Compelled belief in Islam

[lightseeker]

Continued from Haich's profile post.


Here is a map showing the countries which put people to death for leaving Islam, thereby compelling their belief.

"Whoever wills let them believe, and whoever wills let them disbelieve.” (18:29 Quran)

And yet in Saudi Arabia, which does not have a penal code and simply draws its laws from Sharia, apostasy is punishable by death, according to the judiciaries interpretation of Islamic law, along with many other Muslim majority countries.

Common critiques-
"In what way is a non-Muslim comparable to a Muslim who has left the religion? They are not, not at all" - quote from Daze affirming the justice of executing apostates
They are comparable because executing someone who leaves Islam is compelled belief. If someone is born into an Islamic family and wants to change their faith, they are compelled to believe at the cost of their life.

-"The old testament also teaches death for apostates"
Yet no Christian or Jewish country or population imposes this because it is a recognized evil to impose faith, which is a Free Act, by force.

Apostasy in Islam by country - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

So why does Islam kill non believers if apparently their Koran says "whoever wills not to believe, let them"?

 

[Daze]

Wow, pety.

You were wrong and called out on it. Now you need to grandstand?

Well, lots of people here hate Islam. I'm sure you'll get plenty of engagement.

I'll just leave some Bible quotes, because of wisdom and all.





.. And the Quran.

 

[Haich]

There are Hadith which document how the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) witnessed people leaving Islam to become part of other faiths. They were never executed in his time. I note this is important as there are clearly conditions to leaving Islam. You are not held in fear and forced to believe in something you don’t want to. This isn’t what apostasy laws are about..

View attachment 109516

Full article with citations and links if you are interested:

The Issue of Apostasy in Islam | Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research

One of the most common accusations leveled against Islam involves the freedom of religion. The problem, according to critics: Islam doesn’t have any.

yaqeeninstitute.org

You have absolutely every right to believe whatever it is you see fit. Apostasy is concerned with the outward, loud, public declaration of scolding and disrespecting Islam, as Islam isn’t just a faith, it is a law with sharia jurisprudence. The cases of apostasy which resulted in execution referenced in that article [Under Caliph Ali (ra) for instance] were concerned with retaining the public order and law and keeping the Islamic jurisprudence alive under Sharia law. In essence, treason, which has been practiced for centuries.

Some things to note:

1. You cannot be an apostate if you are non Muslim. You have to be a Muslim who has left Islam and publicly condemn and call against it. You are free to convert to other faiths or beliefs as we know, there is no compulsion in religion.

2. You have to be tried in a court; no vigilantism.

3. According to the laws of western liberalism, apostasy is actually perfectly conceivable via social contracts which we have with our leaders/governments. So from a secular perspective, it’s a viable and effective way of maintaining order and social cohesion.
Mohammed Hijab breaks this down well in this 20 min clip:

 

[Haich]

I won’t respond to the comments about Saudi Arabia as they don’t implement Sharia laws in their entirety. They are also very flawed in their implementation of it. There are countries like Brunei and Oman to name a few which implement sharia jurisprudence into their laws and they are diverse, calm, peaceful countries.

Saudi Arabia is culturally, one of the more conservative and patriarchal societies in the Islamic world. Their actions of late and their leadership have shown quite blatantly, they do not hold Islam at the centre of their nation.

 

[Haich]

They are comparable because executing someone who leaves Islam is compelled belief. If someone is born into an Islamic family and wants to change their faith, they are compelled to believe at the cost of their life.

Some places in the world, this is true. However, this isn’t the correct implementation of the apostasy law. It literally contradicts verses in the Quran which state there is no compulsion in religion.

How a nation or a government decide to implement what they derive from The Quran & Hadith, isn’t necessarily what the scholars and those of knowledge state.

 

[lightseeker]

Some places in the world, this is true. However, this isn’t the correct implementation of the apostasy law. It literally contradicts verses in the Quran which state there is no compulsion in religion.

How a nation or a government decide to implement what they derive from The Quran & Hadith, isn’t necessarily what the scholars and those of knowledge state.

So you would say that the states which implement the death penalty for apostasy erroneously execute the laws coming from the Quran?

I won’t respond to the comments about Saudi Arabia as they don’t implement Sharia laws in their entirety. They are also very flawed in their implementation of it. There are countries like Brunei and Oman to name a few which implement sharia jurisprudence into their laws and they are diverse, calm, peaceful countries.

