Apostasy

[jimnyc]

I've debated this subject many, many times. My beef with it of course is rooted somewhere in Islam. It might not make people happy in most other religions, but people are free to leave or stay. I've read for years and years now about Muslims being killed and sentenced to be killed, if they try to leave Islam. Many of these stories are from the very people trying to save their own lives. I can't possibly think of any valid reason for someone to be killed for leaving a religion, or even insulting a religion. Sometimes instead of apostasy, they will bring up the charge of blasphemy. Either way, it's killing people for the pettiest of offenses. And regardless of the facts or lack thereof in this particular case, it's a very, very well known practice in WAY too many Islamic countries.


Blogger Faces Death Penalty for Apostasy

A Yemeni blogger who used his personal Facebook account and the Al-Hiwar Al-Mutmadin website to post articles and research that question the teachings of the Quran could face the death penalty as prosecutors accuse him of apostasy.

Ali Ali Qasim Al-Saeedi, the one-time general manager of budget and planning in the Supreme Judiciary Council, was arrested Nov. 26, under the jurisdiction of the Publishing and Print Court, a government body established to try journalists.

A representative of the prosecution accused him of being an "infidel," according to Al-Saeedi's oldest son, Mohammed. The prosecution also demanded he be removed from his home, dismissed from his job, imprisoned and executed.

“My father has asserted and insisted on his faith in God and the five pillars of Islam,” Mohammed said. “We were shocked by the prosecution's requirements. My father is not a journalist.”

http://www.yementimes.com/en/1631/report/1701/Family-of-Yemeni-blogger-prosecuted-for-apostasy-calls-accusations-

[Larrymc]

I've debated this subject many, many times. My beef with it of course is rooted somewhere in Islam. It might not make people happy in most other religions, but people are free to leave or stay. I've read for years and years now about Muslims being killed and sentenced to be killed, if they try to leave Islam. Many of these stories are from the very people trying to save their own lives. I can't possibly think of any valid reason for someone to be killed for leaving a religion, or even insulting a religion. Sometimes instead of apostasy, they will bring up the charge of blasphemy. Either way, it's killing people for the pettiest of offenses. And regardless of the facts or lack thereof in this particular case, it's a very, very well known practice in WAY too many Islamic countries.



http://www.yementimes.com/en/1631/report/1701/Family-of-Yemeni-blogger-prosecuted-for-apostasy-calls-accusations-some religions will give you the boot, if you don't follow there teachings, but Islam is the only one i have ever heard of that will kill you for going against it, even for not converting

[aboutime]

Gotta love it when we hear, and learn about the so-called Murderous Religions of Peace, as in Islam, or Muslim.

With teaching of so much Love....of the killing. How would anyone know how to separate the enemy from the enemy?

[tailfins]

some religions will give you the boot, if you don't follow there teachings, but Islam is the only one i have ever heard of that will kill you for going against it, even for not converting

What about the Catholic Inquisition?

[aboutime]

What about the Catholic Inquisition?


tailfins. You've got that mixed up with Black Pantherism, Liberally speaking, of course.

[tailfins]

tailfins. You've got that mixed up with Black Pantherism, Liberally speaking, of course.

I'm too tired to solve the puzzle. What do you mean?

[aboutime]

I'm too tired to solve the puzzle. What do you mean?


Never mind. It obviously went WAY over your head.

[Larrymc]

Gotta love it when we hear, and learn about the so-called Murderous Religions of Peace, as in Islam, or Muslim.

With teaching of so much Love....of the killing. How would anyone know how to separate the enemy from the enemy?what do you mean Murderous Islam or Muslims "But Obama Said Its Only Extremist That have Hijacked a Peaceful Religion"?????????

a

[jimnyc]

What about the Catholic Inquisition?

Wasn't that a pretty long time ago, if memory serves me correctly? :)

I will concede that no religion has a perfect track record. But I would like to think that people learn from history and get more civilized as time goes on. In other words, I was speaking of current times.

[aboutime]

what do you mean Murderous Islam or Muslims "But Obama Said Its Only Extremist That have Hijacked a Peaceful Religion"?????????

a


Larrymc. Look at the bottom of this post, where my Signature is located. In case you haven't noticed.


OBAMA IS A LIAR! If he said that. He was lying.

[Larrymc]

Larrymc. Look at the bottom of this post, where my Signature is located. In case you haven't noticed.


OBAMA IS A LIAR! If he said that. He was lying.Seriously Obama's a LAIR (sarcasm)

[Larrymc]

What about the Catholic Inquisition?Yea i had forgot about that, but they have come a long way from that,

[DragonStryk72]

I've debated this subject many, many times. My beef with it of course is rooted somewhere in Islam. It might not make people happy in most other religions, but people are free to leave or stay. I've read for years and years now about Muslims being killed and sentenced to be killed, if they try to leave Islam. Many of these stories are from the very people trying to save their own lives. I can't possibly think of any valid reason for someone to be killed for leaving a religion, or even insulting a religion. Sometimes instead of apostasy, they will bring up the charge of blasphemy. Either way, it's killing people for the pettiest of offenses. And regardless of the facts or lack thereof in this particular case, it's a very, very well known practice in WAY too many Islamic countries.



http://www.yementimes.com/en/1631/report/1701/Family-of-Yemeni-blogger-prosecuted-for-apostasy-calls-accusations-

and 400 years ago, that belief would have made you an apostate in Europe, and large portions of North America. Which church do you think coined the phrase, given it's roman origins?

That was the way of things for EVERY country up until the writing of the 1st Amendment, pretty much. It's easy to think of it as basic sense, but we were raised, along with our parents, grandparents, and great grandparents to believe that religion should be free. America changed the landscape in that manner, but it's naive to think that every single country out there is going to hop to immediately.

Changes occur over time, just like it did for us, but the simple point of fact is that, change is occurring in Islamic countries, just not at the speed we would like. Hell, just back on the other side of the civil war, we still had witch-burning on the books.

Hell, the 30 years war was basically one Christian faction declaring other Christian factions as heresy and murdering them for it. Yeah, we didn't even go outside the religion, we were killing Calvinists, Lutherans, and all the other Protestant factions, while they killed us right back. That was also the time period that gave us the Spanish Inquisition, and we know how well that went in a human rights frame of mind. We sentenced Jewish people to Ghettos (The birthplace of that term) that pretty much ensured they'd die of anything but old age.

These guys are still on a war footing, and until that changes, and until we stop screwing around and playing favorites over there, it's just not gonna change. There's just too much resentment on all sides, and no clear place where it started. The Middle East suffers greatly from a lack of resources as well, which makes the problem even worse. We never had to fight over potable water. Oh, we might want a particular river or sea for strategic or economic value, but they're fighting for water as a tool of survival. Finding properly arable land is also an issue, whereas for us, you can grow just about anywhere in America with little to no real effort.

All of that is right at the surface still, made worse by further desertification, only something changed in the last 50 years: We needed their oil, and suddenly, tiny ME countries like Kuwait suddenly had this insane amount of power that they could wield due to their oil fields, and the tinder sets off again. Some countries, like Saudia Arabia, dominate the oil market, while others, such as Iraq, lag behind, and more resentment is heaped on the plate. Religion, really, is simply what they've latched onto, as opposed to the root cause of the problems.

[Abbey Marie]

Wasn't that a pretty long time ago, if memory serves me correctly? :)

I will concede that no religion has a perfect track record. But I would like to think that people learn from history and get more civilized as time goes on. In other words, I was speaking of current times.

And it's not like Islam is a new religion that still has to work out the kinks. They've had ages to become more civilized. Attempting to equate current barbarisms to those of hundreds of years ago is deflection.

It doesn't make sense that an entire religion can believe that being forced to worship God is meaningful. One must conclude that sincere belief and worship are rather unimportant; increasing the amount of nominal believers is what matters.

[jafar00]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.

[jimnyc]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.

And to blasphemy?

Also, what does Sharia law, specifically, say regarding both of these?

[revelarts]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.

so the clerics who join in and call for the death penalty for apostasy are themselves apostate? and/or murderers?

Are there any clerics that regularly publicly challenge these killing with hadith and Koran, even from the safety of other countries?

ever time i see those who regularly publicly challenge it or stoneing of women or freedom of speech, it's usually someone whose not a cleric and often they are from a muslim country but do not consider themselves Muslim.

[Larrymc]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.so the Koran dose not allow, are call for this, its solely an Extremist fabrication??

[Marcus Aurelius]

some religions will give you the boot, if you don't follow there teachings, but Islam is the only one i have ever heard of that will kill you for going against it, even for not converting

That would be Sharia law, and as we all know, according to Jafar, it does not apply to non-Muslims. So, by Jafar's logic, only Muslims who refuse to convert to Islam would be killed.

:dev:

[Marcus Aurelius]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.

Spin, Baryshnikov, spin!!!!!!!

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Apostasy

Though it may be argued that this is not clear through the Qur'an (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an) alone, scholars have found justification for the penalty from within its pages (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Apostasy), and there are also numerous Sahih (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Sahih) (authentic) hadiths (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Hadith) confirming this punishment as attested by Prophet Muhammad. In Sahih Bukhari, we see it as “Allah's Apostle said, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him'”,[2] (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Apostasy#cite_note-apostasy-1) and it was also one of only three reasons given by him where killing a Muslim is permitted.[3] (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Apostasy#cite_note-2)


Religion was not a personal but communal affair in pre-Islamic Arabia. Deserting religion thus amounted to treason and so was punishable by death.
So, the very act of deserting Islam was considered treason, and the penalty was and is death. Jafar separates treason from leaving Islam, while others consider them one in the same.


http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Apostasy


They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,
Qur'an (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Compendium_of_Muslim_Texts) 4:89 (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.089)




Narrated Abu Burda: That the Prophet sent his (i.e. Abu Burda's) grandfather, Abu Musa and Mu'adh to Yemen and said to both of them "Facilitate things for the people (Be kind and lenient) and do not make things difficult (for people), and give them good tidings, and do not repulse them and both of you should obey each other." Abu Musa said, "O Allah's Prophet! In our land there is an alcoholic drink (prepared) from barley called Al-Mizr, and another (prepared) from honey, called Al-Bit"' The Prophet said, "All intoxicants are prohibited." Then both of them proceeded and Mu'adh asked Abu Musa, "How do you recite the Quran?" Abu Musa replied, "I recite it while I am standing, sitting or riding my riding animals, at intervals and piecemeal." Muadh said, "But I sleep and then get up. I sleep and hope for Allah's Reward for my sleep as I seek His Reward for my night prayer." Then he (i.e. Muadh) pitched a tent and they started visiting each other. Once Muadh paid a visit to Abu Musa and saw a chained man. Muadh asked, "What is this?" Abu Musa said, "(He was) a Jew who embraced Islam and has now turned apostate." Muadh said, "I will surely chop off his neck!"
Sahih Bukhari (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Compendium_of_Muslim_Texts) 5:59:632 (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/059-sbt.php#005.059.632)

[Kathianne]

What about the Catholic Inquisition?

What about them? What do you know or think you know? A place to start, yet a Catholic site, but keep in mind that the Catholic Church for the past 50 years has mostly been an apology tour. Think the Obama administration, with no term limits.

http://catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0075.html

There are plenty of links, if interested.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That would be Sharia law, and as we all know, according to Jafar, it does not apply to non-Muslims. So, by Jafar's logic, only Muslims who refuse to convert to Islam would be killed.

:dev:


-----------:laugh2:, those with prayer rug burns are exempted... but even they must beat their wives like they do their heathen camels..

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

so the clerics who join in and call for the death penalty for apostasy are themselves apostate? and/or murderers?

Are there any clerics that regularly publicly challenge these killing with hadith and Koran, even from the safety of other countries?

ever time i see those who regularly publicly challenge it or stoneing of women or freedom of speech, it's usually someone whose not a cleric and often they are from a muslim country but do not consider themselves Muslim.


And they are usually safe in a country free from the reach of the jihadist warriors that would lop off their wicked heads for daring to speak such blasphemy!--:laugh:

[jafar00]

some religions will give you the boot, if you don't follow there teachings, but Islam is the only one i have ever heard of that will kill you for going against it, even for not converting

Where in Islamic teaching is there a call for conversion or death?


And to blasphemy?

Also, what does Sharia law, specifically, say regarding both of these?

There is no worldly punishment for blasphemy which is basically apostasy since the blasphemer leaves his religion behind.

I think I have already posted something like this in another thread?

O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do. (5:9)


so the clerics who join in and call for the death penalty for apostasy are themselves apostate? and/or murderers?

Misguided.


so the Koran dose not allow, are call for this, its solely an Extremist fabrication??

Correct


That would be Sharia law, and as we all know, according to Jafar, it does not apply to non-Muslims. So, by Jafar's logic, only Muslims who refuse to convert to Islam would be killed.

:dev:

How can a Muslim refuse to convert to Islam? Are you putting me in a round room and telling me to sit in the corner?


Spin, Baryshnikov, spin!!!!!!!

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Apostasy



So, the very act of deserting Islam was considered treason, and the penalty was and is death. Jafar separates treason from leaving Islam, while others consider them one in the same.


http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Apostasy

Exactly. It was history. At the time of the hadiths where examples of people being put to death for apostasy, the actual crime was high treason. At the time, the Muslims were under great persecution by the pagans and jews and apostates usually conspired with the enemy to kill Muslims or the Prophet (saw). It was for this reason they were put to death.

As a side note, why do you think anything in Wkiislam.net has any basis in truth? It was made by the rampantly anti-Islam founder of faithfreedom.org and not by Muslims.

[Dilloduck]

What about the Catholic Inquisition?

For some reason history doesn't count in these discussions. Might be because we as singling out Islam for now. I'm not sure how far back in history one is allowed to go and still be legitimate.

[Kathianne]

For some reason history doesn't count in these discussions. Might be because we as singling out Islam for now. I'm not sure how far back in history one is allowed to go and still be legitimate.

You might wish to go to some of the links above. Just saying.

[jimnyc]

For some reason history doesn't count in these discussions. Might be because we as singling out Islam for now. I'm not sure how far back in history one is allowed to go and still be legitimate.

History doesn't count when you're discussion our current society. Just as today's society shouldn't count when discussing something from 500 years ago. They are 2 different times. If you wish to discuss something from 500 years ago, I'm sure others would enjoy that thread. If you included others having done so a long, long time ago, all you would be doing is 2 things; muddying the waters of the topic at hand, and admitting that everyone else has since become civilized.

[jimnyc]

There is no worldly punishment for blasphemy which is basically apostasy since the blasphemer leaves his religion behind.

So there is no punishment within Sharia law for apostasy or blasphemy? Or you're just not answering that question? People are put to death for both, in many, many countries still, and the reasons given are always Sharia law.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

History doesn't count when you're discussion our current society. Just as today's society shouldn't count when discussing something from 500 years ago. They are 2 different times. If you wish to discuss something from 500 years ago, I'm sure others would enjoy that thread. If you included others having done so a long, long time ago, all you would be doing is 2 things; muddying the waters of the topic at hand, and admitting that everyone else has since become civilized.

Thats because muddy waters blurs the vision enough to help hide any clear examples of right and wrong or so its thought. Its so often an attempt to spin away from clear views on the brutality and injustice of savage and insane people. A tactic often used when trying to defend the murdering and savage actions of today's muslims which by the way are the same as the murdering and savage actions of their brothers from 1400 years ago. It was wrong and evil then just as it is now! -Tyr

[jafar00]

History doesn't count when you're discussion our current society. Just as today's society shouldn't count when discussing something from 500 years ago. They are 2 different times. If you wish to discuss something from 500 years ago, I'm sure others would enjoy that thread. If you included others having done so a long, long time ago, all you would be doing is 2 things; muddying the waters of the topic at hand, and admitting that everyone else has since become civilized.

It's funny how history plays a part when we debate the marriage between Aisha and Mohamed (saw). Today's customs are used to judge the customs of 1400 years ago there.


So there is no punishment within Sharia law for apostasy or blasphemy? Or you're just not answering that question? People are put to death for both, in many, many countries still, and the reasons given are always Sharia law.

Sure, some countries have questionable punishments, but that doesn't mean they are from Islam. Does the death penalty in the USA come from the Bible?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

It's funny how history plays a part when we debate the marriage between Aisha and Mohamed (saw). Today's customs are used to judge the customs of 1400 years ago there.



Sure, some countries have questionable punishments, but that doesn't mean they are from Islam. Does the death penalty in the USA come from the Bible?

Get a clue, child molesting wasnt any nicer or more moral back then than it is now!
You defend a known child molestor. Get used to being called on it ..-Tyr

[DragonStryk72]

Get a clue, child molesting wasnt any nicer or more moral back then than it is now!
You defend a known child molestor. Get used to being called on it ..-Tyr

Okay, then you're a rapist and murderer. Get used to it. If you can call out things over 1000 years ago, then guess what? The Spanish Inquisition is in. You get one or the other, Tyr, but not both.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Okay, then you're a rapist and murderer. Get used to it. If you can call out things over 1000 years ago, then guess what? The Spanish Inquisition is in. You get one or the other, Tyr, but not both.


me? really?? ok, name my victims then.. -go ahead name them..
No, the Spanish Inquisition wasnt ever a part of our nation's history , certainly not part of my life , has nothing to do with whether mohhammad was a pervert or not and Im not a Catholic so it has nothing to do with me at all.
Make the connection or your post is just gibberish .. The connection with mohhammad and diddling a little girl is historic fact. -Tyr

[jimnyc]

It's funny how history plays a part when we debate the marriage between Aisha and Mohamed (saw). Today's customs are used to judge the customs of 1400 years ago there.

Today's pedophilia is used to judge pedophiles of the past as well. It's just that only one of all the pedophiles that I ever heard of is laughingly referred to as a prophet. Regardless, What happened in another religion 500 years ago does nothing at all to change Muslims killing innocent people for apostasy today.


Sure, some countries have questionable punishments, but that doesn't mean they are from Islam. Does the death penalty in the USA come from the Bible?

All of the MANY punishments are based on Sharia, which in MANY places still issues the death penalty for crimes considered apostasy or blasphemy. I find it funny, you claim everything and anything that might be bad, as not from Islam. Whether it's rooted in Islam or not apparently doesn't matter. But what does matter, is that the countless deaths committed for apostasy and blasphemy, are by people that are muslim. They are killing people for things that are hardly even crimes in civilized countries.

So, according to you, instead of having endless things wrong within Islam, there's just endless things wrong with Muslims who apparently who pervert Islam. And where then would be the outrage from the rest of the "civilized" muslims, who obviously must take issue with the killings of those who committed apostasy or blasphemy, and were killed based on what others say is Sharia based law? Shouldn't the people, and those from countries without questionable punishments, be speaking out or trying to protect those meeting questionable punishment aka death?

[jimnyc]

Okay, then you're a rapist and murderer. Get used to it. If you can call out things over 1000 years ago, then guess what? The Spanish Inquisition is in. You get one or the other, Tyr, but not both.

How would that make him a rapist or murderer? That would be like saying someone is a pedophile because Muhammad was one so long ago.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

How would that make him a rapist or murderer? That would be like saying someone is a pedophile because Muhammad was one so long ago.

I must confess that I havent a clue as to how my previous comment led to him equating that I am a murderer and rapist! I am indeed curious as hell as to how he will or can make that connection . One is an historic fact (about Moham)while his accusation against me is based on what? Nothing personal or in my life as I havent done either of those two things.
Indeed a real mystery to me..-Tyr

[jafar00]

Today's pedophilia is used to judge pedophiles of the past as well. It's just that only one of all the pedophiles that I ever heard of is laughingly referred to as a prophet. Regardless, What happened in another religion 500 years ago does nothing at all to change Muslims killing innocent people for apostasy today.

Yet none of the kings and queens and nobles that did exactly the same are pilloried as much as Mohamed (saw). You just attack him alone and that is grossly unfair. In any case, the good that came out of that marriage far outweighs any of your objections 1400+ years later.


All of the MANY punishments are based on Sharia, which in MANY places still issues the death penalty for crimes considered apostasy or blasphemy. I find it funny, you claim everything and anything that might be bad, as not from Islam. Whether it's rooted in Islam or not apparently doesn't matter. But what does matter, is that the countless deaths committed for apostasy and blasphemy, are by people that are muslim. They are killing people for things that are hardly even crimes in civilized countries.

So, according to you, instead of having endless things wrong within Islam, there's just endless things wrong with Muslims who apparently who pervert Islam. And where then would be the outrage from the rest of the "civilized" muslims, who obviously must take issue with the killings of those who committed apostasy or blasphemy, and were killed based on what others say is Sharia based law? Shouldn't the people, and those from countries without questionable punishments, be speaking out or trying to protect those meeting questionable punishment aka death?

Are you saying the death penalty in Pakistan for Apostasy comes from Islam just because they are brown people that happen to be Muslims? IT IS NOT IN THE SCRIPTURE.

[DragonStryk72]

I must confess that I havent a clue as to how my previous comment led to him equating that I am a murderer and rapist! I am indeed curious as hell as to how he will or can make that connection . One is an historic fact (about Moham)while his accusation against me is based on what? Nothing personal or in my life as I havent done either of those two things.
Indeed a real mystery to me..-Tyr

Well, if you can hold all muslims to the actions of one man within their religion 1400 years ago, certainly it must stand, if we are reasonable, that you are responsible for all Christian wrongdoings within that time span. Things like "Prima Nocta", where a noble lord (who held their positions by God's Will. Guess which one?) could sleep with their vassal's wife on the wedding night. How many of those women did you think were really willing in that scenario? Well, guess what, that's on you two.

Oh, and Polygamy, before I forget the Mormons. They're Christians too, so you're responsible for that, and so that means, if we are to treat Christians the same as you are according Muslims to be, that the Bible is evil, as it allowed all of these things.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Well, if you can hold all muslims to the actions of one man within their religion 1400 years ago, certainly it must stand, if we are reasonable, that you are responsible for all Christian wrongdoings within that time span. Things like "Prima Nocta", where a noble lord (who held their positions by God's Will. Guess which one?) could sleep with their vassal's wife on the wedding night. How many of those women did you think were really willing in that scenario? Well, guess what, that's on you two.

Oh, and Polygamy, before I forget the Mormons. They're Christians too, so you're responsible for that, and so that means, if we are to treat Christians the same as you are according Muslims to be, that the Bible is evil, as it allowed all of these things.

Hold on there Hoss. I am not holding jafar responsible for what mohammad did. I am speaking directly about the kind of man mohhamad was when referencing his child molesting. This dispute Im having with jafar is not about jafar's character nor is it about my character rather it is about the religion-Islam-the words of which came directly from mohhamad's mouth.. Its about the character of the man that founded Islam and that reflects highly upon the words that man decreed. Jafar says the man did no wrong diddling a little girl because it was the times and the custom, well by god it was the times and the custom for cannibals to hunt other humans for food but that doesnt make it right or not a vile and wicked act! Jafar defends mohammad because the muslims revere him as a demi-god and I point out what type of worthless, lying , stealing, and murdering dog the bastard was! My attack is directly on mohammad, why you now seek to make it an attack on me or wrongly surmise that I am personally attacking jafar when I cite historic fact about mohammad is simply beyond my understanding. I certainly did not call jafar a murderer or a rapist. I think you went far overboard amigo in trying to make that point and that you were grossly in error..
Making it personal about either jafar or myself is simply wrong IMHO. Reaching out to call me a murderer and a rapist was easily a bridge tooooooooo far. I took no offense because I considered your character and past posts here but you sir did make a gross error by making it personal and applying a false comparison !
This is about Mohhammad and his actions! Not Hannibal, Alexander the great, Ghandi, Jesus, OR ANY OTHER LEADER RELIGIOUS OR OTHERWISE! -Tyr

[jimnyc]

Yet none of the kings and queens and nobles that did exactly the same are pilloried as much as Mohamed (saw). You just attack him alone and that is grossly unfair. In any case, the good that came out of that marriage far outweighs any of your objections 1400+ years later.

You've already listed some, and I've already stated how sick and twisted they were. But only one survived to be held on a pedestal 1000yrs later. I condemn ALL pedophiles, current and past. And I'm sure you would find good out of a CHILD forced into a marriage and having her innocence stolen away by a pedophile.


Are you saying the death penalty in Pakistan for Apostasy comes from Islam just because they are brown people that happen to be Muslims? IT IS NOT IN THE SCRIPTURE.

What is Sharia? Is it American? Is it British? Is it Russian? How many "religions" are there that are controlled by Sharia law? I could have sworn it was solely a Muslim thing.

[jimnyc]

Well, if you can hold all muslims to the actions of one man within their religion 1400 years ago, certainly it must stand, if we are reasonable, that you are responsible for all Christian wrongdoings within that time span. Things like "Prima Nocta", where a noble lord (who held their positions by God's Will. Guess which one?) could sleep with their vassal's wife on the wedding night. How many of those women did you think were really willing in that scenario? Well, guess what, that's on you two.

Oh, and Polygamy, before I forget the Mormons. They're Christians too, so you're responsible for that, and so that means, if we are to treat Christians the same as you are according Muslims to be, that the Bible is evil, as it allowed all of these things.

Where has anyone held a current person accountable/responsible for what happened so long ago?

[jimnyc]

Are you saying the death penalty in Pakistan for Apostasy comes from Islam just because they are brown people that happen to be Muslims? IT IS NOT IN THE SCRIPTURE.

