ammunition and military equipment in place, which could be repurposed to attack the US once again). In this part of the world, they carry grudges for a long time. They still have grudges against Alexander the Great who conquered them many hundreds of years ago.

After years of fighting 3rd world nations like Iraq, the US military is not fit for a nuclear war. We have mach 4 missiles, and we know that China has mach 10. Russia and China seem to side with each other, and we certainly can't take on either one, let alone both together. We therefore can't even contemplate forcing our will upon their nations (how can we stop the invasion of the Ukraine)?

Last I heard, the Ukraine took a vote and wanted to rejoin the Russians. Ukrainian leaders, on the other hand, are reticent and unwilling to turn over their power to another nation. Should the US intervene?

Should the US intervene in the Chinese aquisition of Hong Kong and Taiwan (remember there is a One China pact with Taiwan and both were scheduled to be turned back over to China in about two decades)?

Please give me an example of the UN corrupting Islamics.

Sure: Free to Run | Empowerment Through Sport

 

[MyM]

In Islam, there are rules that are set in by the government. They don't just go in and say "Off with your head!" They consult with them, they give them time to discuss, to repent, to console...This is how it is done. Then if they are not abiding, the penalty is there. Rarely it is done these days but the ruling of Allah still stands.



They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (i.e. 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, "Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the Way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah(trials, troubles, tribulations...) is worse than killing. And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever. 2:217

 

[MyM]

I will take it as an "Yes there is not Freedom of Religion in Islam as far as you understand".

Freedom of Religion entails that one is free to both join or leave a religion by one's own free will without there being any legal, economic of social sanction being put on to the individual by that religion or that society or country that follows this religion.

This also means Islam is against the fundamental human rights as declared by the UN Human Rights Charter.

OHCHR | International standards on freedom of religion or belief

"
UDHR
"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief.
The Committee observes that the freedom to 'have or to adopt' a religion or belief necessarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one's current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views, as well as the right to retain one's religion or belief."
"No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice."

"Article 18.2 bars coercion that would impair the right to have or adopt a religion or belief, including the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers to adhere to their religious beliefs and congregations, to recant their religion or belief or to convert. "


Will you agree that the provisions in the Universal Human Rights Charters on religious freedom where it says no penal or other punishments can be imposed on any person for adopting or leaving any religion including Islam goes against the dictates set forth by Allah in Islam?

This is all political and I am not political. I am not one to judge what goes on with that. I cannot tell you the do's and don'ts.

But in Islam, you are NOT coerced into it accepting it. You have the right to choose it.

 

[sayak83]

This is all political and I am not political. I am not one to judge what goes on with that. I cannot tell you the do's and don'ts.

But in Islam, you are NOT coerced into it accepting it. You have the right to choose it.

But you are coerced into staying with it even if you lose your belief because you can be executed (or punished in other ways).
That is exact opposite of freedom. If you are indeed free in Islam, you could as easily deconvert as you can convert without any punishments whatsoever.
Muslims should have the right to leave the faith without any fear of retribution. Only then is Islam is a free religion.

 

[MyM]

President George W. Bush was confronted by the stubborness of he United Nations. He thought that since the US was paying the majority of the money to run the UN, they should side with the US. But that was not the case. There are many nations in the Middle East, and they banded together in unison to craft their own idea of how the UN should proceed. They convinced many other nations that Israel must go.

President W. Bush figured that he didn't need the UN, and could proceed with the agenda of the United States. Later, after calling the UN redundant, he tried desperately to get the UN to bail him out of the war in Iraq. He even tried to install Mohammad Al Sodr as a leader of Iraq (remember, Sodr City was named after him because he was considered a terrorist). So, obviously the solution is not to put a terrorist in charge of a nation. We have enough trouble with terrorism without doing that.

The problem is that the US entered the war in Iraq (part 2 of the war) without an exit strategy. That is why the US stayed so long and only ended up riling the citizens and surrounding nations. President Biden has finally ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (leaving much ammunition and military equipment in place, which could be repurposed to attack the US once again). In this part of the world, they carry grudges for a long time. They still have grudges against Alexander the Great who conquered them many hundreds of years ago.