Saudi Arabia is culturally, one of the more conservative and patriarchal societies in the Islamic world. Their actions of late and their leadership have shown quite blatantly, they do not hold Islam at the centre of their nation.

so if we take Brunei as an example-
"Penal Code 2013, which came into full force in 2019, Section 112 of states that a Muslim who declares himself non-Muslim (an apostate) commits a crime punishable by death if proved by two witnesses or confession, or with imprisonment for a term not exceeding thirty years and whipping with up to 40 strokes if proved by other evidence"

. You cannot be an apostate if you are non Muslim. You have to be a Muslim who has left Islam and publicly condemn and call against it. You are free to convert to other faiths or beliefs as we know, there is no compulsion in religion

This does not seem to be true. For someone in Brunei for example, who leaves Islam for another religion, they are put to death, and in many Islamic countries it seems to be the norm.

The distinction between private and public seems vague to me, because to say it's not a death sentence to privately leave Islam, one would still "publicly" cease going to mosque and perhaps attending other organizations, therefore leading to death.
This is compulsion in religion is it not?

According to the laws of western liberalism, apostasy is actually perfectly conceivable via social contracts which we have with our leaders/governments. So from a secular perspective, it’s a viable and effective way of maintaining order and social cohesion.
Mohammed Hijab breaks this down well in this 20 min clip:

I haven't watched the clip yet but I can't imagine anything comparable to this in western societies, death sentences for creeds. Furthermore, to sacrifice individual freedoms for the collective good is the definition of fascism, in the true sense of the term.
To say religion is compelled for the good of the whole is still a compulsion in religion.

Also I don't accept the distinction between Muslims apostasizing being justifiably killed and non Muslims not being compelled to believe because there is nothing "inherently" Islamic about a person, saying we can compel this person to believe but not that one. That is still compulsion

So in continuation, you said that Mohammed did not mind when people left his group, and likewise in the Quran it seems to be written clearly that "religion is not to be compelled".Are these facts and statements contradicted by others adding difficulty and nuance to the seemingly clear directive or would you say the cultural prevalence of compelling religion was ingrained in Islamic societies without justification from the original scriptures based on social organizations of the times?

 

[Lalas]

I will not put Like on the lightseeker, only because he believes in some nonsense about Russia (and so he supports the satanic nwo of his own free will). Otherwise, I agree with his points.

 

[George Clinton]

Wow, pety.

You were wrong and called out on it. Now you need to grandstand?

Well, lots of people here hate Islam. I'm sure you'll get plenty of engagement.

I'll just leave some Bible quotes, because of wisdom and all.


View attachment 109509


.. And the Quran.

View attachment 109514

You’re right you both have a lot in common.

Lightseeker where do moral laws come from? If you ran society is it Christianity or some kind neo-pagan volk Germanism?

daze thank you for being honest enough to be a open theocrat

 

[George Clinton]

s

I will not put Like on the lightseeker, only because he believes in some nonsense about Russia (and so he supports the satanic nwo of his own free will). Otherwise, I agree with his points.

fight light seeker lol

 

[Lalas]

s


fight light seeker lol

By no means a fight, he is too strong for me
(and besides, they are the vast majority in their blind reverence for the sacred role of Russia these days, and they can just lynch me in public whenever they want.. they can r*pe me, and whatever they want.. although the majority claim to be believers, but we know what things can be done in the name of religion....)

 

[George Clinton]

By no means a fight, he is too strong for me
(and besides, they are the vast majority in their blind reverence for the sacred role of Russia these days, and they can just lynch me in public whenever they want.. they can r*pe me, and whatever they want.. although the majority claim to be believers, but we know what things can be done in the name of religion....)

Christ you’re a bunch of weird freaks lol

I hope ya all eat each other like zombies

thus always to tyrants lol

 

[lightseeker]

I will not put Like on the lightseeker, only because he believes in some nonsense about Russia (and so he supports the satanic nwo of his own free will). Otherwise, I agree with his points.

I believe you have me confused with someone else, I don’t hold Russia in any special regard.

You’re right you both have a lot in common.

Lightseeker where do moral laws come from? If you ran society is it Christianity or some kind neo-pagan volk Germanism?

daze thank you for being honest enough to be a open theocrat

Stay on topic georgie.

