Killing the apostate! Islamic?? Whats the source? Whats there to consider?

[stvdv]

Quran.

 

[firedragon]

If you had any actual argument to make you would already have made it.

Alright. Since you have no character to speak with some substance and maturity, you will probably receive some now.

Ikrima was a well known Khawarij. Taking a narration of a Khawarij about Ali is like taking Satans word about Allah.

Since you have no clue about any of this, try and learn something.

The Isnad is the most important aspect in Usul ul hadith according to the Sunni school of thought other than the Maliki school and probably the earliest Abu Haneefa's school of thought. So since it seems like you are from the other three fikhussunnah, lets make an analysis based on your own theology mate.

You dumped Isnad down the drain saying "it doesnt matter" because you have no understanding of your own religious sciences. But Isnad is the most important in your theology. Thus, taking a dubious link like Ikrima in a narration about Ali as I said is like taking the devils word about God. Maybe you have no clue of course about these issues in the same system you are speaking of.

Also since it seems like you have never read up on some thalikun of ahadith, the ahadith you are referring to were referencing the harbulriddha in the early period. A murthad in this era can never mean an apostate. It is sedition. This is, even if Ikrima was telling all the truth, and the narration chain is Sarih, and Frabri narrating from Bukhari was absolutely spot on after several centuries after the fact.

On top of all of this, of course knowing you would in your desire to avoid will avoid all of that, the Quran saying La Ikraaha fiddheen is absolutely conflicting with this narration. So obviously you are not interested in the Qur'an at all but propagating your murderous intent.

So that's a very very small piece of analysis if you try you may understand. But since you are a maulathul aalami it might be pretty easy to understand for you.

Cheers.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Alright. Since you have no character to speak with some substance and maturity, you will probably receive some now.

Ikrima was a well known Khawarij. Taking a narration of a Khawarij about Ali is like taking Satans word about Allah.

Since you have no clue about any of this, try and learn something.

The Isnad is the most important aspect in Usul ul hadith according to the Sunni school of thought other than the Maliki school and probably the earliest Abu Haneefa's school of thought. So since it seems like you are from the other three fikhussunnah, lets make an analysis based on your own theology mate.

You dumped Isnad down the drain saying "it doesnt matter" because you have no understanding of your own religious sciences. But Isnad is the most important in your theology. Thus, taking a dubious link like Ikrima in a narration about Ali as I said is like taking the devils word about God. Maybe you have no clue of course about these issues in the same system you are speaking of.

Also since it seems like you have never read up on some thalikun of ahadith, the ahadith you are referring to were referencing the harbulriddha in the early period. A murthad in this era can never mean an apostate. It is sedition. This is, even if Ikrima was telling all the truth, and the narration chain is Sarih, and Frabri narrating from Bukhari was absolutely spot on after several centuries after the fact.

On top of all of this, of course knowing you would in your desire to avoid will avoid all of that, the Quran saying La Ikraaha fiddheen is absolutely conflicting with this narration. So obviously you are not interested in the Qur'an at all but propagating your murderous intent.

So that's a very very small piece of analysis if you try you may understand. But since you are a maulathul aalami it might be pretty easy to understand for you.

Cheers.

Using Google I have a general understanding of what is going on. Though what is a maulathul aalami?

 

[icehorse]

Okay. So show that please.

Where in the Quran does it make a "tone" that apostasy is such a crime that it should be punishable by death?

Well we're back to our old argument again.. Over 500 times, the Quran criticizes non-Muslims. It criticizes them every which way. Using overwhelming repetition, it establishes that Muslims are the good guys, and that non-Muslims are the bad guys. In the Quran it is abundantly clear that Allah hates non-Muslims.

I would say that this establishes fertile ground for Islamic law to treat non-Muslims or critics of Islam in general, to be dealt with harshly.

