The quran was refering to who?

1« Previous thread | Next thread »
- li
- Ex-Muslim
- i want my freedom
- offline
The quran was refering to who?
OP - February 12, 2009, 11:54 AM

004.089
YUSUFALI: They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;

Initially, i thought that this verse is the one that says apostates of Islam should be put to death (including the ones that are born muslims) but now i have a slightly different interpretation. That is:
Muslims cannot take this people: They but wish that ye should reject Faith , as they do, as friends and they can only befriended with if they convert to islam and if they apostasize, they will get killed.

my question is: who is this people, i.e. They but wish that ye should reject Faith , as they do,, does the quran referring to? the critics?

and what does islam has to say about people like me? any reference from the quran and/or the hadiths? Thanks.

~ Edited to change font color ~
- PeruvianSkies
- Ex-Muslim
- La Illaha Il al FSM
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #1 - February 12, 2009, 11:59 AM

According to this site- http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=4&verse=88&to=91
it means - 'This is the verdict on those hypocritical confessors of faith who belong to a belligerent, non-Muslim nation and actually participate in acts of hostility against the Islamic state.'

~My story~
~Collection of unethical hadiths/surahs~
- a.ghazali
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #2 - February 12, 2009, 12:25 PM

I think this verse is reavealed when the Muslims were in disagreement about how to treat with or interact with those that came to Islam but left.

One group wanted to remain friends or maintain family relations and the other group felt all relationships should be severed.

If we look at the previous verse it states:

4:88 What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return (to unbelief) for what they have earned? Do you wish to guide him whom Allah has caused to err? And whomsoever Allah causes to err, you shall by no means find a way for him.

It states that muslims should not bother to guide those who have given up belief in Islam.
It states there is no point trying to guide them or be friends, because it is ALLAH who has caused them to error. And what Allah does you cannot change.

The next verse (89) says that, those hippocties who left the faith wants you to be like them, so don't associate with them. however if they become renegades (I suppose enemies) take them and kill them wherever you find them.

The wherever you find them is a bit tricky. Because if someone, your enemy attacks you, you do battle with them, they are there to fight. But the fact it states wherever you find them seems to mean they are enemies but not in battle, just in ideology and hence wherever they may be you can find them and kill them.

Knowing Islam is the only true religion we do not allow propagation of any other religion. How can we allow building of churches and temples when their religion is wrong? Thus we will not allow such wrong things in our countries. - Zakir Naik
- li
- Ex-Muslim
- i want my freedom
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #3 - February 13, 2009, 05:36 AM

I agree with a.gazali, but then there's 4:90, so it's like don't befriended with the hypocrates unless they truly becomes pious muslims but if they apostasize, kill them whenever you find them and if they surrender, then don't. It's a joke, because if a person wants to kill you, you defend yourself, It's a natural instinct and islam is so bloody that it will find a small reason to murder people. Finally, i found the source for people like me:

Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:
Narrated 'Ikrima:

Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

I also manage to see one at islamonline .Islam is so bloodthirsy that i find it is impossible to be a religion of God.
- coolred38
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #4 - February 13, 2009, 06:35 AM

'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Ive never read that statement with the word "Islamic" in it. Is that an accurate translation?
- Rashna
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #5 - February 13, 2009, 07:38 AM

Hi Li,

I'd like to comment on the islamonline link you provided.
Coming to your question on the basis of the punishment of apostasy, we would like to start with the following words of the prominent Moroccan scholar Sheikh Abdul Bari Az-Zamzamy:

"It should be noted that Islam never compels any person to accept it or embrace its teachings. It gives the freedom of thinking to people, with full respect to their mentalities and way of thinking.
How does it give full freedom? Charging a special tax on non believers, asking non Muslim men to convert to Islam regardless of their beliefs if they want to marry a Muslim woman and smashing the idols of idolaters and killing them wherever they're caught? Are these the signs of freedom according to this scholar?
However, Islam is not a man-made religion that is subject to scrutiny or biased criticism that is based on mere suspicion, since it was originated by Allah, the Supreme Creator of all minds and mentalities.
Proof? Islam isn't the first time someone like Mohammed announced that God was speaking to them, and it wasn't the last either. Many Prophets have come and gone, there's as much evidence for their claims as there is for Mohammed's claims.So either all religions are free from criticism, or all are subject to it. Muslims can't have the privilege of criticising other faiths while restricting the criticism of theirs.