After years of fighting 3rd world nations like Iraq, the US military is not fit for a nuclear war. We have mach 4 missiles, and we know that China has mach 10. Russia and China seem to side with each other, and we certainly can't take on either one, let alone both together. We therefore can't even contemplate forcing our will upon their nations (how can we stop the invasion of the Ukraine)?

Last I heard, the Ukraine took a vote and wanted to rejoin the Russians. Ukrainian leaders, on the other hand, are reticent and unwilling to turn over their power to another nation. Should the US intervene?

Should the US intervene in the Chinese aquisition of Hong Kong and Taiwan (remember there is a One China pact with Taiwan and both were scheduled to be turned back over to China in about two decades)?

Please give me an example of the UN corrupting Islamics.

wonder if she meant media propaganda but I loved your post before this one...was very informative.

 

[MyM]

But you are coerced into staying with it even if you lose your belief because you can be executed (or punished in other ways).
That is exact opposite of freedom. If you are indeed free in Islam, you could as easily deconvert as you can convert without any punishments whatsoever.
Muslims should have the right to leave the faith without any fear of retribution. Only then is Islam is a free religion.

Again, I am not political. I am not the one that made the law. You will have to take that up with Allah himself

 

[sayak83]

Again, I am not political. I am not the one that made the law. You will have to take that up with Allah himself

You are yourself responsible for believing in this religion. Your faith, your belief. You are responsible for what you believe. You should own up to all that believing this faith entails.....including the fact that it (according your beliefs) does not let Muslims deconvert freely but tells to execute them even if they no longer believe in Allah.

 

[MyM]

But you are coerced into staying with it even if you lose your belief because you can be executed (or punished in other ways).
That is exact opposite of freedom. If you are indeed free in Islam, you could as easily deconvert as you can convert without any punishments whatsoever.
Muslims should have the right to leave the faith without any fear of retribution. Only then is Islam is a free religion.

Again, I am not the one who made this law. There are procedures that are set up before the authorities...as I have explained in the other posts

They can leave on their own choosing if they wish and they will be either dealt with in this life or the next. People who advertise it as a joke, mock it, laugh at it, insult it...these are all having to do with a certain standing. It's political yet again. One must understand that in Islam, Allah is not a joke He will always have the last say and sincere Muslims know this to be true. If one leaves Islam and then doesn't speak about it, no one will know about it...who's gonna kill him, anyone? No one will know except he/she and his/her Creator. And again, in Islam, Allah is the final judge

I don't do politics.

 

[sayak83]

Again, I am not the one who made this law. There are procedures that are set up before the authorities...as I have explained in the other posts

They can leave on their own choosing if they wish and they will be either dealt with in this life or the next. People who advertise it as a joke, mock it, laugh at it, insult it...these are all having to do with a certain standing. It's political yet again. One must understand that in Islam, Allah is not a joke He will always have the last say and sincere Muslims know this to be true. If one leaves Islam and then doesn't speak about it, no one will know about it...who's gonna kill him, anyone? No one will know except he/she and his/her Creator. And again, in Islam, Allah is the final judge

I don't do politics.

Of course, if a person leaves Islam and joins, say, Christianity, builds a Christian church and preaches Christianity to fellow Muslims to convince them of the truths of Christianity and falsity of Islam...that will not be tolerated within Islamic law. Such a person and his fellow converts from Islam are liable to get executed. Is that not correct?
That is not freedom of religion in any sense whatsoever. Why can't a person not openly profess what he believes to the truth and openly and publicly reject what he believes to be the untruth? A religion that does not have this freedom cannot be called a free religion. Simple.

 

[MyM]

Of course, if a person leaves Islam and joins, say, Christianity, builds a Christian church and preaches Christianity to fellow Muslims to convince them of the truths of Christianity and falsity of Islam...that will not be tolerated within Islamic law. Such a person and his fellow converts from Islam are liable to get executed. Is that not correct?
That is not freedom of religion in any sense whatsoever. Why can't a person not openly profess what he believes to the truth and openly and publicly reject what he believes to be the untruth? A religion that does not have this freedom cannot be called a free religion. Simple.