 

[firedragon]

Well we're back to our old argument again.. Over 500 times, the Quran criticizes non-Muslims. It criticizes them every which way. Using overwhelming repetition, it establishes that Muslims are the good guys, and that non-Muslims are the bad guys. In the Quran it is abundantly clear that Allah hates non-Muslims.

I would say that this establishes fertile ground for Islamic law to treat non-Muslims or critics of Islam in general, to be dealt with harshly.

Thats not true.

So try again. The question is this.

Where in the Quran does it make a "tone" that apostasy is such a crime that it should be punishable by death?

Of course, you will never ever in your life answer that question directly. Never. See, when someone makes baseless, bogus claims, they cannot substantiate any of that. You know why? Because they are bogus.

Have a nice day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me see if I have this right. @firedragon the Quran itself says nothing of killing apostates appears to be your claim. Those beliefs come from the hadiths. I am not a Muslim, and have never really studied the Quran, much less the hadiths so please forgive my ignorance. Are the hadiths interpretations of applications of the Quran? That seems to be the case. Some Muslims seem to believe that the hadiths are holy too. In fact I saw that one Muslim here seemed to want to insult you for not following the hadiths.

 

[Clara Tea]

It is very well known in the Islamic circles who are considered extremist or fanatical that there is nothing about apostasy laws in the Qur'an. Anyone who studies a little bit of Islamic Jurisprudence knows this very well. Of course there are some non-muslim apologists who propagate otherwise through some websites.

Nevertheless, I wish to discuss with those who propagate apostasy laws, be it muslim or non-muslim, what their sources are and what the justifications are based on the Islamic literature.

To reiterate, there are no killing apostates in the Qur'an. None.

They don't see themselves as extremists or fanatics. Rather, they see themselves as following the morals that God has laid out for them.

They look at trials in the US (OJ Simpson not jailed for killing his wife), and think that the US is soft on crime. US cities are filled with graffiti, smut, prostitutes, and drug pushers. Imagine a society that doesn't have all of that.

Occasionally, a thief would have his hands chopped off.

We shouldn't resort to name calling to win our arguments, and we should try to see things from their perspective. The evildoers are punished, and the good benefit.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It is very well known in the Islamic circles who are considered extremist or fanatical that there is nothing about apostasy laws in the Qur'an. Anyone who studies a little bit of Islamic Jurisprudence knows this very well. Of course there are some non-muslim apologists who propagate otherwise through some websites.

Nevertheless, I wish to discuss with those who propagate apostasy laws, be it muslim or non-muslim, what their sources are and what the justifications are based on the Islamic literature.

To reiterate, there are no killing apostates in the Qur'an. None.

Deuteronomy 13:6 gets them off to a harrowing start with justification for killing apostates, and the Quran (4:89) and Hadith Bukhari (52:260) provide for further justification.

 

[icehorse]

Thats not true.

So try again. The question is this.

Where in the Quran does it make a "tone" that apostasy is such a crime that it should be punishable by death?

Of course, you will never ever in your life answer that question directly. Never. See, when someone makes baseless, bogus claims, they cannot substantiate any of that. You know why? Because they are bogus.

Have a nice day.

As I said in an earlier post, let's assume your base claim is correct. Please, take "yes" for an answer

With that said, a "tone" in this context is something that's established over the course of the book. It's not isolatable to one or two instances, it's instead a pattern. From our previous discussions, it seems to me that you are unwilling to acknowledge that there are repeating patterns of messages in the Quran. Is that correct, or am I misquoting you?

 

[danieldemol]

The Isnad is the most important aspect in Usul ul hadith according to the Sunni school of thought other than the Maliki school and probably the earliest Abu Haneefa's school of thought. So since it seems like you are from the other three fikhussunnah, lets make an analysis based on your own theology mate.

Using that criterion, tell us more about the narrators of all other hadith mentioned.

To refresh your memory they are;
"Narrated Abu Burda: Abu Musa said,"
"Narrated `Ali:"
"It was narrated that Ibn 'Abbas said"

 

[firedragon]

They don't see themselves as extremists or fanatics. Rather, they see themselves as following the morals that God has laid out for them.

