Muslims - Whats wrong with leaving Islam and then criticizing it?

Question

I see Christains, Jews, Hindus and almost all other people doing it all the time and NOBODY kills them. In Islam, if you convert away you must be killed.

Ghorban Tourani - former Iranian Sunni Muslim who became a Christian minister. He received the death penalty for Apostasy in Islam

Salman Rushdie - Probably awaiting his beheading

Ali Sina - Alos awaiting his murder.

The sad thing is, is that Muslims AGREE with this

Comrade Abdul Hassan - Do you live in a Islamic country

Every sigle school of islam agress that leaving Islam warrants exexution

I killed B - Open your eyes. Firstly if you look at my answerrs you will see that I am an atheist. Secondly, I dont care about what happend a 100 years ago. Islam is doing tjhis TODAY

Answer 1

All the Muzzies have on their side is terror, not truth.

There are a whole lot of people who have abandoned Islam and they tell their stories on

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/

It is the natural function of Muslims who end up in North America or Europe to drop Islamic belief, in the spirit of human progress. They should first realize that they were forced to immigrate from a Muslim country that did not fulfill their human needs, and Islam is the problem. So that should be a good start to wean them from Islamery. If they move to a Northern climate like Canada or Sweden, and are unable to fulfill the "pre-dawn" prayer because it comes at 2 a.m. in summer or doesn't even come at all since there was not enough hours of darkness, they should then get the clue that God only intended Islam for people living on a flat Earth...

Answer 2

There are 2 incidents must be considered regarding this subject.

But before I mention them I would like to emphasize that Muslims of our time live a dark age. They themselves don't understand their religion. Additionally, you have the anti-Islam people make it even harder on them!

1st incidents:
Tulaiha Bin Khuwailid was a man who lived during the 7th century. Not only he left Islam, but he claimed to be another prophet, & he had fought the Muslims. He had lost & fled the battle. Nearly 3 years after he returned to the Caliph Omar ibn Alkhatab, & decieded to revert to Islam. Omar agreed!

2nd incident:
Abdullah ibn Abi Alsarh. He used to live in Medina with the Muslims during the time of Muhammad. He left Islam & went back to Mecca, where he began an anti-Islam campaign of fraud & propaganda. When the Muslims bloodlessly conquered Mecca & had the upper hand. Muhammad had accepted Abdullah’s reverting to Islam.

Most Muslim, including scholars, of today seem very ignorant & inconsiderate of those 2 incidents when they made their judgment!

Answer 3

I really wonder how long the "lapsed Muslim" before will last?

Apostacy is a Capital Crime in the Shari'a.

Pity, but if they didn't have these tough controls, there wouldn't be much left of Islam, today.

Peace.

ST

Answer 4

Great question Captin. No one is really going to answer this question, but a christian would be able to answer a question like this. With a christian, faith is not base on works like in the muslim faith.

Answer 5

Fanatics - simple answer - best they get out of our country I reckon except of course life is just too damn good here isn't it as no-one wants to upset them!

Answer 6

it is sad but islam seems to suport murder of those who leave I think they need to re read and define the quran.

Answer 7

cause you cannot disagree with the Koran, even if it says that the sun revolves around the earth.

Answer 8

becoz islam was spread by evil spirit..lol

Answer 9

What sect of islam are you referring to . like christinanity islam haS sects that are more extreme than others, so it's unfair to label a whole religious movement by the works of the more extreme sects.

Answer 10

Read this, your answer is here


The right to change one's religion
by Shaykh Abdallah Adhami
23 October 2007

New York, New York - From the Code of Hammurabi to the Code of Maimonides, most major systems of law have affirmed that apostasy must be punished.

In the renowned code of the Roman emperor Justinian (483-565 CE), corpus juris civilis — the basis of all Roman canon law and of modern civil law — apostasy was "to be punished by death" and there was "no toleration of dissent".

The Biblical codes stipulate that the "one who doubts or ridicules one word of the Torah — or of the rabbinical authors — is a 'heretic' in the fullest sense, an infidel ... and there is no hope for him." The laws concerning such an unbeliever are very strict: "he may be killed directly". Or as Maimonides, the 13th century Andalucian rabbi and philosopher, advised regarding the abeyance of apostasy law in his era, "his death may be caused indirectly."