What is Sharia? This is how best described:


The process of interpreting the two primary sources of Islamic law is called fiqh (literally meaning "intelligence") or Islamic jurisprudence. While the above two sources are regarded as infallible, the fiqh standards may change in different contexts. Fiqh covers all aspects of law, including religious, civil, political, constitutional and procedural law.[38] Fiqh depends on 4 sources:[38]

Interpretations of the Qur'an
Interpretations of the Sunnah
Ijma, consensus amongst scholars ("collective reasoning")
Qiyas/Ijtihad analogical deduction ("individual reasoning")

So it would appear that Sharia IS in fact deeply rooted in Islam and IS partly from interpretations of scripture.

Now let's play a game! The game is, how many "fake muslims" can we root out and declare not Muslims!

Here are a list of countries, and their total populations. These people practice the wonderful act of killing people who dare try leave Islam or in some way insult Islam.

1. Afghanistan - 29m
2. Bahrain - 1.2m
3. Iran - 78m
4. Mauritania - 3.3m
5. Oman - 2.8m
6. Pakistan - 178m
7. Yemen - 24m
8. Saudi Arabia - 28.3m
9. Gaza - 500k

That's a total of 345 million people under Sharia, that will kill or can be killed, solely for leaving Islam or insulting Islam.

Egypt, with a population of about 90 million, has now also entered the fray, and just sentenced 8 people to death for blasphemy. Then there are quite a nice handful of other Islamic ruled countries where apostasy/blasphemy will be punished by death, but in smaller areas and maybe even outside of the official courts aka mob justice.

And the others don't get off free. In these places, you may just sit in jail for up to 5 years or more for daring to leave Islam, or insult Islam:

Algeria
Bangladesh
Egypt
Iraq
Kuwait
Libya
Malaysia
Maldives
Morocco
Somalia
Tunisia
United Arab Emirates

Then we have countries that have only certain areas under Sharia law:

Indonesia (Flogging, Caning; Sharia applied strictly in Aceh province)
Brunei
Jordan (2 years or less for honour killings)
Eritrea (Girls as young as 8 can be married, spousal rape is not recognized)
Syria (1 year or less for honour killings)
Niger (girls can be married off before they reach puberty)
Nigeria (Sharia is enforced in the northern states)
Gambia (Sharia courts decide all family matters, including for non-Muslims) - Interesting how Sharia is applied to non-Muslims here

[Larrymc]

What is Sharia? This is how best described:



So it would appear that Sharia IS in fact deeply rooted in Islam and IS partly from interpretations of scripture.

Now let's play a game! The game is, how many "fake muslims" can we root out and declare not Muslims!

Here are a list of countries, and their total populations. These people practice the wonderful act of killing people who dare try leave Islam or in some way insult Islam.

1. Afghanistan - 29m
2. Bahrain - 1.2m
3. Iran - 78m
4. Mauritania - 3.3m
5. Oman - 2.8m
6. Pakistan - 178m
7. Yemen - 24m
8. Saudi Arabia - 28.3m
9. Gaza - 500k

That's a total of 345 million people under Sharia, that will kill or can be killed, solely for leaving Islam or insulting Islam.

Egypt, with a population of about 90 million, has now also entered the fray, and just sentenced 8 people to death for blasphemy. Then there are quite a nice handful of other Islamic ruled countries where apostasy/blasphemy will be punished by death, but in smaller areas and maybe even outside of the official courts aka mob justice.

And the others don't get off free. In these places, you may just sit in jail for up to 5 years or more for daring to leave Islam, or insult Islam:

Algeria
Bangladesh
Egypt
Iraq
Kuwait
Libya
Malaysia
Maldives
Morocco
Somalia
Tunisia
United Arab Emirates

Then we have countries that have only certain areas under Sharia law:

Indonesia (Flogging, Caning; Sharia applied strictly in Aceh province)
Brunei
Jordan (2 years or less for honour killings)
Eritrea (Girls as young as 8 can be married, spousal rape is not recognized)
Syria (1 year or less for honour killings)
Niger (girls can be married off before they reach puberty)
Nigeria (Sharia is enforced in the northern states)
Gambia (Sharia courts decide all family matters, including for non-Muslims) - Interesting how Sharia is applied to non-Muslims hereJim for the most part, don't they all use the Karon???

[jimnyc]

Jim for the most part, don't they all use the Karon???

Well, of course, all Muslims read the Quran. I take no issue with that. It's the interpretation and current usage of the Quran, Hadiths and Sharia that I have issues with. Take out the supported terrorism, senseless sentences of death, abuses of women and lack of rights to women & other abuses towards people, all rooted in one way or another in Islam, and the religion wouldn't be so bad. It's funny that all of these things are continually denied and denied, no matter how much proof and examples are given. Which is why I said what I did earlier - that it's Islam, or there are an AWFUL LOT of Muslims doing very bad things, and the overwhelming majority of them do it because they think they are supposed to based on Islam. But instead of facing that monster of a problem, it's easier to just say that they are not real Muslims, and then now Islam is 100% free of bad people!

[Larrymc]

Well, of course, all Muslims read the Quran. I take no issue with that. It's the interpretation and current usage of the Quran, Hadiths and Sharia that I have issues with. Take out the supported terrorism, senseless sentences of death, abuses of women and lack of rights to women & other abuses towards people, all rooted in one way or another in Islam, and the religion wouldn't be so bad. It's funny that all of these things are continually denied and denied, no matter how much proof and examples are given. Which is why I said what I did earlier - that it's Islam, or there are an AWFUL LOT of Muslims doing very bad things, and the overwhelming majority of them do it because they think they are supposed to based on Islam. But instead of facing that monster of a problem, it's easier to just say that they are not real Muslims, and then now Islam is 100% free of bad people!we should totally buy that "Because Obama Said" it is just a hijacked peaceful religion (Right)

[Voted4Reagan]

What about the Catholic Inquisition?

Are you serious Tailfins? you want to go back 900 years to find something Similar that was done by the Catholic Church?

The Spanish Inquisition is not considered a part of the Papal Inquisitions because it was decreed by the Monarchs in Spain and not the Holy See.

You really are grasping at straws.....

(From Wiki)

The Medieval Inquisition is a series of Inquisitions (Catholic Church (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church) bodies charged with suppressing heresy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy)) from around 1184, including the Episcopal Inquisition (1184-1230s) and later the Papal Inquisition (1230s). The Medieval (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval) Inquisition was in response to large popular movements throughout Europe considered apostate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy) or heretical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_heresy) to Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity), in particular Catharism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism) and Waldensians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldensians) in southern France and northern Italy. These were the first inquisition movements of many that would follow.

[aboutime]

Are you serious Tailfins? you want to go back 900 years to find something Similar that was done by the Catholic Church?

The Spanish Inquisition is not considered a part of the Papal Inquisitions because it was decreed by the Monarchs in Spain and not the Holy See.

You really are grasping at straws.....

(From Wiki)

The Medieval Inquisition is a series of Inquisitions (Catholic Church (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church) bodies charged with suppressing heresy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy)) from around 1184, including the Episcopal Inquisition (1184-1230s) and later the Papal Inquisition (1230s). The Medieval (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval) Inquisition was in response to large popular movements throughout Europe considered apostate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy) or heretical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_heresy) to Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity), in particular Catharism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism) and Waldensians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldensians) in southern France and northern Italy. These were the first inquisition movements of many that would follow.



V4R. This is what most of us would describe as Liberal Re-writing of History, to please the mentally challenged, and falsely led.

[jafar00]

The process of interpreting the two primary sources of Islamic law is called fiqh (literally meaning "intelligence") or Islamic jurisprudence. While the above two sources are regarded as infallible, the fiqh standards may change in different contexts. Fiqh covers all aspects of law, including religious, civil, political, constitutional and procedural law.[38] Fiqh depends on 4 sources:[38]

Interpretations of the Qur'an
Interpretations of the Sunnah
Ijma, consensus amongst scholars ("collective reasoning")
Qiyas/Ijtihad analogical deduction ("individual reasoning")

So, where is it?

[jimnyc]

So, where is it?

Proof of these punishments in countries with Sharia law? It's all over the place, and based in Islam.

[aboutime]

Proof of these punishments in countries with Sharia law? It's all over the place, and based in Islam.



jafar. The Denial King is back jimnyc. Same old stuff, same old words. But Denial really is a River in Egypt for jafar.

[jafar00]

Proof of these punishments in countries with Sharia law? It's all over the place, and based in Islam.

Scriptural evidence please, not the laws made by the countries in question.

[jimnyc]

Scriptural evidence please, not the laws made by the countries in question.

So Sharia is 100% based on regular law and has nothing to do with any basis in the Quran or Hadiths?

And aside from that, does it really matter? It's a VERY widespread practice, to sentence to death apostates and blasphemers and primarily only Muslims left doing it in this day and age. So these people are wrong that do these things in these Islamic countries? It's not Sharia and they are applying Sharia law incorrectly? All of the countries named have this listed in their laws, and they call it "Sharia Law". All of these countries state what I showed you earlier, that Sharia does have a portion of its basis from the Quran and Hadiths. Was that incorrect?

[jimnyc]

These are the things that Sharia is based on: Fiqh, Ijma, Ijtihad & Qiyas. And oddly enough, one would think after reading about them that a lot is based on scripture. Asking for specific scripture to back this up is backwards, as the law is based on much scripture.


Fiqh (Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language): فقه‎ [fiqh] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_Arabic)) is Islamic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam) jurisprudence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisprudence). Fiqh is an expansion of the code of conduct (Sharia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia)) expounded in the Quran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran), often supplemented by tradition (Sunnah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunnah)) and implemented by the rulings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatwa) and interpretations of Islamic jurists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulema). Fiqh deals with the observance of rituals, morals and social legislation in Islam. There are four prominent schools (madh'hab (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madh%27hab)) of fiqh within Sunni (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni) practice and two within Shi'a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ja%27fari_jurisprudence) practice. A person trained in fiqh is known as a Faqih (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faqih) (plural Fuqaha).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh#cite_note-1)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh



Ijtihad (Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language): اجتهاد‎, ʼijtihād) is the making of a decision in Islamic law (sharia) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia) by personal effort (jihad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad)), independently of any school (madhhab (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhhab)) of jurisprudence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisprudence) (fiqh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh)).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijtihad#cite_note-1) as opposed to taqlid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqlid), following the decisions of a religious expert without necessarily examining the scriptural basis or reasoning of that decision.

To be valid and accepted it has to be rooted in the Qur'an and the hadith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur%27an_and_Sunnah) and it is required that no established doctrine rules the case. A mujtahid is an Islamic scholar who is competent to interpret sharia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia) by ijtihad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijtihad


In Islamic jurisprudence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh), qiyās (Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language) قياس) is the process of deductive analogy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy) in which the teachings of the Hadith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith) are compared and contrasted with those of the Qur'an (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur%27an), in order to apply a known injunction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Injunction) (nass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nass_%28Islam%29)) to a new circumstance and create a new injunction. Here the ruling of the Sunnah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunnah) and the Qur'an may be used as a means to solve or provide a response to a new problem that may arise. This, however, is only the case providing that the set precedent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent) or paradigm and the new problem that has come about will share operative causes (illah).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qiyas#cite_note-1) The illah is the specific set of circumstances that trigger a certain law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia) into action.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qiyas


Ijmāʿ (إجماع) is an [[Arabic] term referring to the consensus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus) or agreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement) of the Muslim community. Various schools of thought within Islamic jurisprudence may define this consensus as that of the first generation of Muslims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahaba) only; the consensus of the first three generations of Muslims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaf); the consensus of the jurists and scholars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulema) of the Muslim world, or scholarly consensus; or the consensus of all the Muslim world, both scholars and laymen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijma


The entire premise of Sharia seems to be awfully rooted in the scriptures from the Hadiths and Quran, and not just common man willy nilly making laws.

[aboutime]

So Sharia is 100% based on regular law and has nothing to do with any basis in the Quran or Hadiths?

And aside from that, does it really matter? It's a VERY widespread practice, to sentence to death apostates and blasphemers and primarily only Muslims left doing it in this day and age. So these people are wrong that do these things in these Islamic countries? It's not Sharia and they are applying Sharia law incorrectly? All of the countries named have this listed in their laws, and they call it "Sharia Law". All of these countries state what I showed you earlier, that Sharia does have a portion of its basis from the Quran and Hadiths. Was that incorrect?


jimnyc: As usual. That tactic being used by jafar is just typical, and expected as a method to distract, or direct attention elsewhere.

Nothing but a NON-answer again. Jafar sounds so much like an American Liberal, Left-winger. If it wasn't for him being in OZ. You'd almost swear. He was a member of the Obama/DNC/Democrat party.

[Gaffer]

Another tidbit of information. The Spanish Inquisition was primarily used to drive out the remaining moors and many Jews from Spain after it had been recaptured from the moors. A form of conversion by the sword, they learned it from the muslims.

[Voted4Reagan]

Another tidbit of information. The Spanish Inquisition was primarily used to drive out the remaining moors and many Jews from Spain after it had been recaptured from the moors. A form of conversion by the sword, they learned it from the muslims.

but be clear... it was decreed by the Spanish monarchy and used LOCAL clergy only under orders of the crown. The Vatican had nothing to do with it. The Inquisition officially ended in the 19th Century... Mid or late 1800's

[Marcus Aurelius]

Scriptural evidence please, not the laws made by the countries in question.

So, your response to the fact that Islamic countries that have a death penalty for apostasy, is that they are not really Islamic because it isn't in the Quar'an?

That's pathetic.

[Marcus Aurelius]

If Jafar doesn't think Sharia Law is based on the Quar'an... then why did he state he and his wife would abide by it?

[jafar00]

These are the things that Sharia is based on: Fiqh, Ijma, Ijtihad & Qiyas. And oddly enough, one would think after reading about them that a lot is based on scripture. Asking for specific scripture to back this up is backwards, as the law is based on much scripture.

Exactly so if the death penalty for apostasy is not based on any scripture, it cannot be sharia.


Another tidbit of information. The Spanish Inquisition was primarily used to drive out the remaining moors and many Jews from Spain after it had been recaptured from the moors. A form of conversion by the sword, they learned it from the muslims.

Conversion or die is forbidden for Muslims so how can it be learned. You are clinging to a myth. It would be a direct violation of the Qur'aan which also talks at length about hypocrites. If faith was forced on you on pain of death, you would become a hypocrite.

In short, forcing someone to convert is a form of Kufr or disbelief.


So, your response to the fact that Islamic countries that have a death penalty for apostasy, is that they are not really Islamic because it isn't in the Quar'an?

That's pathetic.

I say their law is not Islamic.


If Jafar doesn't think Sharia Law is based on the Quar'an... then why did he state he and his wife would abide by it?

Sharia is derived from the Qur'aan. Apostasy punishment apart from it being clearly an afterlife punishment, is not.

[tailfins]

Exactly so if the death penalty for apostasy is not based on any scripture, it cannot be sharia.



Conversion or die is forbidden for Muslims so how can it be learned. You are clinging to a myth. It would be a direct violation of the Qur'aan which also talks at length about hypocrites. If faith was forced on you on pain of death, you would become a hypocrite.

In short, forcing someone to convert is a form of Kufr or disbelief.



I say their law is not Islamic.



Sharia is derived from the Qur'aan. Apostasy punishment apart from it being clearly an afterlife punishment, is not.


I understand a polite society practices religious tolerance. That doesn't seem to apply in this forum; so it's time to take the gloves off.

Jafar, I'm tired of seeing you be a whippin' boy, so let an old Calvinist pass on some old-fashioned anti-Catholic positions you can throw back in their face:

1) The Catholic Institution (it's not a church) is the "Great Whore" referred to in Revelation 19:2
2) Don't forget the recent priest pedophilia scandal
3) Catholicism has changed it beliefs to accommodate paganism
.... and many more

Here are some quick references
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/the_great_whore.htm
All of http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/ is a good reference

Another reference is:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/

Pay close attention to the slide show that presents the Catholic institution as the anti-Christ:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/anti1.htm

You will find more information at:
http://www.wayoflife.org/sphider/search.php?query=Catholicism&search=1

I hope this provides you with some needed references. I will leave it to you to dig deeper. I have heard this stuff most of my life, so I'm tired of discussing it. I tend to shy away from pastors that fixate on it. I prefer to hear what people are FOR, not AGAINST.

[jimnyc]

I understand a polite society practices religious tolerance. That doesn't seem to apply in this forum; so it's time to take the gloves off.

Jafar, I'm tired of seeing you be a whippin' boy, so let an old Calvinist pass on some old-fashioned anti-Catholic positions you can throw back in their face:

1) The Catholic Institution (it's not a church) is the "Great Whore" referred to in Revelation 19:2
2) Don't forget the recent priest pedophilia scandal
3) Catholicism has changed it beliefs to accommodate paganism
.... and many more

Here are some quick references
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/the_great_whore.htm
All of http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/ is a good reference

Another reference is:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/

Pay close attention to the slide show that presents the Catholic institution as the anti-Christ:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/anti1.htm

You will find more information at:
http://www.wayoflife.org/sphider/search.php?query=Catholicism&search=1

I hope this provides you with some needed references. I will leave it to you to dig deeper. I have heard this stuff most of my life, so I'm tired of discussing it. I tend to shy away from pastors that fixate on it. I prefer to hear what people are FOR, not AGAINST.

Yeah, that has a lot to do with this thread. Are you still a little butt hurt? LOL

[jimnyc]

Exactly so if the death penalty for apostasy is not based on any scripture, it cannot be sharia.

Conversion or die is forbidden for Muslims so how can it be learned. You are clinging to a myth. It would be a direct violation of the Qur'aan which also talks at length about hypocrites. If faith was forced on you on pain of death, you would become a hypocrite.

In short, forcing someone to convert is a form of Kufr or disbelief.

I say their law is not Islamic.

Sharia is derived from the Qur'aan. Apostasy punishment apart from it being clearly an afterlife punishment, is not.

I guess there are half a billion muslims who you can add to your "not real" muslims list then. Entire countries perverting the religion in the name of killing people.

[jimnyc]

It is amazing though, that so many of my posts and portions of my posts get zapped and I get little one liner responses. The bottom line is this - People are being killed around the globe for apostasy and blasphemy. "If" it were based on specific scripture, apparently that would make it ok. Millions and millions of Muslims live under wrong Sharia law, and people die as a result of the pettiest of "crimes", and now it's again ignored because it's not in the scriptures.

None of this changes the fact that these things happen on a widespread scale, and almost exclusively to Islamic countries. Whether it was in specific scripture or not wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference. Its still Muslim people, on a widespread scale, killing others for trying to leave the Islamic faith, or for insulting the Islamic faith. No amount of skipping over posts, deleting portions or dancing to answers, will change this disgusting fact and tradition, that we can add alongside honor killings.

[Gaffer]

I understand a polite society practices religious tolerance. That doesn't seem to apply in this forum; so it's time to take the gloves off.

Jafar, I'm tired of seeing you be a whippin' boy, so let an old Calvinist pass on some old-fashioned anti-Catholic positions you can throw back in their face:

1) The Catholic Institution (it's not a church) is the "Great Whore" referred to in Revelation 19:2
2) Don't forget the recent priest pedophilia scandal
3) Catholicism has changed it beliefs to accommodate paganism
.... and many more

Here are some quick references
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/the_great_whore.htm
All of http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/ is a good reference

Another reference is:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/

Pay close attention to the slide show that presents the Catholic institution as the anti-Christ:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/anti1.htm

You will find more information at:
http://www.wayoflife.org/sphider/search.php?query=Catholicism&search=1

I hope this provides you with some needed references. I will leave it to you to dig deeper. I have heard this stuff most of my life, so I'm tired of discussing it. I tend to shy away from pastors that fixate on it. I prefer to hear what people are FOR, not AGAINST.

Gee jafar your being stomped here with facts and in some cases name calling, so here's some information so you can even the odds a bit by attacking a specific segment of Christianity. I would hope that was all sarcasm, but I somehow doubt it. You don't throw rocks in glass houses, but your happy to provide the rocks.

Your boy jafar is losing because he can't argue the facts about islam. It's like trying to tell people bill clinton never fooled around with women. You want to defend islam? Go for it. Present facts. The old "but they did it too" routine doesn't work.

[tailfins]

As I was reading through some of these, since I haven't heard this material in a while, an interesting concept came to mind:



"...I scoff at the notion that anyone other
than a pope could be the antichrist." --W.F. Strojie, a conservative Roman Catholic scholar in,
Last Days of the Catholic Church, 1978, p. 3, (self-published).
...antichrist leads all false religion...and with this is mind...


Could it be that one day Buddhism, Catholicism, Paganism, Islam, ..... could all be in harmony and one day unify? Since I decided to open this Pandora's Box, I'm curious to where it leads. Now that I have lost some restraint: Why not discuss these things somewhere besides the Wednesday night church dinner?

[tailfins]

Gee jafar your being stomped here with facts and in some cases name calling, so here's some information so you can even the odds a bit by attacking a specific segment of Christianity. I would hope that was all sarcasm, but I somehow doubt it. You don't throw rocks in glass houses, but your happy to provide the rocks.

Your boy jafar is losing because he can't argue the facts about islam. It's like trying to tell people bill clinton never fooled around with women. You want to defend islam? Go for it. Present facts. The old "but they did it too" routine doesn't work.

Actually, I consider them all apostate religions and don't favor nor disfavor one over the other. They serve the same master: Lucifer. As a member of polite society, I generally don't bring up some of things discussed at some of the churches I attend. There's a time and place. I decided THIS is one of those places .... to a point. You may remember that Jerry Falwell blamed 9/11 on a nation that turned it's back on God. I agree with Jerry Falwell.

[jimnyc]

Why the need to deflect and change topics when one can't answer what is in front of them? Maybe I can repeat the opening post again? Or is it too difficult to comprehend that human beings still kill one another over these things?

[tailfins]

Why the need to deflect and change topics when one can't answer what is in front of them? Maybe I can repeat the opening post again? Or is it too difficult to comprehend that human beings still kill one another over these things?

It depends on your perspective. From my perspective all apostate religions are interchangeable. I can point out killing done by many religions, even mine. However, the people from the Salem Witch Trials came to their senses in less than a year.

[Abbey Marie]

It is amazing though, that so many of my posts and portions of my posts get zapped and I get little one liner responses. The bottom line is this - People are being killed around the globe for apostasy and blasphemy. "If" it were based on specific scripture, apparently that would make it ok. Millions and millions of Muslims live under wrong Sharia law, and people die as a result of the pettiest of "crimes", and now it's again ignored because it's not in the scriptures.

None of this changes the fact that these things happen on a widespread scale, and almost exclusively to Islamic countries. Whether it was in specific scripture or not wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference. Its still Muslim people, on a widespread scale, killing others for trying to leave the Islamic faith, or for insulting the Islamic faith. No amount of skipping over posts, deleting portions or dancing to answers, will change this disgusting fact and tradition, that we can add alongside honor killings.

:clap::clap::clap:

[Kathianne]

It is amazing though, that so many of my posts and portions of my posts get zapped and I get little one liner responses. The bottom line is this - People are being killed around the globe for apostasy and blasphemy. "If" it were based on specific scripture, apparently that would make it ok. Millions and millions of Muslims live under wrong Sharia law, and people die as a result of the pettiest of "crimes", and now it's again ignored because it's not in the scriptures.

None of this changes the fact that these things happen on a widespread scale, and almost exclusively to Islamic countries. Whether it was in specific scripture or not wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference. Its still Muslim people, on a widespread scale, killing others for trying to leave the Islamic faith, or for insulting the Islamic faith. No amount of skipping over posts, deleting portions or dancing to answers, will change this disgusting fact and tradition, that we can add alongside honor killings.

Agree 100%. If Jafur is to believed, he's sort of Islam's response of the Republicans. Those that 'speak for us' don't really. They are misinterpreting. Welcome to our world. Our texts don't proclaim what they say they do, we're not what they say we are.

We're better than this.

Perhaps some may want to consider how harshly they deal with Jarfar?

[Gaffer]

Actually, I consider them all apostate religions and don't favor nor disfavor one over the other. They serve the same master: Lucifer. As a member of polite society, I generally don't bring up some of things discussed at some of the churches I attend. There's a time and place. I decided THIS is one of those places .... to a point. You may remember that Jerry Falwell blamed 9/11 on a nation that turned it's back on God. I agree with Jerry Falwell.

Falwell was wrong. It's not that the nation turned it's back on god, the nation has just gotten progressively stupid. 9/11 can be laid almost completely at the feet of bill clinton who failed to act in so many ways and was more interested in covering his ass than looking after the country. It wasn't a god that caused 9/11, it was self interest on the part of clinton.

So you have decided to befriend the islamic with attacks on the Catholics. Religion makes strange bedfellows.

[Kathianne]

Falwell was wrong. It's not that the nation turned it's back on god, the nation has just gotten progressively stupid. 9/11 can be laid almost completely at the feet of bill clinton who failed to act in so many ways and was more interested in covering his ass than looking after the country. It wasn't a god that caused 9/11, it was self interest on the part of clinton.

So you have decided to befriend the islamic with attacks on the Catholics. Religion makes strange bedfellows.

Nailed. Truth is this is a war of religion. The Islamics are strong, neither the Christians or Jews are, as far as religion goes.

[jimnyc]

It depends on your perspective. From my perspective all apostate religions are interchangeable. I can point out killing done by many religions, even mine. However, the people from the Salem Witch Trials came to their senses in less than a year.

