BladeoftheImmortal
Member
Emo opinion this is retarded.
Emo opinion this is retarded.
This is the worst pun attempt in the history of NeoGAF. Congrats.
lmao!What a load of Shi'ite
This is why I am against religion. People say to me, oh but it's only the extremists who go around killing people, the majority of religious people are nice normal people. Right. Nice normal people who stone someone to death because of the way they dress.
.
I don't even know what Sura or Hadith these people would reference in their righteousness. I guess the "If a man turns away from his religion (Islam), kill him" one. While that phrase was bad enough, it's so easily... molded to fit any agenda. Start eating Cap'n Crunch? You're turning away from Islam bro.
how the fuck do moderate muslims justify that rule
its pretty clear
wonder how many people in saudi arabia etc are secretly unbelievers but batshit afraid so they keep up the act
That is not a rule set in Islam. The back story behind that was very political.
Back then when the Islamic nation was still young and fragile, some people decided to enter Islam and leave intentionally just a short while after. The goal behind this move was to disrupt Islam's reputation among Arabs in the peninsula. So then, as a counter measurement, the ruling came that anyone who does that will not be tolerated.
I conclude, it was clearly restricted to that time and period, and precise political situation. Nowadays, no one would do any harm if he would step out of Islam. As a matter of fact, those stepping out of it nowadays do it because of issues with the religion itself, not like the those in the story I've just mentioned who did that just to cause harm and intended damage.
If you would like to know if Islamic scholars also share this opinion ? Tariq Al-Suwaidan is a very influential Islamic thinker and he carries this belief. He is a good example.
As for the emos in Iraq, I can only say that it totally pathetic. A human's life is one of the most, if not the most , precious things on this planet.
Interesting perspective on the Rule - but you do realize that the hadith's ambiguity makes it easily applicable to today, correct? I mean all it says is "If a man decides not to be muslim anymore, kill him" - and in another part, it cites apostasy as one of the three justifiable reasons for killing someone. Heck, these quotes are what the Muslims who are okay with the death penalty for apostasy (hint, a whole fucking lot of them) espouse to justify their position. And can you really blame them?
Specifically, the idea that it was put into the hadith simply to prevent some covert underground stuff, is more or less a 'guess'. It's not clear in the Hadith, and you have to look at the history of Islam at the time to even make that assumption. You'd think something as important as killing someone would have been outlined with a bit more clarity.
True, the hadith isn't very clear and is misinterpreted by many as you've pointed.
However, in Islamic sharia or " Fiqh " which is a term referring to teachings of Islam, scholars are taught during their specialization a term called " Fiqh al maqasid " which roughly translated means : Ruling of the causes, or knowledge of the causes. This includes the actual causes and stories behind various Islamic texts whether from the Quran or hadiths ( Mohammad's sayings ). You will see that scholars who come from places like Saudi don't give much value to this. However, scholars who arise from Egypt ( from their Azhar university to be specific ) refer to this sort of reasoning very much in interpreting various Islamic texts. I believe it is the most logical way of understanding many texts in the Islamic heritage because many texts appear very random and without any pre-story or explanation to why exactly they were said.
I don't understand. When those guys watch themselves in the mirror, don't they realize they look fucking ridiculous?
And of course that makes sense, taking any text from hundreds of years ago and trying to apply it to the society we live in today is a horrible idea. And I am fully aware there are some Islamic scholars that are reasonable on this subject and try to separate what should have been considered important then and forgotten now, to what should be kept now. Unfortunately, it doesn't feel like a lot of scholars or Imam consider this in their preaching, and that ignores the Muslims who feel the need to educate themselves on the message of the Hadith and the Qu'ran. When they are taught by the teachings or by others that the Qu'ran is timeless, they seem to apply the same mentality to the Hadith as well it seems.
Basically, my overarching point is, that quote in the Hadith does a lot of harm, and it is the reason why many Islamic apostates fear 'coming out' to their families, even in western countries. Me for example, I am not really afraid of my family doing anything more than excommunicating me, but there is always that lingering fear, always those stories you hear growing up from your parents about a friends friends friends kid who converted away from Islam or something, and what they (or others who heard about it) did to them. You just don't want that drama on your doorstep.
I can only imagine how it would be like in a non-western country. Especially an Islamic Republic.
Islam.
Times have changed since 2005.
Fixed.
If they didn't control the majority of the worlds oil supply, nobody would have ever cared for or bothered with the dirt they call holy.
ALL religion is a problem, not just this one.