Islam: when is a person considered a Muslim?

[Heyo]

That's... let's just say much worse than what I was originally looking into with the OP. I didn't imagine I'd be casually discussing the murder of sentient and sapient children on a Wednesday morning and trying to be academic about it.

The more I learn about Islam, the more I despise it and I understand what Sam Harris meant:

 

[England my lionheart]

When is a person considered to be a Muslim?

I'm most interested in a child born to Muslim parents: are they considered a Muslim from birth? (Does this depend on whether one has Sunni, Shia, etc. interpretations of the religion?)

I'll be up front about why I ask: I'm curious about whether a teen leaving the religion is considered an apostate for instance, and what that means, and why.

Thanks

From what I know a “Muslim” is someone who submits to the will of god,a child born to Muslim parents Is going to be a Muslim like it or not,a catholic child born of catholic parents is going to be a catholic like it or not,the abrahmic religions don’t offer much choice,I was baptised and nobody asked me either.

The argument that I’ve seen on this forum that “everyone is born a Muslim” doesn’t make much in the way of sense to a Hindu for example,a new born child is a blank hard drive so monkey see monkey do is the way imo.

 

[paarsurrey]

I believe considering a child a Muslim is a man made belief. What is true is that a child must obey his parents which means observing religious instruction as the parents command.

One's belief is wrong, I understand, please.

Regards

 

[firedragon]

When is a person considered to be a Muslim?

I'm most interested in a child born to Muslim parents: are they considered a Muslim from birth? (Does this depend on whether one has Sunni, Shia, etc. interpretations of the religion?)

I'll be up front about why I ask: I'm curious about whether a teen leaving the religion is considered an apostate for instance, and what that means, and why.

Thanks

Its like this. In general Islamic philosophy, every human being is considered born a muslim. This is Islamic philosophy. All of this would probably depend on your epistemology.

An apostate is by definition someone who leaves a particular religion. So teen or grey all over, apostasy is simply "leaving a religion". But I think you have something more serious to this question. I believe you are referring to the baggage this apostate matter carries. Why not hammer the nail on the head and ask what you exactly mean by that MM?

 

[firedragon]

I was born into a Muslim family and left Islam at 17. According to your beliefs, should I be executed for apostasy? And if you believe that apostates should be forced to reconvert or be executed if they don't, how are your beliefs any different from those who persecute Uyghur Muslims or Burmese Muslims?



It seems bizarre to say they have the choice of leaving Islam or not given that you just said the penalty for apostasy is death. Living a life in hiding and suppressing one's beliefs for fear of being executed or otherwise physically punished is quite draconian, too, so it's not a desirable or humane alternative.

I think you know this issue and its nuances more than anyone here.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As you can see from the varied responses here when someone is considered a Muslim varies with the sect and the person. The same thing applies to Christianity. There are many that interpret the Bible as saying that all people innately know that Christianity is true. People in both religions have used these interpretations to justify killing others at times.

 

[firedragon]

Also for instance consider this scenario: say a girl is born to Muslim parents. As she ages, she isn't really sure whether the religion is for her, she might go along with it because she's expected to perhaps (this happens a lot where I live, where young people are raised in Christianity and eventually leave it in their teens when they begin to explore their independence).

So would a young woman that chooses not to wear hijab be considered something along the lines of an apostate, something worse than a non-Muslim not wearing hijab, just because her parents are Muslims? Does it affect how much choice she has in the matter in a Muslim society to be born to Muslim parents, de jure or de facto?

Sis. Are you asking this question from a societal point of view or a theological point of view? There are some societies where no girl is "expected" to wear a veil. There are some societies where men are expected wear a veil and women have their own sexual freedom, but of course, this is very very very very rare. There are some societies where the government itself has laws that impose a veil or head cover on women. There were also some other Islamic societies that practically banned the veil at least at institutions.

So if you clarify your question, I think I might be able to give you a better answer, if interested.