I wouldn't state that other religions haven't killed either, but this thread isn't about other religions. This thread is about apostasy and the Islamic religion, and then a current story about it was introduced. Of course we can change the subject to hide the truth of current times, but the facts and the truth don't just disappear.

Honor killings - Blasphemy killings - Apostate killings - they continue year in and year out. Some say it's based on the Islamic faith. Some say it's countries only saying it's Sharia law, but in reality it's not. But at the end of the day, what we have, is one religion/group/area of a people, who are actively killing people for these reasons. If these things happened in a civilized country, the world would be in an uproar.

Can you imagine if the USA in any way condoned sentences of death because someone left the Catholic religion, or ANY religion? Can you imagine if Canada allowed for death sentences for those who left any religious faith? And I'm not talking about little rogue factions, but state sponsored death sentences. Overlooked in many of these shitboxes, and if it were done elsewhere in the 21st century it would be looked at for the barbaric, savage & outdated practice that it is.

But we should keep our mouths shut and ignore these killings - in the name of "religious tolerance"?

[Voted4Reagan]

It depends on your perspective. From my perspective all apostate religions are interchangeable. I can point out killing done by many religions, even mine. However, the people from the Salem Witch Trials came to their senses in less than a year.

once again.... 400+ years ago.... you cant use ancient history as an analogy for modern practices... Christianity long ago gave up execution for Heresy and apostasy.

Islam still practices it.. for well over 1200 years.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Gee jafar your being stomped here with facts and in some cases name calling, so here's some information so you can even the odds a bit by attacking a specific segment of Christianity. I would hope that was all sarcasm, but I somehow doubt it. You don't throw rocks in glass houses, but your happy to provide the rocks.

Your boy jafar is losing because he can't argue the facts about islam. It's like trying to tell people bill clinton never fooled around with women. You want to defend islam? Go for it. Present facts. The old "but they did it too" routine doesn't work.

I believe this topic was the reason I got such a blasting from Tailfins. I see that he defends jafar because jafar can not defend against historic fact and truth of what is still being done in Islam. I've found that appeasoes are all the same , most will use any tactic or method to discredit the truth and attack the person putting forth the truth. Jim and myself have cited fact after fact of the evil deeds that are being done to further Islam's power and growth yet both jafar and tailfins want deny or excuse that action by saying welL X-number of years ago CHRISTIANS DID THIS OR THAT. Thats like a child crying Tony stole cookies last year so excuse my stealing cookies now! Its childish reasoning and represents a huge disdain for truth and reality. Also a sign that they have completely lost the debate! Not that they would admit it and certainly not that they will accept the truth merely because its offered to them.

My father said, you can judge a man by the friends he keeps and by those moral principles that he either endorses or denies! Those principles can be as simple as do good, oppose evil and speak/seek the TRUTH.
If one goes out of their way to defend EVIL DEEDS as being JUST then one is no better than those that one defends IMHO..

Islam and the Koran endorses the murdering action that we see its followers doing all over the world today. To deny that it is so is to be either deceptive or ignorant and possibly even both. I can see why muslims that practice the faith do so but why non-muslims agree and attempt to defend that delusion is a great mystery to me. I have a strong suspicion that its in the heart of such people to defend evil itself. Maybe they do not even know why they do it but they will viciously attack those that present verfiable truth as if they are evil lying scum. I 've been doimng this for well over 20 years now and I've been attacked hundreds of times by non-muslims for daring to present the truth. I never , 1. back down 2. seek to appease or 3. run away. As all three are completely dishonorable acts IMHO.-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I understand a polite society practices religious tolerance. That doesn't seem to apply in this forum; so it's time to take the gloves off.

Jafar, I'm tired of seeing you be a whippin' boy, so let an old Calvinist pass on some old-fashioned anti-Catholic positions you can throw back in their face:

1) The Catholic Institution (it's not a church) is the "Great Whore" referred to in Revelation 19:2
2) Don't forget the recent priest pedophilia scandal
3) Catholicism has changed it beliefs to accommodate paganism
.... and many more

Here are some quick references
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/the_great_whore.htm
All of http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/ is a good reference

Another reference is:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/

Pay close attention to the slide show that presents the Catholic institution as the anti-Christ:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/anti1.htm

You will find more information at:
http://www.wayoflife.org/sphider/search.php?query=Catholicism&search=1

I hope this provides you with some needed references. I will leave it to you to dig deeper. I have heard this stuff most of my life, so I'm tired of discussing it. I tend to shy away from pastors that fixate on it. I prefer to hear what people are FOR, not AGAINST.

Jafar is nobody's whippinboy here. He refuses to admit stonecold truth presented to him and you now attempt to defend his refusal by aiding him which clearly reveals a lot about your true character IMHO.
Explain how wrong actions by others in the past excuse or justify wrong actions today!
Explain how the concept that others murdered and terrorised in the distant past excuses or justifies 1400 years of Islam doing that and continuing to do so today. You can not because its a silly and childish proposition that you try to dress up as a legitimate and valid excuse.
Either you for whatever reasons want to aid Islam or you are just as delusional as are its believers that murder and terrorise people. Neither one is a good place to be IMHO.
It may shock you to discover that the truth will always out. You called me David Duke BECAUSE I CHOOSE TO SPEAK THE TRUTH and now I call you a deceiver because you now seek to justify and promote not only lies but also terror and murder committed by muslims. -Tyr

[jafar00]

Jafar, I'm tired of seeing you be a whippin' boy, so let an old Calvinist pass on some old-fashioned anti-Catholic positions you can throw back in their face:


Cheers but don't worry about me. I have thick skin. :)


Jafar is nobody's whippinboy here. He refuses to admit stonecold truth presented to him and you now attempt to defend his refusal by aiding him which clearly reveals a lot about your true character IMHO.

What truth? All I see are opinions.

[aboutime]

Gee whiz! I wasn't aware that tailfins and jafar were related. Birds of a feather...really do FROCK together.(Chinese dialect used).

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Cheers but don't worry about me. I have thick skin. :)



What truth? All I see are opinions.

Plenty of cited facts have been presented in links that I have provided, links provided by Drummond, Jim and others. You choose to ignore or deny even historic facts when presented.
Sure , we all exspress our opinions here and opinions may or may not be correct.
If by using the word -ALL- in that statement , you mean none of the evidence presented to you thus far has been fact, then I dare say that you are delusional IMHO. Again just an opinion but one that may indeed prove to be factually correct as well given enough time and exsposure here..-Tyr

[Abbey Marie]

Jafar is nobody's whippinboy here. He refuses to admit stonecold truth presented to him and you now attempt to defend his refusal by aiding him which clearly reveals a lot about your true character IMHO.
Explain how wrong actions by others in the past excuse or justify wrong actions today!
Explain how the concept that others murdered and terrorised in the distant past excuses or justifies 1400 years of Islam doing that and continuing to do so today. You can not because its a silly and childish proposition that you try to dress up as a legitimate and valid excuse.
Either you for whatever reasons want to aid Islam or you are just as delusional as are its believers that murder and terrorise people. Neither one is a good place to be IMHO.
It may shock you to discover that the truth will always out. You called me David Duke BECAUSE I CHOOSE TO SPEAK THE TRUTH and now I call you a deceiver because you now seek to justify and promote not only lies but also terror and murder committed by muslims. -Tyr

There's an old saying: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

There's an old saying: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Yes and its so greatly admired and adhered to by muslims , leftists and liberals more so than any other groups I can think of. Tis the reason we so often see those three groups allied in causes together. Causes that almost always attack American interests, justice and security..-Tyr

[jimnyc]

Cheers but don't worry about me. I have thick skin. :)

What truth? All I see are opinions.

Quite frankly, at this point I have no alternative but to label you a liar. This whole thread is about apostasy and blasphemy within the Islamic faith. About the many Islamic countries that still kill people for either offense. And yet here you are once again denying reality and stating it's only an opinion. I've unloaded so many facts to you about the abuses, killings and such within Islam, and all you do is deny it happened or claim these people are not real Muslims. You live in your own little world of denial.

But at the end of the day, these facts remain true. Millions and millions of Muslims throughout the world live under the law which spells out just this. Endless amounts of people are sentenced to death for things that wouldn't even be crimes in a normal country, and even if they were, they would be worthy of fines at best.

And I still stand by my earlier assessment. If any other normal/civilized country in the world killed people for these dumb acts, they would be condemned by the rest of the world. But for some weird reason, when it's Islam, we're supposed to remain silent, and in some odd way, have "religious tolerance" for it. Sorry, I have no tolerance for abuses, senseless murders, terrorism and systematic subjugation of women.

[jimnyc]

Agree 100%. If Jafur is to believed, he's sort of Islam's response of the Republicans. Those that 'speak for us' don't really. They are misinterpreting. Welcome to our world. Our texts don't proclaim what they say they do, we're not what they say we are.

We're better than this.

Perhaps some may want to consider how harshly they deal with Jarfar?

The way I see it is like this - either someone is against abuse, violence, terrorism & death, or they are not. I don't think but maybe once have I seen Jafar unequivocally condemn these things. It's always some kind of twisting, dodging, denying & maybe even supporting. And while it's too hard for him to condemn people being killed for the pettiest of offenses, he is the first to bring up similar things by Americans/Catholics, which blows up in his face as others immediately and steadfastly condemn. And even after they do so, he still dances around the subject. He MUST think many of these things bad, as he's the first to try and separate Muslims from certain acts. But then when proven that Muslims DO do these things, he goes silent or won't answer questions.

You know how we sometimes accuse others of "party over country"? Well, Jafar is Islam over anything, even right and wrong.

[aboutime]

Cheers but don't worry about me. I have thick skin. :)



What truth? All I see are opinions.


jafar. What you laughingly call 'A thick skin', WE call BS. Hiding behind lies, pretending to be someone, or something you are not. Like Our Obama. Only serves to make you one of the most prolific Liars here on DP.

In fact. If you didn't use the name jafar. Most of us would call you OBAMA the False Prophet of Chicago.

[Marcus Aurelius]

I find it fitting with Jarar's obvious narcissism that he seesm to think he is the end all and be all in regards to what is, and is not, Islam.

He seems to feel he is better suited to tell what is Islam than the Quar'an... than Hadith's... than well known and respected Islamic scholars... than the people in Islamic countries who write the laws. They are all obviously wrong, in his mind, and so, are not really Islamic.

Essentially, Jafar has a seriously overinflated sense of self importance.

[Voted4Reagan]

I find it fitting with Jarar's obvious narcissism that he seesm to think he is the end all and be all in regards to what is, and is not, Islam.

He seems to feel he is better suited to tell what is Islam than the Quar'an... than Hadith's... than well known and respected Islamic scholars... than the people in Islamic countries who write the laws. They are all obviously wrong, in his mind, and so, are not really Islamic.

Essentially, Jafar has a seriously overinflated sense of self importance.

Jafar fits the description.....

“I shall turn away from My revelations those who show pride in the world wrongfully.” (7.146)

[tailfins]

The way I see it is like this - either someone is against abuse, violence, terrorism & death, or they are not.

There's a thing called a saturation point. I have hit that saturation point. Some people groups spend so much time telling you what they are against that you don't know what they are for. All of the above things you mention exist in gangs, prisons, slums and on and on and on. If you put your hands in a swirling cesspool so huge that you can't see the other side, those hands will stink. Wouldn't it get a better result promoting what you are FOR? If America positively adheres to it's principles, it won't be necessary to dissect all the weird philosophies of the world. I have heard enough of "this group is no good" and "that group is no good". The BEST response that kind of thing will get from me is a patronizing smile and something like "you sure have done your homework" and THAT'S when I'm being nice.

Remember the saying?
Small minds talk about people; mediocre minds talk about events; great minds talk about ideas.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

There's a thing called a saturation point. I have hit that saturation point. Some people groups spend so much time telling you what they are against that you don't know what they are for. All of the above things you mention exist in gangs, prisons, slums and on and on and on. If you put your hands in a swirling cesspool so huge that you can't see the other side, those hands will stink. Wouldn't it get a better result promoting what you are FOR? If America positively adheres to it's principles, it won't be necessary to dissect all the weird philosophies of the world. I have heard enough of "this group is no good" and "that group is no good". The BEST response that kind of thing will get from me is a patronizing smile and something like "you sure have done your homework" and THAT'S when I'm being nice.

Remember the saying?
Small minds talk about people; mediocre minds talk about events; great minds talk about ideas.


Good grief! You mean to say Islam isnt an ideal. Isnt an ideal on how to live one's life and how to force others to do likewise!!?? We take great exception to the "force others part" and you try to belittle us for noticing it and daring to speak openly about it! In that you are just like the muslims..
No, what you see is the weakness in your defense of Islam and the exsposure you have suffered because of it. Well, bully for you but this attempted spin is bullshat and you know it.
When we discussed the truth about Islam we are discussing an ideal that has enslaved well over a billion people! Apparently "THEY" THINK IT A "GREAT IDEAL" and we are now being accused of all kinds of nasty things for discussing that IDEAL they so love and our pointing out some truths about it. Your defense of Islam after you launched a blindsided attack upon me just proves to me my accusation that you were mad about my relentless posting of the truth about Islam and what you view as my attacks upon jafar. I attack the lie that is put forth to defend Islam and you hate that. Well get in line Hoss, there are hundreds ahead of you and I give them the same headache of hitting with the TRUTH as apparently I do you and Jafar.
Neither you or Jafar have made a dent in the TRUTH that has so shown the Koranic savagery and murder that is promoted by Islam. And you guys have looked quite silly with the futile attempts IMHO.

I tell you this , you will beat down a solid granite wall with a goose feather sooner than you will defeat the TRUTH.
And myself, I dont care what religion you are or what further spin you may attempt because the TRUTH will out.. -Tyr

[jimnyc]

There's a thing called a saturation point. I have hit that saturation point. Some people groups spend so much time telling you what they are against that you don't know what they are for. All of the above things you mention exist in gangs, prisons, slums and on and on and on. If you put your hands in a swirling cesspool so huge that you can't see the other side, those hands will stink. Wouldn't it get a better result promoting what you are FOR? If America positively adheres to it's principles, it won't be necessary to dissect all the weird philosophies of the world. I have heard enough of "this group is no good" and "that group is no good". The BEST response that kind of thing will get from me is a patronizing smile and something like "you sure have done your homework" and THAT'S when I'm being nice.

Remember the saying?
Small minds talk about people; mediocre minds talk about events; great minds talk about ideas.

I can do quite fine pointing out what I am against in addition to what I am for. It's quite simple to speak about both sides. I shouldn't have to forget about evil doings in the world in order to speak my mind about what I'm for.

You say all of those things exist in gangs, prisons, slums and so on.... I choose to speak about the one that is sanctioned by a government, by a population as a whole, as a way of life. All bad though. If you were to post some stories on violence and sentences of death or abuses in gangs, prisons or slum areas, I will condemn those actions just the same. But it stands out to me when I see people being killed because they chose to leave a religion, or made a comment that is taken as an insult to Islam.

[Abbey Marie]

I can do quite fine pointing out what I am against in addition to what I am for. It's quite simple to speak about both sides. I shouldn't have to forget about evil doings in the world in order to speak my mind about what I'm for.

You say all of those things exist in gangs, prisons, slums and so on.... I choose to speak about the one that is sanctioned by a government, by a population as a whole, as a way of life. All bad though. If you were to post some stories on violence and sentences of death or abuses in gangs, prisons or slum areas, I will condemn those actions just the same. But it stands out to me when I see people being killed because they chose to leave a religion, or made a comment that is taken as an insult to Islam.

As it should to anyone with a conscience and compassion for those being abused. tortured and killed. Seems like we may end up going the way of Europe, because all the PC-mongers are trying to make it difficult to call these atrocities out for what they are.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

As it should to anyone with a conscience and compassion for those being abused. tortured and killed. Seems like we may end up going the way of Europe, because all the PC-mongers are trying to make it difficult to call these atrocities out for what they are.


PC-mongers, I love the term.. Gonna openly steal it from ya..:clap:
And that is exactly what the PC-mongers attempt to do!--Tyr

[jafar00]

Gee whiz! I wasn't aware that tailfins and jafar were related. Birds of a feather...really do FROCK together.(Chinese dialect used).

An racist too. I guess that goes well with your genocidal tendencies.


Quite frankly, at this point I have no alternative but to label you a liar.

I know you will oppose anything I say because I am a Muslim but I can let the Qur'aan speak for me. Believe it or not, the Qur'aan doesn't agree with your assessment that the penalty for Apostasy in Sharia is death. Even if you ignore history and bring cherry picked, out of context and mis-quoted Hadiths to support your claims, the Qur'aan supersedes all of that. At the most basic level of Hadith sciences if the Hadith contradicts the Qur'aan, it cannot be used to make any law. The 2 most commonly used Hadith quotes are in fact ahad or weak Hadiths with no chain of narrators.

Say: (It is) the truth from the Lord of you (all). Then whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve. Lo! We have prepared for disbelievers Fire. Its tent encloseth them. If they ask for showers, they will be showered with water like to molten lead which burneth the faces. Calamitous the drink and ill the resting-place! (18:29)

There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. (2:256)

But whoso is averse and disbelieveth, Allah will punish him with direst punishment. (22:23-24)

Lo! We have revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture for mankind with truth. Then whosoever goeth right it is for his soul, and whosoever strayeth, strayeth only to its hurt. And thou art not a warder over them. (39:41)

These are just some verses from the Qur'aan that support me. You can read it front to back and you will not find a single verse to support a worldly punishment for apostasy.

You can call me a liar all you like until you are blue in the face. You are still wrong.

[Marcus Aurelius]

...These are just some verses from the Qur'aan that support me. You can read it front to back and you will not find a single verse to support a worldly punishment for apostasy.

You can call me a liar all you like until you are blue in the face. You are still wrong.

you are a liar, Jafar, as well as a narcissist.




Though it may be argued that this is not clear through the Qur'an (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an) alone, scholars have found justification for the penalty from within its pages (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Apostasy), and there are also numerous Sahih (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Sahih) (authentic) hadiths (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Hadith) confirming this punishment as attested by Prophet Muhammad. In Sahih Bukhari, we see it as “Allah's Apostle said, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him'”,[2] (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Apostasy#cite_note-apostasy-1) and it was also one of only three reasons given by him where killing a Muslim is permitted.[3] (http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Apostasy#cite_note-2)


Hadith are regarded by traditional Islamic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam) schools of jurisprudence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madh%27hab) as important tools for understanding the Quran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran) and in matters of jurisprudence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith#cite_note-Nukat-4) Hadith were evaluated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_hadith) and gathered into large collections during the 8th and 9th centuries. These works are referred to in matters of Islamic law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia) and history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_history) to this day.

http://www.islamicperspectives.com/apostasy1.htm
In this piece by noted Islamic scholar Dr. Ahmad Shafaat, he attempts to explain that the Quar'an does not support the death penalty for apostasy... however, in his conclusion, he does state an instance where it is approved.


The third type of apostate is one who leaves Islam and then engages in hostile actions against Islam and Muslims, e.g. knowingly engages in propaganda against Islam and Muslims blatantly ignoring facts that he is expected to know well, passes secrets to the enemy, takes part in fighting against the Muslims. Such an apostate can be punished by anything from exile to death.

Let me guess, Jafar, you know more than Dr. Shafaat, right?

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://quran.com/4/89
http://c00022506.cdn1.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/4_89.png



They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.


There it is, right there, Jafar. The Quar'an... 4:89... plainly stating that apostates should be killed wherever found. And before you whine that the site is an anti-Islam interpretation...

http://quran.com/about

Credits This website was created by a few volunteers and was made possible with the will of Allah (Glory be unto Him) and with the help of the open source Muslim community online. Data sources include Tanzil (http://www.tanzil.info), QuranComplex (http://www.qurancomplex.com), Zekr (http://www.zekr.org) and Online Qur'an Project (http://www.al-quran.info).




Game... set... match, Jafar. Now, I DARE you to call the Quar'an inaccurate or a fabrication.

[jafar00]

you are a liar, Jafar, as well as a narcissist.






http://www.islamicperspectives.com/apostasy1.htm
In this piece by noted Islamic scholar Dr. Ahmad Shafaat, he attempts to explain that the Quar'an does not support the death penalty for apostasy... however, in his conclusion, he does state an instance where it is approved.



Let me guess, Jafar, you know more than Dr. Shafaat, right?

He has his opinion which appears to be Wahhabi in that he appears to make his own interpretations based on single transmission hadiths (Gharib, weak hadiths) putting aside 1000+ years of scholarly opinion for his own ideas. He is welcome to his opinion but his writing doesn't prove a thing.


http://quran.com/4/89
http://c00022506.cdn1.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/4_89.png



They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.


There it is, right there, Jafar. The Quar'an... 4:89... plainly stating that apostates should be killed wherever found. And before you whine that the site is an anti-Islam interpretation...

http://quran.com/about



Game... set... match, Jafar. Now, I DARE you to call the Quar'an inaccurate or a fabrication.

Check Mate. This verse is aimed at a particular group of people IN HISTORY.

Surat an Nisa was revealed around the time after the Battle of Uhud when the Muslims were under siege from all sides. This included the Munafiqeen (Hypocrites) who on the outside appeared to be Muslims, but as soon as the Prophet's (saw) back was turn, they schemed to kill him. Start at verse 81 of the same surah and you will be introduced to them. They are not apostates but enemy agents.

Sorry Tyr. This is not your smoking gun.

[jimnyc]

An racist too. I guess that goes well with your genocidal tendencies.



I know you will oppose anything I say because I am a Muslim but I can let the Qur'aan speak for me. Believe it or not, the Qur'aan doesn't agree with your assessment that the penalty for Apostasy in Sharia is death. Even if you ignore history and bring cherry picked, out of context and mis-quoted Hadiths to support your claims, the Qur'aan supersedes all of that. At the most basic level of Hadith sciences if the Hadith contradicts the Qur'aan, it cannot be used to make any law. The 2 most commonly used Hadith quotes are in fact ahad or weak Hadiths with no chain of narrators.

Say: (It is) the truth from the Lord of you (all). Then whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve. Lo! We have prepared for disbelievers Fire. Its tent encloseth them. If they ask for showers, they will be showered with water like to molten lead which burneth the faces. Calamitous the drink and ill the resting-place! (18:29)

There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. (2:256)

But whoso is averse and disbelieveth, Allah will punish him with direst punishment. (22:23-24)

Lo! We have revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture for mankind with truth. Then whosoever goeth right it is for his soul, and whosoever strayeth, strayeth only to its hurt. And thou art not a warder over them. (39:41)

These are just some verses from the Qur'aan that support me. You can read it front to back and you will not find a single verse to support a worldly punishment for apostasy.

You can call me a liar all you like until you are blue in the face. You are still wrong.

I've said quite a few times in this thread that it didn't matter if it were in scripture or not - that the thing here is that people are being killed for trying to leave the faith, or for insulting the faith. Whether this is supported by scripture or not doesn't change the fact that it's prevalent in so many countries and millions and millions and millions live under these laws. Then you come waltzing in and claim all you see here is opinions. Sorry, these people dying for these petty little crimes are fact. Do you have trouble knowing specifically what you are replying to? Maybe you should slow down, quote a post and reply? If you have trouble keeping up, it's asinine to skip a shitload of posts, grab the last one, and take a guess at an argument you are responding to. Do I need to go back and re-quote my own posts where I have said this quite a few times now, that scripture doesn't matter? Or will you just say now, that since it's not scripture, it's just bad law? I agree, it is a bad law that SO many Islamic countries are using to kill people for DUMB reasons.

And since you passed over so many of my posts, I'll repeat myself again. Imagine the USA sentencing someone to death for daring to leave the Christian faith. Or for making fun of Jesus. Imagine Canada hanging someone for making fun of the Jews during the holidays. Or maybe the UK stoning someone to death for trying to leave their religion there. Wow, imagine the uproar throughout the world at such savagery and abuse of human rights. But when this crap happens in Islamic crapholes - not a peep. Just another day.

So stop trying to muddy the waters here, Jafar. Look at the guy in the opening post in Yemen. This is standard in MANY countries and MANY regions in IslamWorld. People getting killed for apostasy and blasphemy. Whether it's in the Quran or not matters little when there is a body laying there at the end of the day. It's animal behavior whether supported by a holy book or not.

[Drummond]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.

Here's a little something for you, Jafar ...

http://answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm#

There's a very great deal to read through .. but let me just quote from a piece appearing some way down the page >>


SUMMARY


Analysis of apostasy requires examination of the full scope and weight of the Islamic source materials. We have on one side, a few Muslims, primarily living in the West, arguing that the Quran does not teach execution. On the other hand, the Hadith state specifically that apostates are to be executed, the historical records detail the massacre of thousands of apostates, and the comprehensive weight of Islamic jurisprudence pronounces the death sentence. Both sides cannot be right. Either the modern, "non-death" Muslims are right, and the Companions were fools, liars, and murderers, or the Caliphs of Islam, the great scholars of Islam, the records of Hadith, are correct, and the non-death Muslims are deluded, or playing a shell game to con a Western audience.

Are you playing a 'shell game', Jafar ?