 

[Haich]

So you would say that the states which implement the death penalty for apostasy erroneously execute the laws coming from the Quran?

Yes. These countries have their own laws which they base on the Quran & Hadith but at times they completely negate it and make up their own culturally derived laws. For instance, you have Saudi for instance which forbade women from driving for ages.

 

[Haich]

so if we take Brunei as an example-
"Penal Code 2013, which came into full force in 2019, Section 112 of states that a Muslim who declares himself non-Muslim (an apostate) commits a crime punishable by death if proved by two witnesses or confession, or with imprisonment for a term not exceeding thirty years and whipping with up to 40 strokes if proved by other evidence"

I mean I don’t understand what you want me to respond to here.

 

[Haich]

This does not seem to be true. For someone in Brunei for example, who leaves Islam for another religion, they are put to death, and in many Islamic countries it seems to be the norm.

The distinction between private and public seems vague to me, because to say it's not a death sentence to privately leave Islam, one would still "publicly" cease going to mosque and perhaps attending other organizations, therefore leading to death.
This is compulsion in religion is it not?

I don’t see where Brunei said leaving a faith for another is punishable by death. It is the public declaration of leaving Islam AND condemning or calling against it with provocation which is usually considered apostasy. The Quran supports the idea of one leaving the faith for another as there is no compulsion to believe in Islam.

Again, the conversion of someone is different to someone leaving Islam and making a life publicly condemning and preaching against it. If I leave Islam tomorrow, I won’t be ‘put to death’. If I leave Islam, start a YouTube channel and bash my country and Islam constantly, I’d be tried in a court of law and it would be up to them to determine, if my rhetoric is that much of a threat that I deserve to be killed or lashed. I mean The West actively carry out discreet killings or imprisonment, torture etc for those that oppose their foreign policy. I don’t see this as any different.

 

[Haich]

haven't watched the clip yet but I can't imagine anything comparable to this in western societies, death sentences for creeds. Furthermore, to sacrifice individual freedoms for the collective good is the definition of fascism, in the true sense of the term.
To say religion is compelled for the good of the whole is still a compulsion in religion.

the west literally killed Saddam Hussein, Ghadaffi, caused Julian Assange to live in a tiny building in London (Ecuadorian embassy) for years…all because these people opposed their laws and policies PUBLICLY. I’d argue the apostasy laws are the same. But at least you’re tried in a court of law fairly; it’s not like you’re just killed immediately. There have been plenty of cases of public lashings to deter the emergence of a revolt.

I disagree. Many Christians and Jews thrived under Islamic rule. Islam is all encompassing so it has sharia laws which are derived from the Quran and Sunnah; they’re akin to the 10 commandments. There are also various punishments, it’s not just ‘death’. That’s reserved for those who transgress limits. For instance, if I start a hate group, upon leaving Islam, which grows and targets people of faith and I spread misinformation, of course I’m considered a threat to the ruling party. I will be tried in court and death is an option IF the court finds what I do and say punishable by death. If not, there are lashings or imprisonment. You guys do the same in the west. If someone breaks a law or tries to speak out against a contentious issue, they’re held to account.

So you accept the west, with its collective sense of ‘let’s go to war for the collective good of our people’ is fascist?

 

[Haich]

Also I don't accept the distinction between Muslims apostasizing being justifiably killed and non Muslims not being compelled to believe because there is nothing "inherently" Islamic about a person, saying we can compel this person to believe but not that one. That is still compulsion

You accepting or declining whether something is true is irrelevant. Islam is clear with its rulings and in this case with Apostasy/leaving Islam, there is actually absolutely nothing in The Quran which supports it. It is entirely reliant on Hadith. I think this is why there are a lot of different opinions on this. Personally, I’m of the opinion that death isn’t necessary eventhough it’s an option for the grave cases. This is because the prophet pbuh didn’t kill anyone for leaving Islam, despite many swaying between faiths and changing their minds I’ve linked in an earlier post. Also, The Quran does not support or mention it. This is probably why you won’t find a lot of cases (if any) of nations killing people for leaving Islam. If they do, it had to have been a big threat to the stability and peace of that nation.

