# Afghan Facing Death Penalty for Conversion to Christianity



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 19, 2006)

Afghan Man Prosecuted for Converting

Sun Mar 19, 2006 

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - An Afghan man who allegedly converted from Islam to Christianity is being prosecuted in a Kabul court and could be sentenced to death, a judge said Sunday.

The defendant, Abdul Rahman, was arrested last month after his family went to the police and accused him of becoming a Christian, Judge Ansarullah Mawlavezada told Associated Press in an interview. Such a conversion would violate the country's Islamic laws.

Rahman, who is believed to be 41, was charged with rejecting Islam when his trial started last week, the judge said.

During the hearing, the defendant allegedly confessed that he converted from Islam to Christianity 16 years ago when he was 25 and working as a medical aid worker for Afghan refugees in neighboring Pakistan, Mawlavezada said.

Afghanistan's constitution is based on Shariah law, which states that any Muslim who rejects their religion should be sentenced to death.

"We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law," the judge said. "It is an attack on Islam. ... The prosecutor is asking for the death penalty."

The prosecutor, Abdul Wasi, said the case was the first of its kind in Afghanistan.

He said that he had offered to drop the charges if Rahman changed his religion back to Islam, but the defendant refused.

Mawlavezada said he would rule on the case within two months.

Afghanistan is a deeply conservative society and 99 percent of its 28 million people are Muslim. The rest are mainly Hindus.


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 19, 2006)

This from a supposedly peaceful religion? What are Muslims afraid of? When religions force beliefs onto masses and the retribution is the seeking of an apostates death, do we really recognize this as the "true" religion? I'm certainly not implying that Christians havent done the same throughout history, but it has been done in consummate opposition to the teachings of Christ. Islam is a religion that promulgates hatred; just read the Quran and its salient animosity towards "infidels".


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Mar 19, 2006)

How Theonomic of Islam.

 for the persecuted believer. May God's purpose be done and His name glorified.

[Edited on 3-19-2006 by WrittenFromUtopia]


----------



## SRoper (Mar 19, 2006)

President Hamid Karzai would have to authorize the execution. I'm not sure he would risk his relations with the West.


----------



## bened (Mar 19, 2006)

God will indeed be glorified in this brother whom He has counted worthy to suffer for the sake of the name. 

May the church there and here draw courage from his example.

2 Thessalonians 1:4-11 so that we ourselves boast of you among the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that you endure, 5 which is manifest evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you also suffer; 6 since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, 7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony among you was believed. 11 Therefore we also pray always for you that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfill all the good pleasure of His goodness and the work of faith with power,


----------



## biblelighthouse (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> This from a supposedly peaceful religion? What are Muslims afraid of? When religions force beliefs onto masses and the retribution is the seeking of an apostates death, do we really recognize this as the "true" religion?



Before the birth of Christ, was Judaism the one true religion? Of course, to even _be_ a Christian, you would have to agree that it was.

And yet, what did God command under the religion of Judaism? God commanded the death of apostates.

Take the name of the Lord in vain - death penalty

Break the Sabbath - death penalty

Curse your parents - death penalty

etc.


Thus, I am afraid it is terribly inconsistent to hold to the teachings of Scripture, and then to turn around and say that the "one true religion" could not possibly condemn infidels to death. 

On the contrary, God commanded that very thing in the Old Testament.




> _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> Islam is a religion that promulgates hatred; just read the Quran and its salient animosity towards "infidels".



Just read the Old Testament and its animosity against infidels. 



My point is not to condone what the Afghan Muslims are doing. They are wrong _because their religion is wrong_.

But the point at which they are wrong is not _necessarily_ the point at which they condemn infidels to death. After all, if we were merely to condemn their actions on that point alone, then we would have to condemn the laws of the OT nation of Israel itself, and thus condemn God Himself, who wrote those laws.

Ultimately, ALL infidels will be put to death. All who do not willingly bow the knee to Christ now will forcibly bow the knee to Him later.

The question is not whether infidels deserve death. The question is WHO should mete out that punishment.

And as it is written: "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay."


And from what I can tell, God delegated that authority to punish infidels in the OT, but He did not delegate that authority to us in the NT.


----------



## crhoades (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> How Theonomic of Islam.


How puritan of them.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by crhoades_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> ...


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by crhoades_
> ...



Raises a good question, though: When is punishment criminal? I might start a thread on that.


----------



## satz (Mar 20, 2006)

The question is not whether infidels deserve death. The question is WHO should mete out that punishment.

And as it is written: "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay."


And from what I can tell, God delegated that authority to punish infidels in the OT, but He did not delegate that authority to us in the NT. [/quote]


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

i dont think that it is reasonable to apply old testament law to a post Christ world and try to rationalize this behavior simply because God commissioned retribution of societies who denied Him in the Old Testament. When Christ came, the law was passed away with the initiation of the new covenant. While i agree they are wrong, i dont think comparing Muslims to pre Christ jews is without error simply because Christ did away with the judicial law, and the world is now bound to the new covenant whether we acknowledge it or not. So in that sense, the Muslims are bound to the character of Christ as set forth in the new testament currently, even though they reject Him as one who has ultimate authority. They will be judged based on the standards of Christs moral character. If not, we would accept the Muslim behavior in this situation as perfectly acceptable. We would have no problem with them doing this aside from the fact they are Islamic, because being bound to old testament law allows such conduct; clearly we are not living under mosaic law (judicial).