[jimnyc]

And aside from that, does it really matter? It's a VERY widespread practice, to sentence to death apostates and blasphemers and primarily only Muslims left doing it in this day and age. So these people are wrong that do these things in these Islamic countries? It's not Sharia and they are applying Sharia law incorrectly? All of the countries named have this listed in their laws, and they call it "Sharia Law". All of these countries state what I showed you earlier, that Sharia does have a portion of its basis from the Quran and Hadiths. Was that incorrect?


It is amazing though, that so many of my posts and portions of my posts get zapped and I get little one liner responses. The bottom line is this - People are being killed around the globe for apostasy and blasphemy. "If" it were based on specific scripture, apparently that would make it ok. Millions and millions of Muslims live under wrong Sharia law, and people die as a result of the pettiest of "crimes", and now it's again ignored because it's not in the scriptures.

None of this changes the fact that these things happen on a widespread scale, and almost exclusively to Islamic countries. Whether it was in specific scripture or not wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference. Its still Muslim people, on a widespread scale, killing others for trying to leave the Islamic faith, or for insulting the Islamic faith. No amount of skipping over posts, deleting portions or dancing to answers, will change this disgusting fact and tradition, that we can add alongside honor killings.


I wouldn't state that other religions haven't killed either, but this thread isn't about other religions. This thread is about apostasy and the Islamic religion, and then a current story about it was introduced. Of course we can change the subject to hide the truth of current times, but the facts and the truth don't just disappear.

Honor killings - Blasphemy killings - Apostate killings - they continue year in and year out. Some say it's based on the Islamic faith. Some say it's countries only saying it's Sharia law, but in reality it's not. But at the end of the day, what we have, is one religion/group/area of a people, who are actively killing people for these reasons. If these things happened in a civilized country, the world would be in an uproar.

Can you imagine if the USA in any way condoned sentences of death because someone left the Catholic religion, or ANY religion? Can you imagine if Canada allowed for death sentences for those who left any religious faith? And I'm not talking about little rogue factions, but state sponsored death sentences. Overlooked in many of these shitboxes, and if it were done elsewhere in the 21st century it would be looked at for the barbaric, savage & outdated practice that it is.

But we should keep our mouths shut and ignore these killings - in the name of "religious tolerance"?


What truth? All I see are opinions.

Everything in bold has nothing to do with scripture and is absolute FACT.


Quite frankly, at this point I have no alternative but to label you a liar. This whole thread is about apostasy and blasphemy within the Islamic faith. About the many Islamic countries that still kill people for either offense. And yet here you are once again denying reality and stating it's only an opinion. I've unloaded so many facts to you about the abuses, killings and such within Islam, and all you do is deny it happened or claim these people are not real Muslims. You live in your own little world of denial.

But at the end of the day, these facts remain true. Millions and millions of Muslims throughout the world live under the law which spells out just this. Endless amounts of people are sentenced to death for things that wouldn't even be crimes in a normal country, and even if they were, they would be worthy of fines at best.

And I still stand by my earlier assessment. If any other normal/civilized country in the world killed people for these dumb acts, they would be condemned by the rest of the world. But for some weird reason, when it's Islam, we're supposed to remain silent, and in some odd way, have "religious tolerance" for it. Sorry, I have no tolerance for abuses, senseless murders, terrorism and systematic subjugation of women.


The way I see it is like this - either someone is against abuse, violence, terrorism & death, or they are not. I don't think but maybe once have I seen Jafar unequivocally condemn these things. It's always some kind of twisting, dodging, denying & maybe even supporting. And while it's too hard for him to condemn people being killed for the pettiest of offenses, he is the first to bring up similar things by Americans/Catholics, which blows up in his face as others immediately and steadfastly condemn. And even after they do so, he still dances around the subject. He MUST think many of these things bad, as he's the first to try and separate Muslims from certain acts. But then when proven that Muslims DO do these things, he goes silent or won't answer questions.

You know how we sometimes accuse others of "party over country"? Well, Jafar is Islam over anything, even right and wrong.

These selected posts took out the "religious" factor and left scripture out of it. They were posted leaving this out, but showing that these barbaric acts of killing people for stupid things still happens. Then you claim it's all opinions. Then you come back once again with scripture, ignoring those posts. Do these beasts that kill people for such things get a pass because it's not in scripture?

Nearly half a billion people, maybe more, living under the threat of death if they try to leave Islam. Nearly half a billion people living under the threat of death if they merely insult the religion. I don't give a crap if that's in any scriptures or not, it's still retarded and should have been left in the stone ages. No other civilized country would kill for such petty reasons and the rest of the world would be up in arms for humanitarian reasons if one did. But when it's a Muslim country, people just shake their heads and move on.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

He has his opinion which appears to be Wahhabi in that he appears to make his own interpretations based on single transmission hadiths (Gharib, weak hadiths) putting aside 1000+ years of scholarly opinion for his own ideas. He is welcome to his opinion but his writing doesn't prove a thing.



Check Mate. This verse is aimed at a particular group of people IN HISTORY.

Surat an Nisa was revealed around the time after the Battle of Uhud when the Muslims were under siege from all sides. This included the Munafiqeen (Hypocrites) who on the outside appeared to be Muslims, but as soon as the Prophet's (saw) back was turn, they schemed to kill him. Start at verse 81 of the same surah and you will be introduced to them. They are not apostates but enemy agents.

Sorry Tyr. This is not your smoking gun.

Jafar, the majority of mulims today believe in the death sentence for both blasphemy and apostasy. So if Islam is so perfect, the Koran so perfect how and why is this true? I could go to any muslim controlled nation today, walk the streets shouting mohammad is false and Allah is too -And I would be murdered that very day!
Your assertions that only a minority of muslims believe in and practice such savagery is totally in error. Even a majority of muslims here in the USA (by far the tamest of the lot) when polled stated that blasphemy should be a punishable offense! They are now even working to make that a law here. -Tyr

[aboutime]

He has his opinion which appears to be Wahhabi in that he appears to make his own interpretations based on single transmission hadiths (Gharib, weak hadiths) putting aside 1000+ years of scholarly opinion for his own ideas. He is welcome to his opinion but his writing doesn't prove a thing.



Check Mate. This verse is aimed at a particular group of people IN HISTORY.

Surat an Nisa was revealed around the time after the Battle of Uhud when the Muslims were under siege from all sides. This included the Munafiqeen (Hypocrites) who on the outside appeared to be Muslims, but as soon as the Prophet's (saw) back was turn, they schemed to kill him. Start at verse 81 of the same surah and you will be introduced to them. They are not apostates but enemy agents.

Sorry Tyr. This is not your smoking gun.



Thanks so much jafar. You have finally proven to the rest of us. "YOU REALLY ARE THAT DUMB!"

You are convinced you are playing a game here. While everyone else is as Serious as a Heart Attack. You can CHECK-MATE yourself till the cows come home. Or should I say PIGS COME HOME?
You only prove, with every new post you make. How phony, disingenuous and convinced your lies MUST, and WILL always be accepted by anyone who disagree's with you.

If you want to make this a game.
Try this one out. You never will lose.

Dip one thumb up your butt, and place your other thumb in your mouth.
Then have someone you trust yell "SWITCH!"
Replace the thumbs, and repeat until Both Thumbs have been Sucked Clean.

YOU WIN!

[Marcus Aurelius]

He has his opinion which appears to be Wahhabi in that he appears to make his own interpretations based on single transmission hadiths (Gharib, weak hadiths) putting aside 1000+ years of scholarly opinion for his own ideas. He is welcome to his opinion but his writing doesn't prove a thing.



Check Mate. This verse is aimed at a particular group of people IN HISTORY.

Surat an Nisa was revealed around the time after the Battle of Uhud when the Muslims were under siege from all sides. This included the Munafiqeen (Hypocrites) who on the outside appeared to be Muslims, but as soon as the Prophet's (saw) back was turn, they schemed to kill him. Start at verse 81 of the same surah and you will be introduced to them. They are not apostates but enemy agents.

Sorry Tyr. This is not your smoking gun.

So, once again, Jafar claims to be more learned than yet another well respected Islamic scholar, proving yet again he is nothing more than a narcissistic poster with delusions of his own importance and intelligence.

Also, once again a passage in the Quar'an showing the death penalty for apostasy is actually in the Quar'an... and Jafar ignores it, claiming it doesn't apply. Again, proving that in Jafar's tiny little mind, only HE has the correct interpretation of Islam.

[jafar00]

I've said quite a few times in this thread that it didn't matter if it were in scripture or not

Actually that matters a great deal when you are saying that there is a death penalty for leaving Islam in Islam.


Here's a little something for you, Jafar ...

http://answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm#

There's a very great deal to read through .. but let me just quote from a piece appearing some way down the page >>



Are you playing a 'shell game', Jafar ?

The website is lying and playing the usual game of reading english interpretations of Hadith at face value without delving into the history, meanings, validity, supported or not in the Qur'aan or any other methods of determining the validity of the hadith that most hadith scholars would do.

No Hadith supports in any way a death penalty for simply leaving the religion. Besides, the Qur'aan is held above any Hadiths. If a Hadith contradicts the Qur'aan, it is not to be followed.


Everything in bold has nothing to do with scripture and is absolute FACT.





These selected posts took out the "religious" factor and left scripture out of it. They were posted leaving this out, but showing that these barbaric acts of killing people for stupid things still happens. Then you claim it's all opinions. Then you come back once again with scripture, ignoring those posts. Do these beasts that kill people for such things get a pass because it's not in scripture?

Nearly half a billion people, maybe more, living under the threat of death if they try to leave Islam. Nearly half a billion people living under the threat of death if they merely insult the religion. I don't give a crap if that's in any scriptures or not, it's still retarded and should have been left in the stone ages. No other civilized country would kill for such petty reasons and the rest of the world would be up in arms for humanitarian reasons if one did. But when it's a Muslim country, people just shake their heads and move on.

Yes, there are bad laws and bad customs in some places. Don't blame Islam if the teaching isn't ther



Also, once again a passage in the Quar'an showing the death penalty for apostasy is actually in the Quar'an... and Jafar ignores it, claiming it doesn't apply. Again, proving that in Jafar's tiny little mind, only HE has the correct interpretation of Islam.

It's not just my opinion. Have you studied Islamic History? Have you studied the Tafsir of the Qur'aan? No? I have.

You cannot claim that I am lying if you don't understand it yourself.

If you believe half of these anti Islam agenda websites and blogs, I should have already blown myself up in a shopping mall after chopping the heads off a few infidels before I pressed the button or something. It's ridiculous.

[jimnyc]

Actually that matters a great deal when you are saying that there is a death penalty for leaving Islam in Islam.



The website is lying and playing the usual game of reading english interpretations of Hadith at face value without delving into the history, meanings, validity, supported or not in the Qur'aan or any other methods of determining the validity of the hadith that most hadith scholars would do.

No Hadith supports in any way a death penalty for simply leaving the religion. Besides, the Qur'aan is held above any Hadiths. If a Hadith contradicts the Qur'aan, it is not to be followed.



Yes, there are bad laws and bad customs in some places. Don't blame Islam if the teaching isn't ther



It's not just my opinion. Have you studied Islamic History? Have you studied the Tafsir of the Qur'aan? No? I have.

You cannot claim that I am lying if you don't understand it yourself.

If you believe half of these anti Islam agenda websites and blogs, I should have already blown myself up in a shopping mall after chopping the heads off a few infidels before I pressed the button or something. It's ridiculous.

So you don't care that Muslims all over the world are killed for petty offenses? I didn't think so. And that's why Islam is so fucked up, no one within has a moral compass.

[jimnyc]

If you believe half of these anti Islam agenda websites and blogs, I should have already blown myself up in a shopping mall after chopping the heads off a few infidels before I pressed the button or something. It's ridiculous.

No, you just admittedly support those that do so to your sworn enemy.

[jafar00]

So you don't care that Muslims all over the world are killed for petty offenses? I didn't think so. And that's why Islam is so fucked up, no one within has a moral compass.

Yes I do care but there is little I can do about it.


No, you just admittedly support those that do so to your sworn enemy.

Since when?

[aboutime]

Actually that matters a great deal when you are saying that there is a death penalty for leaving Islam in Islam.



The website is lying and playing the usual game of reading english interpretations of Hadith at face value without delving into the history, meanings, validity, supported or not in the Qur'aan or any other methods of determining the validity of the hadith that most hadith scholars would do.

No Hadith supports in any way a death penalty for simply leaving the religion. Besides, the Qur'aan is held above any Hadiths. If a Hadith contradicts the Qur'aan, it is not to be followed.



Yes, there are bad laws and bad customs in some places. Don't blame Islam if the teaching isn't ther



It's not just my opinion. Have you studied Islamic History? Have you studied the Tafsir of the Qur'aan? No? I have.

You cannot claim that I am lying if you don't understand it yourself.

If you believe half of these anti Islam agenda websites and blogs, I should have already blown myself up in a shopping mall after chopping the heads off a few infidels before I pressed the button or something. It's ridiculous.



jafar. Now that you have all of that stuff we've heard from you so many times before...off your mind. Are you now ready to tell us, or admit you DO NOT SUPPORT the known Terrorist Group...HAMAS?

Simple question, only requires one of two answers.

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=598651#post598651)

Also, once again a passage in the Quar'an showing the death penalty for apostasy is actually in the Quar'an... and Jafar ignores it, claiming it doesn't apply. Again, proving that in Jafar's tiny little mind, only HE has the correct interpretation of Islam.


It's not just my opinion. Have you studied Islamic History? Have you studied the Tafsir of the Qur'aan? No? I have.

You cannot claim that I am lying if you don't understand it yourself.

If you believe half of these anti Islam agenda websites and blogs, I should have already blown myself up in a shopping mall after chopping the heads off a few infidels before I pressed the button or something. It's ridiculous.

Interesting that you completely ignore this part of my post...


So, once again, Jafar claims to be more learned than yet another well respected Islamic scholar, proving yet again he is nothing more than a narcissistic poster with delusions of his own importance and intelligence.

You have repeatedly been show articles from noted and respected Islamic scholars who contradict you... and you repeatedly ignore them, or claim you are right and they are wrong.

Your answer to everyone who disagrees with you is 'you do not understand...I do'. Even noted Islamic scholars who have dedicated their entire lives to the study of the Quar'an, you claim are incorrect, because they disagree with you.

You appear to think your interpretation is perfect... your knowledge is perfect. Essentially, you're comparing yourself with God (Allah). Allah has told you in the Quar'an that killing for apostasy is permitted, and you've said HE is wrong... that the Quar'an does NOT permit this.

You essentially called Allah a liar.

[Kathianne]

In general what I'm getting from Jafur is that Islam, via the Koran is being misinterpreted, not by the West, but by those claiming to be Islam believers.

A hard road that, as they seem to be in the majority.

I'd have much more sympathy towards him, if he'd condemned the Egyptian rulers in error, but he didn't. Nor does he condemn Hamas. Indeed, there are posts of his agreeing with the ideals, if not the methods of Musim brotherhood and Hamas.

He picked the wrong ponies. I feel his pain.

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.qsep.com/media/drzakirnaikOnApostasy.pdf


Here is a clarification on some serious misunderstanding that can occur as a result of Dr. Zakir Naik's answer at the Oxford Union Debate on the issue of "Punishment of Riddah (apostasy) in Islam"

In reply to a question, Dr. Zakir Naik said, "…death penalty is not the standard punishment for any Muslim who leaves his faith and professes any other religion…" and he substantiated it by stating that Muslim who converted to another faith, was pardoned by Allah's Messenger (sallallahu alaihe wasallam) according to hadeeth no. 4345 from Sunan Abu Dawood.

The answer to this in brief is that Dr. Zakir's statement is factually false. Killing is the
standard and only prescribed punishment for the murtad (apostate, one who leaves Islam). [Pl. see the fatwa of Allamah Ibn Baaz (rahimahullah) mentioned later]. The hadeeth from Sunan Abu Dawood that Dr. Zakir referred to in support of 'pardoning' the apostate, is actually mentioned by the scholars in support of killing the apostate, because the incident (mentioned in this hadeeth) is not about pardoning the apostate, for his apostasy (leaving Islam), at all.

The summary of the incident in the narration is that Abdullah ibn abu Sarh accepted Islam and was one of the scribes of the Qur'aan. He then became an apostate and returned to Meccah. After the conquest of Meccah, the Prophet (salallahu alaihe wasallam) ordered the killing of Abdullah ibn abu Sarh and some others, even if they were found clinging to the curtains of the Kaaba.

Abu Sarh hid in the house of Uthmaan ibn Affan (radhiallahu anhu), and came along with him to
Allah's Messenger salallahu alaihe wasallam to enter Islam again, but the Prophet refused three
times. He sallallahu alaihe wasallam finally accepted Abu Sarh's return to Islam because of hayaa for Uthmaan (radhiallahu anhu). The Prophet salallahu alaihe wasallam hoped that while he refused to accept Abu Sarh's return to Islam three times, one of his companions would kill him.

Therefore, this incident is not about pardoning the murtad (apostate) who insists upon his apostasy (which is the situation Dr. Zakir was asked about). Rather the incident is about the Prophet's refusal to accept Abu Sarh's "return to Islam" three times because of the severity of his crime, while hoping that one of his sahabah would come forward and kill him.


What will the people understand from Dr. Zakir Naik's reply and the brief narration of
Abu Dawood?

a) The listeners will be under the impression that killing is not the standard punishment for Riddah
(apostasy, turning away from the religion of Islam), while in realty it is the standard punishment, though the actual execution of an apostate may not be carried due to weakness of the Muslim nations in applying the hudood.

b) The listener will be misguided that the Hadeeth supports the pardoning of apostasy, while in
reality, Riddah is the greatest crime in Islam, and the Murtad is far worse than the original disbeliever. [A detailed explanation from the books of tafseer to follow insha'allah]
Shaikh ul-Islam Ibn Taymeeyah said in Majmoo al-Fatawa (2/193) in his refutation of the Batini
Ittihadis, "It is known that the disbelieving Tatars are better than these – because these are murtads (apostates) from Islam and of the worst people of Riddah – and the murtad is more evil than the original (disbeliever) from many aspects." [More to follow on the gravity of Riddah.]

c) Dr. Zakir's statement, "… many scholars say that a Muslim who leaves his faith and professes any other religion, death penalty is the punishment"; indicates that this is an issue of disagreement amongst the scholars, while such is not the case. Those who disagree are not scholars, but hadeethrejectors, liberalists, proponents of western-style individual freedom, and others innovators of this category.


Question: I heard in one of the radio interview programs that there is no proof from the Qur'aan, Hadeeth or Islamic fatawa for the permission of killing the apostate from Islam, please explain how sound is this (statement)?

Answer: The noble Qur'aan and the purified Sunnah have proven the killing of the murtad if he does not repent as in Soorah Tawbah, "… But if they repent and perform As-Salât (Iqâmat-as-Salât), and give Zakât, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." [Soorah Tawbah (9): 5] This verse proves that those who do not repent, their way should not be left.


Whosoever denies it (i.e., the killing of the apostate) is a Jahil (ignorant) or deviant – his sayings should not be given any consideration, rather he should be advised and educated perhaps he might be guided, and all guidance is with Allah." [end quote of Allamah Abdul-Aziz ibn Baaz]

I name Jafar, Jahil.

[jafar00]

jafar. Now that you have all of that stuff we've heard from you so many times before...off your mind. Are you now ready to tell us, or admit you DO NOT SUPPORT the known Terrorist Group...HAMAS?

Simple question, only requires one of two answers.

Yes I do support their struggle against the tyranny of the Zionist occupation and blockade.


Interesting that you completely ignore this part of my post...

I generally ignore insults.


You have repeatedly been show articles from noted and respected Islamic scholars who contradict you... and you repeatedly ignore them, or claim you are right and they are wrong.

Your answer to everyone who disagrees with you is 'you do not understand...I do'. Even noted Islamic scholars who have dedicated their entire lives to the study of the Quar'an, you claim are incorrect, because they disagree with you.

You appear to think your interpretation is perfect... your knowledge is perfect. Essentially, you're comparing yourself with God (Allah). Allah has told you in the Quar'an that killing for apostasy is permitted, and you've said HE is wrong... that the Quar'an does NOT permit this.

You essentially called Allah a liar.

You have not shown me any noted scholars. I have seen opinions from anti islam sites and a medical doctor.


In general what I'm getting from Jafur is that Islam, via the Koran is being misinterpreted, not by the West, but by those claiming to be Islam believers.

A hard road that, as they seem to be in the majority.

I'd have much more sympathy towards him, if he'd condemned the Egyptian rulers in error, but he didn't. Nor does he condemn Hamas. Indeed, there are posts of his agreeing with the ideals, if not the methods of Musim brotherhood and Hamas.

He picked the wrong ponies. I feel his pain.

My opinion of Ikhwan has declined to the point where I openly oppose them. Morsi did nothing to stop his supporters from rioting. Ikhwan have run about calling anyone who opposes them kufar.

They had a chance to prove themselves, but have already failed. Don't confuse my silence on the matter in this forum for support. I have spent many hours recently talking with my wife about what is happening in Egypt and it is not good.


http://www.qsep.com/media/drzakirnaikOnApostasy.pdf
I name Jafar, Jahil.

So, you're using Salafi sources now? I take it you also support Al Qaeda since they are from the Salafi? The Taliban are also Salafis. Do you also agree with them?

You call me ignorant? I am not the one trying to twist the Qur'aan to say what I want it to say. I am not the one who is IGNORANT of the history behind the revelation of the Qur'aan.

[Kathianne]

Yes I do support their struggle against the tyranny of the Zionist occupation and blockade.



I generally ignore insults.



You have not shown me any noted scholars. I have seen opinions from anti islam sites and a medical doctor.



My opinion of Ikhwan has declined to the point where I openly oppose them. Morsi did nothing to stop his supporters from rioting. Ikhwan have run about calling anyone who opposes them kufar.

They had a chance to prove themselves, but have already failed. Don't confuse my silence on the matter in this forum for support. I have spent many hours recently talking with my wife about what is happening in Egypt and it is not good.



So, you're using Salafi sources now? I take it you also support Al Qaeda since they are from the Salafi? The Taliban are also Salafis. Do you also agree with them?

You call me ignorant? I am not the one trying to twist the Qur'aan to say what I want it to say. I am not the one who is IGNORANT of the history behind the revelation of the Qur'aan.

From what I can see, you're far from ignorant. However you are in the process of dealing with disillusionment. There are bad apples everywhere, it's all the comfort I can extend.

[Marcus Aurelius]

So, you're using Salafi sources now? I take it you also support Al Qaeda since they are from the Salafi? The Taliban are also Salafis. Do you also agree with them?

You call me ignorant? I am not the one trying to twist the Qur'aan to say what I want it to say. I am not the one who is IGNORANT of the history behind the revelation of the Qur'aan.

Actually, yes... that is exactly what you do here. You continually claim complete mastery of interpretation of the Quar'an, while all examples that disagree with you are labeled as incorrect by you.

http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/religion-miscellaneous/difference-between-sunni-and-salafi/

The Salafi rely solely upon the Quran and the hadith or Sunah of the prophet narrated by his companions.


Jahil doesn't appear to think the Salafi are correct, yet they rely solely on the Quar'an.

[jafar00]

Actually, yes... that is exactly what you do here. You continually claim complete mastery of interpretation of the Quar'an, while all examples that disagree with you are labeled as incorrect by you.

http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/religion-miscellaneous/difference-between-sunni-and-salafi/



Jahil doesn't appear to think the Salafi are correct, yet they rely solely on the Quar'an.




If you knew what the Salafi/Wahhabi/Khawarij really are you wouldn't be turning to them for guidance. However since you do seem to hold them in high regard, I expect to see you appointed as the next Al Qaeda #2 before long.

[red states rule]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.

I am sure you would love to sit in the front row, munching popcorn, at the "execution) i.e murder of another recipient of the Religion of Peace. Or would want to take a more active part?

[jafar00]

I am sure you would love to sit in the front row, munching popcorn, at the "execution) i.e murder of another recipient of the Religion of Peace. Or would want to take a more active part?

If I lived in those places, I would probably be already dead for clipping my toenails on the wrong day or something.

[tailfins]

If I lived in those places, I would probably be already dead for clipping my toenails on the wrong day or something.

I bet you look like Nemo the fish because you live in Sydney.

[Marcus Aurelius]

If you knew what the Salafi/Wahhabi/Khawarij really are you wouldn't be turning to them for guidance. However since you do seem to hold them in high regard, I expect to see you appointed as the next Al Qaeda #2 before long.

I seem to have struck a nerve, Jahil.

I do not turn to them for guidance. I used them as an example of your inability to take any source that disagrees with your interpretation. Whether it be a learned Islamic scholar who is Sunni, Shi'a, or someone more strict like the Salafi, if they disagree with you, you utterly dismiss them as irrelevant, incorrect or not really Islamic. So far, the only source you have agreed with, is yourself.

You are narcissistic and delusional to think you alone are the greatest source of authority on what is, and is not, Islam.

[aboutime]

I bet you look like Nemo the fish because you live in Sydney.


tailfins. Good point. Perhaps a DENTIST's office?

[Drummond]

Yes I do support their struggle against the tyranny of the Zionist occupation and blockade.

This was in reply to Aboutime's challenge to you, Jafar, to answer the question as to whether you supported Hamas, a TERRORIST organisation.

It's taken you quite a while to meet the challenge posed by that question. But at last you have done so. For that, Jafar, I thank you.

But your answer, Jafar, surely places you in an impossible position ?

