Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While there are quite a few non-citizen Christians in Saudi, the majority are Catholic or main stream Protestant. It seems the only ones that get arrested are Pentecostal Evangelists. Usually as the result of reports.
to me this lends some credence to the concept that the larger denominations are paying off the Monarchy.
The definition and appropriate punishment for apostasy in Islam is controversial, and it varies among Islamic scholars.
In Islam’s history, the vast majority of scholars have held that apostasy in Islam is a crime punishable with the death penalty, typically after a waiting period to allow the apostate time to repent and return to Islam.
Some contemporary Muslim scholars also hold the traditional view that the death penalty for apostasy is required by the two primary sources of Sharia - the Quran and the Hadiths - while others argue that the death penalty is an inappropriate punishment.
A majority considers apostasy in Islam to be some form of religious crime, although some reject the use of the death penalty.
A minority of contemporary Islamic scholars, relying on the Quran, hold the view that apostasy in Islam is not a crime.
Our friend Woodrow here is more the "Option 5" type of guy. As with so many other issues, if the rest of the world's Muslims would "grow up" and start thinking the same way then Islam wouldn't be so terrifying to the rest of the world.
Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen all have either encoded laws against apostasy or traditions in favor of looking the other way while mobs or local governments put apostates to death or in prison or carry out some brutal punishment or another. Some are better than others, but all of them favor a very hard line -- defining apostasy as a crime against the state and against Allah. In those nations -- from the Muslim point of view -- allowing other religions to move in could lead to the apostasy and death of dear friends and family members. So while the Quran and Hadiths teach the opposite, extreme intolerance for other religions has been a recurring theme in Muslim history.
This is one of those issues where much of Islam looks mighty barbaric. If my son grows up in my own chosen Christian faith, but leaves to become an atheist it will sadden me. But the very idea of killing him or punishing him in any way for it is unthinkable. Essentially, once you embrace the Muslim faith you can be as religious or non-religious as you like, so long as your religiousness does not see you abandoning the Muslim faith in favor of another religion. In essence, you can join anytime you like but you can never leave. The surprising thing is that Muslims who favor brutal punishment for apostasy can't seem to see why the rest of the world finds them to be so repulsive and threatening.
The definition and appropriate punishment for apostasy in Islam is controversial, and it varies among Islamic scholars.
In Islam’s history, the vast majority of scholars have held that apostasy in Islam is a crime punishable with the death penalty, typically after a waiting period to allow the apostate time to repent and return to Islam.
Some contemporary Muslim scholars also hold the traditional view that the death penalty for apostasy is required by the two primary sources of Sharia - the Quran and the Hadiths - while others argue that the death penalty is an inappropriate punishment.
A majority considers apostasy in Islam to be some form of religious crime, although some reject the use of the death penalty.
A minority of contemporary Islamic scholars, relying on the Quran, hold the view that apostasy in Islam is not a crime.
Our friend Woodrow here is more the "Option 5" type of guy. As with so many other issues, if the rest of the world's Muslims would "grow up" and start thinking the same way then Islam wouldn't be so terrifying to the rest of the world.
Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen all have either encoded laws against apostasy or traditions in favor of looking the other way while mobs or local governments put apostates to death or in prison or carry out some brutal punishment or another. Some are better than others, but all of them favor a very hard line -- defining apostasy as a crime against the state and against Allah. In those nations -- from the Muslim point of view -- allowing other religions to move in could lead to the apostasy and death of dear friends and family members. So while the Quran and Hadiths teach the opposite, extreme intolerance for other religions has been a recurring theme in Muslim history.
This is one of those issues where much of Islam looks mighty barbaric. If my son grows up in my own chosen Christian faith, but leaves to become an atheist it will sadden me. But the very idea of killing him or punishing him in any way for it is unthinkable. Essentially, once you embrace the Muslim faith you can be as religious or non-religious as you like, so long as your religiousness does not see you abandoning the Muslim faith in favor of another religion. In essence, you can join anytime you like but you can never leave. The surprising thing is that Muslims who favor brutal punishment for apostasy can't seem to see why the rest of the world finds them to be so repulsive and threatening.
Actually I am sort of between 4 and 5. I see Apostasy alone as being a Religious crime but one that does not call for an earthly punishment. This is in agreement with the hanafi madhab of Sharia, which does not consider it to be a Hadd crime. Hadd/Hadud crimes are crimes that have a prescribed punishment related to them. Under the Hanafi madhb of sharia the judge has an obligation to first find reason to declare the accused innocent. If that can not be done to find reason to reduce the accusation to a lesser charge. If the accused is found guilty the judge has an obligation to find reason to forgo punishment and if that can not be done to give the lightest sentence permissible,
Guilt of a Hadd crime requires an earthly punishment. The Maximum punishment being death,Saudi being under the Hanbali Madhab (or claims to be) leaves the Judge with no option except to order death if a person is found guilty of apostasy.
There are strict criteria for determining proof of guilt. Which can be difficult as one might be totally non-practicing, but as long as they say they are Muslim they are accepted as being Muslim. But there are other factors that can prove Apostasy One of which being an act of treason. In Saudi as only Muslims can be citizens being an Apostate also means denouncing your citizenship. As most Apostates seem to become Christian Missionaries, it is viewed as an act of treason because they are causing people to denounce their citizenship.
The other 2 Madhabs Maliki and Safi'i make it more difficult to prove Apostasy. I do not believe either have ever been able to prove anyone was an Apostate. Iran is Shi'ite and does not follow any madhab of Sharia they follow a different school of jurisprudence, Jafa'ari, I know very little about it except if the Ayatollah says you are guilty, you are guilty.
About 80% 0f the world's Muslims are Sunni and about 30% of Sunni follow the Hanafi Madhab of Sharia. But, Hanafi does differ from nation to nation. The source of law for the Hanafi Madhab in order of importance are:
1. Qur'an
2. Sunnah
3. consensus of local Scholars
4. community needs
5.. Local tradition
This results in the Hanafi Madhab being very adaptable to times and location. The current Nations that follow the Hanafi Madhab are:
Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Kirghistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Egypt, Tajikistan, Maldives, Syria, Jordan, Uzbekistan ---along with many American Muslims
I should make notice that in recent years Saudi, Afghanistan, Egypt and Pakistan have been greatly influenced by the Wahhabi/Salafi movement.
Egypt in the past had outlawed Salafi making the following of Wahhabi or salafi a capital offense. However the international court ruled that a human rights violation and we can see what happened to Egypt.
Salafi is an extreme form of Wahhabi, but usually not violent. However when Salafi do become violent you get extreme violence.
What about Sufi? Aren't they supposed to be like the least extreme and non violent?
Sufi can be Sunni, Shi'ite, Buddhist, Atheist etc. It is a movement rather than a specific sect. There are Non-Muslims that follow Sufism. I myself while following the Hanafi Madhab of Sunni do have some Sufi leanings but not enough to actually practice Sufism.
Sufism is often called the metaphysical aspect of Islam, but it does seem to have much of it's practices based on Buddhism
I'm Catholic and I lived in Saudi Arabia for 18 years. My husband and children are Muslim.
I think if Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) returned to Saudi Arabia he'd get arrested. His acceptance/tolerance of other religions would not be...accepted/tolerated.
Islam and the way it is practiced varies greatly from country to country and even from city to city.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll stop trying to post when I in a hurry
