The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

If Islam is a religion that opposes murder, then what's with all the killings?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Waqar Khanny
Who told you it doesn't?


i can look back at the actions of islamic men and see that it doesnt - i can also read pages of the quran that condone killing
Original post by mud4554r
No I'm not denying it but not every apostate will be punished by death and this is for a number of reasons. There is a strict witness criteria when it comes to assessing whether someone has committed apostasy or another serious crime in Islam..


why is leaving islam deemd a 'serious crime in Islam' and potentially 'punished by death' ?

is this your definition of a 'religion of peace'?
Original post by mud4554r
Killing innocent people is a grave sin in Islam. It is as if they have killed the whole of mankind. When the muslims had to go to war during Muhammed's time, Muhammed never wanted to fight unless there was absolutely no other choice.


I'll have to quote this post because you quickly deleted the other one but somebody else quoted it so thankfully I can see it.

'No I'm not denying it but not every apostate will be punished by death and this is for a number of reasons. There is a strict witness criteria when it comes to assessing whether someone has committed apostasy or another serious crime in Islam..' - mud4554r

Why does it matter that not every apostate is punished by death. You claimed that there is apparently no compulsion in religion according to Islam and now you're trying to defend killing people for apostasy... Which is it, then? Is there no compulsion in Islam or is death not the prescribed punishment for apostasy?
Original post by Moonstruck16
Those Christians and Catholics. Never get on do they.

Posted from TSR Mobile


Catholics are Christians
Looks like the apologists have dropped out very quietly...
Why bother explaining anything if *******s like you just listen to what the so called ISIS have got to say. What they are doing is completely wrong, they may use the Islamic points and quotations from the Quran, that doesn't mean anything until they fully understand what those points mean. Killing another is completely wrong, blowing up their own masjids, how is that what Islam teaches? These people don't understand the true meaning of Islam and what a Muslim is, how can anybody go about calling them Muslims?
Original post by Waqar Khanny
Why bother explaining anything if *******s like you just listen to what the so called ISIS have got to say. What they are doing is completely wrong, they may use the Islamic points and quotations from the Quran, that doesn't mean anything until they fully understand what those points mean. Killing another is completely wrong, blowing up their own masjids, how is that what Islam teaches? These people don't understand the true meaning of Islam and what a Muslim is, how can anybody go about calling them Muslims?


they dont blow up their own mosques, they blow up the oes they deem 'unislamic' as they deem various non sunni groups to not be muslim- therefore apostates.
mohammed said it was ok to destroy places of worship that werent islamic ( hence why he went into mecca and trashed the arab pagan shrines in the kabaa) So again this is simply an example fo IS follwing islamic edict word-for word.

the sooner the rest of the muslim world recognises this and stops apologising for this by claiming 'these ppl arnt muslims' the sooner the issue can be tackled.
Original post by Waqar Khanny
Killing another is completely wrong,


Apart from ex muslims, or muslims who become christian or those who cause 'strife' or those who................
Original post by Waqar Khanny
Why bother explaining anything if *******s like you just listen to what the so called ISIS have got to say.


Calm down. If you can't explain it, just say so. Don't tell me not to ask questions you're not happy to answer.

These people don't understand the true meaning of Islam and what a Muslim is, how can anybody go about calling them Muslims?


And you do? What gives you the right to say what's 'true Islam?'

Killing another is completely wrong, blowing up their own masjids, how is that what Islam teaches?


Like somebody else has said, they blow up Shia mosques, not Sunni ones. For what reason? Because, lo and behold, Shia people are yet another group that are excluded from the 'innocent' category in that Koranic verse that the other Muslim on this thread tried to wave about.

What they are doing is completely wrong, they may use the Islamic points and quotations from the Quran, that doesn't mean anything until they fully understand what those points mean.