On the one hand ... you've expressed a distancing, an actual opposition, to other Islamists who turn to terrorism as a means of furthering Islam. You say that terrorism actually defies what Islam is about, if I've understood you correctly. Yet, here, now, you express support for a known terrorist organisation.

I don't see that you can claim both these things. You are either against terrorism, or you're for it. Your latest answer shows that you are a SUPPORTER OF TERRORISM.

It cannot be otherwise.

Hamas has committed itself to terrorism throughout its history, Jafar. Its very foundling principles show this to be true. They even reject outright any possibility of peaceful outcomes against Israel, again as part of their Charter.

And they've followed through. THOUSANDS of rockets have been fired at Israel. Suicide bombers have been sent into Israeli territory, not to harm or destroy military targets, but to murder and maim innocent civilians.

They've even strapped bombs to CHILDREN, to commit their TERRORIST ATROCITIES.

... so, now, you express support for that SCUM, Jafar ??

You say you support 'their struggle'. Well, 'their struggle' has ALWAYS been intended as terrorism, Jafar.

Note these quotes, based on Hamas's Charter ..

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/880818a.htm


On the Destruction of Israel:----'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble)

The Call to Jihad:----'The day the enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In the face of the Jews' usurpation,it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.' (Article 15)'Ranks will close, fighters joining other fighters, and masses everywhere in the Islamic world will come forward in response to the call of duty, loudly proclaiming: 'Hail to Jihad!'. This cry will reach the heavens and will go on being resounded until liberation is achieved, the invaders vanquished and Allah's victory comes about.'(Article 33)

Rejection of a Negotiated Peace Settlement:----'[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement... Those conferences are no more thana means to appoint the infidels as arbitrators in the lands of Islam... There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.' (Article 13)

Anti-Semitic Incitement:----'The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.' (Article 7)

'The HAMAS regards itself the spearhead and the vanguard of the circle of struggle against World Zionism... Islamic groups all over the Arab world should also do the same, since they are best equipped for their future role in the fight against the warmongering Jews.'(Article 32)
So there it is, Jafar. Hamas's Charter commits Hamas, as it stands, to unending terrorism against Israel. They don't want peace - they reject that as any option EVER worth considering. What they want, in its place, is continued mass murder.

If you support Hamas, THIS is what you're supporting. Therefore, you are a terrorist supporter.

Do you feel any measure of pride in your choice, Jafar ??

[Robert A Whit]

What about the Catholic Inquisition?

Do you believe that is recent news?

[jimnyc]

VERY well said, Drummond! That's why I crack up when people are falling over one another to talk about how reasonable he must be, or how he doesn't lash out when others would, or that he's picked on. Just a swell guy who happens to support terrorism and many terror attacks by Hamas that have been placed before him! A stand up guy alright. Sorry, I can't muster up the energy to be polite with someone who condones and supports terrorism.

[Drummond]

VERY well said, Drummond! That's why I crack up when people are falling over one another to talk about how reasonable he must be, or how he doesn't lash out when others would, or that he's picked on. Just a swell guy who happens to support terrorism and many terror attacks by Hamas that have been placed before him! A stand up guy alright. Sorry, I can't muster up the energy to be polite with someone who condones and supports terrorism.:clap::clap::clap:

Many thanks, Jim.

My patience has basically ended. Had Jafar taken the opposite line and pledged himself to be in opposition to Hamas, I could've applauded that. But the evidence is clear. We all know what Hamas is, what it's done, what it's still determined to do. We all know that there's not the slightest sign of Hamas taking a different line to the one it's always chosen. They COULD renounce violence if they chose, they COULD tear up their so-called 'Charter'.

But, of course, that's not going to happen. They are, after all, Islamic terrorist scum. Known to be, known to be unashamed mass murderers who will continue to be exactly that, who exult in the misery they inflict against the innocent. Murderers who are committed to the destruction of Israel.

Jafar is clear about his support, regardless. And there it is. QED.

[jimnyc]

:clap::clap::clap:

Many thanks, Jim.

My patience has basically ended. Had Jafar taken the opposite line and pledged himself to be in opposition to Hamas, I could've applauded that. But the evidence is clear. We all know what Hamas is, what it's done, what it's still determined to do. We all know that there's not the slightest sign of Hamas taking a different line to the one it's always chosen. They COULD renounce violence if they chose, they COULD tear up their so-called 'Charter'.

But, of course, that's not going to happen. They are, after all, Islamic terrorist scum. Known to be, known to be unashamed mass murderers who will continue to be exactly that, who exult in the misery they inflict against the innocent. Murderers who are committed to the destruction of Israel.

Jafar is clear about his support, regardless. And there it is. QED.

One can very easily support every last thing within Palestine without supporting a terror organization. That's why I asked him several times myself, to be clear on his position. IMO, there is never a reason to support a known terror organization and to look the other way over terror attacks. And once someone admits publicly that they do in fact support a terror organization, I will have trouble in the future believing them when they claim to not support another terror organization, and act as if the very thought of terrorism is somehow wrong - when out the other side of their mouth is pronounced support. Nope, you either support terror or you don't. You support Hamas one day. Then say you don't like Al Qaeda the next. That's not being against terrorism, that's just because Al Qaeda has different targets.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

:clap::clap::clap:

Many thanks, Jim.

My patience has basically ended. Had Jafar taken the opposite line and pledged himself to be in opposition to Hamas, I could've applauded that. But the evidence is clear. We all know what Hamas is, what it's done, what it's still determined to do. We all know that there's not the slightest sign of Hamas taking a different line to the one it's always chosen. They COULD renounce violence if they chose, they COULD tear up their so-called 'Charter'.

But, of course, that's not going to happen. They are, after all, Islamic terrorist scum. Known to be, known to be unashamed mass murderers who will continue to be exactly that, who exult in the misery they inflict against the innocent. Murderers who are committed to the destruction of Israel.

Jafar is clear about his support, regardless. And there it is. QED.

He supports Hamas then he supports their methods of fighting /opposing. Thats open and clear support for terrorism and murder. This is the man that tailfins went orgasmic over! Even called a great guy..
Supports those that deliberately murder innocent women and children! Finally Jafar had enough and admitted the truth. Now watch how his defenders here either go silent or still defend him.. Either action is reprehensible IMHO after reading what Jafar just admitted.
What say ye now tailfins, logroller etc.?????????--Tyr

[Kathianne]

VERY well said, Drummond! That's why I crack up when people are falling over one another to talk about how reasonable he must be, or how he doesn't lash out when others would, or that he's picked on. Just a swell guy who happens to support terrorism and many terror attacks by Hamas that have been placed before him! A stand up guy alright. Sorry, I can't muster up the energy to be polite with someone who condones and supports terrorism.

I think on the board, Jafur is very patient, he does tolerate a lot of abuse. However, he doesn't appear to get the disconnect between his defense of Islam or the Koran, his interpretation of both, and many if not most of his fellow believers. As is and has been obvious, he doesn't see that his defense being that the Koran doesn't 'allow' for killing innocents, he supports both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. He's confused between ideals and 'practicality' of his and their end goals.

[Marcus Aurelius]

VERY well said, Drummond! That's why I crack up when people are falling over one another to talk about how reasonable he must be, or how he doesn't lash out when others would, or that he's picked on. Just a swell guy who happens to support terrorism and many terror attacks by Hamas that have been placed before him! A stand up guy alright. Sorry, I can't muster up the energy to be polite with someone who condones and supports terrorism.

Jahil's spin on how Hammas is not really Islam, and therefore he can support it, should be amusing.

[Abbey Marie]

One can very easily support every last thing within Palestine without supporting a terror organization. That's why I asked him several times myself, to be clear on his position. IMO, there is never a reason to support a known terror organization and to look the other way over terror attacks. And once someone admits publicly that they do in fact support a terror organization, I will have trouble in the future believing them when they claim to not support another terror organization, and act as if the very thought of terrorism is somehow wrong - when out the other side of their mouth is pronounced support. Nope, you either support terror or you don't. You support Hamas one day. Then say you don't like Al Qaeda the next. That's not being against terrorism, that's just because Al Qaeda has different targets.

Hatred of Israel means support for some very nasty stuff.

[Voted4Reagan]

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.


Qur'an (4:89) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.089) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them"



Qur'an (9:11-12) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.011) - "But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief - Lo! they have no binding oaths - in order that they may desist."

Bukhari (52:260) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/052-sbt.php#004.052.260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' " Note that there is no distinction as to how that Muslim came to be a Muslim.

Bukhari (83:37) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/083-sbt.php#009.083.037) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."

Bukhari (84:57) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/084-sbt.php#009.084.057) - "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Bukhari (89:271) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/089-sbt.php#009.089.271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."

Bukhari (84:58) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/084-sbt.php#009.084.058) - [I]"There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, 'Who is this (man)?' Abu Muisa said, 'He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism.' Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, 'I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice.' Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, 'Then we discussed the night prayers'"

Bukhari (84:64-65) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/084-sbt.php#009.084.064) - "Allah's Apostle: 'During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for whoever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.'"

Abu Dawud (4346) (http://www.esinislam.com/Quran_And_Hadith/Sunan_Abu_Dawud_Hadith/Sunan_Abu_Dawud_Hadith_Book_38.htm) - "Was not there a wise man among you who would stand up to him when he saw that I had withheld my hand from accepting his allegiance, and kill him?" Muhammad is chastising his companions for allowing an apostate to "repent" under duress. (The person in question was Muhammad's former scribe who left him after doubting the authenticity of divine "revelations" upon finding out that he could suggest grammatical changes. He was brought back to Muhammad after having been captured in Medina).

Reliance of the Traveller (Islamic Law) o8.1 - "When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed." (o8.4 affirms that there is no penalty for killing an apostate).


Islamic Law:

There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafii), as well as classical Shiite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death. The process of declaring a person to be an apostate is known as takfir and the disbeliever is called a murtadd.

Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy: "An apostate...is to be executed by agreement in the case of a man, because of the words of the Prophet, 'Slay those who change their din [religion]'...Asking the apostate to repent was stipulated as a condition...prior to his execution."
The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy endorsed manual of Islamic Law, Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states: "Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst.... When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. In such a case, it is obligatory...to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed."

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I think on the board, Jafur is very patient, he does tolerate a lot of abuse. However, he doesn't appear to get the disconnect between his defense of Islam or the Koran, his interpretation of both, and many if not most of his fellow believers. As is and has been obvious, he doesn't see that his defense being that the Koran doesn't 'allow' for killing innocents, he supports both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. He's confused between ideals and 'practicality' of his and their end goals.

My take is he like hundreds of millions other muslims remains blinded by his religion that enforces intolerance and promotes death and destruction to achieve its goal, apostasy being a prime example of that . No real excuse for rejecting the truth. They are taught unbelievers (infidels)are not even human, worthy only of contempt and death! Anybody that believes the lies about the nature of the religion need only look at how they treat their women and how they use extreme violence to advance their goal of "ALL must submit or die". Absolute intolerance that has been called a Religion of Peace. Jafar is undoubtedly a true believer but THAT MISTAKEN belief forces its blindness upon him and he is as lost he can be IMHO. Rejection of the truth still bears its fruits regardless. -TYR

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by jafar00 http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=598195#post598195)

There is no WORLDLY punishment for apostasy in Islam. Death penalties for such are purely man made laws by despots. Yes, some of you may list random hadiths to support an argument that there is a death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but if you also know your history as you should when studying hadiths, you would know that those who did get the death penalty for leaving Islam in the time of the Prophet (saw), were also guilty of high treason which was the real reason for the death penalty.


Qur'an (4:89) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.089) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them"



Qur'an (9:11-12) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.011) - "But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief - Lo! they have no binding oaths - in order that they may desist."

Bukhari (52:260) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/052-sbt.php#004.052.260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' " Note that there is no distinction as to how that Muslim came to be a Muslim.

Bukhari (83:37) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/083-sbt.php#009.083.037) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."

Bukhari (84:57) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/084-sbt.php#009.084.057) - "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Bukhari (89:271) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/089-sbt.php#009.089.271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."

Bukhari (84:58) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/084-sbt.php#009.084.058) - [I]"There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, 'Who is this (man)?' Abu Muisa said, 'He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism.' Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, 'I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice.' Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, 'Then we discussed the night prayers'"

Bukhari (84:64-65) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/084-sbt.php#009.084.064) - "Allah's Apostle: 'During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for whoever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.'"

Abu Dawud (4346) (http://www.esinislam.com/Quran_And_Hadith/Sunan_Abu_Dawud_Hadith/Sunan_Abu_Dawud_Hadith_Book_38.htm) - "Was not there a wise man among you who would stand up to him when he saw that I had withheld my hand from accepting his allegiance, and kill him?" Muhammad is chastising his companions for allowing an apostate to "repent" under duress. (The person in question was Muhammad's former scribe who left him after doubting the authenticity of divine "revelations" upon finding out that he could suggest grammatical changes. He was brought back to Muhammad after having been captured in Medina).

Reliance of the Traveller (Islamic Law) o8.1 - "When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed." (o8.4 affirms that there is no penalty for killing an apostate).


Islamic Law:

There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafii), as well as classical Shiite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death. The process of declaring a person to be an apostate is known as takfir and the disbeliever is called a murtadd.

Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy: "An apostate...is to be executed by agreement in the case of a man, because of the words of the Prophet, 'Slay those who change their din [religion]'...Asking the apostate to repent was stipulated as a condition...prior to his execution."
The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy endorsed manual of Islamic Law, Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states: "Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst.... When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. In such a case, it is obligatory...to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed."

According to Jahil,

Those Quar'an passages do not exist...
You made them up...
You misunderstood the meaning of 'slay them wherever ye find them'...
You are looking at a bad English translation...
The people who wrote that are not really Muslim...

(insert similar bogus excuse here...)

Everyone here knows that Jahil is the ultimate authority on Islam in the world. Those that disagree with him are just plain wrong.

[jafar00]

According to Jahil,

Those Quar'an passages do not exist...
You made them up...
You misunderstood the meaning of 'slay them wherever ye find them'...
You are looking at a bad English translation...
The people who wrote that are not really Muslim...

(insert similar bogus excuse here...)

Everyone here knows that Jahil is the ultimate authority on Islam in the world. Those that disagree with him are just plain wrong.

4:89 is about Mushrik (Hypocrites), who plotted against Mohamed (saw) and the Muslims, not about leaving the faith. I have already established this.
9:11-12 is about the treaty of Hudaibiyyah where Mohamed (saw) made a peace treaty with the Quraysh of Mecca to allow Muslims to go to Mecca for Umra. The treaty was soon broken when the Quraysh attacked Muslim caravans thus violating the treaty.

The hadiths you quoted are all about those who committed treason, not just left Islam. READ it.
Bukhari (83:37) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/083-sbt.php#009.083.037) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."

Despite the fact that most of those are weak hadiths with a single person in the chain of transmission and so cannot be used for jurisprudence anyway, you shouldn't quote them without understanding them.

I should start just copy pasting my answers since I keep repeating myself.

[jimnyc]

Apostasy IS considered treason in some countries, hence some saying the death sentence is valid. Either way, killing someone for leaving Islam, or killing someone who commits treason, by leaving Islam, is a damn sorry reason to be killing someone.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Apostasy IS considered treason in some countries, hence some saying the death sentence is valid. Either way, killing someone for leaving Islam, or killing someone who commits treason, by leaving Islam, is a damn sorry reason to be killing someone.

same thing... except to Jahil. To him, it's like night and day.

[Marcus Aurelius]

4:89 is about Mushrik (Hypocrites), who plotted against Mohamed (saw) and the Muslims, not about leaving the faith. I have already established this.
9:11-12 is about the treaty of Hudaibiyyah where Mohamed (saw) made a peace treaty with the Quraysh of Mecca to allow Muslims to go to Mecca for Umra. The treaty was soon broken when the Quraysh attacked Muslim caravans thus violating the treaty.

The hadiths you quoted are all about those who committed treason, not just left Islam. READ it.
Bukhari (83:37) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/083-sbt.php#009.083.037) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."

Despite the fact that most of those are weak hadiths with a single person in the chain of transmission and so cannot be used for jurisprudence anyway, you shouldn't quote them without understanding them.

I should start just copy pasting my answers since I keep repeating myself.

The act of leaving Islam was the treason, dipshit. You are separating the two, and you're wrong to do so.

Spin away, Jahil. It's what we've come to expect form you.

Perhaps if you didn't siomply repeat the same misinformation and nonsense over and over, you'd be taken more seriously here, Jahil.

[aboutime]

The act of leaving Islam was the treason, dipshit. You are separating the two, and you're wrong to do so.

Spin away, Jahil. It's what we've come to expect form you.

Perhaps if you didn't siomply repeat the same misinformation and nonsense over and over, you'd be taken more seriously here, Jahil.


Marcus. You seem to have forgotten....when responding to 'jarfar', or whatever other name you use. That he is only following the instructions, orders, and tactics of his Mentor.....OBL. That should explain why jafar does what he does, and always repeats the same misinformation, nonsense, and propaganda over, and over. HE HAS NOTHING ELSE.

[jafar00]

Apostasy IS considered treason in some countries, hence some saying the death sentence is valid. Either way, killing someone for leaving Islam, or killing someone who commits treason, by leaving Islam, is a damn sorry reason to be killing someone.

The USA also has the death penalty for high treason so......

There is nothing in Islam to support a death penalty simply for leaving the religion.

[jimnyc]

The USA also has the death penalty for high treason so......

There is nothing in Islam to support a death penalty simply for leaving the religion.

And the qualifications for high treason is FAR FAR FAR from anything like "choosing to leave a religion". And whether you see anything in Islam or not doesn't make a difference, as MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Muslims follow under these laws and shitloads of Muslims are killed for it - and JUST for leaving Islam. There are ENDLESS stories out there supporting these stories and countries handing down the punishment. Again, take your choice, either it's Islam killing for these offenses or muslim men making laws and killing people for these offenses. Makes no difference to me, it's still barbaric and no civilized people do these things.

[jimnyc]

I've debated this subject many, many times. My beef with it of course is rooted somewhere in Islam. It might not make people happy in most other religions, but people are free to leave or stay. I've read for years and years now about Muslims being killed and sentenced to be killed, if they try to leave Islam. Many of these stories are from the very people trying to save their own lives. I can't possibly think of any valid reason for someone to be killed for leaving a religion, or even insulting a religion. Sometimes instead of apostasy, they will bring up the charge of blasphemy. Either way, it's killing people for the pettiest of offenses. And regardless of the facts or lack thereof in this particular case, it's a very, very well known practice in WAY too many Islamic countries.



http://www.yementimes.com/en/1631/report/1701/Family-of-Yemeni-blogger-prosecuted-for-apostasy-calls-accusations-


The USA also has the death penalty for high treason so......

There is nothing in Islam to support a death penalty simply for leaving the religion.

First we have the original post, showing a man possibly facing a death sentence for which you claim doesn't happen or exist. Then we'll let Google's results speak for the rest:

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=islam+sentence+apostasy&oq=islam+sentence+apostasy&gs_l=hp.3..0i8i30.1310.4873.0.5479.23.22.0.1.1.0.1 64.1621.20j2.22.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.btbdkusMQ9Q&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355247934,d.dmQ&fp=78b16b8d5d1dc30&bpcl=39918873&biw=1920&bih=884

[jimnyc]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=islam+sentence+apostasy

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

This link covers it quite well. Jim is absolutely correct, Islam prescribes the death penalty for apostasy. -Tyr

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/012-apostasy.htm


<TBODY>







A Sample of Modern Day Treatment of Those Who Leave Islam:Islamists Behead Convert to Christianity... (http://www.persecution.org/2012/11/21/why-was-a-christian-beheaded-in-somalia/)
Ex-Muslim and Family Denied Fresh Water... (http://www.opendoorsusa.org/pray/prayer-updates/2012/November/Relief-for-Bangladesh-Christian-Barred-from-Community-Well)
al-Shabaab Shoots 3 Christian Converts in Somalia... (http://www.persecution.org/2012/09/07/somali-christians-fear-militant-islam-at-home-and-abroad/)
Teenage Girl Gets Two Years in Prison after Leaving Islam... (http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/08/tanzania-teenage-girl-who-converted-from-islam-to-christianity-gets-two-years-prison-for-false-accus.html)
Apostate Preacher Murdered in His Own Home... (http://www.waohnaija.com/news-features/suspected-boko-haram-gunmen-kill-evangelist-in-maidugurinigeria/)
Criminal Past Invented to Punish Christian Convert... (http://www.mohabatnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4963:christian-convert-denied-receiving-criminal-background-for-being-apostate-document&catid=36:iranian-christians&Itemid=279)
Convert Released from Solitary Confinement After 105 Days... (http://www.mohabatnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4940:christian-convert-released-after-105-days-in-solitary-confinement-&catid=36:iranian-christians&Itemid=279)
Five Christian Converts 'Disappear' in Iranian Prison System... (http://mohabatnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4779:status-of-five-christian-converts-in-shiraz-unknown&catid=36:iranian-christians&Itemid=279)
Atheist Sentenced to Three Years for Denying God's Existence... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2159530/Indonesian-man-jailed-half-years-writing-God-doesn-t-exist-Facebook-page.html)
Muslims Offer Prayers as They Cut Man's Throat for Embracing Christianity... (http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3092/tunisia-muslims-slaughter-apostate)
Death Sentence Fatwa Placed on Head of 'Apostate' Rapper... (http://www.iranian.com/main/2012/may/shahin-najafi-salman-rushdie-music)
Church Pastor Abducted for Baptizing Muslim Girl... (http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/lebanon-church-pastor-abducted-for-baptizing-muslim-girl.html)
Apostates Jailed, Families Mocked... (http://www.mohabatnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4468:two-christian-converts-arrested-in-tehran-their-condition-is-unknown&catid=36:iranian-christians&Itemid=279)
Christian Converts Describe Torture by Muslim Fundamentalists... (http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2012/April/Terror-Group-Wants-Somalia-Rid-of-Christians/)
Ex-Imam and Wife Nearly Beaten to Death for Converting to Christianity (http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Ex-imam-convert-to-Catholicism-almost-killed-24414.html)
Girl Severely Beaten, Families Threatened for Showing Interest in Jesus (http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religion-today/parents-islamic-extremists-beat-young-woman-india.html)
Iran: No College for Ex-Muslims (http://www.mohabatnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3954:iranian-christian-convert-sentenced-to-one-year-of-deprivation-of-education&catid=36:iranian-christians&Itemid=279)
Two Converts to Christianity Stabbed in Norway (http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2012/01/norway-two-iranian-converts-attacked.html)
Uganda Girl Learning to Walk after Brutal Torture for Leaving Islam (http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/uganda/article_1351832.html)
Egyptian Cleric Says to Behead Apostates (http://www.memri.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3307.htm)
Convert Beheaded for Leaving Islam (http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/somalia/article_1390864.html)
Iran Jails Christian Woman for Two Years over Leaving Islam (http://www.mohabatnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3887:iranian-christian-convert-sentenced-to-two-years-in-prison&catid=36:iranian-christians&Itemid=279)
Muslim Father Arrested to Lure Christian Sons Back to Fate (http://www.persecution.org/2012/01/25/isamists-arrest-a-muslim-father-after-his-sons-convert-to-christianity/)
Zanzibar Christian Suffers in Jail after Incarceration and Torture for Apostasy (http://www.christiannewstoday.com/Christian_News_Report_9005042.html)
Christian Woman Faints While Being Publicly Flogged for Leaving Islam (http://www.eurasiareview.com/10012012-somali-convert-from-islam-whipped-in-public/)
Secularist Endures 'Unbearable' Torture, Prepares for Execution (http://www.iranian.com/main/2012/jan/ahmad-reza-hashempour-prisoner-day)
Apostate Pastor Blinded with Acid in Uganda (http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/315067-pastor-umar-mulinde-blinded-by-acid-attack.html)
Children Murdered to Punish Ex-Muslim for Embracing Christianity (http://www.bosnewslife.com/19199-news-alert-nigeria-militants-kill-children-of-christian-convert)
Christian Convert Sentenced to 6 Years in Prison following Baptism (http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2011/12/seyedi/)
Iran Orders Ex-Muslim Pastors to Serve Prison Sentences (http://www.christianpersecution.info/index.php?view=11095)
Kenyan Convert Stripped and Beaten with Iron Rods at Kenyan Church (http://www.christianpost.com/news/somali-muslims-cut-beat-christian-unconscious-in-kenya-60704/)
Christian Convert Tied Up and Stomped On (http://www.eurasiareview.com/18112011-somali-christians-find-danger-follows-them-to-kenya/)
Five Afghan Christian Converts Martyred... (http://www.worthynews.com/91-five-afghan-christians-martyred?wpmp_switcher=mobile)
Converts from Islam Detained and Beaten (http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/india/article_122974.html)


</TBODY>

[jimnyc]

He'll deny the stories from that site, but you can literally sit here all night long reading about these deaths from endless sources, and tons of them from those who escaped with their lives.

[jafar00]

Since you all refuse to listen to me while I share what I have learned while studying Islam, I will do some copy/paste of my own. BTW, all of your examples are from Salafi groups like Al Shabab, Al Qaeda, Taliban etc... and the shia which discounts all of your claims that there is a death penalty in Islam for Apostasy and the simple fact that the Qur'aan doesn't agree with it either makes my point there is no prescribed death penalty even stronger.


