Sharia Law

[kidcanman]

Again, as a Muslim it would have been simpler to say that your sect dies not accept the Hadiths of another sect(s). Regardless of whether you believe in the legitimacy of one set of Hadith over another does not negate the fact that Hadiths are immutably tied to the Qur'an.

You did not address my point. My point is that, "The reason why ahadith are not dependent on the Quran is because there are thousands of ahadith that have no connection to the Quran whatsoever. They are not used to put the Quran in context, and the Quran is not used to put them in context."

Did I not already make this point? The Qur'an is the backbone of Islamic law, regardless of whatever secular law and/or Hadiths may be incorporated.

No, that is not your point. Your point is not that the Quran is the "Backbone" of sharia. Your point is that sharia is "Allah's Law" or "Divine Law" according to Muslims.

The Quran plays a prominent role in sharia, but once you "incorporate" secular law, ahadith, and the opinions of scholars, sharia is no longer "divine law".

Shari'a is a set of religious & moral codes as a guideline for a Muslims everyday life.

Wrong. Sharia is a combination of religious and secular "laws" to govern Muslims society.

Again, have I not made this point already? I have maintained from the beginning that Shari'a is predicated on immutable texts. At no point has Shari'a ever not included the Qur'an, in spite of secular law.

I know that you have maintained that sharia is predicated on immutable text. And so from the beginning you left out the fact the sharia is also predicated on mutable ideas. The Quran is the only immutable text used for sharia; different ahadith are used by different groups of Muslims. But even if you argue that the Muslims that use a particular group of ahadith consider those ahadith immutable. You still did not address the main point in my argument. The portion of sharia law that is definitely not predicated on immutable text: "scholars of fiqh will readily admit that their opinions, which are incorporated into sharia, cannot be taken to be inspired or "divine"/immutable"

And of course sharia is not immutable. That is to say sharia law within a country changes constantly. So with all the talk about immutability, why would Muslims consider sharia to be divine when it is not immutable? So like I said, sharia is based on the Quran, which is immutable, and other mutable ideas, and that's why sharia within specific countries is mutable.

What did Allah command?

The fact that the Quran commanded the Prophet not to leave the correct way does not mean that Allah has stated that laws created hundreds of years after the prophet, laws that are constantly changing, are the correct way.

"A complicated issue that cuts deep into the history of Arab society. .. What the men of the family, clan, or tribe seek control of in a patrilineal society is reproductive power. Women for the tribe were considered a factory for making men. The honour killing is not a means to control sexual power or behavior. What's behind it is the issue of fertility, or reproductive power."

-Sharif Kanaana, professor of anthropology at Birzeit University

Even if such killings are only the result of pre-Islamic Arab tradition

Sharif Kanaana is probably referring to honor killings performed by Christian Arabs, because killing innocent people is against Islam.

has honor killing been prosecuted as murder, or any other crime for that matter. On the contrary, only the alleged crime(s) of the "murder" victim are prosecuted.

again you are probably talking about "honor killings" done in India.

 

[Drummer4Christ]

I added more to post #39

 

[kidcanman]

Davies,

Sharia incorporates many different ideologies. It incorporates the Quran, ahadith, secular laws, and even local traditions.

Asking me to comment on Iran's sharia law is similar to asking me to comment on China's local laws. You would have to get an Iranian lawyer to explain it to you. And of course Ashtiani has her own lawyer working in her defense.

Of course we don't know to what degree she was "complicit" to murder (did she set him up or did she just here about it and did not do anything to stop it?) and so we can't judge if 5 years is just or not.

From what I remember it takes four witnesses to convict somebody of adultery and so again I don't know if she was guilty or not. If she confessed then that is a separate matter.

But the problem that you have is that you can't comprehend that fact that these people are living similar lives as we are.

Iran has a judicial system, and lawyers, and prosecutors, and national laws, and local laws, just like we do.

Sometimes people get cheated by the system ("many activists believe her convictions were based on confessions made under duress").

This is not a lawless country were a bunch of crazy men just picked her up and treated her however they wanted to.

