Islam forbids

[Mr.Fitnah]

The fact is "kalam" your Islam doesn't explain the Islam people see on the news,

I would take that up with media outlets.

Mine does.

Perhaps it does for those who are naive enough to think that every crime committed in the Muslim world is attributable to religiosity and Islamic teachings. Admittedly, this sentiment seems to be somewhat widespread. Pay attention to the actions of "terrorists" and you'll find that they uphold the aspects of Islam that benefit their cause and ignore those aspects that don't. It has been made a mockery of in the worst way through its widespread use as a political tool... what a shame.

People dont care about unicorns,Your Islam doesn't exists in the real world. They want to know what is real.

No, they want a simple explanation. It has been provided for them in the form of Islam. Genocide in Africa? "Islam did it." Rape? "Islam did it." Any and all strife that takes place in North Africa, South Asia, and the Middle East? "Islam did it." Who can blame people for choosing an easy explanation? Why examine the myriad political, economic, social, and cultural influences that give rise to these issues when the blame can simply be placed on Islam? People may think they want to know what's real, but what they're really looking for are explanations that they can quickly and easily understand. As far as I'm concerned, this is confirmed by people being more interested in what's "on the news" than what's in the books.

“The killing of civilians was considered OK because civilians are taxpayers and are non-believers,” Loucks said. He wouldn’t disclose where the attacks were supposed to take place.

You will forgive me if I don't consider Tarek Mehanna an authority on Islam.

Not ever crime committed by muslims is do to Islam
But so many are there is no reason to over look the possibility .
Since you reject most of what is in the books you might as well just watch the news.
The Islam, I present includes the Quran and the sunna .

Just because it is the simple answer doesn't make it the wrong answer.
Laying the blame on the Quran and Mohammad it appropriate

What you judge as what is good for the ummah is not necessarily what others agree with,
That you feel like Islam is being used as a tool elicits little sympathy from me,your whining about tactics not the end results , in the end as a muslim you benefit by getting your sharia law whether you like it or not.

 

[JW Frogen]

What did Allah say when he found out he does not exist?

Blow me. And while you are at it, you blow you up too.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

The passage itself can be found in two places. It is on page 54 of my copy of the Noble Qur’an
translation by Muhammad Khan and distributed by “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.

The Muhsin Khan "translation" isn't really a translation, it's a Wahhabi tafsir that is mass produced and distributed free-of-charge by Saudi Arabia for propaganda purposes. If you paid anything for it, you were ripped off. Let's use Al-Fatiha as an example; we'll compare Muhsin Khan's translation with those of three good translators.

Arthur John Arberry:
Guide us in the straight path, the path of those whom Thou hast blessed, not of those against whom Thou art wrathful, nor of those who are astray. - 1:6-7

Maulana Muhammad Ali:
Guide us on the right path, the path of those upon whom Thou has bestowed favours, Not those upon whom wrath is brought down, nor those who go astray. - 1:6-7

Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall:
Show us the straight path, the path of those whom Thou hast favoured; Not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray. - 1:6-7

-----

Muhammad Muhsin Khan:
Guide us to the Straight Way; The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians). - 1:6-7
​

That should give you an idea of the extent to which the Wahhabi translator warps the divine message for the purpose cof propagating his erroneous ideology. The author did not even have the decency to include his opinions as footnotes. Instead, he chose to insert them into the body of the Qur'an itself -- a manifest sin -- in a misleading attempt to make it seem as if they're actually part of the Recitation.

The" devine message" of the Quran has some "issues when being translated all translations attempt to reconcile this by adding the missing words, punctuation fixing the grammar, At least Khan puts them in parentheses ,or in brackets to give some meaning to the quranic mess.
Most translations are tailored to be inoffensive to western sensibilities .
The Noble Quran is unapologetically direct

It is a footnote to Qur’an 2.190 and is designed to explain Jihad according to Allah as this is the first time the word is used.
Because it's evident that you have no real knowledge of the holy Qur'an, I'll assume that this statement was made out of ignorance and that it wasn't your intention to be dishonest. As you'll see, the word "jihad" does not appear in 2:190. In fact, it appears in few or none of the verses that deal explicitly with physical conflict against an enemy. For this, the verb qatala and its variations are used - this applies to the wars of Muslims as well as those of non-Muslims.