Why don't you explain those points then, instead of getting worked up because a contradiction in your beliefs was pointed out to you?
The hadith some of u mentioned about killing appostates. Basically this only applied to when the prophet pbuh was talking about people who left Islam and then went to fight against you wih the opposition, then you are allowed to kill them. This is in battle btw

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 30
Avatar for UmarP
UmarP
Original post by Hydeman
I'll have to quote this post because you quickly deleted the other one but somebody else quoted it so thankfully I can see it.

'No I'm not denying it but not every apostate will be punished by death and this is for a number of reasons. There is a strict witness criteria when it comes to assessing whether someone has committed apostasy or another serious crime in Islam..' - mud4554r

Why does it matter that not every apostate is punished by death. You claimed that there is apparently no compulsion in religion according to Islam and now you're trying to defend killing people for apostasy... Which is it, then? Is there no compulsion in Islam or is death not the prescribed punishment for apostasy?


Actually, the death sentence for people who reject Islam is upheld in Islamic countries which hold the Islamic Sharia as constitution, which not every single Muslim country does. By (that country's) law, if you reject the constitution, aka treason, you get the death sentence, which is also carried out in "developed" countries which are not muslims.
Original post by UmarP
Actually, the death sentence for people who reject Islam is upheld in Islamic countries which hold the Islamic Sharia as constitution, which not every single Muslim country does. By (that country's) law, if you reject the constitution, aka treason, you get the death sentence, which is also carried out in "developed" countries which are not muslims.


I didn't say anything about Islamic countries. My point is entirely about Islam. I'm amazed at how you're trying to turn this onto developed countries. In most developed countries, for the record, the death penalty has been abolished, even for 'treason.' And in most developed countries, 'treason' does not include changing one's religion. This is a penalty established by Islam; it doesn't suddenly become not-Islam if it's in the form of a constitution.

The person to whom I was replying said the following: a) there is no compulsion in religion according to the Koran and b) apostasy is punishable by death in Islam but not in all cases. I merely asked him to explain why he holds such contradictory beliefs.
Original post by Hydeman
Catholics are Christians... In any case, they were shooting each other down not so long ago in Northern Ireland and, even today, there are some walls and things which separate communities in Northern Ireland.

And that's just the recent stuff. Wait 'til you get to the good old Middle Ages...


Ireland is about land not faith

Get a book about it if I were you.
Original post by BaconandSauce
Ireland is about land not faith

Get a book about it if I were you.


It is about both although, if one had to put it in decreasing order of importance, then, yes, it would be about land first and faith second. To say that there was no sectarian violence in Ireland is a straight out lie. It may have had its origins in a land dispute but that does not mean that that is what it was about from start to (hopefully the) finish.
Original post by Hydeman
It is about both although, if one had to put it in decreasing order of importance, then, yes, it would be about land first and faith second. To say that there was no sectarian violence in Ireland is a straight out lie. It may have had its origins in a land dispute but that does not mean that that is what it was about from start to (hopefully the) finish.


As I said get a book
Original post by BaconandSauce
As I said get a book


And as I said, you're lying.
Original post by BaconandSauce
Catholics are Christians


I know. The person I replied to believes that Christians and Catholics are from different religions.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Hydeman
And as I said, you're lying.


what lying about it being a land dispute

OK.......

But here you go here's a quick guide for you

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/quick_guides/04/uk_northern_ireland_conflict/html/1.stm
Original post by BaconandSauce
what lying about it being a land dispute


No, lying about it not being about faith. You mentioned land but you also said it's not about faith, which you now seem to be backtracking from.

Original post by BaconandSauce
Ireland is about land not faith

Get a book about it if I were you.
Original post by Hydeman
No, lying about it not being about faith. You mentioned land but you also said it's not about faith, which you now seem to be backtracking from.


No I said it's about land not about faith

the faith of both sides is irrelevant and would not change the argument as its about land not faith,

Lets say for example if one side suddenly all converted to Atheism would it change the nature of the dispute?

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you