 

[Haich]

in continuation, you said that Mohammed did not mind when people left his group, and likewise in the Quran it seems to be written clearly that "religion is not to be compelled".Are these facts and statements contradicted by others adding difficulty and nuance to the seemingly clear directive or would you say the cultural prevalence of compelling religion was ingrained in Islamic societies without justification from the original scriptures based on social organizations of the times?

I think because there is no definitive law in The Quran which stipulates that those who publicly leave and declare themselves non Muslim should be put to death, we have to look at the Hadith where this comes from. There are millions of Hadith, about 10-15% would be considered legitimate. This is because our standard of grading Hadith is very stringent. Any weak link in the oration and it’s dismissed entirely.

Here is another opinion, which I’d say reflects my stance.

You must check the Hadith back to the larger rule found in The Qur'an, if The Qur'an does notdirectly support the injunction found in this Hadith, then that means without question that the Hadith is for a very narrow and very explicit situation that most probably will never be relevant to you.

Thus, when The Prophet says that those who leave Islam should be put to death, he is talking about a very specific time, when the Muslims were living in Yathrib (Medina) and were being attacked and besieged by the Meccans.

Let us remember that what constituted the community of the early Muslims was not tribal, blood ties, or ethnic; the community that was established by The Prophet was predicated on belief (among the Muslims) and as a conscious, willing union between those of other faiths (namely Jews, Christians, and Pagans of Yathrib [Medina]).


So, when we think of “religion” today, we think of it as something separate to our nationality, tribe, ethnicity, etc. People can be a German Buddhist, or a Japanese Christian, or a Argentinian Follower of The Church of Diego, but during the time of The Prophet, a person’s status as a “Muslim” was the equivalent to what we consider our national identity. The governmental structure that a Muslim was subject and loyal to was that of Islam, just like, an American citizen is subject and loyal to the United States government.

So, within the Hadith that refer to The Prophet sanctioning death as a penalty towards those who leave Islam, this is not an issue of someone saying: “Oohhh yahhhh I’m like, not mazlam any moreeee, just not feelin’ it anymore, lolz, let’s watch Twilight.”

It is not the simplistic notion of leaving a religion, as we understand it today, rather, it should be understood as someone committing high treason, a crime that is punishable by death in the United States, and many other countries. This is different to “regular” treason, or petty treason, which is usually punished with life in prison. The difference between “high treason” and “treason” is whether the nation is at war, and in many countries, high treason is punishable by death, while treason is not.

So, the context of The Prophet saying that those who leave Islam should be put to death, it is not because they are “leaving Islam,” it is because they are betraying their community, which is defined by their acceptance of the tenants of Islam, much like the American community is not defined by any ethnic ties, but by one’s acceptance of the tenants of the US Constitution. Thus, this Hadith is within the context of (1) War time, (2) High Treason, and (3) Does not abrogate The Qur'an, but, is the result of a need deemed necessary by The Prophet, applies to this very narrow situation that he was in.

So, it is such a narrow context that it can almost be rendered meaningless. Today we do not organize our states by virtue of religion, we do so by the boundaries of the state, either in a geographic and/or national sense, so by saying that “death is penalty for those who turn to other religions,” we are not really referring to the same thing, which adds to the confusion.

 

[phipps]

The Quran commands the followers of Allah to resort to violence upon non Muslim’s. Following are a few verses from the Quran:

“Kill them wherever you find them and drive them from where they drove you out. Persecution is worse than slaughter” (2:191).

“So keep firm those who have believed. I will strike terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved. So, strike them at the neck and cut off their fingers” (8:12).

It talks about seizing and slaying apostates too. I don't know if this is during war or at all times.

So its a book that contradicts itself from the little I know.

In most majority Muslim countries there is no freedom of religion, conscious or speech (not publicly anyway). People cannot evangelise and preach Christ to others. That's not a coincidence. It because of what is written in the Quran.

I have read and heard stories of Muslims who've converted to Christianity who would not dare tell anyone they know that their beliefs have changed. They know and fear they will be ostracised by family and friends and will be prosecuted by their governments and either be imprisoned, be physically punished or get the death penalty depending on the sharia law in the country the person lives in.

 

[Haich]

Yh I can’t stand Phipps so I’ll be leaving the discussion. His points have been addressed numerous times yet he continues to post rubbish, out of context, ignorant statements.

Hope you find what I posted of use. @lightseeker