In addition, apostasy causes a total disruption and confusion in the Muslim community, and thus, a severe punishment was set for it to deter anyone from thinking of it. It was originally put into force following the Jewish conspiracy against Islam. The details of that conspiracy were simply mass conversion to Islam and then mass apostasy. The main ill aim was to cause confusion and to lead people astray. Thus, the punishment was set as a precautionary measure to stop all these offenses."

The Jews and idolaters had little choice in the matter.Jews had to pay a tax and helplessly see the curtailment of their rights which they'd enjoyed in Pagan Arabia, and the idolaters' idols were smashed and their only choice was conversion or death. Thats' why as soon as the Prophet died, they sought to break free.

There was a forced conversion, which is where the deceit and attempt to apostate came from.

What a bad scholar to quote...

Fortunately not all scholars support this sort of interpretation, some will claim there's no earthly punishment for apostasy, but only Hellfire in the hereafter.

World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
- PeruvianSkies
- Ex-Muslim
- La Illaha Il al FSM
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #6 - February 13, 2009, 10:02 AM

Quote from: Rashna on February 13, 2009, 07:38 AM
In addition, apostasy causes a total disruption and confusion in the Muslim community, and thus, a severe punishment was set for it to deter anyone from thinking of it. It was originally put into force following the Jewish conspiracy against Islam. The details of that conspiracy were simply mass conversion to Islam and then mass apostasy. The main ill aim was to cause confusion and to lead people astray. Thus, the punishment was set as a precautionary measure to stop all these offenses."

The Jews and idolaters had little choice in the matter.Jews had to pay a tax and helplessly see the curtailment of their rights which they'd enjoyed in Pagan Arabia, and the idolaters' idols were smashed and their only choice was conversion or death. Thats' why as soon as the Prophet died, they sought to break free.

There was a forced conversion, which is where the deceit and attempt to apostate came from.

What a bad scholar to quote...

I thought as long as the poll tax was paid they were ok? They had lesser freedoms than muslims but they were allowed to live and keep their religion from what I've read.

~My story~
~Collection of unethical hadiths/surahs~
- Rashna
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #7 - February 13, 2009, 10:12 AM

Quote from: PeruvianSkies on February 13, 2009, 10:02 AM
Quote from: Rashna on February 13, 2009, 07:38 AM
In addition, apostasy causes a total disruption and confusion in the Muslim community, and thus, a severe punishment was set for it to deter anyone from thinking of it. It was originally put into force following the Jewish conspiracy against Islam. The details of that conspiracy were simply mass conversion to Islam and then mass apostasy. The main ill aim was to cause confusion and to lead people astray. Thus, the punishment was set as a precautionary measure to stop all these offenses."

The Jews and idolaters had little choice in the matter.Jews had to pay a tax and helplessly see the curtailment of their rights which they'd enjoyed in Pagan Arabia, and the idolaters' idols were smashed and their only choice was conversion or death. Thats' why as soon as the Prophet died, they sought to break free.

There was a forced conversion, which is where the deceit and attempt to apostate came from.

What a bad scholar to quote...

I thought as long as the poll tax was paid they were ok? They had lesser freedoms than muslims but they were allowed to live and keep their religion from what I've read.

Well, first the Jewish case, they hadn't paid any poll tax to Saudi pagans before Islam came on the scene, so they weren't particularly keen to pay any taxes to a new faith which demanded it. Would your parents like it if they were made to pay a special tax, and have their freedom significantly curtailed for remaining Muslims? Thats' what p***ed the Jews off, leading them to try to fight the new faith, with the idolaters who had even more reasons for disliking the new faith .

