The leader of muslim scholars: muslims can't leave islam

Post Reply New Topic

This guys name is Yusuf al-Qaradawi, He is the leader of muslim scholars. He is the closest thing to a muslim "pope".

4 minute video, he talks in english about killing people who leave islam, which he thinks is okay.



He also say in the video that muslim scholars generally agress with him.

How on earth can leftists, atheists and feminists go around and think that islam is not a violent religion?

This guy knows more about Islam than this whole forum.

Christianity and judaism is not the only violent religions in the world, people need to wake up.

This is pretty much widely believed across all segments of Islam, it's an even greater crime to them to convert to another religion than to lose your religion. Apostasy carrying a death sentence is widely accepted among Muslim scholars, it's like one of their main rules.

That is not Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. It is Assim Al-Hakeem (as the description of the video also states).

Compared to Qaradawi, he's a slightly bigger as*hole with a somewhat smaller audience...

When you cannot leave islam, doesn't this mean that it is not a religion, but a sect?

No, a sect is a particular branch of some organization. The word you're looking for is a cult.

For Sunnis, maybe.

Sunni extremists do not represent all Muslims.

Does anyone represent all muslims? I suspect the answer is no. That is why OP said "the closest thing to a muslim pope" rather than "he is the muslim pope". And it doesn't really matter that there are muslims who disagree with him so long as a significant number of them don't, which seems to be the case.

And are you saying that the punisment for apostasy isn't death in shia?

Last edited by Wolfram87 on 03 Jun 2016, 12:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think Barchan hates me but maybe she can help explain some of the differences between Shia and Sunni Islam

from what I understand the Shia basically have a centralized hierarchical church structure with a religious authority being derived from those that can trace their ancestry back to those that can trace their lineage to the prophet Mohammad and ugh I don't know what to call them other than the crew he rolled with. Whereas Sunni are completely decentralized believe that anybody with knowledge of the Quran can be an imam and basically whoever has the most followers is the most influential. Maybe that's a crude outline outline but I think that's correct so correct me if I am wrong.

This is one reason why religion should not be involved in government policy, theocracy is never a good thing.

I don't hate you. I don't hate anyone on this site.


Well, not quite. The authority of an ayatollah is based on his education and wisdom, not descent. Ayatollah Khamenei claims to be descended from Muhammad, but that's not a requirement. Every ayatollah is expected to be thoroughly and formally educated at a seminary, and have several published books under his belt.
Very few men alive hold the title of Grand Ayatollah. The most famous of course is Ali Khamenei, supreme leader of Iran. His authority in Shi'a Islam is not absolute however; Ali al-Sistani is also very well-respected and influential for both Iraqi and Iranian Twelvers.


Pretty much. Each country has their own council of scholars, there are four different schools of Sunni law, so it's much harder to pinpoint a definitive "leader" in Sunni Islam. Does this make them more open to corruption and internal conflict? Maybe.

does shia islam allow conversion to christianity or another belief/atheism?

PS: as I write this, I looked on syria.liveuamap.com and saw that Aleppo is in danger, Al Nusra and co are cutting of the regime's supply route to the city. Assad is a dictator, but Nusra is Al Qaeda

As a Jain I'm not supposed to harbor hatred in my heart for anyone, so I can't hate Muslims even though they once rode into an Indian town and killed 8,000 Jains who wouldn't convert to Islam. I do not condone their practices such as apostasy=death. In fact, I condemn it. I condemn ANY of their practices which results in harm or death to another human being. If the radical Muslims define their heinous acts as definitions of what they are, then I cannot condone radical Muslims. In fact, I condemn them.

They are leaving Islam secretly, and in droves too.

In SAUDI ARABIA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligio ... udi_Arabia


I predict.... in the coming 200-300 years perhaps, the Middle East societies will end up polar-sided and divided into two major groups: All totally irreligious (and minorities) vs all Muslims.
Almost all Muslim groups will be radicals because only those will remain so. The more sane people leave Islam, the more it will have only radical Muslims.

And a bloody religious regional conflict will happen then....probably the bloodiest ever since the spread of Islam and the Mongol invasion.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 15 Feb 2017, 6:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

That's good to hear. Their is already a massive divide emerging in the Islamic world between the Secularists and the Fundamentalists. I am worried over what that will brew into.

But its bloody shocking to hear of how allot of these societies are morally bankrupt. It makes me worried.

This is different, most of these Secularists were/are moderate muslims, Moderate muslims live in denial or ignorant of their true religion- but moderate islam is slowly becoming a dying breed, things are becoming more polar.

I posted those videos in another thread the other day:


Must-watch.






in Egypt:


Funny:



This program claims that atheism is rising in Saudi Arabia, to about 5% of young people according to a study, and theory reason they claim (in the program) is due to the wahabbi extremist policy.
[/quote]