And of course our media never explains the details of the story and many times they leave important facts out or else they add their own spin.

Now if you don't agree that the punishment for adultery should be death then you have a valid disagreement.

 

[Davies]

kidcanman,

I understand that you aren't able to answer how the law is implemented. Apparently, they have the same problem, because they don't know if they could change the sentence or not. Stoning seems to be cruel and unusual, and though it was used in ancient times, I don't think it should be used today. But the fact Ashtiani received the death sentence for adultery and didn't received death for complicity to commit murder, it just doesn't sound consistent to me even if she was guilty on all accounts.

- Davies

 

[Drummer4Christ]

You did not address my point. My point is that, "The reason why ahadith are not dependent on the Quran is because there are thousands of ahadith that have no connection to the Quran whatsoever. They are not used to put the Quran in context, and the Quran is not used to put them in context."

From islamhelpline.com:

What is the connection between the Holy Quran and Hadith?

Mu' meneen Brothers and Sisters,
As Salaam Aleikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh. (May Allah's Peace, Mercy and Blessings be upon all of you)
One of our brothers/sisters has asked this question:
What is the connection between the Holy Quran and Hadith, Allah himself tells that Holy Quran is the proper guidance and if anybody wants to do any changes in that ,they can't do as it is protected by Me(Allah),but there is nothing about hadith,if i am not mistaken hadith was written after250 or 300 years the death of Mohd(SAWs).And i have gone through some of the hadiths about Aisha(PBUH) wife of Mohd(SAWS) which are written in such a shamelesss manner and a person having a logical mind will never digest it.