Undoubtedly some kinds of apostasy are more abhorrent than others, and the apostasy of one who wages war against Islam is more abhorrent than that of anyone else. Hence some of the scholars differentiated between them, and said that it is not essential to ask the muhaarib to repent or to accept his repentance; rather he should be put to death even if he repents, whereas the repentance of one who is not a muhaarib should be accepted and he should not be put to death.

When people start dictating because they think they know better than their Creator, people end up messing up. In Islam, if one does go out of Islam, depending on the status, they must deal with the consequences. again, I am not political

 

[Debater Slayer]

Undoubtedly some kinds of apostasy are more abhorrent than others, and the apostasy of one who wages war against Islam is more abhorrent than that of anyone else. Hence some of the scholars differentiated between them, and said that it is not essential to ask the muhaarib to repent or to accept his repentance; rather he should be put to death even if he repents, whereas the repentance of one who is not a muhaarib should be accepted and he should not be put to death.

When people start dictating because they think they know better than their Creator, people end up messing up. In Islam, if one does go out of Islam, depending on the status, they must deal with the consequences. again, I am not political

You have mentioned that you're an ex-Christian. If all religions followed the same logic you're using in your arguments here, you could have been put to death for leaving Christianity and openly supporting Islam.

I don't think it should be hard for you to see why many people--including many Muslims--view executing someone for deconversion as morally indefensible and as a form of murder.

 

[MyM]

You have mentioned that you're an ex-Christian. If all religions followed the same logic you're using in your arguments here, you could have been put to death for leaving Christianity and openly supporting Islam.

I don't think it should be hard for you to see why many people--including many Muslims--view executing someone for deconversion as morally indefensible and as a form of murder.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

 

[firedragon]

Of course, if a person leaves Islam and joins, say, Christianity, builds a Christian church and preaches Christianity to fellow Muslims to convince them of the truths of Christianity and falsity of Islam...that will not be tolerated within Islamic law.

Can you please cite this Islamic law?

What is your source? What is the language? What is your analysis? And why do you trust it?

Thanks.

 

[firedragon]

Undoubtedly some kinds of apostasy are more abhorrent than others, and the apostasy of one who wages war against Islam is more abhorrent than that of anyone else. Hence some of the scholars differentiated between them, and said that it is not essential to ask the muhaarib to repent or to accept his repentance; rather he should be put to death even if he repents, whereas the repentance of one who is not a muhaarib should be accepted and he should not be put to death.

When people start dictating because they think they know better than their Creator, people end up messing up. In Islam, if one does go out of Islam, depending on the status, they must deal with the consequences. again, I am not political

Sis. Your Islamic knowledge is very poor.

To speak of Islamic "Law", which Fikh do you follow and what are your sources, why do you follow it, whats your methodology??

 

[Link]

The few who do think that killing for apostacy is just should not be considered the norm.

Unfortunately, they are the norm. Muslims worship scholars over God. Nothing new in the way Iblis misguides humanity. Had they loved God more than their scholars, they would not attribute him this lie and fabrication but instead detached themselves from the scholars who lied.

 

[sayak83]

Can you please cite this Islamic law?

What is your source? What is the language? What is your analysis? And why do you trust it?

Thanks.

I was talking about Mym's interpretation only. Its what she believes about Islam and apostasy that was being addressed. I have made no claim that her view is the correct or the normative one.
You may have a different interpretation just as Link has.

 

[firedragon]

I was talking about Mym's interpretation only. Its what she believes about Islam and apostasy that was being addressed. I have made no claim that her view is the correct or the normative one.
You may have a different interpretation just as Link has.

Oh okay. I understand. Apologies.

 

[KWED]

So from reading Hadiths from Sunnah.com.. Well 6 strong ones
And i am somewhat 20 Chapters of Quran in by reading commentator Ibn Kathir Tafsir

I can assume apostacy is comparable to treason? Like trying to be against muslim community. But that if you dont outwardly speak out then you may repent if you find out its the right religion.

Or am i wrong with the context here?

Yes, the penalty for leaving Islam is death, but if you rejoin then you may be spared.

I wonder how many people over history "converted" in order to avoid punishment or hardship rather than because they were convinced the Quran is true?