The idolaters weren't allowed to remain, at least not by Mohammed, although later Muslims realised the benefits of letting idolaters remain in the sub continent, and the practical near impossibility of killing them all. When Mohammed seized Mecca, he issued a clear warning, that only those who remained in their house would remain safe, and proceeded to smash all idols chanting, "Truth has come and falsehood disappeared, as falsehood is bound to disappear,"

How would today's Muslims in Saudi like it if Bush marched there with an army, destroyed the kaaba and mosques, chanting "Truth has come..." and ask them to become Christian?

Maybe they'd convert under compulsion, but wouldn't they want to become apostates as soon as they could? What's your opinion Peruvian?

World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
- PeruvianSkies
- Ex-Muslim
- La Illaha Il al FSM
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #8 - February 13, 2009, 10:30 AM

I guess that's a good point. I'm still in the middle of reading about the conquests so don't know enough yet.

~My story~
~Collection of unethical hadiths/surahs~
- awais
- Ex-Muslim
- mulhid taqwa
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #9 - February 13, 2009, 03:25 PM

Quote from: coolred38 on February 13, 2009, 06:35 AM
'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Ive never read that statement with the word "Islamic" in it. Is that an accurate translation?

I'm pretty sure the word 'Islamic' is an insertion to make it clear. It doesn't matter if a Jew becomes a Christian, or better yet, a Christian becomes Muslim, the problem is when a Muslim becomes something else. From my recollection, the word is just 'deenahu' - 'his religion'.

I chose to get circumcised at 17, don't tell me I never believed.
- BMZ
- Muslim
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #10 - February 14, 2009, 05:36 AM

Quote from: coolred38 on February 13, 2009, 06:35 AM
'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Ive never read that statement with the word "Islamic" in it. Is that an accurate translation?

There is no such verse in Qur'aan. Also, Qur'aan does not say that apostates should be killed.
There is no death punishment for apostates, mentioned in Qur'aan.

You are right. That translation is wrong.

Thanks
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #11 - February 14, 2009, 07:10 AM

Nobody said it was in the Quran. It is from Sahih Bukhari.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- li
- Ex-Muslim
- i want my freedom
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #12 - February 14, 2009, 08:21 AM

yup, it was form sahih bukhari, and please, read properly. Here's the link:

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/084.sbt.html
- li
- Ex-Muslim
- i want my freedom
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #13 - April 17, 2009, 11:47 AM

I've found a hadiths from bukhari regarding that allows a person to kill an apostate. The only thing is that this time, the hadiths was found on the chapter about Blood Money. Here it is:

Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17:
Narrated 'Abdullah:

Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

This, i believe, is one of the evidence that islam is bloodthirsty and does not allow a person for an independent thinking all at once. It is bloodthirsty because, the sharia law state that apostate (a human being) should be killed. The sharia law came from quran and hadiths. This, of course contradicts to the notion that islam is a religion of peace. If, islam is indeed the religion of peace, then why islam allows a human to be killed? This human, does not do crime according to the international law and doesn't disturb the peace of others but merely choosing his or her own path. It will also instill fear in the people(why must the religion of peace does that?) from thinking independently.This also proves that islam does justify murder at a smallest grain of rice. This smallest grain of rice is to kill someone whom decided to choose another belief. Islam, criminalised apostasy.
- Pazuzu
- any% speedrunner
- Ex-Muslim
- Pazuzu bin Hanbi
- offline
Re: The quran was refering to who?
Reply #14 - April 17, 2009, 06:40 PM

There are also later anecdotes about 'Ali burning an apostate (or saying he wanted to) because that is what Muhammad had said to do.

"At 8:47 I do a grenade jump off a ladder."
1« Previous thread | Next thread »