Wrong to blame all Muslims for terrorism; Right to blame all white supremacists for Charlottesville

You won't meet a Muslims who can muster the moral courage to condemn the person who said the following: "kill those who leave their Islamic religion" (Mohammad).


Quran
Quran (4:89) - "They wish that you should reject faith as they reject faith, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper." Verse 4:65 says that those who have faith are in "full submission" to Muhammad's teachings. This verse explains what should happen to Muslims who do not have faith.
Quran (9:11-12) - "But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief - Lo! they have no binding oaths - in order that they may desist."

Other verses that seem to support the many Hadith that establish the death sentence for apostates are Quran verses 2:217, 9:73-74, 88:21, 5:54, 9:66.

Hadith and Sira
The most reliable Hadith collection contain numerous accounts of Muhammad and his companions putting people to death for leaving Islam. According to verse 4:80 of the Quran: "Those who obey the Messenger obey Allah."

Sahih Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "

Sahih Bukhari (83:37) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."

Sahih Bukhari (84:57) - [In the words of] "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Sahih Bukhari (89:271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."

Sahih Bukhari (84:5 - "There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, 'Who is this (man)?' Abu Muisa said, 'He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism.' Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, 'I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice.' Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, 'Then we discussed the night prayers'"

Sahih Bukhari (84:64-65) - "Allah's Apostle: 'During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for whoever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.'" This verse from the Hadith is worse than it appears because it isn't speaking solely of apostates, but those who say they believe but don't put their religion into practice.

Sahih Bukhari (11:626) - "The Prophet said, 'No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr and the 'Isha' prayers and if they knew the reward for these prayers at their respective times, they would certainly present themselves (in the mosques) even if they had to crawl.' The Prophet added, 'Certainly I decided to order the Mu'adh-dhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses'."

Abu Dawud (4346) - "Was not there a wise man among you who would stand up to him when he saw that I had withheld my hand from accepting his allegiance, and kill him?" Muhammad is chastising his companions for allowing an apostate to "repent" under duress. (The person in question was Muhammad's former scribe, who left him after doubting the authenticity of divine "revelations" - upon finding out that grammatical changes could be made. He was brought back to Muhammad after having been captured in Medina).

al-Muwatta of Imam Malik (36.18.15) - "The Messenger of Allah said, "If someone changes his religion - then strike off his head."

Reliance of the Traveller (Islamic Law) o8.1 - "When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed." (o8.4 affirms that there is no penalty for killing an apostate).


Islamic Law:

There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafii), as well as classical Shiite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death. The process of declaring a person to be an apostate is known as takfir and the disbeliever is called a murtad.

Averroes (d. 119, 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 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 OIC's Sharia-based Cairo Declaration is transparent in its rejection of freedom of conscience in Article 10:

"Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion, or to atheism." Ominously, articles 19 and 22 reiterate a principle stated elsewhere throughout the document, which clearly applies to the "punishment" of so-called "apostates" from Islam: "[19d] There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Sharia.; [22a] Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Sharia.; [22b] Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Sharia.; [22c] Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith."
From Andrew Bostom's CAIR's Silence on Pastor's Apostasy Death Sentence is Deafening

In 2012, the website, Islam QA, offered a studied defense of killing apostates and "enemies of Islam" which was captured by Jihad Watch: Apostates from Islam and Those Who Wage War Verbally on Islam Must be Put to Death
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/apostasy.aspx

 

My god man I am asking who you would accept as an authority on it. Why are you trying to dodge the question? It is simple enough. You have been more then articulate in expressing your views on this topic so please inform us on what authoritative organisation you would accept to designate terrorist organisations?

 

You seem to be under the delusion that most all Muslims will condemn, say, Q5:33, which barbarically calls for brutal CRUCIFIXION, and also calls for barbaric chopping off of hands, and for chopping off of feet. If TRUMP called for that you'd be up in arms(!), but Muslims can't even condemn the person who called for that (Allah/Mohammad), and you're apparently(?) going to give them a pass on their barbarity? Or am I wrong?

 

To do THAT they'd have to condemn Qur'an 9:5 and 9:29......will they do that?

 

Only the extremes practice it. A large number outside of the extreme support it.

 

In all fairness, so is the God of the Bible, as well - in fact he seems even more barbaric and sadistic than "Allah" is.

 

Nope. That sums up my parody of the right-wing's tendency to declare all Muslims terrorists.

 

Supporting it is IMO fostering it, which is participation.

 

Yet Ron finds all that just ticketty boo. White boys with very short hair and too much time on their hands, however .. pure evil.

 

Sam Harris say it's around 250 million Muslims, or so.

 

So that makes people who believe in Islam immoral people.

 

Which is worse, crank, the Islamic texts, the Christian texts, or the Nazi texts?

 

The god of the Bible is not a Doctrine or ideology.

We don't even know if such deities exist.

And I'd absolutely call Christianity hateful if they obeyed Leviticus which is this same in Islam.

 

vast majority of white supremacist don't call for the death of other races are they then not a hate group?
most would be happy just living in an all white community and to be left alone
just like many Muslims

 

They have the same Qur'an, however. THAT'S the problem.

 

If they absolutely believe and follow everything to a letter yes. If they use their judgment and morality instead no.

Islam is immoral but two people born into it are not necessarily able to leave.

 

I'll admit that's a quandary, but I would need to see evidence of your position.

Separatists are simply extreme.

 

Well FeeSee, I'm not up on the Nazi texts, but I would submit that probably the first two are worse than the last? Only surmising, on body count and general sentiments etc.

 

Good post.
But giving their impressionable young children a book that contains Leviticus et al, and ENDORSING said book as the best moral guide book of all time(!) (wow!), inspired by an all-loving and all-knowing creator of the entire universe no less, is of course immoral. Unless of course they tell their kids "ok, look, Jesus got this part wrong, and this part, and Moses was immoral, and god got this part wrong.......", THEN they can be considered moral people.

 

I agree. However I say more blame falls on the person dropping the axe then on the person thinking it's right.

Nobody's hands are clean.

 

Thy are both ideologies. Some members of both support violence. What's the difference?

An Imam in California who called for the extermination of Jews. Islam is a hate group.

 

The Bible/Qur'an are more dangerous than Nazism because they are believed in by way more people.

Signed - FeeSee.

 

I agree, but the division is minuscule.

 

You mean like they do (according to race) in Japan, China, Mexico, Denmark ... etc etc. How dare they!

 

Why is it only nuts in America, but totally acceptable in countries who adhere to stringent 'non-multiculturalism'?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for it .. not at all. But the question has to be asked.