Discussion in 'Religion' started by Goldtop, Dec 13, 2017.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
As to the interrogative, well, I suppose I just don't feel like digging up these familiar tropes from ten to fifteen years ago, when they were popular, before; and, furthermore, it's not like snip jobs of religious texts are difficult or uncommon. I would say wake me when you get around to taqiyya, but it's probably better to simply remind to think it through, and skip the part about dating.
As to the declarative, "the Islamic book the Quran" is extraneous; you can just call it the Qur'an.
Similarly, we refer to the Torah as the Torah, and not the Jewish scrolls the Torah We might use terms like Hebrew Scriptures and Christian Scriptures, or Old Testament and New Testament, but we generally refer to the Bible, and not the Christian book the Bible.
This is from the islamic book The quran, why is it a "prop trope"?
Quran 9:29 -Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah (jizyah = tax levied by Muslim on non- - believers or be killed on refusal to pay) willingly while they are humbled.
While the "true" date may not be known for the Islamic book the - Qur`an - I am pretty confident that it is much older than the "fifteen years" you seem to be suggesting. You are of course entitled to you views and opinions.
Not when it comes to Islam , by all accounts
plural noun: apostates
a person who renounces a religious or political belief or principle.
Quran (4:89) - "They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliya' (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allah (to Muhammad). But if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliya' (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them."
There are other verses that seem to support the many Hadith that establish the death sentence for apostates are Quran verses 2:217, 9:73-74, 88:21, 5:54, 9:66.
It is all KILL! KILL! KILL! when it comes to muslims and apostasy. There is no leaving islam without the penalty of death hanging over the apostate.
Sahih Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "
Sahih Bukhari (83:37) - "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."
Sahih Bukhari (84:57) - [In the words of] "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"
Sahih Bukhari (89:271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."
Sahih Bukhari (84:58) - "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'"
Sahih Bukhari (84:64-65) - "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.'" This verse from the Hadith is worse than it appears because it isn't speaking solely of apostates, but those who say they believe but don't put their religion into practice.
Abu Dawud (4346) - "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 grammatical changes could be made. He was brought back to Muhammad after having been captured in Medina).
al-Muwatta of Imam Malik (36.18.15) - "The Messenger of Allah said, "If someone changes his religion - then strike off his head."
It probably helps if you don't misrepresent the hadith. The first part is that you've excerpted a portion of one hadith, which in turn is one of two seemighly related stories. Additionally, commentary on the issue reminds it is a problematic story, to begin with:
Narrated 'Ikrama: 'Ali burnt some people and this news reached ibn 'Abbas, who said, “Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's punishment. 'No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him” Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Chapter 149, Number 260, p.160-161).
Firstly this hadith presumes that ibn Abbas knew more about Prophet's (PBUH) hadith than Ali whom Prophet (PBUH) described as door of city of knowledge and I (Prophet) am city of knowledge. How can Ali burn apostates? Ali is known for his passion for justice. Burning is a very cruel way of killing someone. And what is worse, there is no mention of any trial or confession or anything and he just burnt them? If Ali could do this what about lesser Muslims?
There are other ahadith as well of this nature. The Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said that 'kill one who changes his religion' (uqtulu man baddala dinahu). All these ahadith contradict Qur'an and cannot be acceptable. Moreover we are not told the context of such ahadith when and in what circumstances the Prophet ordered killing a person for changing religion. May be such a person was suspected of some serious conspiracy against Islam and Muslims. Sedition is punishable with death even in modern laws. Was the execution ordered for sedition or for change of religion? No such context is available in respect of such ahadith.
Certain things are said in some context and without understanding the context it will do disservice to Islam to apply them blindly.
And while we're on questions of the commentary, see Elias↱ in re Barã'ah 9:29.
Part of the point is that your lack of any coherent argument leaves everyone else to pull the commentary on each one of your citations, and, no, at some point you can do your own homework. Do you even know, for instance, who Mu'adh bin Jabal (Bukhari 9.89.271) was?
It's also worth noting, of Asghar Ali Engineer's consideration of apostasy, part of the context in which the Prophet might have ordered that killing might be found in consideration of the point that Ikrima narrated Bukhari 4.52.260: Ikrimah ibn Amr ibn Hishām converted to Islam in 630 CE, at Mecca, and died six years later at Yarmouk, fighting against the Byzantines. In between, Abu Bakr dispatched him to suppress the heretic Maslamah bin Ḥabīb (Musaylimah), a post-Christian claimant of Islamic prophethood at Al-Yamamah. The question of discarding one's religion finds some context and shape; indeed, the tale seems reflective more of Ikrima than ibn Abbas. Additionally, Ikrima was thirty-four when Muhammad died; Ali was thirty; Abd Allah ibn Abbas was thirteen. Abu Huraira, narrator of 4.52.259, was an early convert to Islam, and rich source of ahadith, and would have been in Ikrima's time extraordinarily well respected; if 260 reflects Ikrima, then Ikrima would certainly want his narration coupled with Abu Huraira's prestige.
