The Final Hurdle of becoming a Muslim is

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 TG12345 wrote:

 Nausheen wrote:

Salaam Alaikum Nausheen,Thank you for being so honest and open about your faith. I have spoken to other Muslims who have argued the death penalty for apostacy applied only during the time of Muhammad, I wasn't aware of Muslims (outside of countries like Afghanistan etc) who believe it should still be applied.

 Nausheen wrote:

Walaikum assalam TG. I did not speak of myself when I said the punishemnt is a death penalty, rather how the sharia sees it. 

Do you have references from those who said this was implemented only in the time of the prophet pbuh?

Peace be upon you as well, Nausheen. A Muslim friend of mine who I will not name because I have not obtained his permission does not believe it is applicable today.

Here is an article written by a Muslim who states that the death penalty for apostasy is against the teachings of the Quran. He does not state that the death penalty for apostasy applied only during the time of Muhammad, but rather, the only apostates who were to be executed were those who were fighting Muslims. According to the author, those apostates who kept on friendly terms with Muslims and those who were neutral towards them were to be left alone.

http://www.islamicperspectives.com/Apostasy1.htm

HE DEATH PENALTY FOR APOSTASY CONFLICTS WITH THE
QUR`AN

The evidence against any legally prescribed penalty
for apostasy in Islam does not rest only on the fact that the Qur`an does not
prescribe any such penalty while referring to the subject of apostasy many
times. We can go further and state that:

a)      
There
is no mandatory death penalty in the Qur`an for any crime.

b) The death penalty for apostasy in fact conflicts
with the Qur`an. 

The truth of the above statements can be seen by
examining the verses: 5:32-33, 45, 2:178 and 4:88-91. 

Qur`an 5:32-33, 45, 2:178

In 5:32,
after relating the story of the murder of Habil by his brother Qabil, God says:

	On that account We ordained for the Children of
Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading
mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole humanity: and if any
one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole humanity. Then although
there came to them Our Messengers with clear (guidance), yet, even after that,
many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (5:32)

In the context of an emphasis on preserving the
life of each and every individual the above verse mentions only two crimes for
which a person can be killed: 

1)      
Murdering
another human being; 

2)      
Spreading
mischief (fasad) in the land. 

...

At first sight the words �seize them and kill them
wherever you find them� would suggest that they are to be killed. But this is
quickly seen to be wrong if we read the next two verses: 

	Except those who join a group between you and whom
there is a (peace-) treaty or those who approach you with their hearts
restraining them from fighting you or fighting their own people. Had God willed he would have given them
power over you and they would have fought you. So 
	if they withdraw from you and do not fight you but give you (guarantees
of) peace, then God has opened no way for you against them. 

	You will find others that wish to gain your confidence as well as that of
their people. Every time they are sent back to temptation they give in to it.
If they do not withdraw from you nor give you (guarantees) of peace, nor
restrain their hands, seize them and kill them, wherever you find them. In
their case We have provided you with a clear warrant against them. (4:90-91).

These
verses clarify the command �seize them and kill them�. The apostates who
rejected Islam by failing to emigrate as commanded by God are divided into
three categories: 

1)      
Those who ally themselves with a
group with whom Muslims have a peace treaty; 

2)      
Those who want to keep neutrality,
committing themselves to peace with both the Muslims and their own people who
had not accepted Islam; 

3)      
Those who provide no real guarantee
of peace to Muslims and by all indications ally themselves with non-believers engaged
in hostilities towards Islam. 

The
first two types of apostates are to be left in peace while the third one is to
be treated like any non-believers in a state of war: they are to be seized and
killed wherever they are found. Notice that the Qur`an uses the words �God has opened no way for you against them�
in connection with the apostates of the first two types. This means that the
Qur`an actually prohibits killing those apostates who want to live in peaceful
terms with the Muslims. 

The anti-Christian website "answering Christianity"- which I actually have a very low opinion of because of its highly insulting content- also challenges this belief. The authors state that apostates were killed during the time of Muhammad only because they were joining forces that were militarily fighting Muslims.

4-  The Sayings of
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, regarding killing the renegades came when Islam was
partial and the Muslims were dealing with wars all the time.  As I said above, if the
person wasn't with the Muslims, then he was certainly with his people, the pagans and the
other non-Muslims, and he would've then had to join the evil forces to fight the
Muslims.  So the case back then was different than today. 

http://www.answering-christianity.com/apostates.htm

 Nausheen wrote:

Why do you think Afghanistan can implement sharia rulings - its not an islamic state, fully, rather they are having democracy - am not sure of the exact politics there. 

You just admitted that Afghanistan is not an Islamic state. Some would argue that its puppet rulers who are helping maintain a US and NATO occupation are the opposite of what an Islamic government would be. The high corruption also makes me question how Islamic the government there is.

Is it possible that Afghanistan's implementation of the death penalty for apostasy (or effort to, since the Christian convert was allowed to flee) is based on a misunderstanding of Islam?

 TG12345 wrote:

I have to say, with all due respect, that this is one of the reasons I would never become Muslim. I don't think that a religion that is truly of no compulsion would punish people for leaving. I also think it is a form of weakness to punish people for no longer believing what you believe, and points to an inability to convince them to come back to what you believe is true, and a fear that others will also fall away.

 Nausheen wrote:

You are right.

Sorry, what did you say I was right about? That killing apostates is contradictory to the claim there is no compulsion in Islam? That it is a form of weakness to punish people for leaving one's faith? That it is based on an inability to convince people to return and a fear that others will also leave? 

 Nausheen wrote:

I dont understand why the death penalty. Although the people who do not declare themselves as apostates are to be given the benefit of doubt. A person who declares publicly,should be counseled, sent out of the state, and given time to reconsider etc, etc ... there is a whole protocol, I dont remember exactly, but do know that its not a simple matter to be judged or even sentenced. 

I understand, but why is there the need to sentence or judge them at all? Why can't you leave that to God?

Two friends of mine over the past few years left Christianity. It was a very sad thing for me (FYI they became atheists, not Muslims). I feel sad that they have rejected God, however I still keep on good terms with them and witness to them, and pray for them. 

I would never ever even think of harming them, and would die rather than allow someone to harm them. 

Well Sheikh TG12345 now we know why you are here on this forum. You probably have never read the translation of the Holy Qur'an nor the Hadiths yet you want to preach Islam to Muslims. That's rich. If that is indeed your intention then you can get lost.