The widely publicized 2006 case of the conversion of an Afghan citizen to Christianity, caused the issue of apostasy under Islamic Law (sharia), to be brought to public attention. It raised troubling questions about freedom of religion and interfaith relations in Islam. As such, it caused many Muslims to re-examine their Qur'an in order to ascertain if indeed death for apostasy is what their holy book prescribes.Mainstream media made a lot of this event to further demonize Muslims, by showing the world how hateful Islam is against other religions. After all, Islam is the only religion that prescribes death for anyone who leaves it to join another religion. At the same time Muslims boast about Islam being the fastest growing religion in the world. Yet other religions are humane enough to not kill their former adherents for leaving their religion and becoming Muslims.
It was also strange to see that after killing thousands of Afghans and Iraqis and calling their deaths collateral damage, the US was so "deeply concerned" for the life of this one Afghani. How hypocritical indeed!
Along with other things, this story shows how far Muslims have strayed from their religion. The truth is that if you search the Qur'an from cover to cover you will not find death prescribed as a punishment for apostasy. In fact you will find the opposite.
I will prove this by first quoting what one American Muslim leader has written. Then I will reference and discuss verses in the Qur'an which opposes the idea of death for apostasy. It should be noted that the information used to dispel the idea of death for apostasy in Islam, is taken solely from Qur'an and Islamic sources. No western or non-Islamic sources were used. As such, the arguments are from within Islam and therefore no claims can be made of external influences, such as western democracy, creeping in to change the religion. The words of Qur'an is more than sufficient to dispel the erroneous idea of death for apostasy in Islam.
Is there a death penalty for apostasy in Islam?
Quoted response of American Muslim Leader:
“No. That, however, does not prevent some people from murdering Muslims for "changing" their religion when the clear original meaning of the Arabic word translated as "change" is "alter," not "turn away." There is a clear Arabic term for "turn away" and that word is not used in the sources underlying the typical polemics calling for the murder of apostates. The basis first cited by the polemicists is a case where the leaders of several tribes refused to pay the Zakat, saying it was tribute paid to Muhammad and not a requirement of Islam, thus falsifying the faith from a position of authority ~ "changing" their religion. Judaism prescribes the death penalty for the identical offense, so that a rabbi who declared (or, as a judge, ruled) that stoning for adultery is not the Law of the Torah would be falsifying the Law and subject to the capital penalty for that.
”There were several people who accepted Islam during the time of the prophet who then left and returned to their former communities, and NONE of them were pursued in any way, let alone killed. One person who left, and on the way out killed a shepherd and his wife, was apprehended and killed for the murders ~ later "jurists" also used this event to "explain" that apostasy was capital. However, it is not a part of Shari’a law at all.
”Apostasy, Adultery, and Abrogation (the idea that some verses of the Qur'an "abrogate" others) are what I call "The Hypocrite-Makers." Shari’a Law prescribes NO temporal penalty for apostasy, but the priests have made it capital; Shari’a Law prescribes a hundred stripes for adultery, but the priests have made it capital; and to deny ANY part of the Qur'an is denial and an absolute departure FROM Islam, but the priests pick and choose what they want to implement and what not. All three of these things produce hypocrites, each in its own way.
”All three, however, are firmly entrenched in traditional Abbasid jurisprudence, including all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. These draconian errors will be considerably reduced when the Arabs and their followers are nearly annihilated, which is the next prophesied event that has not yet occurred; and the further indications of the relevant prophecies are that the restoration of the original Shari’a Law, which rejects all three, will be in and from America. At present, this is a minority view regarded as heresy.”
The above words of this American Muslim leader rings true especially during this time. I also want to add the following from the life of Prophet Muhammad (saaw) regarding compulsion in religion. In the article titled "'Real' Islam and Jihad - A rejoinder", Dr Habib Siddiqui writes the following:

In the Quranic commentaries it is written that an Ansari who had previously been a polytheist had two sons who had converted to Christianity. These two sons had become fascinated by Christianity and very devoted to it, but their father was now a Muslim and upset that his sons had become Christians. He went to the Holy Prophet and said to him: "Rasula-lah! What can I do to these sons of mine who have become Christians? Whatever I have tried, still they do not accept Islam. Do you give me permission to force them to leave their religion and become Muslims?" The Prophet said: "No. La ikraha fid-din, there is no compulsion in religion."
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/3094
Let's further explore death for apostasy in Islam by answering a few more questions.
Isn't a Muslim who gives up Islam considered an apostate and is subject to the Death Penalty in most Middle East countries?Yes, that's true. In some Muslim countries, it is believed that apostates are to be sentenced to death, due to certain passages from the secondary documents of Islam: the Hadiths, a collection of sayings and actions attributed to the Prophet of Islam. Most of these sayings -- unlike the Qur'an -- were not written down immediately during the life of the Prophet, but were orally transmitted about 250 years after the death of the Prophet (saaw). Although, all Muslims value the knowledge and wisdom in these secondary documents (the Hadiths), we know that any Hadith should be rejected if it contradicts the Qur'an. The Prophet Muhammad (saaw) said the following regarding this:


Ali (RA) narrated, Prophet Muhammad (SAW) said, there is NO DOUBT that, there will be Hadiths coming after me, claiming that I have said things. So you MUST test those Hadiths from the QURAN. If it is really according to the QURAN only then accept it, otherwise reject it. (Sanan Dar Qatni, Vol-2, Book – Imrani Abee Musa, Matba Farooqi – 513)

Was it possible that Jews, hypocrites and other enemies of Islam united together and tried to include fabricated Hadiths, to mislead the Muslim community? Yes, of course. Even during the life of the Prophet (saaw) the enemies of Islam demanded he change verses of Qur'an, to which the Prophet (saaw) answered that he didn’t have any authority to do. The proof that an attempt had been made by the enemies of Islam with introduction of false Hadiths is the fact that out of seventeen original books of Hadiths, only seven are accepted by our religious scholars. More than 60% were rejected as being fabricated and misleading.
Is it possible that still in the seven accepted books of Hadiths there might be fabricated Hadiths? Yes, and many have been found. In fact many Hadiths, were rejected for contradicting the Qur'an. The enemies of Islam could not influence the Qur'an but they were able to influence the Hadiths. In fact, you will never find Muslims who endorse death for apostasy quoting anything from the Qur'an to justify their position. They always quote from Hadiths.
The Qur'an directly contradicts the idea that apostates should be sentenced to deathNo where in the Qur'an is punishment for apostasy prescribed, even though the Qur'an mentions apostasy in several verses.
Additionally, prescribing the death penalty for apostasy appears to contradict the following verse of the Qur'an:

"...There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is here forth distinct from error..." [2:256]
In the light of the above verse, a person has to be totally irrational to believe that Islam prescribes execution for apostasy. Having the punishment of being killed for leaving the religion of Islam is severe compulsion. The Qur'an is clearly against any compulsion in religion.
The Qur'an further states:

"Say (Muhammad it is) truth from the Lord of all. Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, LET him disbelieve." [18:29]
In no uncertain terms, Allah commands the Prophet (saaw) to allow people to exercise full liberty regarding believing and disbelieving in Islam. If claims are made that the Shari'a recommends killing apostates, this law cannot be Islamic because it contradicts the above two verses.
The Qur'an further states:

"And so, O Prophet, exhort them, thy task is ONLY to exhort; thou canst NOT compel them to believe." [88:21-22]
"Thy duty is to make the message reach them; it is OUR PART to call them to account." [13:40]
"Call thou (all mankind) unto thy Sustainer's path with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and argue with them in MOST KINDLY MANNER..." [16:125]
"Those who believe, then reject Faith, then believe (again) and again reject Faith, go on increasing in Unbelief--G'd will not forgive them nor guide them on the Way." [4:137]
An apostate cannot enjoy the repeated luxury of believing and disbelieving if punishment is death. A dead man has no further chance of again believing and disbelieving.
Furthermore, if taken at face value, this verse indicates that G'd will only withdraw His guidance after repeated rejections. It does not tell the Prophet (saaw) to kill the apostate. So, what right do these religious authorities and Imams have to deprive a person of access to that divine guidance after the first?
The Qur'an states:

"How shall G'd guide those who reject Faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the apostle was true and that clear signs had come unto them? But G'd guides not a people unjust. Of such the reward is that on them (rests) the curse of G'd, of His Angels, and of all mankind;--In that will they dwell; nor will their penalty be lightened, nor respite be their lot;--except for those that repent (even) after that, make amends; For verily G'd is oft-forgiving, most merciful." [3:86-89]
It is obvious from these verses that no punishment is to be inflicted for apostasy. By no stretch of the imagination can the phrase, "curse of Allah," be interpreted to be a license to murder anyone considered to be an apostate. If any such commandment was prescribed it would have been clearly defined as all other punishments are in the Holy Qur'an.
The Qur'an also mentions that apostates can be forgiven if they amend and repent. How could they amend and repent if apostates are to be killed? By forced repentance and reacceptance of Islam? Does not the Qur'an state that there is no compulsion in religion? What use is the supposed repentance and supposed amendment of a person who is forced to do so under duress and compulsion, as if a gun were pointed to his head? It is not logical to think that just because the apostate has been threatened with execution and repented under duress and compulsion, that anything has truly changed in his or her heart. The person who threatens an apostate with death and, as a result, gets the apostate to repent is only deluding himself into thinking that he has actually brought faith back to the apostate's heart and mind. The verse that states that there is no compulsion in religion should be enough for a fair minded person to realize that Islam does not teach death to apostates.
In reading the Qur'an from cover to cover we find that certain punishments are specifically spelled out for committing crimes. The Qur'an is very specific about the punishment for murder, theft, adultery, warring on others, etc and gives specific guidance as to how Muslims should address people committing these crimes. Yet for turning away from Islam, no specific punishment to be meted out by Muslims is mentioned. The words of the Qur'an clearly states that not Muslims, but G'd will punish them. In reality this makes sense.
Leaving Islam for another religion is a matter between G'd and that person. If a person peacefully lives in society observing the rights and rituals of his new religion and not harming anyone then there is no crime that he has committed requiring human intervention. The Qur'an does not specify any earthly punishment for him because if he does any earthly wrong to harm himself or society, G'd and society's laws are already in place to address that.
The Qur'an says, "count not your religion as a favor to G'd, it is a favor to you!" G'd does not have to force anyone to stay in Islam with the threat of death for apostasy.
http://www.ascertainthetruth.com/att/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=61:death-for-apostasy-is-un-islamic-and-not-in-the-quran&catid=64:understanding-al-islam&Itemid=53


Is Killing An Apostate in the Islamic Law?

by Ibrahim B. Syed, Ph. D.
President
Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc.
7102 W. Shefford Lane
Louisville, KY 40242-6462, U.S.A.
E-mail: irfi@iname.com
Website: http://WWW.IRFI.ORG (http://www.irfi.org/)

Ridda or Irtidãd: Literally means "turning back". The act of apostasy -- leaving Islam for another religion or for a secular lifestyle.Murtadd: Literally means "one who turns the back." An apostate.Murtad Fitri: Literally means apostate - natural. A person born of a Muslim parent who later rejects Islam.Murtad Milli: Literally means apostate - from the community. A person who converted to Islam and later rejected the religion.Due lack of education and critical thinking several myths have taken root in the Muslim world over the ages, and there have not been any efforts in the past to clear these doubts. On the contrary, there has been a sort of effort to strengthen these myths and misconceptions. These misinterpretations of Islamic teachings have taken their toll on the Muslim world and have strengthened a misplaced perception that Islam is a symbol of obscurantism, a religion of intolerance and answers everything with the sword.

And there is no bigger misconception-strengthened with misunderstanding of Islamic beliefs over the years-other than the belief that Islam doesn't tolerate apostasy. The Christian missionaries and the Western world are cashing in on it. Ulama have tried to strengthen their point of view and several leading Muslim reformists have failed to tackle the issue. This misconception has also presented Islam as a medieval and killer religion. Islam bashers have time and again tried to carry the point by pointing out that Islam orders the killing of a person if he or she reverts to another religion from Islam.

No body is forthcoming to challenge this widely held belief as well as put forth a convincing argument about the misinterpretation of Qur'anic teachings by Ulama.

The Qur’an is completely silent on any worldly punishment for apostasy and the sole Tradition that forms the basis of rulings is open to many interpretations.Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: ‘Whosoever changes his religion, Kill Him (man baddala Dinahu faqtuluhu)’”. It is this last quote from the Prophet that forms the basis of the said ruling.While jurists are agreed on the authenticity of this tradition, they differ very widely on the appropriate interpretation and thus, the law concerning apostasy. Understanding the different viewpoints, and arriving at the truth is crucial to our discussion of this subject.

This tradition does not refer to Muslims who leave the religion of Islam for other religions. Finally, there is the crucial dispute over the nature of the punishment and the crime. Al-Nakha’ee and, according to Sha’rani, al-Thawri, hold that the apostate is a grave sinner who should however be continuously called back to the fold for the rest of his life, and not killed. By implication, they do not consider the offence a hadd (fixed penalty) offence with a fixed punishment that must be carried out. This view is similar to the view that apostasy is a sin that carries no fixed punishment, and any penalty for it is discretionary (ta’zeer). This is a view held by the Hanbali scholar, Ibn Taimiya and he attributes it as well to the Maliki Imam al-Baji. Among Hanafites, the jurist Shamsuddeen al-Sarakhshi holds the same view. He says in al Mabsut that the fixed penalties or hudud are generally not suspended because of repentance, especially when they are reported and become known to the Imam. He then adds in the case of apostasy “renunciation of the faith and conversion to disbelief is admittedly the greatest of offences, yet it is a matter between man and his Creator, and its punishment is postponed to the day of Judgement. (“fa’l jaza’ ‘alayha mu’akhkhar ila dar al-jaza”).

If repentance is accepted, then apostasy is not a hadd offence with a fixed punishment. Secondly, once scholars accept that a Muslim apostate has the right to be given the opportunity to repent, they lose the right to set a time limit for his repentance.

Allah (SWT) says in the Glorious Qur’an (39: 53-54: Say: “ O you servants of Mine who have transgressed against your own selves! Despair not of God’s mercy. Behold God forgives all sins, for verily He is much forgiving, a dispenser of grace! Hence, turn toward your sustainer and surrender yourselves unto him before the suffering (of death and resurrection) comes upon you for then you will not be succored.”

Any scholar who says the death sentence applies to leaving the faith, then the convict is to be given a life-time to repent, and this is the view of Sufyan al-Thawri, Ibrahim al-Nakha’ee, Shamsuddeen al-Sarakhshi, Imam al-Baji and, by strong implication, Ahmad Ibn Taimiya. One must conclude that the death sentence is not for “simple apostasy” (mujarrad al-ridda), but for apostasy accompanied by treason and sedition, or by the abuse and slander (sabb) of the Noble Prophet.
Freedom to convert to or from Islam"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.The Glorious Qur'an says, "Let there be no compulsion in the religion: Surely the Right Path is clearly distinct from the crooked path." Al Baqarah, 2:256."Those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe again, then disbelieve, and then increase in their disbelief - Allah will never forgive them nor guide them to the path." Surah An-Nisa', 4:137.For example, the Qur'an says: "Let him who wishes to believe, do so; and let him who wishes to disbelieve, do so." (Al-Kahf: 29)
In another verse, Allah Almighty says: "Yours is only the duty to convey the message; you are not a guardian over them." (Al-Ghashiyah: 21- 22)
The quotation from Surah An-Nisa', 4:137, shown above, seems to imply that multiple, sequential apostasies are possible. That would not be possible if the person were executed after the first apostasy.
From the above verses it can be argued that religious freedom and the absence of compulsion in religion requires that individuals be allowed adopt a religion or to convert to another religion without legal penalty.
Hence the death penalty is not an appropriate response to apostasy.
The former Chief Justice of Pakistan, SA Rahman, has written that there is no reference to the death penalty in any of the 20 instances of apostasy mentioned in the Qur'an.
Muslims who support the death penalty for apostasy use as their foundation the above cited hadith, in which the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: "Kill whoever changes his religion." But this is a weak foundation because this hadith was only transmitted from Muhammad (pbuh) by one individual. It was not confirmed by a second person. According to Islamic law, this is insufficient confirmation to impose the death penalty. The Shari`ah has not fixed any punishment for apostasy.

The hadith is so generally worded that it would require the death penalty for a Christian or Jew who converted to Islam. This is obviously not the prophet's intent. The hadith is in need of further specification, which has not been documented. Many scholars interpret this passage as referring only to instances of high treason. (e.g. declaring war on Islam, Muhammad (pbuh), God, etc.).
There is no historical record, which indicates that Muhammad (pbuh) or any of his companions ever sentenced anyone to death for apostasy.
The issue of killing a murtad or the apostate is not a simple one. Scholars have debated it from various angles and it is not simply an issue of killing someone for choosing one religion or another.
The question of apostasy has been debated among scholars based on their interpretations of some hadiths since the Qur'an does not specify any worldly punishment for it. For example, there was a case at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) where a man came to him in three consecutive days and told him that he wanted to apostate. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never took any action against him, and when the man finally left Madina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never sent anyone to arrest him, let alone kill him.
This is why some scholars distinguished between individual apostasy and apostasy which is accompanied by high treason. So, it cannot be confused with the freedom of conscience for every individual, which has been guaranteed in the Qur'an through hundreds of verses.
For example, one version of a hadith narrated by `A'isha (RA) concerning apostasy relates to one who left his religion and fought against Muslims.
QUR'ANIC VIEWS
The Qur’an has referred to the issue of apostasy at more than one place (for example see Al-Baqarah 2: 217, Al-Baqarah 2: 108, A’l Imra’n 3: 90, Al-Nisa’ 4: 137 and Al-Nahl 16: 106). But at none of these places does the Qur’an mention the punishment of death for such people who change their religion. The Qur’an does mention that such people shall face a terrible punishment in the hereafter but no worldly punishment is mentioned at any of these instances in the Qur’an. This situation obviously raises a question mark in the mind of the reader that if Allah had wanted to give the punishment of an apostate a permanent position in the Shari`ah, the punishment should have been mentioned, at least at one of the above mentioned places. If the Qur’an had kept completely silent about the apostate, the matter would have been different. But the strange thing is that the Qur’an mentions apostasy, and still does not mention the punishment (if any) it wants the apostate to be subjected to.
Furthermore, the Qur’an has strictly disallowed the imposition of the death penalty except in two specific cases. One of them is where the person is guilty of murdering another person and the other is where a person is guilty of creating unrest in the country (fasa’d fil-ardh) like being involved in activities that create unrest in a society, for example activities like terrorism etc. The Qur’an says:
Whoever kills a person without his being guilty of murder or of creating unrest in the land, is as though he kills the whole of mankind. (Al-Ma’idah, 5: 32)
Obviously, apostasy can neither be termed as "murder" nor "creating unrest in the land".
Thus, in view of the above facts, we are left with one option only. We can only say that either the saying has been wrongly ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), as it is clearly contradictory to the Qur’an and the Prophet could not have said anything contradictory to the Qur’an, or that the saying ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) relates not to all apostates but to a particular and specific people.
Shaykh Subhani
Shaykh Inayatullah Subhani (author of the Book Apostasy doesn't carry death penalty in Islam) says that neither Islam forces any person to embrace neither Islam nor it forces him to remain within its fold. He writes, "Apostasy has been mentioned several times in Qur'an. It also describes the bad treatment that will be meted out for committing apostasy, but it never talks of punishment for the crime in this world." The learned scholar mentions three Ayaat (verses) from Qur'an on apostasy (Al-Baqara 217, Muhammad 25-27 and Al-Maida 54) and then says that none of these Ayaat prescribes any punishment for that though these Ayaat pass strictures on the people who commit it. There are several other Ayaat on the same issue and none of them prescribes either death penalty or any other punishment for apostasy in this world. He then adds that had there been some punishment in Islam for apostasy there was no reason as to why the issue was mentioned repeatedly in Qur'an but no punishment was prescribed.

Misinterpretation of the hadith, Man baddala Dinahu faqtuluh (kill him who changes his religion) has caused the problem. This order has been made to look general and permanent, though it was said in a particular circumstance for a particular group. Shaykh Subhani writes that this order was made to counter a scheme prepared by Jews of Madinah. They had planned that some of them embrace Islam for some time and then return to their old religion. Then some other people do the same. It was aimed to create restlessness among Muslims against their own leadership so that the strong Muslim unity should start crumbling. It was made clear in Qur'an in (Aal Imran, 3: 72-73).

To counter this planning the Prophet (SAW) ordered his companions to act in such a manner. Despite this order lengthy investigations were made to ascertain that the case was true and the person concerned was given adequate time to explain before the punishment was carried out.

Shaykh Subhani says lack of clear grasp of Qur'an misguided even leading Ulama. Otherwise it was not difficult to understand the hadith. Qur'anic teachings on the issue were not kept in mind.

He emphasizes that people who were awarded death penalty for reverting to other religions from Islam during the time of the Prophet (SAW) or during the reign of his caliphs were not given the punishment for the crime of apostasy but for the fact that they were at war with Muslims and Islamic government.

Shaykh Subhani regrets that punishment that was prescribed for certain people under special circumstances was made to look like a general order. He says that it was the order for people who posed threat to Islamic state and became at war with Islam and not for any person who reverts to other religion.

A number of Islamic scholars from past centuries, Ibrahim al-Naka'I, Sufyan al-Thawri, Shams al-Din al-Sarakhsi, Abul Walid al-Baji and Ibn Taymiyyah, have all held that apostasy is a serious sin, but not one that requires the death penalty. In modern times, Mahmud Shaltut, Sheikh of al-Azhar, and Dr Mohammed Sayed Tantawi have concurred.
In conclusion, we must never confuse the issue of killing a murtad with the freedom of conscience guaranteed in the Glorious Qur'an. For a detailed discussion, one should read (1) the Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi's book on this issue:Jareemat ar-riddah wal murtadd (The Crime of Apostasy and Apostate) - published by Ar-Risalah foundation.
(2) Apostasy doesn't carry death penalty in Islam (Book: Tabdili-e-Mazhab aur Islam) by Maulana Inayatullah Asad Subhani)-published by Idara Ihya-e-Deen, Bilariya Ganj, Azamgarh (UP, India) Pages: 108, Price Rs 30.
REFERENCES
1. http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_apos.htm2. "Islam, Apostasy and PAS," 1999-JUL-22, at: http://www.muslimtents.com/sistersinislam/
3. S.A. Rahman, "Punishment of apostasy in Islam," Kazi Publ., (1986). Limited availability from Amazon.com online bookstore).
http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_251_300/is_killing_an_apostate_in_the_is.htm

[jimnyc]

More excellent reading that will be ignored and/or denied.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/apostasy.htm

[jimnyc]

Since you all refuse to listen to me while I share what I have learned while studying Islam, I will do some copy/paste of my own. BTW, all of your examples are from Salafi groups like Al Shabab, Al Qaeda, Taliban etc... and the shia which discounts all of your claims that there is a death penalty in Islam for Apostasy and the simple fact that the Qur'aan doesn't agree with it either makes my point there is no prescribed death penalty even stronger.

Apparently you have trouble with comprehension. I've already listed the countries, totaling 350 million muslims in total where apostasy is met with the death sentence. I really couldn't care less where it specifically originates from, but it's still practiced today, in major countries and quite often.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

He'll deny the stories from that site, but you can literally sit here all night long reading about these deaths from endless sources, and tons of them from those who escaped with their lives.

He preaches denial and excuses rejecting the truth in that way. His defenders here toss out silly excuses as to why they will not condemn his supporting terrorist murderers.
I ask, which is worse ,he in his religious denial or they in their fawning praise and ignorant reasoning!??
Peanut gallery boy attacked me and then complained when somebody dared to quote me. Even made a thread about how the truth about Islam serves no purpose and how wrong we were for daring to post about it! -Tyr

[jimnyc]

Here, right from one of your own sources. They claim that apostasy is a capital crime.

http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_1001_1050/is_apostasy_a_capital_crime_in_i.htm

[jimnyc]

Since you all refuse to listen to me while I share what I have learned while studying Islam, I will do some copy/paste of my own. BTW, all of your examples are from Salafi groups like Al Shabab, Al Qaeda, Taliban etc... and the shia which discounts all of your claims that there is a death penalty in Islam for Apostasy and the simple fact that the Qur'aan doesn't agree with it either makes my point there is no prescribed death penalty even stronger.

Let me make this as clear as humanly possible. In many Islamic countries, people are often sentenced to death solely for apostasy, or for blasphemy. I am not even going any further to say that it's rooted in Islam, from the Quran or Hadiths. I'm simply saying that this savagery is still practiced primarily and only in Muslim countries. I couldn't care less about whether or not scripture or Islam supports it - I just know it is almost exclusively something that happens in the Muslim world. You can continue to try and muddy the waters, but the body count doesn't stop on those being killed for such offenses.


Here are a list of countries, and their total populations. These people practice the wonderful act of killing people who dare try leave Islam or in some way insult Islam.

1. Afghanistan - 29m
2. Bahrain - 1.2m
3. Iran - 78m
4. Mauritania - 3.3m
5. Oman - 2.8m
6. Pakistan - 178m
7. Yemen - 24m
8. Saudi Arabia - 28.3m
9. Gaza - 500k

That's a total of 345 million people under Sharia, that will kill or can be killed, solely for leaving Islam or insulting Islam.

Egypt, with a population of about 90 million, has now also entered the fray, and just sentenced 8 people to death for blasphemy. Then there are quite a nice handful of other Islamic ruled countries where apostasy/blasphemy will be punished by death, but in smaller areas and maybe even outside of the official courts aka mob justice.