Answer:
What is the connection between the Holy Quran and Hadith?
In the name of Allah, We praise Him, seek His help and ask for His forgiveness. Whoever Allah guides none can misguide, and who-ever He allows to fall astray, none can guide them aright. We bear witness that there is no one (no idol, no person, no grave, no prophet, no imam, no dai, nobody!) worthy of worship but Allah Alone, and we bear witness that Muhammad (saws) is His slave-servant and the seal of His Messengers.
Throughout time, Allah Subhanah in His Divine Wisdom has sent Books as a guidance for mankind to follow. The ones mentioned in the Holy Quran by name are Saheefas, Zuboor, Ingeel (Gospel), Tauraah, and the Holy Quran. Allah did not send any of His Books on its own, but the All Wise also sent a Messenger to act according to all the theories of His Books and show their people in practical manners how to follow the Guidance of Allah Subhanah. Thus the Holy Quran was revealed and Allah appointed Mohamed ibn Abdullah (saws) as His Messenger and a Prophet. The Prophet (saws) lived his whole life exactly according to the principles and commandments of the Holy Quran, and gave us a practical example of how to follow Allah’s Guidance.
Whatever the Prophet (saws) said, and whatever he did are known as his Sunnah, which means The Prophet (saws) way. Hadith is the name given to the record of writing down the Prophet’s (saws) Sunnah by somebody. It is true that the hadiths were only recorded in writing, about 120 years after the death of the Prophet (saws).
What concerns us first and foremost is the guidance and the teachings in the Holy Quran. There is absolutely no doubt in the mind of any mu’min that these are the very words of Allah Subhanah. The Sunnah of the Prophet (saws) is the way he followed the commandments of the Holy Quran in a practical way and showed his companions and believers to act accordingly. To follow the way and example of the Prophet (saws) is a commandment of the Holy Quran
Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 33 Surah Al Ahzaab verse 21: There is indeed the best example or model for you (to follow) in the Messenger of Allah, for every such person who looks forward to Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah much.
For example: The Quran says ‘establish Prayer’, but does not give other details of the number of rakah, etc. This the Prophet (saws) showed us practically by praying five times a day for a number of years in front of thousands of believers. He prayed two rakahs for fajr, three for ‘magrib’, and four for ‘zuhr’, ‘asr’ and ‘isha’. This is how the Prophet (saws) established the Prayer commandment of the Holy Quran practically. And that is known as His Sunnah. Another example is that the Prophet (saws) kept a beard, and instructed the believers to grow a beard. Thus keeping a beard is regarded as Prophet Mohamed (saws) Sunnah. In other words, Sunnah is the way of the Prophet Mohamed (saws).
The Sunnah is something that the believers followed immediately after the Prophet (saws) did or said something himself. They did not wait for a 120 years for the hadith to be recorded and then started doing it, but rather as soon the Prophet (saws) did it, they started following it as his way or Sunnah. The Sunnah of the Prophet (saws) was followed by the believers from the first day of the Prophet’s mission.
The Hadith is only a record of the acts or words of the Prophet (saws), written down by some muslims 120 years after the Prophet’s (saws) death, for reference to future generations. The reason we pray the five prayers or the 3 rakahs of magrib prayers today, is not because they are recorded in the hadiths of Qadi Noaman or Bukhari or Muslim, but because hundreds of thousands of the believers saw the way or Sunnah of the Prophet (saws) and followed it. And this Sunnah or way of the Prophet (saws) was being followed by all the believers, who narrated to their next generation and they to the next. The Sunnah was followed when the Prophet (saws) was alive, and will be followed, Insha Allah, until the end of time.
The original laws and commandments are all in the Holy Quran for the guidance of mankind. The Sunnah or way of the Prophet (saws) is exactly according to the teachings of the Holy Quran. And the Hadiths are just a record of these ways written by man some 120 years after the death of the Prophet (saws) as reference for future generations.
Because the hadiths were recorded by man, they are prone to error. Not every hadith recorded is genuine. In fact a lot of them are fabrications and may have been recorded by people with political or material bias. Some might say the Prophet (saws) said or did this act, which, he (saws) might never have done or said! But a lot of the hadiths are genuine, and the Prophet (saws) did say and do these things, and these are the ones we have to follow. It is said that Bukhari collected in excess of 300,000 hadiths, but only 7500 were considered authentic by him and recorded in his volumes of Sahih Bukhari. So, how can we gauge which hadiths are genuine and which ones are fabrications?
There are a few rules, if followed, one can easily realize if the hadith is genuine or not. If any hadith is directly against any commandment or statement of the Holy Quran, it will be immediately rejected. Simply because, it is inconceivable that the Prophet (saws) did or said anything against the Holy Quran. His whole life was a practical example of following the Quran, and Allah Himself certifies in the Holy Quran that the Prophet (saws) is a good example to follow for anyone who believes in Allah and the Last Day. If any hadith is directly against any established Sunnah of the Prophet (saws), it will be rejected. For example, if one hadith says the Prophet (saws) prayed four rakahs for ‘magrib’ prayers, it will not be accepted. If any hadith goes against the foundation of Islam, it will not be accepted. For example, if one hadith says that the Prophet (saws) went to an idol or grave and invoked it, it is against the basic foundation of Tauheed or worship and invocation of one-God, and will thus be rejected. It would just be inconceivable for the Prophet (saws) to do such an act! If any hadith is against basic commonsense, it will not be accepted. For example if one hadith says that a man talked to a tree and the tree started walking! This sort of things are absolutely against basic common sense, and will be rejected.
A lot of unscrupulous people wrote a lot of slander and false statements and said the Prophet (saws) said or did this. These people might have had any number of agendas, be it political, material, or otherwise. If one wrote that the Prophet (saws) said this or that, it does not mean by any means that the Prophet (saws) actually said or did those things. Thus what you might have read about Aisha (wife of the Prophet (saws)) in some recording, might have been absolutely false and dedicated to the Prophet (saws), even though he might never have said or done the act. If the saying or act goes against any of the four principles or laws laid above, chances are that the hadith is a fabrication and should be rejected. It would be inconceivable for the wife of our beloved Prophet (saws) to be shameless! By saying that, the person who wrote it and the person who believes it, has not only reviled the wife of our Prophet (saws), but the Prophet (saws) himself! Is it possible for a Prophet (saws) who was sent by Allah to guide all of mankind till the end of time, could not even guide his wives and/or his closest companions?? What kind of leadership could we expect from our Prophet (saws), some of whose wives and closest companions were all hypocrites?? May Allah curse and take full retribution from the people who recorded or fabricated slander in the name of hadiths and mis-guided people to their own agendas. May Allah also curse and take full retribution from the people who look for these hadiths in pursuit to slander some of the wives and closest companions of the Prophet (saws).
Thus in conclusion, the genuine hadiths are a record of the Sunnah of the Prophet (saws), and the false hadiths are the work of unscrupulous people in pursuit of their own agendas.
May Allah guide us to understand the wisdom and teachings of the Holy Quran, so that we can determine and follow the genuine hadiths, and reject the slander of the fabricated ones. May Allah guide you and us to follow the Sunnah of our beloved Prophet Mohamed (saws), which was exactly in conformity with each and every verse revealed by Allah Himself in the Holy Quran.
May Allah guide you and us all to the Siraat al-Mustaqeem
Whatever written of Truth and benefit is only due to Allah’s Assistance and Guidance, and whatever of error is of me. Allah Alone Knows Best and He is the Only Source of Strength.
Your brother and well wisher in Islam,
Burhan