2:190 -

وَقَٰتِلُوا۟ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقَٰتِلُونَكُمْ وَلَا تَعْتَدُوٓا۟ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلْمُعْتَدِينَ

Waqatiloo fee sabeeli Allahi allatheena yuqatiloonakum wala taAAtadoo inna Allaha la yuhibbu almuAAtadeena

And fight in the way of God with those who fight with you, but aggress not: God loves not the aggressors.
​

Nice strawman stuff it yourself?
The Noble Quran : Surat 2

2:190. And fight in the Way of Allâh[] those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors. [This Verse is the first one that was revealed in connection with Jihâd, but it was supplemented by another (V.9:36)].

The Noble Quran : Surat 9

9:36. Verily, the number of months with Allâh is twelve months (in a year), so was it ordained by Allâh on the Day when He created the heavens and the earth; of them four are Sacred, (i.e. the 1st, the 7th, the 11th and the 12th months of the Islâmic calendar). That is the right religion, so wrong not yourselves therein, and fight against the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) collectively[], as they fight against you collectively. But know that Allâh is with those who are Al-Muttaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2).

The translators and scholars correctly saw fighting in Allah's Cause and Jihad as being synonymous. If Jihad is not fighting in allah's cause, allah and muhammad are liars That is why they explained it this way.
2:190"Al-Jihad (holy fighting) in Allah's Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry..."
Violent jihad, holy fighting in allah's cause, is the only kind of jihad proscribed for muslims in the Quran and in scripture.

I am aware that Muhsin Khan claims that 2:190 was "the first [ayah] that was revealed in connection with Jihad," which is an outright lie, because it neither mentions "jihad" nor was it the first passage to deal with the concept. Chronologically, the first passages in which forms of the j-h-d trilateral were used are passages that deal with making and keeping oaths.

The use of jihad in the sense of "striving" occurred first in 31:15, which instructs believers to disobey their parents if their parents "strive" to make them disbelieve (they are instructed to treat them kindly nonetheless.) The first mention of believers' jihad occurs in 16:110 -

Then, surely thy Lord -- unto those who have emigrated after persecution, then struggled and were patient -- surely thy Lord thereafter is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.​

I have to assume that this has to do with the tense 16:110 being in past tense

And it can be found on page 580 of the Islamic University of Medina’s translation of Sahih al-Bukhari’s Hadith. There it opens Bukhari’s Book of Jihad.

Care to tell us who the translator was? It was Muhsin Khan, was it not?

You'll find that Sahih Bukhari contains no such definition of jihad; it was Muhsin Khan's addition.

In both cases, the Islamic scholars are condensing Allah’s and Muhammad’s teachings on Jihad to a single paragraph.

In both cases, the same translator attempts to spread the same lies by amending texts to include his own false interpretation of jihad. An entirely accurate definition of jihad has already been provided. Muhsin Khan is a doctor by trade, not a scholar. He should not quit his day job.

You'd do well to familiarize yourself with Lane's Lexicon if you expect to be taken seriously; it's widely believed to be the best reference book of its kind for a reason.

Wa salam.

They have had ample opportunity to edit it if they though there an error.

 

[Intense]

What really amazes me though is all of the Millions of Muslims that are so misinformed about such matters. Somebody should denounce all of this bloodshed and terror.

OK I will do that right now:

"The Western nations should immediately get out of Iraq and Afghanistain and stop all of this bloodshed and terror".

There I said it:

Now are you Happy???

Call Everybody Home, leave us the fuck alone and you got a deal.

 

[Kalam]

Um no.

Unless you can provide reliable lexicographical citations that prove "fitnatun" is synonymous with "kufr" or "shirk", I accept your concession.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Um no.

Unless you can provide reliable lexicographical citations that prove "fitnatun" is synonymous with "kufr" or "shirk", I accept your concession.

This is sufficient proof as to the multitude meanings of the fitnah. Including shirk and kufr.


Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir
Islam Question and Answer - Meanings of the word fitnah in the Qur’aan

 

[Kalam]

The" devine message" of the Quran has some "issues when being translated all translations attempt to reconcile this by adding the missing words, punctuation fixing the grammar, At least Khan puts them in parentheses ,or in brackets to give some meaning to the quranic mess.

This does not excuse the imposition of his false interpretation on the words of the holy Qur'an. His translation was intended to deceive and radicalize Muslims by dishonestly suggesting that Wahhabi beliefs are rooted in the Qur'an. That is why it's disseminated by the Saudis like a propaganda leaflet - that's essentially what it is. You have fallen victim to Saudi propaganda.

Most translations are tailored to be inoffensive to western sensibilities.

Those that are have not risen to prominence among Muslim and non-Muslim academics. The most reliable translations are M. Ali's, Arberry's, and Pickthalls; they should be compared with each other and checked using proper lexicographical resources if any doubt about their accuracy arises.

The Noble Quran is unapologetically direct

It's unapologetically direct in its butchering of the divine message, yes.

Nice strawman stuff it yourself?

The "Noble Qur'an" claims that 2:190 is the first instance in which jihad was mentioned. Khan is a liar, because 2:190 does not mention "jihad" nor was it the first to describe war.

The translators and scholars correctly saw fighting in Allah's Cause and Jihad as being synonymous. If Jihad is not fighting in allah's cause, allah and muhammad are liars That is why they explained it this way.

Jihad fi sabil Allah is striving in the way of Allah. The suggestion that this refers exclusively or even mostly to warfare has no basis in Islam or the Qur'an.

Violent jihad, holy fighting in allah's cause, is the only kind of jihad proscribed for muslims in the Quran and in scripture.

That is patently false. "Jihad" is used almost only in a general sense in the Qur'an and imposing a specific meaning (ie: physical warfare) on it is involves falsely interpreting the divine message. This is confirmed in various ahadeeth.

Narrated 'Aisha: I said, "O Allah's Apostle! We consider Jihad as the best deed." The Prophet said, "The best Jihad is Hajj Mabrur. " - Sahih Bukhari, Hajj, no. 595 & Jihad, no. 43

Narrated 'Aisha: I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shouldn't we participate in Holy battles and Jihad along with you?" He replied, "The best and the most superior Jihad is Hajj which is accepted by Allah." 'Aisha added: Ever since I heard that from Allah's Apostle I have determined not to miss Hajj. - Sahih Bukhari, Penalty of Hunting while on Pilgrimmage, no. 84

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr: A man came to the Prophet asking his permission to take part in Jihad. The Prophet asked him, "Are your parents alive?" He replied in the affirmative. The Prophet said to him, "Then perform jihad by serving them." - Sahih Bukhari, Jihad, no. 248 & Adab, no. 3

Narrated AbuSa'id al-Khudri: The Prophet (SAWS) said: The best jihad in the path of Allah is (to speak) a word of justice to an oppressive ruler. - Sunan Abu Dawud, Malahim, no. 4330 & Sunan Al-Nasa'i, no. 4209.

"the mujahid is he who strives against his self (nafs) for the sake of obeying Allah, and the muhajir is he who abandons evil deeds and sin." - Sahih Ibn Hibban, no. 4862​

I have to assume that this has to do with the tense 16:110 being in past tense

Your assumption is incorrect. It is because Khan and his backers are liars.

And whoever strives hard (jahada), strives for himself. Surely Allah is Self-sufficient, above creatures. - 29:6​

They have had ample opportunity to edit it if they though there an error.

That should give you an idea of how untrustworthy they are.

 

[Kalam]

Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir
Islam Question and Answer - Meanings of the word fitnah in the Qur’aan

Nope. Ibn Kathir was not a lexicographer, nor is the owner of "Islam-qa." Moreover, Khan implies that fitnah is synonymous with shirk and kufr. I want proof of this.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir
Islam Question and Answer - Meanings of the word fitnah in the Qur’aan

Nope. Ibn Kathir was not a lexicographer, nor is the owner of "Islam-qa." Moreover, Khan implies that fitnah is synonymous with shirk and kufr. I want proof of this.