Islamic law, (shari'a), likewise stipulated killing in cases of established public apostasy. Though there is little literature on the emergence and application of apostasy law in the early periods of Muslim history, its actual application usually depended upon whether its declaration was public or private. Within the Islamic state, what minorities — religious and otherwise — did in their private lives was left to their own discretion, even if it may have been technically termed "deviant" or against Islamic teaching.

Shari'a, like all religious law, governs rites of worship and codes of individual and communal conduct and ethics. Contrary to stereotypical notions of religion, the earthly realm within shari'a is in fact pragmatically understood to be essentially secular.

From the point of view of religion, the fundamental nature of the human being is to yearn to worship God unencumbered. The private realm of apostasy had thus always reflected more complex dimensions that make ultimate human judgment impossible. The mysteries of the heart and mind are as beyond theology as they are barely fathomable to neuroscience.

It is our creative encounter with earthly, secular life that reveals our capacity for usefulness to others, and it is the premier instrument by which our own spiritual station is elevated. Authentic, sincere worship ultimately becomes the daily barometer of our spiritual state.

Free, rational debate had always been accommodated within the religious context of shari'a. This was a uniquely Islamic phenomenon, as true in European Cordoba as it was in Arabian Baghdad. Neither the theological abstraction of the Mu'tazilites, a 9th century group of philosophers, nor the unmitigated foreign dialectics by the secretive 10th century group, Brethren of Purity, for example, was ever grounds for removing one from the fold of Islam.

The most salient evidence for not punishing "private" apostasy in Islam is the perennial existence of the so-called hypocrites amidst Medinan society despite grave Qur'anic passages against them. Moreover, private "heretical" thought was neither censured nor censored; as long is it was not publicly preached, it was not condemned as such, nor were there articulations of a need to suppress it.

Outward or visible stability in the earthly domain is what allows the institutions of civil society to continue.

The non-violent resistance of the Prophet Muhammad in Mecca and his diplomacy during the Treaty of Hudaybiyah taught his companions a similar lesson. Under this Treaty, the Prophet allowed people to emigrate without any reprisal, despite the fact that they were abandoning Islam in the process (some having only adopted the new religion for reasons of self-interest).

No prophet was ever given the license to pass judgment over the faith of a human being — as the Qur'an repeatedly reiterates, judgment is ultimately with God alone. Hence, constructive service of our sacred traditions lies in showing their relevance as a vehicle of infinite creativity, not in demoting them to preoccupation with judgment of contemporary culture.

We need to acknowledge and affirm that diversity and difference are part of the divine intent for creation — that we were made as nations and tribes so that we may "learn about and be enriched by the ways of each other" (Qur'an, 49:13). Provincialism and relativism will always challenge diversity — especially when the latter is disguised as tolerance; and not because people are inherently incapable of living together, either.

We need a renewed devotion to the truth, and to seeking it freely through our established non-sectarian, scholarly institutions. Thomas Jefferson exhorted: "Truth is ... the proper and sufficient antagonist to error." It is only through respectful free argument and debate that ideologies can be judged and challenged on their own merits.

The reformation that is direly needed — across the entire globe — is the honest reassessment of the original sources of all our oppressive cultural myths and tyrannical modes of thinking.

As Muslims, we need to establish a higher barometer for what constitutes competence in the service of the scholarly disciplines of shari'a. This would equip us with greater clarity and confidence and prevent us from thoughtlessly demonstrating in passionate protest every time a passing wind seems to challenge our faith.

As religious leaders of all faiths, we need to acknowledge our responsibility for much alienation and estrangement among the faithful around the world. This would begin to re-establish the credibility of our institutions, which would eventually re-ignite the religious imagination of the masses.

Lastly, we need a renewed commitment to focus on an ethos of compassionate, selfless service as a public trust; and this is certainly more becoming of the example of the Blessed Messengers that we claim loyalty to.



* Shaykh Abdallah Adhami is an Arab-American imam and a leading scholar of Islam. He is currently working on an exploration of the linguistic implications of apparently problematic verses in the Qur'an. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 23 October 2007, www.commongroundnews.org