See what happens? Maybe you should do your own damn homework. Seriously, people aren't going to drag themselves through it for your snip jobs.
Elias, Abu Amina. "On interpretation of verse 9:29 and the battle of Tabuk". Faith in Allah. 16 June 2014. AbuAminaElias.com. 8 June 2018. http://bit.ly/2McQrOg
Engineer, Asghar Ali. "Islam and Punishment for Apsotasy". The American Muslim. 6 April 2008. TheAmericanMuslim.org. 8 August 2018. http://bit.ly/2KBuynd
Stephen H and Tiassa can I ask?
I am sure some in the thread will read ALL which you have posted and good on you and those who read everything and contribute to the discussion (which I am not doing with this post)
But this appears as Duelling Religious snippets or a a large version of He said / She said
And on the snippets it appears on my skimming read most appear to be of dubious quality
I'm guessing the whole "was it said - was it translated correctly" will never be settled
Is it possible to relate to what is being said / done now without really tracking back years and years to what was said then
Really the Earth does revolve around the sun
To those doing the full reading of the thread I hope you get a certificate when the thread winds up
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I have seen nothing or read anything that contradicts the Islam law on apostasy. The punishment is death. Besides, why is it even even in contention if these were not Islamic facts that bear out in Islamic scriptures. There are many references to what the punishment is for apostasy in Islam and I suppose it is what one chooses to believe, take as proof or evidence. It is my belief that had this thread have been started by me, it wouldn't have seen light of day if the extremely bias Tiassa had his /her way.
Egyptian Muslim Cleric: The punishment for apostasy is death
Without punishment for apostasy Islam wouldn't exist today!
This is strange form.
Certain people criticize religion for just being a bunch of stuff that apparantly anyone can say anything about. They say it lacks a format of critical thought.
Yet the very same persons, when presented with a format of critical thought, now criticize religion for not just being something anyone can say anything about.
At 11 posts with about 3 locked threads under your belt, you could possibly interpret that you are running the gauntlet of your account also joining those things that will cease to see the light of day.
Why propose anything?
Self-knowledge may be achieved through intuition and introspection, but I would be wary of calling that reliably true.
Indeed. Had I started a thread to debate and discuss critically , 'Islam and Apostasy', it would have no doubt been locked before anyone had the slightest chance to discuss the subject. It has been clearly shown to me that anything to do with Islam on this forum is taboo where Tiassa is concerned as he/she has locked my very first two Islamic topics. One has to wonder what is it this muslim has to hide that he/she cannot allow discussion or debate?
Still, the evidence is overwhelming , there is a punishment of death hanging over any person that decides to leave the Islamic ideology. It is right up there with death for blasphemers, death for homsexuals.
Mod Hat — Fine, if this is the way you want to do it
No it hasn't, actually. Are you lying, or just stupid?
Seriously, go ahead and prove your statement. No, really. Consider that your first priority as of right now.
It is clear that before you had power to wield as "staff member" you couldn't have locked any thread. Obviously the power has gone clean to your head and "Mod Hat" and given you the power to lock anything concerning Islam. Which in my case you have done. I will not fall for your bs of derailing a thread that isn't mine , i.e. one that it is too late for you to lock. I don't have time to help and assist you in derailing other peoples threads that you object to.
The problem is that you appear to be a poisonous anti-Islam monomaniac troll. As such, you have triggered the forum's immune response. On your first day here. Congratulations.
Why would I leave the garden of empiricism?
You have become all powerful since becoming a mod/staff member. It has gone to your "Mod Hat"
It appears that you had absolutely no problem with this thread until ISLAM was brought into the topic. You then got on your high tyrannical Islamic horse. You have locked my first two threads without cause and only that you are undoubtedly a defender of Islam, fair enough, but locking threads is no way to defend your ideology. You seem to have your hands tied on this particular thread simply because it is someone else's and was started some time ago. I will not help you derail a thread that isn't mine just because you have now decided you do not like the content. There is no mention of ISLAM on this thread until I posted on it. The op wrote " no one should have freedom from religion, that this was not a right". I have show this to be the case when it comes to Islam and apostasy; argue that that if you will, but the evidence is overwhelming that the punishment for leaving ISLAM is DEATH!!!
I see, so anyone even mentioning the word Islam is flagged up as being "a poisonous anti-Islam monomaniac troll". Why don't you just be brave enough and say that - all other religions can be mocked, criticised and ridiculed as long as it isn't ISLAM and that there is no legitimate reason to discuss ISLAM under any circumstances.? We would all then know exactly where we stand, wouldn't we.
Nope. People mention Islam here all the time. People who post hate speech and show irrational phobias are sometimes labeled anti-Islamic trolls.
You must have missed the long threads mocking and criticizing Christianity.
Separate names with a comma.