You want me to prove a claim you are making?

You have provided no evidence to suggests tha Ibn Kathir nor the informations from the website run by the late grand mufti of Saudi Arabia is not based on authentic Islamic scripture.

You are the one making the claim of the meaning being synonymous, shirk and kufr fall under the rubric of disorder, persecution temptation.


In the same way defying and challenging Islam is considered mocking Islam.

I see you copy editd the hadith to distort its meaning..
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 43:
Narrated 'Aisha:

(That she said), "O Allah's Apostle! We consider Jihad as the best deed. Should we not fight in Allah's Cause?" He said, "The best Jihad (for women) is Hajj-Mabrur (i.e. Hajj which is done according to the Prophet's tradition and is accepted by Allah)."

 

[Kalam]

You have provided no evidence to suggests tha Ibn Kathir nor the informations from the website run by the late grand mufti of Saudi Arabia is not based on authentic Islamic scripture.

That would entail proving a negative. The burden of proof lies with you. You have not demonstrated that their definitions are based on a proper understanding of the word or "authentic Islamic scripture."

You are the one making the claim of the meaning being synonymous, shirk and kufr fall under the rubric of disorder, persecution temptation.

That is your opinion. Your author implies that Fitnah is synonymous with kufr and shirk; I didn't make that up:

Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) - M. Muhsin Khan​

There is nothing inherent in the word that means or implies kufr or shirk. You have implicitly acknowledged that Khan is a liar by remaining silent in the face of the proof I provided, so why you continue to believe that his definition is trustworthy is beyond me.

In the same way defying and challenging Islam is considered mocking Islam.

Defying and challenging Islam verbally carries no legal consequences for non-Muslims, nor does mocking it. Attacking it physically, encouraging others to do so, or supporting others in doing so carries legal consequences, as it should.

I see you copy editd the hadith to distort its meaning..

(That she said), "O Allah's Apostle! We consider Jihad as the best deed. Should we not fight in Allah's Cause?" He said, "The best Jihad (for women) is Hajj-Mabrur (i.e. Hajj which is done according to the Prophet's tradition and is accepted by Allah)."

I use more than one translation to ensure accuracy and try to omit parenthetical text that does anything apart from improving grammatical clarity. Your translator is the one who attempted to alter the meaning; I presented the hadith exactly as it was reported. Thank you for admitting that you were incorrect about the meaning of jihad.

 

[PoliticalChic]

In the same way defying and challenging Islam is considered mocking Islam.

Defying and challenging Islam verbally carries no legal consequences for non-Muslims, nor does mocking it. Attacking it physically, encouraging others to do so, or supporting others in doing so carries legal consequences, as it should.

Punishment by death for apostasy from Islam is firmly rooted in the most holy Muslim texts -- both the Koran (verses such as 2:217 and 4:89) and the hadith (i.e., collections of the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as compiled by pious Muslim transmitters), as well as the sacred Islamic Law (the Shari'a). For example, Muhammad is reported to have said "Kill him who changes his religion," in hadith collections of both Bukhari and Abu Dawud. There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i), as well as Shi'ite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death. Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy:


"An apostate...is to be executed by agreement in the case of a man, because of the words of the Prophet, ‘Slay those who change their din [religion]'...Asking the apostate to repent was stipulated as a condition...prior to his execution."

The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy-endorsed Shafi'i manual of Islamic Law, 'Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states:


"Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst.... When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. In such a case, it is obligatory...to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed."

The media's ignorance (or denial) of relevant Islamic jurisprudence on apostasy is compounded by its obliviousness to public pronouncements by North American Muslim legal scholars and clerics urging draconian punishments for Muslims who renounce Islam in Canada, or the US.

Syed Mumtaz Ali, the late architect of Canada's Sharia (Islamic Law) tribunal, and law professor Ali Khan, for example both advocated extending Islamic apostasy laws to the West. Mumtaz Ali, in a disturbing essay, affirmed the traditional Islamic legal viewpoint that apostates must "choose between Islam and the sword," arguing further that if Canada were to act in accord with its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian government must grant the country's Islamic community authority to punish those Muslims who apostasize, or malign their faith.

Washburn (Topeka, Kansas) University Law Professor, Ali Khan, another practicing Muslim, provided a more original, but no less chilling rationale for Muslims in the West to violate -- fatally -- the basic freedom of conscience of their co-religionists. Khan argued in The Cumberland Law Review that apostasy from Islam is an "attack" upon "protected knowledge," which if deemed (i.e., by some Islamic tribunal one must assume!) to be "open, hostile, and voiced contemptuously," justified punishment by death. Ali Khan is convinced that traditional Islamic law precepts antithetical to freedom of conscience nevertheless trump this foundational Western freedom, because,


"Islam is the truth beyond doubt. [And] [t] hese rules preserve the dignity of protected knowledge, discouraging an ‘easy in, easy out' attitude toward Islam."
American Thinker: Killing Rifqa

 

[mal]

Such a Tolerant Religion...

All of the Homosexual Leftist Activists who Attack American Christians for being Intolerant while Excusing Islam, should Move to Iran and Live as "Out" as they do here, and then Report back on how that Worked out for them.



peace...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Such a Tolerant Religion...

All of the Homosexual Leftist Activists who Attack American Christians for being Intolerant while Excusing Islam, should Move to Iran and Live as "Out" as they do here, and then Report back on how that Worked out for them.



peace...

Many people deny international and domestic terrorism of Islam because they feel safer if they think that other people are mainly good, and behave rationally. The idea that they are evil is genuinely frightening. And people tend to think that others are like they are. Many westerners tend to resist knowledge of Arabs and Muslims whom they have already romanticized, exoticized, justified, etc.
Politically correct westerners have another reason for not looking too closely at the realities of the Muslim world: fear that to do so might be seen as ‘racist.’

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

The opinion of the meaning of fitnah including kufr is not held by Ibn Kathir singularly

Ibn Faaris said: “Fa-ta-na is a sound root which indicates testing or trial.” (Maqaayees al-Lughah, 4/472). This is the basic meaning of the word fitnah in Arabic.

Ibn al-Atheer said: “Fitnah: trial or test… The word is often used to describe tests in which something disliked is eliminated. Later it was also often used in the sense of sin, kufr (disbelief), fighting, burning, removing and diverting.” (al-Nihaayah, 3/410. Ibn Hajar said something similar in al-Fath, 13/3).

Ibn al-A’raabi summed up the meanings of fitnah when he said: “Fitnah means testing, fitnah means trial, fitnah means wealth, fitnah means children, fitnah means kufr, fitnah means differences of opinion among people, fitnah means burning with fire.” (Lisaan al-‘Arab by Ibn Manzoor).

I have remained silent on nothing your proof is included within the bounds of the proof I provide that is more inclusive which is in harmony with what is known of Mohammad.

Volume:9 Book :92 (Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah)Number :378
Top
Narrated Said bin Al-Musaiyab:

Abu Huraira said that Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with 'Jawami-al-Kalim ' (the shortest expression with the widest meaning) and have been made victorious with awe (cast in my enemy's hearts), and while I was sleeping, I saw that the keys of the treasures of the world were placed in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has gone, and you people are utilizing those treasures, or digging those treasures out." or said a similar sentence.

Not everyone agrees with you.

 

[Kalam]

Let's look into this.

Punishment by death for apostasy from Islam is firmly rooted in the most holy Muslim texts -- both the Koran (verses such as 2:217 and 4:89)

They ask thee about fighting in the sacred month. Say: fighting it is a grave (offense). And hindering from Allah's way and denying Him and the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out of it, are still graver with Allah; and persecution is graver with Allah; and persecution (fitna - persecution, trial, etc.) is graver than slaughter. And they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion, if they can. And whoever of you turns back from his religion, then he dies while an unbeliever -- these it is whose works go for nothing in this world and the Hereafter. And they are the companions of the Fire: therein they will abide. - 2:217​

This ayah condemns those who attempt to proselytize Muslims and who prevent them from worshiping freely in the Masjid al-Haram. Moreover, it's made clear that the disbelievers being referenced are "fighting" Muslims with the intent of making them convert to another religion. Of those who abandon Islam, it is said that anything that they may accomplish is nullified in the sight of Allah (SWT) and that they'll receive their due punishment in the hereafter. No earthly punishment is prescribed, so the claim that this ayah provides justification for executing apostates is dishonest and inaccurate. The next ayah you cite proves my point rather than yours. Let's read it along with the ayah that immediately follows it:

They long that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved so that you might be on the same level; so take not from among them friends until they flee in Allah’s way. Then if they turn back, seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take no friend nor helper from among them, except those who join a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they would have fought you. So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them. - 4:89-90​

The passage hardly requires an explanation. If the person in question "withdraws" from the Muslims (ie: becomes an apostate), attacking him is not permissible unless he takes up arms against Muslims.

and the hadith (i.e., collections of the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as compiled by pious Muslim transmitters),

Narrated Jabir: A bedouin came to the Prophet and said, "Please take my Pledge of allegiance for Islam." So the Prophet took from him the Pledge of allegiance for Islam. He came the next day with a fever and said to the Prophet "Cancel my pledge." But the Prophet refused and when the bedouin went away (from Madinah,) the Prophet said, "Madinah is like a pair of bellows: It expels its impurities and brightens and clears its good."

- Sahih Bukhari, Ahkaam ("Judgements"), no. 323.​

The same hadith is reported in nos. 316 and 318 of that book as well as no. 107 of Virtues of Madinah and no. 424 of Holding Fast to the Quran and Sunnah.


More:
Is Apostasy a Capital Crime in Islam? - IslamOnline.net - Living Sharia'h

as well as the sacred Islamic Law (the Shari'a).

Sharia is derived from the Qur'an and Ahadith. Law with no firm basis in scripture is not Sharia.

For example, Muhammad is reported to have said "Kill him who changes his religion," in hadith collections of both Bukhari and Abu Dawud.

See the link above.

There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i),

This is untrue. The Shafi'i Grand Mufti, Ali Gomaa, does not believe that apostasy is a capital offense under Islam.

Ali Gomaa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

as well as Shi'ite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death.

Nope. Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri disagrees.

Hosein-Ali Montazeri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy

The Middle Ages were a period of particularly high intolerance in Islam. A legal opinion issued during that period was not necessarily reflective of the actual teachings of the religion.

The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy-endorsed Shafi'i manual of Islamic Law, 'Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states:

Reliance of the Traveler is not contemporary; it was written by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 1367 CE.) You're referring to the 1990 translation of that work by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The Shafi'i position on apostasy was articulated by Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa; see above.

You'll forgive me for not addressing the rest of the post, as it deals with individuals whose opinions hold no real weight in Islam.

Wa 'alaykum as-salam.

 

[Douger]

Islam is Evil !
Load your guns, sharpen your knives and grab a bigazz bag of rocks and head home to take car of bidness.
The Kriztian way
Bible Babble - The Laws of the Bible

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

4:76.
Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allâh, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Tâghût (Satan, etc.).[] So fight you against the friends of Shaitân (Satan); Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitân (Satan).
4:77.
Have you not seen those who were told to hold back their hands (from fighting) and perform As-Salât (Iqâmat*as*Salât), and give Zakât, but when the fighting was ordained for them, behold! a section of them fear men as they fear Allâh or even more. They say: "Our Lord! Why have you ordained for us fighting? Would that you had granted us respite for a short period?" Say: "Short is the enjoyment of this world. The Hereafter is (far) better for him who fears Allâh, and you shall not be dealt with unjustly even equal to the Fatilâ(a scalish thread in the long slit of a date*stone).

4.88. Then what is the matter with you that you are divided into two parties about the hypocrites? Allâh has cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they have earned. Do you want to guide him whom Allâh has made to go astray? And he whom Allâh has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance).

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 Auliyâ' (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allâh (to Muhammad ). But if they turn back (from Islâm), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliyâ' (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's look into this.

Punishment by death for apostasy from Islam is firmly rooted in the most holy Muslim texts -- both the Koran (verses such as 2:217 and 4:89)

They ask thee about fighting in the sacred month. Say: fighting it is a grave (offense). And hindering from Allah's way and denying Him and the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out of it, are still graver with Allah; and persecution is graver with Allah; and persecution (fitna - persecution, trial, etc.) is graver than slaughter. And they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion, if they can. And whoever of you turns back from his religion, then he dies while an unbeliever -- these it is whose works go for nothing in this world and the Hereafter. And they are the companions of the Fire: therein they will abide. - 2:217​

This ayah condemns those who attempt to proselytize Muslims and who prevent them from worshiping freely in the Masjid al-Haram. Moreover, it's made clear that the disbelievers being referenced are "fighting" Muslims with the intent of making them convert to another religion. Of those who abandon Islam, it is said that anything that they may accomplish is nullified in the sight of Allah (SWT) and that they'll receive their due punishment in the hereafter. No earthly punishment is prescribed, so the claim that this ayah provides justification for executing apostates is dishonest and inaccurate. The next ayah you cite proves my point rather than yours. Let's read it along with the ayah that immediately follows it:

They long that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved so that you might be on the same level; so take not from among them friends until they flee in Allah’s way. Then if they turn back, seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take no friend nor helper from among them, except those who join a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they would have fought you. So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them. - 4:89-90​

The passage hardly requires an explanation. If the person in question "withdraws" from the Muslims (ie: becomes an apostate), attacking him is not permissible unless he takes up arms against Muslims.

and the hadith (i.e., collections of the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as compiled by pious Muslim transmitters),

Narrated Jabir: A bedouin came to the Prophet and said, "Please take my Pledge of allegiance for Islam." So the Prophet took from him the Pledge of allegiance for Islam. He came the next day with a fever and said to the Prophet "Cancel my pledge." But the Prophet refused and when the bedouin went away (from Madinah,) the Prophet said, "Madinah is like a pair of bellows: It expels its impurities and brightens and clears its good."

- Sahih Bukhari, Ahkaam ("Judgements"), no. 323.​

The same hadith is reported in nos. 316 and 318 of that book as well as no. 107 of Virtues of Madinah and no. 424 of Holding Fast to the Quran and Sunnah.


More:
Is Apostasy a Capital Crime in Islam? - IslamOnline.net - Living Sharia'h


Sharia is derived from the Qur'an and Ahadith. Law with no firm basis in scripture is not Sharia.


See the link above.


This is untrue. The Shafi'i Grand Mufti, Ali Gomaa, does not believe that apostasy is a capital offense under Islam.

Ali Gomaa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Nope. Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri disagrees.

Hosein-Ali Montazeri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy

The Middle Ages were a period of particularly high intolerance in Islam. A legal opinion issued during that period was not necessarily reflective of the actual teachings of the religion.

The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy-endorsed Shafi'i manual of Islamic Law, 'Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states:

Reliance of the Traveler is not contemporary; it was written by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 1367 CE.) You're referring to the 1990 translation of that work by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The Shafi'i position on apostasy was articulated by Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa; see above.

You'll forgive me for not addressing the rest of the post, as it deals with individuals whose opinions hold no real weight in Islam.

Wa 'alaykum as-salam.

Ah, my friend, methinks thou has become too unctious.

Please tell me what fate will befall a Muslim living in a Muslim county who professes a change in religion, say, to Christianity.

[youtube]
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LtrMjtRvLeI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LtrMjtRvLeI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

 

[mal]

Please tell me what fate will befall a Muslim living in a Muslim county who professes a change in religion, say, to Christianity.

[youtube]
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LtrMjtRvLeI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LtrMjtRvLeI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

That's a Question that not only the Mooooooslims here Need to Answer, but also the Christian Bashing, Deviant Left that Excuses the Religion of Peace and Love.



peace...

 

[Kalam]

Please tell me what fate will befall a Muslim living in a Muslim county who professes a change in religion, say, to Christianity.

I'm sorry; this doesn't address any of the points I made in my previous post. Is your assertion that the laws of self-styled "Muslim" countries are necessarily reflective of the teachings of Islam?