And the others don't get off free. In these places, you may just sit in jail for up to 5 years or more for daring to leave Islam, or insult Islam:

Algeria
Bangladesh
Egypt
Iraq
Kuwait
Libya
Malaysia
Maldives
Morocco
Somalia
Tunisia
United Arab Emirates

Then we have countries that have only certain areas under Sharia law:

Indonesia (Flogging, Caning; Sharia applied strictly in Aceh province)
Brunei
Jordan (2 years or less for honour killings)
Eritrea (Girls as young as 8 can be married, spousal rape is not recognized)
Syria (1 year or less for honour killings)
Niger (girls can be married off before they reach puberty)
Nigeria (Sharia is enforced in the northern states)
Gambia (Sharia courts decide all family matters, including for non-Muslims) - Interesting how Sharia is applied to non-Muslims here

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The act of leaving Islam was the treason, dipshit. You are separating the two, and you're wrong to do so.

Spin away, Jahil. It's what we've come to expect form you.

Perhaps if you didn't siomply repeat the same misinformation and nonsense over and over, you'd be taken more seriously here, Jahil.

Careful amigo, keep hitting Jafar like that with the truth and you will incur the wrath of tailfins and be denounced as a peanut gallery stooge fit only to be living in a trailer and marrying your own sister!
Not that you'd likely give a damn what he says in his manlove angry defense of his hero, Jafar! -Tyr--:laugh2:

[jimnyc]

More, with much discussion from Muslims themselves. Again, couldn't care less where specifically it's rooted. But it's SO obvious that it's still practiced, honored and followed.

http://www.muhammadanism.org/Government/Government_apostasy_1.htm
(http://www.muhammadanism.org/Government/Government_apostasy_1.htm)

^^ There is LOTS of good reading in there!

[gabosaurus]

There have been a lot of Christian faiths that executed heretics during previous eras.

What many fail to understand is that, in many countries, Islam is more than a religion. It is law. You violate the law by condemning religion.
You can find many Third World countries where criticizing the government is punishable by death.

I don't support what happens in Islamic governments. But it is not our place to criticize what happens in other countries, simply because their lifestyles and laws do not fit our standards.

And don't think that Mossad doesn't have death squads that take out heretics.

[aboutime]

There have been a lot of Christian faiths that executed heretics during previous eras.

What many fail to understand is that, in many countries, Islam is more than a religion. It is law. You violate the law by condemning religion.
You can find many Third World countries where criticizing the government is punishable by death.

I don't support what happens in Islamic governments. But it is not our place to criticize what happens in other countries, simply because their lifestyles and laws do not fit our standards.

And don't think that Mossad doesn't have death squads that take out heretics.


Good for you gabby. Like the Constitution grants you...unquestionably. You will always have the right to be STUPID! Thanks for showing us, and proving how good you are at it.

[tailfins]

He'll deny the stories from that site, but you can literally sit here all night long reading about these deaths from endless sources, and tons of them from those who escaped with their lives.

That sounds like a great way to spend a weekend!

Has it ever occurred to you that those responsible for anti-terrorism are playing triage? The sheer volume of the Islamic population means something done by 1 million people is just a small fraction. Successful leaders will tell you that to be effective you trust people in their area of expertise and don't try to micromanage.

If your house is burglarized, you can spend unlimited time focusing on how bad burglars are or you can better invest that time becoming expert on home security.

[Drummond]

There have been a lot of Christian faiths that executed heretics during previous eras.

What many fail to understand is that, in many countries, Islam is more than a religion. It is law. You violate the law by condemning religion.
You can find many Third World countries where criticizing the government is punishable by death.

I don't support what happens in Islamic governments. But it is not our place to criticize what happens in other countries, simply because their lifestyles and laws do not fit our standards.

And don't think that Mossad doesn't have death squads that take out heretics.

... Nuts.

Just taking the one point I've highlighted .. you don't think you have any right to criticise outrages ?

OK, then. Hitler's Holocaust, resulting in the mass murder of six million Jews .. that happened in another country. Didn't it, Gabby ? The Third Reich had a lifestyle, and laws, which don't fit present-day American standards ... yes ?

By that reckoning, then, you must regard American intervention as part of the Allied effort to defeat Hitler's mob as something of a travesty ? The Nuremberg Trials .. tell me, Gabby, should they never have been conducted, since they offered 'criticism' of all the atrocities the Germans got up to ??

So your case, Gabby, is not only ill-conceived, but downright ridiculous. In the name of sheer human decency, it's sometimes VERY appropriate to not only criticise, but take a meaningful stand. And, Gabby .. Islam BLIGHTS human existence. Just because people still stuck with so-called 'values' better belonging in the 14th century still want to practice barbarities of that era today, does NOT mean that there's a duty to have no say, and offer the threat it poses no opposition.

Non-progress, Gabby, might be your idea of 'progressive' thinking. It is not mine.

[Marcus Aurelius]

The USA also has the death penalty for high treason so......

There is nothing in Islam to support a death penalty simply for leaving the religion.

you've been repeatedly proven wrong on this. Give up.

[jafar00]

More excellent reading that will be ignored and/or denied.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/apostasy.htm

Why bother posting something from self confessed evangelical Christians and presenting it as the truth about Islam?


Here, right from one of your own sources. They claim that apostasy is a capital crime.

http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_1001_1050/is_apostasy_a_capital_crime_in_i.htm

Thanks for that link. If you read past the 1st few paragraphs, your link actually 100% supports everything I have said in this thread. Such as....

* No worldly punishment for Apostasy in the Qur'aan
* No death penalty for Apostasy in the Qur'aan
* Hadiths used by laymen to attack Islam saying they are proof of a death penalty for leaving Islam are weak Hadiths and not considered reliable
* There are stronger Hadiths that go hand in hand with the Qur'aan of examples of where the Prophet (saw) did not act (not even prison!) against those who left Islam and did not act against the Prophet(saw) or the Muslims or scheme against them
* Punishments in other Hadiths were given for sedition, murder, treason and desertion to the enemy to fight the Muslims which happened when or after they went apostate, NEVER for apostasy alone.

Jamal Badawi is a reliable source and a well respected Islamic scholar who has studied among other places at Al Azhar, the world's most respected Islamic University and I am glad that his writing supports what I have myself said here before based on my own knowledge and studies of Islam.

I feel vindicated.


Let me make this as clear as humanly possible. In many Islamic countries, people are often sentenced to death solely for apostasy, or for blasphemy. I am not even going any further to say that it's rooted in Islam, from the Quran or Hadiths. I'm simply saying that this savagery is still practiced primarily and only in Muslim countries. I couldn't care less about whether or not scripture or Islam supports it - I just know it is almost exclusively something that happens in the Muslim world. You can continue to try and muddy the waters, but the body count doesn't stop on those being killed for such offenses.

While some countries may have this law it doesn't make it an Islamic law because Islamic Law clearly does not support their position and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that some of their other laws may be lacking in Islamic sources too.

Jim, we are of like mind when it comes to condemning such laws, but you cannot claim they come from Islam.


you've been repeatedly proven wrong on this. Give up.

Look at Jim's link and READ IT, then tell me I was ever wrong.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Look at Jim's link and READ IT, then tell me I was ever wrong.

read this, dumb ass...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Badawi


He cites Hassan al-Banna (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_al-Banna) and Muslim Brotherhood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood) as his source for inspiration.

You know, the group that says "Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law, the Prophet is our leader; Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations."?

The group that did this...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-12/egypt-s-muslim-brotherhood-abused-protesters-at-rally-hrw-says.html
Members of Egypt (http://topics.bloomberg.com/egypt/)’s Muslim Brotherhood unlawfully detained and abused at least 49 anti- government protestors outside the Presidential Palace last week as security forces stood by, Human Rights Watch (http://topics.bloomberg.com/human-rights-watch/) said.

Yeah... great people to look to for inspiration.
/sarcasm

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That sounds like a great way to spend a weekend!

Has it ever occurred to you that those responsible for anti-terrorism are playing triage? The sheer volume of the Islamic population means something done by 1 million people is just a small fraction. Successful leaders will tell you that to be effective you trust people in their area of expertise and don't try to micromanage.

If your house is burglarized, you can spend unlimited time focusing on how bad burglars are or you can better invest that time becoming expert on home security.

Has it ever occured to you that your defending such murdering scum is shallow and petty despite any enlightened thoughts you may harbor of how great you are to be so tolerant and inclusive? Vanity is one of the least recognised afflictions for its victims.. -Tyr

[Voted4Reagan]

Why bother posting something from self confessed evangelical Christians and presenting it as the truth about Islam?



Thanks for that link. If you read past the 1st few paragraphs, your link actually 100% supports everything I have said in this thread. Such as....

* No worldly punishment for Apostasy in the Qur'aan
* No death penalty for Apostasy in the Qur'aan
* Hadiths used by laymen to attack Islam saying they are proof of a death penalty for leaving Islam are weak Hadiths and not considered reliable
* There are stronger Hadiths that go hand in hand with the Qur'aan of examples of where the Prophet (saw) did not act (not even prison!) against those who left Islam and did not act against the Prophet(saw) or the Muslims or scheme against them
* Punishments in other Hadiths were given for sedition, murder, treason and desertion to the enemy to fight the Muslims which happened when or after they went apostate, NEVER for apostasy alone.

Jamal Badawi is a reliable source and a well respected Islamic scholar who has studied among other places at Al Azhar, the world's most respected Islamic University and I am glad that his writing supports what I have myself said here before based on my own knowledge and studies of Islam.

I feel vindicated.



While some countries may have this law it doesn't make it an Islamic law because Islamic Law clearly does not support their position and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that some of their other laws may be lacking in Islamic sources too.

Jim, we are of like mind when it comes to condemning such laws, but you cannot claim they come from Islam.



Look at Jim's link and READ IT, then tell me I was ever wrong.

I always try to respect you Jafar... I dont rant and scream at you... but have always tried to deal with you logically.

Unfortunately it would seem that you are indeed your own worst enemy here.. You cant expect others to honor your views or expertise on the Koran (Which you obviously have studied) because just a few days ago you proclaimed your support of HAMAS.

to support Terror and a group that has it's basis in the Nazi/Fascist movement of the 1930's and 40's is against all the teachings of Allah and his Prophet (may peace be upon him).

If you really wished to do the work of Allah who is just the Islamic recognition of the Judeo-Christian God you would call for an end of all violence ... yet you play in between, neither calling for peace and hiding your support for violence.

that is the worst hypocrisy one can have.... to hide behind ones proclaimed faith and speaking from both sides of a forked tongue.

speaking truth to neither side... yet holding ones self above the fray...

you seek only the advancement of an agenda... not of Islam and certainly not Peace.

you need to really read the Koran... and after that the Bible and then the Torah/Talmud.

Only then will you understand.... until then you are mearly a pawn in a political game founded by a war criminal who learned it from the worlds biggest mass murderer and his followers.

simply put.... you're an unwitting dupe... you simply dont understand...

[jimnyc]

That sounds like a great way to spend a weekend!

Has it ever occurred to you that those responsible for anti-terrorism are playing triage? The sheer volume of the Islamic population means something done by 1 million people is just a small fraction. Successful leaders will tell you that to be effective you trust people in their area of expertise and don't try to micromanage.

If your house is burglarized, you can spend unlimited time focusing on how bad burglars are or you can better invest that time becoming expert on home security.

And what does that have to do with us simply discussing the animals that kill others for simple things like apostasy and blasphemy?

[gabosaurus]

And what does that have to do with us simply discussing the animals that kill others for simple things like apostasy and blasphemy?

Perhaps it is this previous statement from you:


He'll deny the stories from that site, but you can literally sit here all night long reading about these deaths from endless sources, and tons of them from those who escaped with their lives.


By the way, you can literally sit all night long reading about deaths caused by both sides in the fighting. Trouble is, you only want to read about one side.

[jimnyc]

Thanks for that link. If you read past the 1st few paragraphs, your link actually 100% supports everything I have said in this thread. Such as....

* No worldly punishment for Apostasy in the Qur'aan
* No death penalty for Apostasy in the Qur'aan
* Hadiths used by laymen to attack Islam saying they are proof of a death penalty for leaving Islam are weak Hadiths and not considered reliable
* There are stronger Hadiths that go hand in hand with the Qur'aan of examples of where the Prophet (saw) did not act (not even prison!) against those who left Islam and did not act against the Prophet(saw) or the Muslims or scheme against them
* Punishments in other Hadiths were given for sedition, murder, treason and desertion to the enemy to fight the Muslims which happened when or after they went apostate, NEVER for apostasy alone.

Jamal Badawi is a reliable source and a well respected Islamic scholar who has studied among other places at Al Azhar, the world's most respected Islamic University and I am glad that his writing supports what I have myself said here before based on my own knowledge and studies of Islam.

I feel vindicated.

Are you seriously this retarded, or do you just not read what others post? I've said at least a dozen times in this thread that it doesn't matter if we're speaking of the quran or hadiths, that what matters is that the muslims in Islamic countries are still killing people for apostasy and blasphemy. I really don't give a fuck if it comes from the quran or some coffee selling guy on a street corner - what matters is that the muslims are still practicing this stone age savagery. All I can gather from your imput is that you're cool with this being all over the Muslim world so long as it's not written in the scriptures.



While some countries may have this law it doesn't make it an Islamic law because Islamic Law clearly does not support their position and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that some of their other laws may be lacking in Islamic sources too.

Jim, we are of like mind when it comes to condemning such laws, but you cannot claim they come from Islam

Well then it comes from muslim men then, I already said I couldn't care less where it came from. The fact that it is still practiced is so many Islamic countries is what I've been discussing, and what disturbs me. And while you say it's not from Islam, I still stand by my position that this practice is overwhelmingly only used in Islamic countries anymore, and they claim it's sharia law when they prescribe it. Perhaps they are wrong, I won't argue scripture with you on this, but it is yet ANOTHER major problem coming from Islam, or muslim men if that suits you better.

[gabosaurus]

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EUGBJA-eYEY" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="420"></iframe>

[tailfins]

And what does that have to do with us simply discussing the animals that kill others for simple things like apostasy and blasphemy?

It has to do with what are Americans going to do about it. Should the US military be a human rights patrol that invades to put an end to all this? Does the US find out where these threats congeal into plans for another 9/11 attack? All this focus on killing with no objective seems morbid. At least killing deer and such has the objective of food on the table. Gang killings on US soil has the objective of getting the perps off the street before they kill non-gang members.

All this portrayal with the apparent objective of painting all Muslims as violent looks like "justification" to violate the civil rights of law-abiding Muslims living in the US. What other Muslims do you have access to?

[jimnyc]

It has to do with what are Americans going to do about it. Should the US military be a human rights patrol that invades to put an end to all this? Does the US find out where these threats congeal into plans for another 9/11 attack? All this focus on killing with no objective seems morbid. At least killing deer and such has the objective of food on the table. Gang killings on US soil has the objective of getting the perps off the street before they kill non-gang members.

All this portrayal with the apparent objective of painting all Muslims as violent looks like "justification" to violate the civil rights of law-abiding Muslims living in the US. What other Muslims do you have access to?

So we shouldn't discuss a topic unless we have some sort of plan to stop/fix it?

I've NEVER painted all Muslims in the light with those who abuse, riot, kill or terrorize others. Claiming I want to violate the rights of American Muslims is laughable. I have "access" to plenty of Muslims and not a one of them thinks I am out to violate their rights.

[Drummond]

Why bother posting something from self confessed evangelical Christians and presenting it as the truth about Islam?

Absurd, Jafar. You're somehow concluding that an evangelical Christian can't tell the truth about Islam ?

Such Christians - by that reckoning, in your worldview - are LIARS, then ??? Do you wish to clearly accuse any of lying ?

[.... Heyy, here's a challenge, Jafar. Name me ONE evangelical Christian claiming to be both against terrorism, and yet, an enthusiastic supporter of Hamas ....]

Consider the absurdity of the basis for your 'logic' in these terms, if you will. Consider the case of a civic authority publicising crime statistics for the area, that community, the authority is charged with serving. Now ... it's a safe bet, SURELY, that the authority in question would want to oppose crime in the locality .. yes ? So, being naturally biased against crime, does that make the statistics they release automatically 'suspect', or - more bluntly - 'a pack of LIES' ?

NATURALLY NOT.

So, Jafar, don't judge information coming your way adversely, purely and simply because of where it comes from. I fail to see that you have that right .. if you want to be fair, devoid of your OWN biases in the process.

One final thing. Would it not be fair to categorise the UK's former Archbishop of Canterbury as an 'evangelical Christian' ? Yet ... didn't he call (admittedly controversially) for LIMITED SHARIA LAW to be introduced here ???

So ... forget your convenient suppositions, Jafar, your wish to discredit any Christian sources just because they're Christian. They don't hold water. Just, instead, accept facts you encounter, AS the facts they ARE ...

... even if you'd prefer not to ...

[jimnyc]

Absurd, Jafar. You're somehow concluding that an evangelical Christian can't tell the truth about Islam ?

Such Christians - by that reckoning, in your worldview - are LIARS, then ??? Do you wish to clearly accuse any of lying ?


Isn't it funny when he finds reasons to dismiss every single site that others post, even when some of them are quotes from Islamic scholars? He did the same when I posted a ton of pages from nothing but Islamic scholars and Imam's regarding beating ones wife in Islam - of course he dismissed every single one of them - every one. I suppose it doesn't matter. I'll even bend and state that I'll side with Jafar, and that none of this stuff is in scripture, Hadith's or anything else "rooted in Islam". Then we're still left with TONS AND TONS AND TONS and then TONS more of Muslim men beating their wives. Jafar loves Egypt, but won't acknowledge how the beating of ones wife there is more rampant than any disease known to man. And Jafar can be right about apostasy and blasphemy too. Doesn't change anything at all to the fact that this happens all over Muslim countries and is law there. They need to address these problems regardless of where or how they were started.

[jafar00]

Absurd, Jafar. You're somehow concluding that an evangelical Christian can't tell the truth about Islam ?

Such Christians - by that reckoning, in your worldview - are LIARS, then ??? Do you wish to clearly accuse any of lying ?

Yes they are liars. Especially the ones who put together websites specifically for the purpose of discrediting Islam by twisting the Qur'aan and Hadiths worse than Al Qaeda do to advance an anti Islam agenda.


Isn't it funny when he finds reasons to dismiss every single site that others post, even when some of them are quotes from Islamic scholars? He did the same when I posted a ton of pages from nothing but Islamic scholars and Imam's regarding beating ones wife in Islam

There is a lot of disinformation out there. A part of me thinks that you want me to be the stereotypical wife beating, head cutting, terrorist you obviously believe we Muslims are.


Then we're still left with TONS AND TONS AND TONS and then TONS more of Muslim men beating their wives. Jafar loves Egypt, but won't acknowledge how the beating of ones wife there is more rampant than any disease known to man.

Of course it never happens in Western countries right? There are no shelters for victims of domestic abuse. They don't exist right?

I am with in in condemning them. I would never beat my wife. Never have and never will. I'm am not that kind of scum.

[tailfins]

Isn't it funny when he finds reasons to dismiss every single site that others post, even when some of them are quotes from Islamic scholars? He did the same when I posted a ton of pages from nothing but Islamic scholars and Imam's regarding beating ones wife in Islam - of course he dismissed every single one of them - every one. I suppose it doesn't matter. I'll even bend and state that I'll side with Jafar, and that none of this stuff is in scripture, Hadith's or anything else "rooted in Islam". Then we're still left with TONS AND TONS AND TONS and then TONS more of Muslim men beating their wives. Jafar loves Egypt, but won't acknowledge how the beating of ones wife there is more rampant than any disease known to man. And Jafar can be right about apostasy and blasphemy too. Doesn't change anything at all to the fact that this happens all over Muslim countries and is law there. They need to address these problems regardless of where or how they were started.

The same thing happens throughout Latin America, a place I DO have some knowledge about. Visit a demographically appropriate police precinct here in the US to see with your own eyes. That however, we can do something about. There are options of significant jail time, strict probation and deportation. However, deportation doesn't solve the problem for the victim. I still have an uneasiness that unguided outrage goes to the lowest common denominator. That LCD would be people violating the civil rights of law-abiding Muslims in our own country.

[jimnyc]

The same thing happens throughout Latin America, a place I DO have some knowledge about. Visit a demographically appropriate police precinct here in the US to see with your own eyes. That however, we can do something about. There are options of significant jail time, strict probation and deportation. However, deportation doesn't solve the problem for the victim. I still have an uneasiness that unguided outrage goes to the lowest common denominator. That LCD would be people violating the civil rights of law-abiding Muslims in our own country.

I don't see the latin American stories popping up every day. But if you do, go ahead and post about them and I can equally condemn them too. I won't tell you that you shouldn't discuss it.

[Marcus Aurelius]

It has to do with what are Americans going to do about it. Should the US military be a human rights patrol that invades to put an end to all this? Does the US find out where these threats congeal into plans for another 9/11 attack? All this focus on killing with no objective seems morbid. At least killing deer and such has the objective of food on the table. Gang killings on US soil has the objective of getting the perps off the street before they kill non-gang members.

All this portrayal with the apparent objective of painting all Muslims as violent looks like "justification" to violate the civil rights of law-abiding Muslims living in the US. What other Muslims do you have access to?

Translation of the above post...

'If you don't have a solution, don't discuss the problem.'


My opinion of the a fore mentioned post...

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/playful/blowing-a-raspberry-smiley-emoticon.gif

[Marcus Aurelius]

I would never beat my wife. Never have and never will. I'm am not that kind of scum.

what kind of scum are you?

[jimnyc]

There is a lot of disinformation out there. A part of me thinks that you want me to be the stereotypical wife beating, head cutting, terrorist you obviously believe we Muslims are.

Not in the slightest bit. I never once thought you were anything but peaceful. But you seem to go to great lengths to dismiss, deny or excuse people and places that do engage in these behaviors. If you do defend, dismiss, deny these things, people are going to wonder why and think you support it on some way.


Of course it never happens in Western countries right? There are no shelters for victims of domestic abuse. They don't exist right?

I am with in in condemning them. I would never beat my wife. Never have and never will. I'm am not that kind of scum.

Yes, abuse of women in general is a problem here too, which I condemn the same. General abuse is much different than books on how to beat ones wife and Imam's and such telling their followers how and when to do so.

Do I think you beat your wife? From what I know about you, certainly not. I still think you are a deeply religious and peaceful man - but I am at odds at times when that very same person supports a terror group, dismisses or denies atrocities and defends deplorable acts.

[aboutime]

Absurd, Jafar. You're somehow concluding that an evangelical Christian can't tell the truth about Islam ?

Such Christians - by that reckoning, in your worldview - are LIARS, then ??? Do you wish to clearly accuse any of lying ?

[.... Heyy, here's a challenge, Jafar. Name me ONE evangelical Christian claiming to be both against terrorism, and yet, an enthusiastic supporter of Hamas ....]

Consider the absurdity of the basis for your 'logic' in these terms, if you will. Consider the case of a civic authority publicising crime statistics for the area, that community, the authority is charged with serving. Now ... it's a safe bet, SURELY, that the authority in question would want to oppose crime in the locality .. yes ? So, being naturally biased against crime, does that make the statistics they release automatically 'suspect', or - more bluntly - 'a pack of LIES' ?

NATURALLY NOT.

So, Jafar, don't judge information coming your way adversely, purely and simply because of where it comes from. I fail to see that you have that right .. if you want to be fair, devoid of your OWN biases in the process.

One final thing. Would it not be fair to categorise the UK's former Archbishop of Canterbury as an 'evangelical Christian' ? Yet ... didn't he call (admittedly controversially) for LIMITED SHARIA LAW to be introduced here ???

So ... forget your convenient suppositions, Jafar, your wish to discredit any Christian sources just because they're Christian. They don't hold water. Just, instead, accept facts you encounter, AS the facts they ARE ...

... even if you'd prefer not to ...


Drummond. All of jafar's post tend to provide more proof used to document what we have been saying.

If jafar is so far gone, as in believing only he is permitted, or has access to the Truth. Let him be.

No sense in continual arguments with someone that refuses to admit, or believe otherwise.

Best way to describe someone like that is to just call them...
"A Lost Cause."

We all know. Those who think, and speak like jafar MUST always discredit, or deny anyone else is capable of logical, common sense, and honesty.
So. There's really no need to carry on any attempts to disprove jafar's obvious Training, and Tactics he uses. Even when proven wrong on many topics.
That's how OBL operatives, and Taliban trainee's operate. If they dare to agree with anyone they hate....for any reason. They doom themselves, and become the very same victims of the tactics they deny.
Let him go.
Let him say whatever he wants.
He only has to Impress Himself.

[tailfins]

Drummond. All of jafar's post tend to provide more proof used to document what we have been saying.

If jafar is so far gone, as in believing only he is permitted, or has access to the Truth. Let him be.

No sense in continual arguments with someone that refuses to admit, or believe otherwise.

Best way to describe someone like that is to just call them...
"A Lost Cause."

We all know. Those who think, and speak like jafar MUST always discredit, or deny anyone else is capable of logical, common sense, and honesty.
So. There's really no need to carry on any attempts to disprove jafar's obvious Training, and Tactics he uses. Even when proven wrong on many topics.
That's how OBL operatives, and Taliban trainee's operate. If they dare to agree with anyone they hate....for any reason. They doom themselves, and become the very same victims of the tactics they deny.
Let him go.
Let him say whatever he wants.
He only has to Impress Himself.