 

[firedragon]

There are many that interpret the Bible as saying that all people innately know that Christianity is true.

Which passage and who interpreted it that way?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Which passage and who interpreted it that way?

Of the Bible? Just a moment.

 

[firedragon]

Of the Bible? Just a moment.

Sure. Thanks a lot.

 

[firedragon]

Should anything negative happen to someone for deciding not to be a Muslim at this point? According to some, they should be killed. Is this thinking in error?

Some people do believe that anyone who openly confesses publicly that he has left Islam should be put to death. Well hell, some people believe that someone practicing homosexuality out in the open should be put to death. People believe many things. There were some scholars who believed someone who openly says he is no longer a Muslim should be resettled in a non-muslim state and that they should have an agreement with that particular state who will deport anyone who denounces their system. But of course this was practically due to them being defectors of the state, not their personal theological beliefs. It was later changed into personal theological beliefs. This is a hell of a long conversation.

Of course killing an apostate is in error. It has no basis. If you take the Quranic discourse, there is nothing about killing an apostate, but its a biblical matter where some scholars call it "Israeliat" which is a very well known Islamic term for things that entered Islam from the Judaic text. These are latter additions. Just FYI.

 

[viole]

Those decisions are made by judges.

Who defines them?

How is Islam different from the Chinese government?

Is it different?

When I say the choice to leave Islam or not I'm not referring to pretending to be a Muslim.

But do you agree that leaving Islam deserves death?

Yes or no. Simple binary question.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Subduction Zone]

Okay, Romans 1 19 is a verse relied upon heavily by presuppositionalists. I tend to find them extremely obnoxious so it took a while.

Here is a nice article on them:

Secular Web Kiosk: On Presuppositionalism

 

[Debater Slayer]

Those decisions are made by judges.

How is Islam different from the Chinese government?

When I say the choice to leave Islam or not I'm not referring to pretending to be a Muslim.

1) I asked about your own support or lack thereof for such a ruling, not about who makes it. The Chinese regime is the entity responsible for persecuting Uyghurs, but that doesn't mean that the people who support the persecution aren't also culpable, even if morally rather than physically (since votes often mean very little in China's tyrannical political climate).

2) Conservative Islam--since your beliefs don't represent Islam wholesale--and the Chinese government differ in many aspects, which doesn't eliminate certain parallels. Persecution of religious minorities per the beliefs you've expounded in this thread is a marked similarity between both.

3) Pretending to be a Muslim--or anything else contrary to one's actual identity and beliefs, for that matter--is a difficult and smothering way to live, especially when the cost of failing to pretend could be one's safety or life. If your religious beliefs encourage honesty and integrity at all, then it also seems inconsistent that you would support forcing people to pretend or support executing them if they didn't.

Muslims and non-Muslims, as well as ex-Muslims, coexist well in many multicultural societies, and life continues for them without infringement on each other's safety and rights. I don't see any need for either group to pretend to be something they're not or hide their beliefs just so they can live safely.

 

[JustGeorge]

So would a young woman that chooses not to wear hijab be considered something along the lines of an apostate, something worse than a non-Muslim not wearing hijab, just because her parents are Muslims? Does it affect how much choice she has in the matter in a Muslim society to be born to Muslim parents, de jure or de facto?

I think the hijab is more cultural than some let on....

We have a large Muslim population locally, many of whom are of Bosnian descent. Typically, Bosnian Muslims don't wear the hijab. It doesn't mean they can't, and that none do, its just not very often that you see it from them. The actual verse in the Qur'an regarding the issue of women's dress is this:

And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their private parts; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their khimār over their breasts and not display their beauty except to their husband, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments.

— Quran 24:31

As to what it means and how its carried out is kind of open ended. The ahadith come into play as to how a woman(or man) may decide to dress, but as we can see, many different Muslims carry it out in many different ways.

As to Muslims bothering over what non-Muslims do, here is an interesting verse:

42.6. As for those who take for themselves others besides God for guardians and confidants (to whom they entrust their affairs, thereby associating partners with Him): God is ever watchful over them (preserving a record of their deeds). You are not a guardian over them (responsible for their conduct).