But even they dont say the Quran says to kill the apostate.

You missed the whole point.

 

[firedragon]

Using that criterion, tell us more about the narrators of all other hadith mentioned.

Why?

Ahadith is considered Kabrul Ahad mate. So one weakest link breaks everything. Dont you know that?

 

[firedragon]

Deuteronomy 13:6 gets them off to a harrowing start with justification for killing apostates, and the Quran (4:89) and Hadith Bukhari (52:260) provide for further justification.

Its strange that you can cherry pick one verse. Why not at least read the immediate next verse if you can't read anything other than that at all?

4:90. Read.

And it has nothing to do with Apostates.

 

[firedragon]

As I said in an earlier post, let's assume your base claim is correct. Please, take "yes" for an answer

With that said, a "tone" in this context is something that's established over the course of the book. It's not isolatable to one or two instances, it's instead a pattern. From our previous discussions, it seems to me that you are unwilling to acknowledge that there are repeating patterns of messages in the Quran. Is that correct, or am I misquoting you?

Where in the Quran does it make a "tone" that apostasy is such a crime that it should be punishable by death?

Please provide evidence to your claim.

 

[firedragon]

Using that criterion, tell us more about the narrators of all other hadith mentioned.

To refresh your memory they are;
"Narrated Abu Burda: Abu Musa said,"
"Narrated `Ali:"
"It was narrated that Ibn 'Abbas said"

Daniel Rather than asking questions that are absurd while ignoring the whole post altogether for your agenda, why dont you prove your case as to why you trust this particular hadith so much?

 

[danieldemol]

Why?

Ahadith is considered Kabrul Ahad mate. So one weakest link breaks everything. Dont you know that?

You said, "The Isnad is the most important aspect in Usul ul hadith according to the Sunni school of thought"

So explain how the most important aspect applies to negate the sayings of these narrators as well.

In other words what is their weak link according to the Isnad?

And why does it matter if Isnad/matn reliability is as decided by the early scholars and not by modern individuals applying their own modern analysis? That is to say, if Islam is what certain scholars said it is for a portion of Muslims then why isn't their Islam different to your Islam?

 

[danieldemol]

Daniel Rather than asking questions that are absurd while ignoring the whole post altogether for your agenda, why dont you prove your case as to why you trust this particular hadith so much?

You are strawmanning me, where did I say that I trust this particular hadith?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Its strange that you can cherry pick one verse. Why not at least read the immediate next verse if you can't read anything other than that at all?

4:90. Read.

And it has nothing to do with Apostates.

Tell that to those who interpret stuff like that to mean kill apostates. Add in the sword verse 9:5 and we see many using the Quran to justify their violence and cruelty.

 

[icehorse]

Where in the Quran does it make a "tone" that apostasy is such a crime that it should be punishable by death?

Please provide evidence to your claim.

I will take your lack of answer to mean that you do not want to discuss patterns. That's fine of course, but it's a very self-limiting approach to analysis.

 

[epronovost]

Yes of course it is, but that's just on the surface of things. Thats not how things work, or has ever worked, even with some of the most fanatical Muslims.

1. You must though explain why you would take this above the Quran. Whats the analysis?
2. Also you must explain the Sanad or the chain of narration of the story you are quoting, and why you trust that chain so much.
3. Also you must explain the mathn or the narration itself, and why you would take it above the Furqan or what is called the yardstick of the Fikh, vis a vis, the Qur'an.

This is according to the methodology of these usul ul hadith scholars. So its not so black and white.

Do you understand?

No I don't understand.

1. Isn't that a passage of the Quran?
2. How is the context of the story going to radically inverse the meaning of "if someone changes religion, kill him"? That's a tall order. How did you do it?
3. Please make the demonstration of that, just name dropping religious texts and school of interpretations without providing any explanation seems more like a fallacious appeal to authority than a sound argument derived from special relevent expertise.