 

[kidcanman]

I added more to post #39

I replied more in post #41.

 

[kidcanman]

Drummer4Christ, I'm not going to read your long article that you got off of an anonymous website.

My point remains that "The reason why ahadith are not dependent on the Quran is because there are thousands of ahadith that have no connection to the Quran whatsoever. They are not used to put the Quran in context, and the Quran is not used to put them in context." If your answer is found in that article then explain it to me. If your point is that Muslims hold ahadith in high esteem, then say that. Or else copy and paste the main points from that article. I don't desire to do extra research.

 

[kidcanman]

kidcanman,

Stoning seems to be cruel and unusual, and though it was used in ancient times, I don't think it should be used today.

You have the right to your opinion and I to mine. I disagree.

But the fact Ashtiani received the death sentence for adultery and didn't received death for complicity to commit murder, it just doesn't sound consistent to me even if she was guilty on all accounts.

You can't judge whether or not it is consistent because you don't know in which way she was "complicit" in committing murder.

- Davies[/QUOTE]

 

[Drummer4Christ]

@ kidcanman

At no point has Shari'a not included the Qur'an. Secondary sources, such as scholarly opinion, do not take precedence over immutable text. Local customs do not take precedence over immutable text. Hadiths sole purpose it do supplement the Qur'an (instructions on prayer, for example). If a specific set or individual Hadith contradicts the Qur'an, it is discarded. Simply because Sunni & Shi'a reject each others Hadiths does not mean that Hadiths are used in any other way than supplementing the Qur'an.

 

[Davies]

@ kidcanman

At no point has Shari'a not included Simply because Sunni & Shi'a reject each others Hadiths does not mean that Hadiths are used in any other way than supplementing the Qur'an.

This is related to my questions. What is being used in the case of Ashtiani? It is obvious the Iranian government uses Sharia. Others not including Ashtiani have been charged with apostasy. Does that fall under Sharia or the Quran? If you don't know, then when an injustice is done, do we always put the blame at the feet of the Hadith or is it just a misunderstanding by people of other faiths because they don't believe the same way as Muslims?

- Davies

 

[kidcanman]

@ kidcanman

At no point has Shari'a not included the Qur'an. Secondary sources, such as scholarly opinion, do not take precedence over immutable text. Local customs do not take precedence over immutable text.

As a matter of fact it is possible for scholarly opinion and local customs to take place over "immutable text". Davies mentioned the fact that they are disputing whether or not to hang or stone a woman in Iran. Assuming that this information is true, the Quran does not mention hanging, and so the decision to hang the woman would be an example of scholarly opinion and local customs, replacing an immutable text.

Hadiths sole purpose it do supplement the Qur'an (instructions on prayer, for example). If a specific set or individual Hadith contradicts the Qur'an, it is discarded. Simply because Sunni & Shi'a reject each others Hadiths does not mean that Hadiths are used in any other way than supplementing the Qur'an.

The companions of the prophet would memorize and copy what the prophet did because they believed that his way of doing things is the best way. They did not do it with the intent of supplementing the Quran they simply wanted to do everything in the manner that the prophet did it.

As a result there are thousands of ahadith that have no connection to Quranic teachings.

How does wiping yourself with your left hand supplement the Quran? How does walking into the masjid with your right foot first supplement the Quran.

And so your statement that ahadith are only used to supplement the Quran is false and of course ahadith do not depend on the Quran.

 

[kidcanman]

This is related to my questions. What is being used in the case of Ashtiani? It is obvious the Iranian government uses Sharia. Others not including Ashtiani have been charged with apostasy. Does that fall under Sharia or the Quran? If you don't know, then when an injustice is done, do we always put the blame at the feet of the Hadith or is it just a misunderstanding by people of other faiths because they don't believe the same way as Muslims?

- Davies

Davies how many times must it be explained that sharia incorporates the Quran, ahadith, and the opinion of local scholars?

Your question, "does it fall under sharia or the Quran", does not make sense. Sharia incorporates the Quran.

I don't think that Iran has apostasy laws, but if they do I'm pretty sure that in recent history they have not convicted anybody under these laws.

There is no earthly punishment for apostasy found in the Quran.

There are ahadith that mention punishments (death being one punishment), but scholars don't agree on the legitimacy and application of those ahadith in the context of sharia(Drummer4christ you should take note of this point).

Davies when injustices occur, you put the blame at the feet of the specific people that committed the injustices apart from ahadith and the Quran.

People across the world follow ahadith and the Quran in very different ways.

If you have issues with ahadith and the Quran, then address those issues separately.

 

[Drummer4Christ]

As a matter of fact it is possible for scholarly opinion and local customs to take place over "immutable text". Davies mentioned the fact that they are disputing whether or not to hang or stone a woman in Iran. Assuming that this information is true, the Quran does not mention hanging, and so the decision to hang the woman would be an example of scholarly opinion and local customs, replacing an immutable text.

That is my point. When the Qur'an does not outline a specific guideline, scholarly opinion based on the Hadiths and/or local customs are used. If the Qur'an does outline a specific guideline, secondary sources, such as local custom, are not used in favor of the Qur'an.

The companions of the prophet would memorize and copy what the prophet did because they believed that his way of doing things is the best way. They did not do it with the intent of supplementing the Quran they simply wanted to do everything in the manner that the prophet did it.

Yes, because Allah revealed to Muhammad the "best way" through the Qur'an.

As a result there are thousands of ahadith that have no connection to Quranic teachings.

How does wiping yourself with your left hand supplement the Quran? How does walking into the masjid with your right foot first supplement the Quran.

How does it supplement the Qur'an?

The companions of the prophetwould memorize and copy what the prophet did because they believed that his way of doing things is the best way

Why did they believe the prophet did things "the best way"? Because Allah revealed to him "Shari'a" (the right way) through the Qur'an.

And so your statement that ahadith are only used to supplement the Quran is false and of course ahadith do not depend on the Quran.

The Hadiths were written exclusively to record Muhammad's application of the Qur'an. Again, simply because you may or may not believe that Muhammad wiped himself with his left hand does not mean that such an alleged occurrence was written for any other purpose other than Muhammad following the "right way".

 

[kidcanman]

Yes, because Allah revealed to Muhammad the "best way" through the Qur'an.

How does it supplement the Qur'an?

Why did they believe the prophet did things "the best way"? Because Allah revealed to him "Shari'a" (the right way) through the Qur'an.

The Hadiths were written exclusively to record Muhammad's application of the Qur'an. Again, simply because you may or may not believe that Muhammad wiped himself with his left hand does not mean that such an alleged occurrence was written for any other purpose other than Muhammad following the "right way".

Your logic falls apart in light of the fact that the companions memorized the actions of the prophet long before surah 45 verse 18 was revealed.

Your argument is not only wrong, from my humble Islamic perspective, it is ridiculous.

I know that people use ahadith in order to supplement the Quran, but the argument that ahadith were written with that purpose in mind is just plain wrong and the argument that they were written "exclusively" for that purpose is ridiculous.

I hesitate to be so frank, but it is not hyperbole. And to be honest I hope that we don't have to waste hours debating the point.

 

[Davies]

I don't think that Iran has apostasy laws, but if they do I'm pretty sure that in recent history they have not convicted anybody under these laws.

There is no earthly punishment for apostasy found in the Quran.

There are ahadith that mention punishments (death being one punishment), but scholars don't agree on the legitimacy and application of those ahadith in the context of sharia(Drummer4christ you should take note of this point).

Davies when injustices occur, you put the blame at the feet of the specific people that committed the injustices apart from ahadith and the Quran.

People across the world follow ahadith and the Quran in very different ways.

I'm not sure what happened to this pastor (Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani), for all I know he's still in jail. But the fact is, he was accused of apostasy and was threatened with death. Because scholars don't agree on the application of the law, or whether the law derived from the Quran or the Hidith, is a mute point. I don't think they pull it out of thin air though. You may be right that there has not been any convictions for apostasy in Iran, I don't know, but I tell you one thing. I wouldn't go to a Muslim country, stand on the street corner and say Mohammed was a mad man. I'd go to the underground churches. To be put to death for believing a different religion is a crime whether it's sanctioned by the government or not in many Muslim countries. Try blaspheme in Pakistan. That will send you to the next life rather quickly. If what you say is true about there being no earthly punishment on the earth for apostasy in the Quran, why do so many Muslim countries have apostasy laws on their books and threaten death? If they revere the teachings in the Quran, then those laws shouldn't be on the books.

"As early as this week, the British-based Christian Solidarity Worldwide reports, Iran may execute Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani for refusing to recant his Christian faith.

As my colleague Paul Marshall recently wrote, evangelical Pastor Nadarkhani was sentenced to death for apostasy because he converted to Christianity. He had been tried and found guilty a year ago, even though the court also found that he had never been a practicing Muslim as an adult. Nadarkhani, from Rasht, on the Caspian Sea, converted to Christianity as a teenager."

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/278400/iran-execution-apostasy-seems-imminent-nina-shea

The fact we even have to talk about the death sentence regarding what your faith is ludicrous. I know we do bad things here in America too, but the laws in Iran take the cake.

- Davies

 

[Drummer4Christ]

Your logic falls apart in light of the fact that the companions memorized the actions of the prophet long before surah 45 verse 18 was revealed.

Even if that were true, considering that Muhammad made up the Qur'an as he went along, no Hadith was written, nor actions of the "prophet" recorded prior to the first revelation. Muhammad had no companions to memorize his actions until he first claimed revelation from Allah and prophethood of Allah.

Your argument is not only wrong, from my humble Islamic perspective, it is ridiculous.

I know that people use ahadith in order to supplement the Quran, but the argument that ahadith were written with that purpose in mind is just plain wrong and the argument that they were written "exclusively" for that purpose is ridiculous.

I hesitate to be so frank, but it is not hyperbole. And to be honest I hope that we don't have to waste hours debating the point.

The only thing "ridiculous" is that I've "wasted hours" debating the tenants of a false religion that is simultaneously a counterfeit of Christianity and blatantly anti-Christ.

The fact of the matter is that Shari'a dictates the lives of all Muslims, regardless of sect, based on the Qur'an, Hadiths, scholarly opinion and, local custom.

Shari'a is never implemented nor jurisprudence formulated without the Qur'an & Hadiths. Never does scholarly opinion, let alone local custom, supersede the absolute directives of either Allah or Muhammad.

 

[kidcanman]

Even if that were true, considering that Muhammad made up the Qur'an as he went along, no Hadith was written, nor actions of the "prophet" recorded prior to the first revelation. Muhammad had no companions to memorize his actions until he first claimed revelation from Allah and prophethood of Allah.

So bring your evidence or example of where a companion stated that he recorded an action of the prophet in order to supplement the Quran. Since according to you that is the "exclusive" reason why they recorded it.

Or else give me any evidence from the Quran or any ahadith that shows where a companion indicated that they were recording an ahadith in order to supplement the Quran.

You are the first I've heard to make the claim, you have not provided any evidence for the claim, there is logical evidence to the contrary that is plain and yet you still would like to insist on it.

The fact of the matter is that Shari'a dictates the lives of all Muslims, regardless of sect, based on the Qur'an, Hadiths, scholarly opinion and, local custom.

here is another claim that you have made that is obviously not true but that you will probably defend anyway.

How is it a fact that sharia dictates the lives of all Muslims, when the vast majority of Muslims don't live in countries governed by sharia?

Shari'a is never implemented nor jurisprudence formulated without the Qur'an & Hadiths. Never does scholarly opinion, let alone local custom, supersede the absolute directives of either Allah or Muhammad.

Never...? Again your claim is an absolute statement...?

 

[Stormcrow]

How is it a fact that sharia dictates the lives of all Muslims, when the vast majority of Muslims don't live in countries governed by sharia?

Yet. 2

 

[kidcanman]

I'm not sure what happened to this pastor (Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani), for all I know he's still in jail.

But the fact is, he was accused of apostasy and was threatened with death.

Iranian officials say that he was threatened with death for rape and extortion. I am aware that there is a "translation of his Supreme Court brief from 2010" circulating in our media in which it states that Youcef was convicted of turning his back on Islam. The problem is that the entire Supreme Court brief is not provided and so we don't know if there were other convictions, or if he was threatened with punishments only because he "turned his back on Islam".

In addition this "translation", was translated by the Confederation of Iranian Students in Washington; a group that is basically against the current form of government in Iran and has an interest in discrediting it. Also, the translation is posted on Fox News as an "Unofficial Translation". And to me "Unofficial" means "inaccurate".

Furthermore the document is described as a translation of a Supreme Court "brief". It is not described as a translation of the official transcript of the brief. And so it is possible that somebody either recorded a section of or gave their own summery of the "brief" and then had the "anti-Iran" students translate it.

My point is that Iranian officials stated that Youcef is facing the death penalty because of rape and extortion and I have no reason not to believe them. He might be facing a lessor punishment due to apostasy; I don't know.

Because scholars don't agree on the application of the law, or whether the law derived from the Quran or the Hidith, is a mute point.

The fact that you do not know that apostasy laws cannot be derived from the Quran shows that you do not know much about apostasy laws in the first place.

You may be right that there has not been any convictions for apostasy in Iran, I don't know

I am right and I agree that you don't know.

But I tell you one thing. I wouldn't go to a Muslim country, stand on the street corner and say Mohammed was a mad man.

If you did that in most majority Muslim countries, nothing would happen to you. If you did that in Iran nothing would happen to you because it would not be apostasy; you are currently Christian.

To be put to death for believing a different religion is a crime whether it's sanctioned by the government or not in many Muslim countries.

This claim is not based on facts. Besides countries that are in war (afghan, Iraq, to a degree Pakistan, palistine), list the many Muslim countries in which you will be put to death for believing in a different religion. My guess is that you can't list one. Countries that are in war don't count because you can be "put to death" just for crossing the street in those countries (thanks to Bush).

Try blaspheme in Pakistan. That will send you to the next life rather quickly.

Davies because you are American you don't have to blaspheme in Pakistan if you wish to die. There are plenty of Christian and atheist Pakistanis that would "put you to death" on site the moment they see you in their country.

If what you say is true about there being no earthly punishment on the earth for apostasy in the Quran, why do so many Muslim countries have apostasy laws on their books and threaten death? If they revere the teachings in the Quran, then those laws shouldn't be on the books.

Again, please list the "so many" countries.

The punishment for apostasy is not necessarily death. I'm not going to go into detail about it. But the reason some countries have the law is evident; because of ahadith. I'm surprised that you did not deduce this yourself.

 

[farside]

The following satirical posts deal with the Sharia as it applies to booty, Amputation for stealing, and the regulation of slavery. Warning! Not recommended for devout Muslims.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Farsideology:_Lesson_13_-_The_Sharia

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Farsideology:_Booty_and_The_Wisdom_of_Islam

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Farsideology:_Amputation_and_The_Wisdom_of_Islam

Enjoy!
Farside of http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Farsideology