To me, this kinda seems like Allah is telling people to mind their own....

This verse as well seems to me that Allah is asking his followers not to be cruel to unbelievers...

45.14. Tell those who believe that they should pardon those who do not hope for the coming of the Days of God (when He will make them understand what their unbelief means), seeing that He will recompense people for what they have earned.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The more I learn about Islam, the more I despise it and I understand what Sam Harris meant:

The problem with Harris' statement is that it effectively dismisses the beliefs of reformist and more moderate Muslims who are able to coexist peacefully with ex-Muslims, LGBT people, etc. By arguing that the "fundamentals of Islam" are those represented in hateful and extremist beliefs, he's unintentionally playing into the hands of extremists and legitimizing their beliefs as the "correct" version of Islam, an argument that is bizarrely similar to what the extremists themselves claim.

With how diverse and sometimes opposed the various strains of Islam are, I find it a lot more useful to focus on supporting the peaceful ones and encouraging progressive interpretations of Islamic texts and doctrine instead of saying that the fundamentals of Islam are the problem and going down the route of the wild-goose chase of seeking to eliminate Islam from society. It's most likely not going anywhere for decades or centuries to come, so the former path seems to me a lot more realistic as well as more productive.

 

[firedragon]

Okay, Romans 1 19 is a verse relied upon heavily by presuppositionalists. I tend to find them extremely obnoxious so it took a while.

Here is a nice article on them:

Secular Web Kiosk: On Presuppositionalism

Great. Thank you very much.

Im sure you do know though that this verse when speaking of "it was made plain to them" or "shown to them" does not really mean it was embedded into them. It is shown by faneron or manifestation. That means humans are shown, not programmed. I mean it does not really say they are programmed.

But I get what you are saying. Thanks a lot.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think you know this issue and its nuances more than anyone here.

Some of the more conservative interpretations and fatwas lack nuance and casually discuss the lives of apostates as if they were expendable or subject to the will of the scholars issuing the fatwas. This kind of mindset is what I'm concerned with standing against in this thread.

 

[firedragon]

Some of the more conservative interpretations and fatwas lack nuance and casually discuss the lives of apostates as if they were expendable or subject to the will of the scholars issuing the fatwas. This kind of mindset is what I'm concerned with standing against in this thread.

Absolutely. The nuances I was talking about was not in fatawa's but the actually sources of the fatawas. For example the fatawas about the Murtads dont really spell out that the Fusha Atthurath meaning may differ. It may very well be those who defected to the opposition governance or army or whatever. Also, the narrator Ikrema who was a known khawarij speaking about Ali is almost a nonsensical crime in adoption. I dont see any sense in that. Actually even in history, many have seen no sense in that. Just that the majority has won. Politics has won.

 

[Heyo]

The problem with Harris' statement is that it effectively dismisses the beliefs of reformist and more moderate Muslims who are able to coexist peacefully with ex-Muslims, LGBT people, etc. By arguing that the "fundamentals of Islam" are those represented in hateful and extremist beliefs, he's unintentionally playing into the hands of extremists and legitimizing their beliefs as the "correct" version of Islam, an argument that is bizarrely similar to what the extremists themselves claim.

With how diverse and sometimes opposed the various strains of Islam are, I find it a lot more useful to focus on supporting the peaceful ones and encouraging progressive interpretations of Islamic texts and doctrine instead of saying that the fundamentals of Islam are the problem and going down the route of the wild-goose chase of seeking to eliminate Islam from society. It's most likely not going anywhere for decades or centuries to come, so the former path seems to me a lot more realistic as well as more productive.

I hear you and usually I see it the same way. Judaism/Christianity had similar fundamentals and they have discarded them (mostly). Islam needs an enlightenment, urgently. It is just frustrating how slow that process is - and a positive outcome isn't guaranteed.