Maybe he's just a guy with a difference of opinion.

[aboutime]

Maybe he's just a guy with a difference of opinion.


Just like my post was my difference of opinion?

But, the differences are. I do not, and never have supported Hamas...in any way, or for any excuse. Like jafar has done.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

It has to do with what are Americans going to do about it. Should the US military be a human rights patrol that invades to put an end to all this? Does the US find out where these threats congeal into plans for another 9/11 attack? All this focus on killing with no objective seems morbid. At least killing deer and such has the objective of food on the table. Gang killings on US soil has the objective of getting the perps off the street before they kill non-gang members.

All this portrayal with the apparent objective of painting all Muslims as violent looks like "justification" to violate the civil rights of law-abiding Muslims living in the US. What other Muslims do you have access to?


What is it with you, one absurd accusation after another? All posted in an effort to stop members from posting the truth about Islam. You that scared of the truth? Of course you are and because you can not defeat it and can not stop it from being posted here.-Tyr

[Drummond]

Yes they are liars. Especially the ones who put together websites specifically for the purpose of discrediting Islam by twisting the Qur'aan and Hadiths worse than Al Qaeda do to advance an anti Islam agenda.

An interesting, if totally unconvincing charge, Jafar. The fact of the matter is that you don't like what they have to say, so you seize upon an excuse to try and 'discredit' their claim to accuracy .. one just based on their identity as Christians.

I've a funny feeling, Jafar, that if I called Muslim clerics 'liars' based upon nothing else but their identity as Muslim clerics, you'd not be willing to accept that I had a case ! If I pick out a Muslim site which tries to find ways of attacking Christianity, Jafar, will I have the right, in your eyes, to dismiss what's asserted out of hand just because they are clearly motivated by their own agenda ?

Yet this is your own position concerning Christians.

By the way, I've posted links on Hamas's own approach to their actions, and what they expect of Muslims, elsewhere on this forum .. this based on their Charter, that in turn (according to them) being representative of THEIR beliefs as to what Muslims should do. You, yourself, have said you support them (Hamas) 'in their struggle'. Well ... if you support them (as you say you do), do you accept THEIR representation of good conduct according to Islamic principle ???

You talk of an 'issue' of twisting the Koran and Hadiths. I'd like to ask ... given your support of Hamas, is it your position that they are faithful to your religion ?

OR, do they, too, stand in defiance of its allegedly 'peaceful' nature, Jafar ?

If, in your judgement, they do ... are you in violation of Islam by supporting Hamas ?

... just thought I'd ask, in passing ...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

An interesting, if totally unconvincing charge, Jafar. The fact of the matter is that you don't like what they have to say, so you seize upon an excuse to try and 'discredit' their claim to accuracy .. one just based on their identity as Christians.

I've a funny feeling, Jafar, that if I called Muslim clerics 'liars' based upon nothing else but their identity as Muslim clerics, you'd not be willing to accept that I had a case ! If I pick out a Muslim site which tries to find ways of attacking Christianity, Jafar, will I have the right, in your eyes, to dismiss what's asserted out of hand just because they are clearly motivated by their own agenda ?

Yet this is your own position concerning Christians.

By the way, I've posted links on Hamas's own approach to their actions, and what they expect of Muslims, elsewhere on this forum .. this based on their Charter, that in turn (according to them) being representative of THEIR beliefs as to what Muslims should do. You, yourself, have said you support them (Hamas) 'in their struggle'. Well ... if you support them (as you say you do), do you accept THEIR representation of good conduct according to Islamic principle ???

You talk of an 'issue' of twisting the Koran and Hadiths. I'd like to ask ... given your support of Hamas, is it your position that they are faithful to your religion ?

OR, do they, too, stand in defiance of its allegedly 'peaceful' nature, Jafar ?

If, in your judgement, they do ... are you in violation of Islam by supporting Hamas ?

... just thought I'd ask, in passing ...

How can he not be in violation of his contention that Islam is about peace when he supports an organisation is all about war, the fight , against Israel?? All about Israel's total destruction. Clear the his too admissions can not both be true and he can not walk both paths! His duplicity is ignored by his defenders here too . I find it amazing how much such appeasors will overlook to maintain their loyalty to Islam. Proving they have no honor IMHO. -Tyr

[Drummond]

Maybe he's just a guy with a difference of opinion.

And then again, maybe Jafar has an agenda to pursue.

We have, in Jafar, someone who disapproves of Islamic terrorists, whilst simultaneously being willing to support Hamas. We have, in Jafar, someone trying to make a case as to the peaceful and 'just' basis of Koranic teachings .. yet Hamas are murderous terrorists, committed to the most murderous interpretation possible of the word 'Jihad', and enshrining that in their Charter as a blueprint for Islamic conduct, most notably against Jews and Israel.

If Jafar has opinions, I would be delighted if he would at least remain consistent about them. But I see inconsistency, explainable through the demonstration of expedience.

Expedience in the pursuit of WHAT, though ?

The pursuit of a greater truth .. I suggest. The pursuit both of Islam's TRUE nature, and simultaneous to that, the need to whitewash Islam's image so as to somehow project a moral high ground which it has no true claim to represent.

The world's media are replete with accounts of Islamic savagery, Tailfins. THAT is the truth. But you won't see Jafar openly acknowledge the truth about the source of all that savagery.

[Kathianne]

And then again, maybe Jafar has an agenda to pursue.

We have, in Jafar, someone who disapproves of Islamic terrorists, whilst simultaneously being willing to support Hamas. We have, in Jafar, someone trying to make a case as to the peaceful and 'just' basis of Koranic teachings .. yet Hamas are murderous terrorists, committed to the most murderous interpretation possible of the word 'Jihad', and enshrining that in their Charter as a blueprint for Islamic conduct, most notably against Jews and Israel.

If Jafar has opinions, I would be delighted if he would at least remain consistent about them. But I see inconsistency, explainable through the demonstration of expedience.

Expedience in the pursuit of WHAT, though ?

The pursuit of a greater truth .. I suggest. The pursuit both of Islam's TRUE nature, and simultaneous to that, the need to whitewash Islam's image so as to somehow project a moral high ground which it has no true claim to represent.

The world's media are replete with accounts of Islamic savagery, Tailfins. THAT is the truth. But you won't see Jafar openly acknowledge the truth about the source of all that savagery.

Word.

Although I think Jafur's dissonance between what he thinks is meant and what is meant are not compatible and he refuses to believe it.

[Drummond]

Word.

Although I think Jafur's dissonance between what he thinks is meant and what is meant are not compatible and he refuses to believe it.

I'll concede the possibility (if I understand you correctly). Perhaps. But my own opinion is that what's at work is something else: expediency.

We all know - to illustrate this - what Hamas does, what it's capable of, and the fact that they richly deserve the label 'terrorist', right along with all the condemnation that goes with this. Yet ... when the chips are down, surely KNOWING all of this, Jafar finds himself not only supporting Hamas, but openly admitting to it.

Belief can only survive for a while, before the glare of overriding truth dispels false loyalty to it.

Let him review that support in light of well publicised and appalling truths about them .. if he cares to. But - subject to correction ? - I don't think we'll see any such thing from him. Jafar is simultaneously 'against terrorism' and supportive of it ... when it suits him.

I don't think self-delusion is at work .. in any sense .. within any context. But the pursuit of an agenda to further a purpose .. that's something else.

[Kathianne]

I'll concede the possibility (if I understand you correctly). Perhaps. But my own opinion is that what's at work is something else: expediency.

We all know - to illustrate this - what Hamas does, what it's capable of, and the fact that they richly deserve the label 'terrorist', right along with all the condemnation that goes with this. Yet ... when the chips are down, surely KNOWING all of this, Jafar finds himself not only supporting Hamas, but openly admitting to it.

Belief can only survive for a while, before the glare of overriding truth dispels false loyalty to it.

Let him review that support in light of well publicised and appalling truths about them .. if he cares to. But - subject to correction ? - I don't think we'll see any such thing from him. Jafar is simultaneously 'against terrorism' and supportive of it ... when it suits him.

I don't think self-delusion is at work .. in any sense .. within any context. But the pursuit of an agenda to further a purpose .. that's something else.

Yes, I'll concede that is actually the more likely reason. My own dissonance.

[Drummond]

Yes, I'll concede that is actually the more likely reason. My own dissonance.

Time will tell, Kathianne.:)

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'll concede the possibility (if I understand you correctly). Perhaps. But my own opinion is that what's at work is something else: expediency.

We all know - to illustrate this - what Hamas does, what it's capable of, and the fact that they richly deserve the label 'terrorist', right along with all the condemnation that goes with this. Yet ... when the chips are down, surely KNOWING all of this, Jafar finds himself not only supporting Hamas, but openly admitting to it.

Belief can only survive for a while, before the glare of overriding truth dispels false loyalty to it.

Let him review that support in light of well publicised and appalling truths about them .. if he cares to. But - subject to correction ? - I don't think we'll see any such thing from him. Jafar is simultaneously 'against terrorism' and supportive of it ... when it suits him.

I don't think self-delusion is at work .. in any sense .. within any context. But the pursuit of an agenda to further a purpose .. that's something else.

Jafar is firmly encased in his adoration of Islam's perfection and Islam's ultimate goal. That is why and how he can justify his seemingly love of peace and his admitted support of a terrorist organisation. All he has to do i say to himself Allah knows better than I. Allah commands that we force world submission and Hamas wants Israel destroyed as a first step towards achieving that goal! First the worldwide Caliphate and first the riddance of the thorn in Islam's side, Israel-- little Satan. Next big Satan --USA.. !
We are outside looking in wheras he is firmly entrenched in the ideology of the ultimate victory of perfection==Islam.. -Tyr

[Larrymc]

I understand a polite society practices religious tolerance. That doesn't seem to apply in this forum; so it's time to take the gloves off.

Jafar, I'm tired of seeing you be a whippin' boy, so let an old Calvinist pass on some old-fashioned anti-Catholic positions you can throw back in their face:

1) The Catholic Institution (it's not a church) is the "Great Whore" referred to in Revelation 19:2
2) Don't forget the recent priest pedophilia scandal
3) Catholicism has changed it beliefs to accommodate paganism
.... and many more

Here are some quick references
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/the_great_whore.htm
All of http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/ is a good reference

Another reference is:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/

Pay close attention to the slide show that presents the Catholic institution as the anti-Christ:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/anti1.htm

You will find more information at:
http://www.wayoflife.org/sphider/search.php?query=Catholicism&search=1

I hope this provides you with some needed references. I will leave it to you to dig deeper. I have heard this stuff most of my life, so I'm tired of discussing it. I tend to shy away from pastors that fixate on it. I prefer to hear what people are FOR, not AGAINST.while i agree the Catholic religion tends to change to suite society, but i haven't seen anyone claim to be Catholic??

[Drummond]

Jafar is firmly encased in his adoration of Islam's perfection and Islam's ultimate goal. That is why and how he can justify his seemingly love of peace and his admitted support of a terrorist organisation. All he has to do i say to himself Allah knows better than I. Allah commands that we force world submission and Hamas wants Israel destroyed as a first step towards achieving that goal! First the worldwide Caliphate and first the riddance of the thorn in Islam's side, Israel-- little Satan. Next big Satan --USA.. !
We are outside looking in wheras he is firmly entrenched in the ideology of the ultimate victory of perfection==Islam.. -Tyr:clap::clap:

[tailfins]

:clap::clap:

What do you think the UK could have done differently inside its borders regarding Islam? Police refusing to enforce the law and protect the freedom of expression of non-Muslims is bothersome.

[Kathianne]

while i agree the Catholic religion tends to change to suite society, but i haven't seen anyone claim to be Catholic??

I'm Catholic. Please clarify this post.

[Drummond]

What do you think the UK could have done differently inside its borders regarding Islam? Police refusing to enforce the law and protect the freedom of expression of non-Muslims is bothersome.

This is a curious 'take' on the UK situation (and I note its diversionary value, by the way ....).

At the heart of our situation, Tailfins, is one truly appalling fact: our people were stupid enough to vote Socialists into power, repeatedly, for an extended time (is this ringing any bells with you ?). Thanks to this, we had a governing body determined to appease Islamists (and other minority groupings) in any and various ways.

A virtually 'open door' policy on immigration didn't exactly help.

So it's been that Muslim numbers have grown considerably. They've set up communities of their own, formed pressure groups dedicated to advancing a pro-Muslim agenda .. and as for the law, well, laws have been passed that empower Muslims to use legal backing for prohibition of free expression of views, sentiments, which they can claim not to like. It's called 'hatespeech' legislation.

Our Labour Government banned Geert Wilders from entering the UK because he'd planned to give a talk on his film, 'Fitna'. Your disc-jockey, Michael Savage, is STILL prohibited from setting foot on UK territory, because he was placed on a ban-list which also included terrorists on it. He has supposedly 'undesirable' views, you see ... and the easiest way of tackling this is to do whatever it takes to silence him. By State Order ...

So my answer - perhaps putting it over-simply - is that we should've kept our Socialist trash firmly OUT of Government. When in power, they sold us out .. much as your Socialist-In-Chief is happy to still be free to do, on your side of the Pond ...

[aboutime]

I'm Catholic. Please clarify this post.


Kathianne. Seems you just did CLARIFY it for yourself.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

This is a curious 'take' on the UK situation (and I note its diversionary value, by the way ....).

At the heart of our situation, Tailfins, is one truly appalling fact: our people were stupid enough to vote Socialists into power, repeatedly, for an extended time (is this ringing any bells with you ?). Thanks to this, we had a governing body determined to appease Islamists (and other minority groupings) in any and various ways.

A virtually 'open door' policy on immigration didn't exactly help.

So it's been that Muslim numbers have grown considerably. They've set up communities of their own, formed pressure groups dedicated to advancing a pro-Muslim agenda .. and as for the law, well, laws have been passed that empower Muslims to use legal backing for prohibition of free expression of views, sentiments, which they can claim not to like. It's called 'hatespeech' legislation.

Our Labour Government banned Geert Wilders from entering the UK because he'd planned to give a talk on his film, 'Fitna'. Your disc-jockey, Michael Savage, is STILL prohibited from setting foot on UK territory, because he was placed on a ban-list which also included terrorists on it. He has supposedly 'undesirable' views, you see ... and the easiest way of tackling this is to do whatever it takes to silence him. By State Order ...

So my answer - perhaps putting it over-simply - is that we should've kept our Socialist trash firmly OUT of Government. When in power, they sold us out .. much as your Socialist-In-Chief is happy to still be free to do, on your side of the Pond ...

A fine post but will be wasted effort on him. I've made nemnerous posts about Britain's plight and gave links with details that support exactly what you have just posted, its not like he hasnt seen it before. Diversion is a very old tactic and employed by the defenders of Islam so very often. You my friend , are dealing with such a defender with your reply made to tailfins. Sad, isnt it?-Tyr

[Abbey Marie]

This is a curious 'take' on the UK situation (and I note its diversionary value, by the way ....).

At the heart of our situation, Tailfins, is one truly appalling fact: our people were stupid enough to vote Socialists into power, repeatedly, for an extended time (is this ringing any bells with you ?). Thanks to this, we had a governing body determined to appease Islamists (and other minority groupings) in any and various ways.

A virtually 'open door' policy on immigration didn't exactly help.

So it's been that Muslim numbers have grown considerably. They've set up communities of their own, formed pressure groups dedicated to advancing a pro-Muslim agenda .. and as for the law, well, laws have been passed that empower Muslims to use legal backing for prohibition of free expression of views, sentiments, which they can claim not to like. It's called 'hatespeech' legislation.

Our Labour Government banned Geert Wilders from entering the UK because he'd planned to give a talk on his film, 'Fitna'. Your disc-jockey, Michael Savage, is STILL prohibited from setting foot on UK territory, because he was placed on a ban-list which also included terrorists on it. He has supposedly 'undesirable' views, you see ... and the easiest way of tackling this is to do whatever it takes to silence him. By State Order ...

So my answer - perhaps putting it over-simply - is that we should've kept our Socialist trash firmly OUT of Government. When in power, they sold us out .. much as your Socialist-In-Chief is happy to still be free to do, on your side of the Pond ...


http://www.littlekingsroad.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/dwyane-wade-slam-dunk-miami-heat.jpg

[Larrymc]

I'm Catholic. Please clarify this post.today they have Gay Priest, and a history of hiding and defending pedophiles, some even are accepting Gay couples, in conversations on this site i have seen you defend homosexuals, and use foul language, so i already suspected you were a Catholic when you said you were a Christian

[Kathianne]

today they have Gay Priest, and a history of hiding and defending pedophiles, some even are accepting Gay couples, in conversations on this site i have seen you defend homosexuals, and use foul language, so i already suspected you were a Catholic when you said you were a Christian

Oh lord! You haven't a clue. No problem, I'm not going to get into this with you. Just reminded myself why I avoid religion topics.

[Larrymc]

Oh lord! You haven't a clue. No problem, I'm not going to get into this with you. Just reminded myself why I avoid religion topics.i have no interest in arguing religion with, you insisted i explain my opinion i did, but i don't care if you disagree

[tailfins]

This is a curious 'take' on the UK situation (and I note its diversionary value, by the way ....).

At the heart of our situation, Tailfins, is one truly appalling fact: our people were stupid enough to vote Socialists into power, repeatedly, for an extended time (is this ringing any bells with you ?). Thanks to this, we had a governing body determined to appease Islamists (and other minority groupings) in any and various ways.

A virtually 'open door' policy on immigration didn't exactly help.

So it's been that Muslim numbers have grown considerably. They've set up communities of their own, formed pressure groups dedicated to advancing a pro-Muslim agenda .. and as for the law, well, laws have been passed that empower Muslims to use legal backing for prohibition of free expression of views, sentiments, which they can claim not to like. It's called 'hatespeech' legislation.

Our Labour Government banned Geert Wilders from entering the UK because he'd planned to give a talk on his film, 'Fitna'. Your disc-jockey, Michael Savage, is STILL prohibited from setting foot on UK territory, because he was placed on a ban-list which also included terrorists on it. He has supposedly 'undesirable' views, you see ... and the easiest way of tackling this is to do whatever it takes to silence him. By State Order ...

So my answer - perhaps putting it over-simply - is that we should've kept our Socialist trash firmly OUT of Government. When in power, they sold us out .. much as your Socialist-In-Chief is happy to still be free to do, on your side of the Pond ...

What I don't like is people who lost an election descend into directionless anger. I don't like the results of the election either. The line of these posts is counter-productive. Our focus should be to minimize the damage. The Michigan right to work law was a nice victory. It's time to focus on battles that can be won. It would appear the lowest hanging fruit in your area of interest would be to influence immigration policy. I'm not diverting; I'm focusing.

[Drummond]

What I don't like is people who lost an election descend into directionless anger. I don't like the results of the election either. The line of these posts is counter-productive. Our focus should be to minimize the damage. The Michigan right to work law was a nice victory. It's time to focus on battles that can be won. It would appear the lowest hanging fruit in your area of interest would be to influence immigration policy. I'm not diverting; I'm focusing.

Not at all sure what you mean by 'lowest hanging fruit in your area of interest'.

I can understand that you don't like to see 'anger' getting an airing following an unhappy election result. But, really, isn't it VERY understandable ? Those feeling such anger are patriots who want the best for their country, only to see a prospect of the WORST being realised, instead. So I suggest to you that those expressing such anger are showing their decency when they do so ... not to mention, of course, their totally understandable frustration at those who insist upon dragging their compatriots down with them.

Granted, 'minimizing the damage', IF that's achievable, is a good thing. But I'd suggest that far more is also involved. How about concerted efforts at education, to prove to people just how terribly wrong-headed a pro-Socialist vote is ... so that, by the time of the next election, there is NO hope of a further repeat ?

Working in favour of that will be, of course, the trail of social destruction that Obama and his mob will inflict in the months and years ahead. Not least in furthering - as Socialists insist upon doing - the ongoing sellout of Christian identity, the enhancement of Muslim encroachment. My country has seen this already. Over the next four years, SO WILL YOURS. IT'S WHAT SOCIALISTS DO.

You talk about wanting to focus on winnable battles. Fair enough. But, what do you think CAN be won, with Obama in charge ? Do you underestimate his powers to inflict harm ? Do you think he'll backslide on his determination to inflict his agenda, as and when he can ?

So, no. Re-education is vitally important. Posts, messages, which highlight the means by which harm will result have great value. If 'anger' is expressed in the process, this is most understandable, honest, and indeed, it has its own power to impress and persuade.

An angry Public can be a mobilised Public ... no bad thing in many circumstances, Tailfins. If people feel justified anger .. I say that they have a right to it.

That you may be unhappy with it is, ultimately, neither here nor there, in the greater scheme of things. Yours is not the only opinion out there.

[Drummond]

A fine post but will be wasted effort on him. I've made nemnerous posts about Britain's plight and gave links with details that support exactly what you have just posted, its not like he hasnt seen it before. Diversion is a very old tactic and employed by the defenders of Islam so very often. You my friend , are dealing with such a defender with your reply made to tailfins. Sad, isnt it?-Tyr

Fair points, Tyr, of course, and thanks for them. Still ... posting what I did to Tailfins is no waste, in my view. OK, my points were regurgitations of what's been said before, and by both of us. Nonetheless, regardless of any reaction Tailfins may offer, many other people read our posts. For one person who fails to take on board what's expressed, there could be 50 others (or far more) who DO heed what's said.

Let Tailfins defend as he chooses. In the fullness of time, Tyr, what is RIGHT will be PROVED right. A viewpoint with merit, one with justice on its side, will prevail. Have faith, my friend.

I ultimately don't care if modes of expression cause a negative reaction in those only caring about such things. What truly matters is the justice of a case properly advanced.

Justice, decency, righteousness, these things MATTER. We have right on our side, Tyr. THAT is what's important.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

some religions will give you the boot, if you don't follow there teachings, but Islam is the only one i have ever heard of that will kill you for going against it, even for not converting

Yes, they will kill you for 'not converting' to it and will kill you for "converting" from it.
They get you coming and they get ya going..
Think of it like the poor fly that hits the spider's web, its dead meat.. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Fair points, Tyr, of course, and thanks for them. Still ... posting what I did to Tailfins is no waste, in my view. OK, my points were regurgitations of what's been said before, and by both of us. Nonetheless, regardless of any reaction Tailfins may offer, many other people read our posts. For one person who fails to take on board what's expressed, there could be 50 others (or far more) who DO heed what's said.

Let Tailfins defend as he chooses. In the fullness of time, Tyr, what is RIGHT will be PROVED right. A viewpoint with merit, one with justice on its side, will prevail. Have faith, my friend.

I ultimately don't care if modes of expression cause a negative reaction in those only caring about such things. What truly matters is the justice of a case properly advanced.

Justice, decency, righteousness, these things MATTER. We have right on our side, Tyr. THAT is what's important.

Of course you are right. Its the presentation of the truth for others to consider that weighs the most importance !
Sometimes one may temporarily lose sight of that when in heated exchanges with an opponent. And my consideration of the futile merits of attempting to enlighten one individual , tailfins, fails when reminded of the overall necessity of removing the cloak that has been placed to hide the truth. I too, have often even had to remind others of the very thing that you have just rightly reminded me! And you have my thanks for it my friend. I instead of pitying his ignorance, went into contempt mode far ,far too deeply. You have my apology for casting such a mistaken post for your considerations. I am nothing if not humbly able to admit my mistakes to a friend. The truth being aired for "others to read and then consider" takes precedent over petty contempteous comments made in haste.
Bravo, for such an honest and insightful reply my friend..-:beer:
Reminds me of the time I had to tell my really great friend Louis, over 35 years ago, that his girlfriend got drunk at a party while he was out of town and banged his cousin in a parked car in the backyard there. . I hated to give the brutal truth but the truth will out. He was pissed at me for a week , then he apologised and thanked me for it. He died in a motorcycle accident about 9 years later after having been very happily married to a different girl for 8 years and having wonderful two children..
The truth will out, decency and justice are not to be denied.. --Tyr

[Drummond]

Of course you are right. Its the presentation of the truth for others to consider that weighs the most importance !
Sometimes one may temporarily lose sight of that when in heated exchanges with an opponent. And my consideration of the futile merits of attempting to enlighten one individual , tailfins, fails when reminded of the overall necessity of removing the cloak that has been placed to hide the truth. I too, have often even had to remind others of the very thing that you have just rightly reminded me! And you have my thanks for it my friend. I instead of pitying his ignorance, went into contempt mode far ,far too deeply. You have my apology for casting such a mistaken post for your considerations. I am nothing if not humbly able to admit my mistakes to a friend. The truth being aired for "others to read and then consider" takes precedent over petty contempteous comments made in haste.
Bravo, for such an honest and insightful reply my friend..-:beer:
Reminds me of the time I had to tell my really great friend Louis, over 35 years ago, that his girlfriend got drunk at a party while he was out of town and banged his cousin in a parked car in the backyard there. . I hated to give the brutal truth but the truth will out. He was pissed at me for a week , then he apologised and thanked me for it. He died in a motorcycle accident about 9 years later after having been very happily married to a different girl for 8 years and having wonderful two children..
The truth will out, decency and justice are not to be denied.. --Tyr

Yet again, Tyr ... :clap::clap::clap: