Peace


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSPvnFDDQHk&t=663s
The Untold Story of Muslim opinions and demographics

The following link is a documentary on the degree of Fundamentalism(non-violent extremism) among Muslims. It contain a review of Pew survey on the Muslim population view on death penalty for apostasy, adultery, gay and blasphemers. It is a poignant clarification that way more than 5% of the Muslim world are plain extremists who uphold views antagonistic to human rights laws.

Why in 2018, in the information age, do Muslims still cling to such harmful teachings that continue to harm innocent lives? Why haven't Muslims come out to admit this is a problematic issue that need to be dealt with, that prove there is a fault in their ideology?

To better answer these question, we try to delve into the Muslims' psyche on Islam by analyzing their comments in an old thread - What's The Proper Punishment For A Muslim Apostate?

NB: I do not want unwarranted attention in this thread. So while quoting comments, I'll spell the usernames incorrectly. But the pronunciation of the names will be same so you can identify the poster I address.

Sheun: In your view, what is the right punishment for a muslim who says, "I don't want to follow Islam anymore. I want to be a Christian (or Atheist)"?

Topestbily:
Quran 2: 256

There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.

Quran 109*:1-6
Say, "O disbelievers, I do not worship what you worship. Nor are you worshippers of what I worship. Nor will I be a worshipper of what you worship. Nor will you be worshippers of what I worship. For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."

Sheun is an atheist, who knows well enough the answer to this question from an academic point of view in traditional Islam. I believe Sheun is not a novice to Islam, looking for answer. Sheun was most likely asking; "Hey, what do you think about the penalty of death apostates for Islam? Do you think this is right?"

But Sheun knows that asking with such brutal honesty may trigger some Muslim posters. He has to ask in the most neutral and non-challenging manner as possible so that no one will be provoked. I mean, he knows there is a level of truth in the notion that Muslim community is easily offended by criticism or challenges to her beliefs.

Now, in a community where people are afraid to pose challenging on the tradition, backward and harmful traditions can't be expunged. This is the first problem that plaguing the Muslim community.

We'll get back to Sheun, but let's see the first reply.


Topestbily was brief, he cites the verses. Apostates are free, he implies. Then Tope disappears, and he never reappears ever again. Tope most probably is aware that this is not the formal opinion among scholars. In any condition, the penalty for apostasy is death in traditional Islam. He knows, but he refuse to agree with this. Tope knows hardliners will come after him with refutation. Probably unable to bear this, Tope took his leave.

Among traditional Muslims, hardline fundamentalists and ultraconservatives generally have more supporting evidences than moderates and liberals like Tope. Most of the backward, anti-human rights or restrictive practices that moderate Muslims reject are well mandated or recommended by traditional Islamic text, giving the ultraconservatives the upper hand in the war of ideas.

Throughout this thread, you will see how the moderates or liberals struggled badly against the ultraconservatives. You'll see why Tope's view is wrong from a traditional Islamic text standpoint and why he was indeed better off disappearing off the thread.

NB: The next(third) post on this thread had been deleted. I've reposted it at the bottom of the page. Click the link below to read it first, to get a better context, then return for the fourth post that follows. Next(third) Post

Now, here is where things get really heated. Alhajipablow, Anteena, Rilwayne were the first to confront lexiconkabeer. Their whole argument is that the hadith on killing apostates contradict the verse of the Qur'an on freedom of beliefs and in such a case, the hadith must be discarded.

This theory that hadith contradictory to Qur'an ought to be neglected has no root in traditional Islamic legislation. The jurists see the hadith as elaboration of Qur'an, both always are in harmony. And perceived contradiction is explained as misunderstanding on part of the reader. This is the point lexiconkabeer makes to back the hadith he cited.

Alhajipablow: LexiconKabeer is it your post we should accept or the ones of those who posted before you?

How Sahib is the Hadith you quoted?

I strongly believe he knows this hadith are classified authentic, but wants to believe otherwise. And his wish is to see someone with more knowledge soundly prove the weakness of this hadith. But this did not happen.

I won't bet on that though, it is completely possible that Alhajipablow is ignorant of those hadith and honestly want to be sure. Most Muslims do not understand traditional Islam beyond the basic and publicized aspect like salat, fasting, hijab, charity, no pork, no alcohol, no sex outside marriage.

If you stop a random Muslim on the street and ask him, "Hey, in Judaism, apostates are sentenced to death. Is it the same for apostates in Islam?"

8 of 10 will answer NO to this question. This problem of ignorance among Muslims is really a danger. It's like an abused spouse who is ignorant that they are being abused by their spouse. How do you diagnose the marital abuse? How do you get Muslims to officially denounce the penalty for apostasy if many of them are ignorant that such a penalty exist in their religion?

Anteena: Let assume one of ur siblings change religion, will u kill him or her?

A rational question, by Anteena. But rationality have no place in traditional religions. Traditional Islam does not share the idea that death sentence is only justifiable for murder. The rational principle that "Punishment must fit the crime" is not recognized in traditional Islam.

This further lead us to another problem with Muslim moderates. Realizing that the traditional texts lend very little credit to their position, moderates try to argue with reason and logic. This effort utterly fails, because reason in itself does not appeal to religious masses. All the masses want is traditional Islamic texts explained by clerics & proving apostates are to be tolerated or executed, but the moderates cannot provide this.

In this kinds of internal debates among Muslims, moderates are often denounced as aiding the enemies of Islam or appealing to their desires.
You can observe this even on this thread;

Anteena: Ask him ooo, sheikh Agege sometimes ago laid emphasis on some these hadith quotations that there are some wrong ones which we all know prophet cannot say, people are shouting here and there that he doesn't knw what he is saying, so, in a case where God says and prophet says to Sahih Buhari says, please which one do we count as authentic?

lexiconkabeer: Are you going to follow your whims, or you gonna follow clear proofs?

Derogatory terms like "modernists Muslims, westernized Muslims, non-observant Muslims or apostates" have been employed to marginalize liberals or moderates who seek to point out and denounce harmful teachings and ideas in traditional Islam.

For such reasons, it is very clear that many Muslims are afraid to speak out in condemnation of these harmful sharia decrees. They either keep quiet when these debate arises or they hypocritically side with the conservative voices.

Further down the thread, you'll see that the conservative voices ultimately suppressed the moderates. This has been the status quo in the war of ideas between the moderate Muslims and the conservative Muslims.

Rilwayne: :
Smh..

I don't accept this.

lexicokabeer:
Because?

Rilwayne:
Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 54:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَن يَرْتَدَّ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِ فَسَوْفَ يَأْتِي اللَّهُ بِقَوْمٍ يُحِبُّهُمْ وَيُحِبُّونَهُ أَذِلَّةٍ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ يُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَلَا يَخَافُونَ لَوْمَةَ لَائِمٍ ذَٰلِكَ فَضْلُ اللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَن يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ

O you who have attained to faith! If you ever abandon your faith," God will in time bring forth [in your stead] people whom He loves and who love Him - humble towards the believers, proud towards all who deny the truth: [people] who strive hard in God's cause, and do not fear to be censured by anyone who might censure them: such is God's favour, which He grants unto whom He wills. And God is infinite, all-knowing

lexiconkabeer:
How does this contradict the hadith? BTW you don't believe in hadith? Or you just follow the ones that suits you? Hope you know hadith is also a revelation?

Rilwayne is about the only moderate voice to engage lexiconkabeer with sacred textual evidence. But by the end of page two, Rilwayne like Tope, Alhajipablow and Anteena completely bowed out on a sad note.

In quoting supporting verses, Rilwayne must have thought he stood a chance against the orthodox position on apostasy. But, it's obvious to me that he never stood a chance.

See, traditional Islamic legislation is like a game with rules. To play the game and win, you must stick with the rules.
In tradition Islam, the Qur'an generalizes, it doesn't go into details. Hadith interpret, interpolate and extrapolate Qur'an. The Qur'an makes blanket statements, while the Hadith goes into specifics and exceptions.

By accepting Islam as preached by the jurists, Rilwayne have lived by legislations derived in respect of the traditional Islamic rules for legislation. For instance, salat is to be recited in a moderate volume according to Qur'an, but Rilwayne as a traditional Muslim recites his noon salat silently because the scholars teach this in accordance with hadith.

But when the subject of apostasy arises, Rilwayne is quick to dismiss the rules of the game to derive his own conclusion? This kind of inconsistency is a major loophole in the narratives of the liberals, and it will open them further to intellectual counterattacks from the conservatives.

The only way to overcome the dominance of the conservatives in this war of ideas is to first challenge the existing rules for Islamic legislation.
But the liberals or moderates have never attempted this. This is to their own detriment.

Till he vanished at the end of the next page, Rilwayne continued to quote verses supposedly supporting his position, earning him a lot of thumbs up(Likes). This confirms that many more Muslims oppose the death penalty but lack the courage to speak out. They are still awaiting an official fatwa from Saudi Arabia, declaring apostasy non-punishable. Until that happen very few Muslims dare speak out like Rilwayne did.

The emergence of Empyree introduced a new position into the discourse. "Apostasy in punishable but only when the apostate becomes a threat to the Muslim state. Apostasy is treason."

Then tbobo1234 would come in later to refine Empyree's position. If you still recall, this is the same position promulgated by ShiaMoslem as early as page 1 but barely earned as much thumbs up.

Empyree: The context of the hadith in reference to another hadith that you failed to cite in your #5 is when the prophet(saw) made the statement, it was in the time of war and if the apostate poses a threat to the community. So it is to mean that in that time when every man was a soldier at war and call to defend Muslim populace and then he joins the other side(enemy) and divulges the secrets of Muslim military to the enemy, then he's to be killed. This is clear case of treason. This is also general rule in any given nations today.

tbobo1234: However in an Islamic state, there are certain conditions where conversion is accompanied with acts that could be considered treasonable by the state. The punishment for treason is death.

The act of just conversion is not punishable in most cases, however if that conversion is accompanied by an attempt to discredit Islam or propagate another religion within the islamic state, It is considered treasonable.

If someone leaves Islam in an Islamic state for whatever reason, as long as he doesn't go around opening trying to convert people to whatever belief/unbelief he has found thereby trying to discredit the constitution of the state. He is fine.

Empyree, tbobo1234 and ShiaMoslem sought to strike a balance, by deriving an interpretation that would appeal to Muslims while asserting the validity of the hadith. But how successful were they?

They failed to convince lexiconkabeer to change his stand. In fact if you read till the end of the thread, Newnaz, bosar, Hebariom, easymoh, AminuRanu, yahmuh27 joined the discussion on the side of lexiconkabeer.

Lexiconkabeer sees the position of Empyree or tbobo1234 hold no support from the traditional Muslim jurisprudence. And he remained unshaken by their long winded exegesis. He may seem like an extremist, but in the end he's just another Muslim trying hard to tell it as it is.

Now, tbobo1234 and Empyree's view seem some what less harsh, but it is highly toxic. It'll definitely attract the approval of the masses, 99% of whom know nothing about sharia. These Muslims will continue in ignorance, denying killing for apostates.

But as more of these Muslims learn of sharia, they'll uncover the truth about the penalty for apostasy. And in bid to be honest like lexiconkabeer, they'll begin admitting the truth. Thus, even beyond 2018, this barbaric law will continue to be approved in the Muslim community.

Through this commentary, we've seen the faces of ignorance, accuracy and denials of Muslims on the death penalty for apostates under sharia law. Today, we see the face of deceit and double dealing.

Turn to page 2, scroll towards the bottom, eitzei has a remark for lexiconkabeer.

eitzei: lol..you don't give that kind of general reply to a non Muslim next time and no, I'm not practicing islam for them but we should let people see the beauty of Islam in us... Shikena

lexiconkabeer:
I guess you should see how he asked the question, i gave him a reply the way i feel he should be answered, if you disagree with my method, its normal, we cant reason in the same direction in all matters.

Islam is not a religion of hypocrisy, if you are asked a question about your beliefs, you dont have to hide it in order to impress the kuffar, thats hypocrisy

eitzei: yeah.. Islam is not a religion of hypocrisy and if you are asked questions about it you give honest answers but at the same time you need to look at your environment before you say some things, that's why Allah says we need to apply wisdom and good preaching when calling people to practice the religion with us... Before you answer some questions you need to check the person who asked the question sometimes it might even be a Muslim, it's important to assess his level of commitment before you give your answers

eitzei is basically recommending lexiconkabeer sugarcoat the bitter truth, especially when dealing with non-Muslims like Sheun. I'd not believe this myself without the evident text.

Sugarcoating keeps Muslims in the dark. For now, these Muslims will echo moderate voice, denying death to apostates. But as these Muslims further get indoctrinated with traditional Islamic teachings, some of them will gravitate towards the harsh view of death to apostates.

For Muslims to unite against death for apostates, two important things must happen.

1. Muslims must all admit that the penalty for death in traditional interpretation of Islam is death. This is very important.
2. Muslims must couragely admit traditional interpretation of Islam is not flawless and should be subject to revision.

Unless these happens, there will exist the 20-40% vocal and influential minorities like lexicokabeer who stand for death against apostasy. And they'll always be Muslims in the Muslim world, who apostatize, but are forced to remain Muslims outwardly, unable to reveal their apostasy to anyone.

usermane:
The emergence of Empyree introduced a new position into the discourse. "Apostasy in punishable but only when the apostate becomes a threat to the Muslim state. Apostasy is treason."

Then tbobo1234 would come in later to refine Empyree's position. If you still recall, this is the same position promulgated by ShiaMoslem as early as page 1 but barely earned as much thumbs up.





Empyree, tbobo1234 and ShiaMoslem sought to strike a balance, by deriving an interpretation that would appeal to Muslims while asserting the validity of the hadith. But how successful were they?

They failed to convince lexiconkabeer to change his stand. In fact if you read till the end of the thread, Newnaz, bosar, Hebariom, easymoh, AminuRanu, yahmuh27 joined the discussion on the side of lexiconkabeer.

Lexiconkabeer sees the position of Empyree or tbobo1234 hold no support from the traditional Muslim jurisprudence. And he remained unshaken by their long winded exegesis. He may seem like an extremist, but in the end he's just another Muslim trying hard to tell it as it is.

Now, tbobo1234 and Empyree's view seem some what less harsh, but it is highly toxic. It'll definitely attract the approval of the masses, 99% of whom know nothing about sharia. These Muslims will continue in ignorance, denying killing for apostates.

But as more of these Muslims learn of sharia, they'll uncover the truth about the penalty for apostasy. And in bid to be honest like lexiconkabeer, they'll begin admitting the truth. Thus, even beyond 2018, this barbaric law will continue to be approved in the Muslim community.

love the way you interpolated my moniker.


Anyways, my stance and tbaba was the fair one bcus Quran gives free will to renounce Religion and at the same time it regulates Islamic state society (that's, people are checked from saying things not protected by Islamic Constitution).


Anyways, same people who criticize blasphemy law, remember they have this too



Deuteronomy 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."


Case Settled

^^^

***Modified***

Empiree:
^^^

***Modified***

Well, nothing I can say about this anymore. I have explained why your view won't work, and folks like lexiconkabeer will remain.

usermane:


Well, nothing I can say about this anymore. I have explained why your view won't work, and folks like lexiconkabeer will remain.

you better spell his current moniker properly to come here. You never know he might have his view changed. His new moniker is Abdelkabir

Mine and his view have equal scholarly standards. But I reject his for obvious reason. Between, why does it matter since anti-Islam people altogether have theirs ways of punishing apostate. So this isn't issue

Poor Moderating or Bias Against Me

My third post on this thread, where I analyzed lexiconkabeer's post advancing death for apostates, has been quietly deleted. No warning from the mods, no explanation for the deletion.

This is uncalled for. What's wrong with the post? Acknowledging lexiconkabeer's honesty and alignment with the canon interpretation?

God willing, I will repost on lexiconkabeer's comment again, with utmost politeness, with respect for the posting regulation. Truth deserves to be presented.

^^^

I do not support them on this. You do have the right to post your view so long it is in line with the rules.

The way I believe you should be silenced is through counter challenge. However, if it is clear that you are refuted but you insist on posting the same thing over and over for personal motives, then I support removing your post (s)

This is a repost of the third post that had been deleted. After reading, click on the link at the bottom to return you to the next(fourth) post chronologically.

lexiconkabeer:
(1) This is the ruling of Allaah and His Messenger, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." (reported by al-Bukhaari, al-Fath, no. 3017).

(2) The one who has known the religion which Allaah revealed, entered it and practised it, then rejected it, despised it and left it, is a person who does not deserve to live on the earth of Allaah and eat from the provision of Allaah.

I reserve much respect exclusively for lexiconkabeer for staying honest to the truth. The assertion and brevity in his post sums it up, he has the backing of the scholars. Something that none of his opponents on this thread can boast of. Here's to his proof;

- Hadith on unconditional killing of apostates
- All the schools of law in traditional Islam stipulate death sentence for leaving Islam.
- The first civil war in traditional Muslim history was launched by Abu Bakr as Sadik against apostates.

With this much evidence for killing apostates, it will be impossible to convince some Muslims otherwise. Thus, whether 40%, 30%, 20% or 10%, as long as there is this much hefty evidence in traditional Islam, there'll always be those that stand with lexiconkabeer.

It's why it's long overdue for traditional Islamic teachings to be reformed. As long as the orthodox teachings from the middle ages remain canon, we'll never have a community of Muslims that agree on freedom for apostasy.

Next(4th) Post

Smh,

You considered what he said to be honest bcus you play along his myopic understanding of the hadith?. We know his type for taken literal approach to every religious text unless where it suits him. You should mention his new moniker in this thread and ask him if he changed his position?. The dude is somehow taqlidi. Three years ago he uploaded his nice handsome selfie during eld. A year later he considered taking pictures Haram because he had just read from his saudi Shuyukh that picture is Haram so he started preaching that to us and I kicked him in the butt.

We know Quran hints about freedom of religion. In that case, if that hadith appears to be in conflict with it, then, we must look at the hadith in the context of war.
Why?. Because anytime Hadith talks about killing apostate it is usually has to do with enemies. This is why many scholars, minus Kabir's scholars, said death sentence for apostate is linked with treason.

Look, I usually disagree with Ahmadiya but please go through their website. They said something similar to what I said.

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/islam/tolerance.htm