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by satz_
> The question is not whether infidels deserve death. The question is WHO should mete out that punishment.
> 
> And as it is written: "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay."
> ...


 
Let's prhase it another way: Can the state punish religious groups for religious actions?


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> . We would have no problem with them doing this aside from the fact they are Islamic, because being bound to old testament law allows such conduct; clearly we are not living under mosaic law (judicial).



Are you saying that there is no difference between Islamic penal sanctions and God's penal sanctions?


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

if death to infidels is analagous to old testament law well of course there is a similarity, but by no means am i implying that Islam is somehow in the divine right because of this similarity...


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> if death to infidels is analagous to old testament law well of course there is a similarity, but by no means am i implying that Islam is somehow in the divine right because of this similarity...



There is also the fact that the law is an expression of God's holy character. To say that it is equated with Islamic law is to say that Islamic law is also an expression of God's holy character!
But does the OT law call for the death of infidels? Not necessarily. We do not punish sins. We punish crimes. Not all sins are crimes. So, I restate my question: Can the state punish religious acts? It is all well and good to say that the State cannot stand between man's conscience and his chosen way of worship. But what if man's chosen way of worship includes virgin sacrifice to Satan (the Santierra cult in Mexico in 1989)? Can the State then use the sword to punish religious crimes? We could go on. Therefore, at least some infidels will be punished for religious crimes.


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

again, i am not implying that Islam has any divine vindication for such acts, i merely presented the similarity, not an association, and not an equation to Gods character. Muslims pray and Christians pray; this does not mean we pray to the same God. Now comparing the murder of virgins to worshipping Christ in secret and labeling them "religious crimes" simply because they fall under the umbrella of "religion" or an opposition to religous law, is in my opinion fallacious, since Gods standard for moral law in Christ clearly admonishes murder, but not worship (I am not denying retribution on imparted by God in eternity - "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay."). It can be the states responibility to punish for murder, but not for worship (although some may argue it is transgression against theocratic law, as is murder, it does not make it equivalent to murder)

[Edited on 3-20-2006 by fivepointcalvinist]


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> again, i am not implying that Islam has any divine vindication for such acts, i merely presented the similarity, not an association, and not an equation to Gods character. Muslims pray and Christians pray; this does not mean we pray to the same God. Now comparing the murder of virgins to worshipping Christ in secret and labeling them "religious crimes" simply because they fall under the umbrella of "religion" or an opposition to religous law, is in my opinion fallacious, since Gods standard for moral law in Christ clearly admonishes murder, but not worship (I am not denying retribution on imparted by God in eternity - "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay."). It can be the states responibility to punish for murder, but not for worship (although some may argue it is transgression against theocratic law, as is murder, it does not make it equivalent to murder)
> 
> [Edited on 3-20-2006 by fivepointcalvinist]



You are not seeing the argument. Worship by definition for the Santierra cult includes murder. Therefore, when the State punishes said cult for murder it is punishing them for religion.


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

my brother, i see and understand your argument, but i wish not to submit the moral foundation of Christ to that of the world, namely making truth and law subjective to the interpretation of unregenerate men. while it can be said that murder is part of worship for that cult, i think there should always be made the distinction that there are standards that transcend interpretation and relative thought. without these standards how could we recognize murder in any respect to be morally wrong? the state punishing a cult in your last example punishes an aspect of the moral foundation of the orginization, but it does not specifically condemn for the beliefs, only the action. i think that in the case of the state punishing for beliefs (and i think that is the original intent of the thread) that is wrong. now one will argue that you will not have an initiation of action without a belief, and to this i agree, but the belief in itself cannot be made manifest without desire to commit action. think of this; we all (i hope) recognize homosexuality to be a sin worthy of separation from Christ apart from His intervention, but do the thoughts only condemn the man apart from the manifestation in this life? Now to use it specifically with murder; can a man think of murder and be imprisoned or executed for thought alone? is committing murder the same as thinking about it? so in that respect the state can punish religous worship only if it specifically violates the moral standards imposed by God by which all men are bound. God will punish sins of thought at His discretion.


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 20, 2006)

About half of your post I agree with and the other half I don't understand, respectufly. You seem to switch terms in the middle of the argument concerning private and public morality.

The state is a minister of God against evil and bears the sword. This includes religious beliefs such as the ones I mentioned above. But let's take it down a notch:
Can the state discrimate against mormons who advocate polygmay?
Can the state discrimate against native americans who advocate the use of peyote in their worship?
Can the state discrimate against groups (some california group in the early 90s) who are essentially prositution cults?

All law is moral/religious in nature and/or procedural to a moral concept. The question then becomes, "Who's morality?"


----------



## CalsFarmer (Mar 20, 2006)

Death to the infidels has always been a part of Islam...its how islam was spread...by the sword..convert or be killed or forced to live as a dhminni (think I spelled that right...) and be taxed and live as a second class citizen....

Jacobs point about procedural to a moral concept is probably the best on target question Who's morality? The morality as described in sharia law......muslim morality.....a lot different than judeo christian moral ethic..


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

"About half of your post I agree with and the other half I don't understand, respectufly. You seem to switch terms in the middle of the argument concerning private and public morality."

i think you may be referring to the example of homosexuality? i wanted to make the example that morality cannot be made subjective privately or publicly, because what is private will be made public (the lack of morality privately denegrates society and manifests itself in humanism), which i believe falls in line with your latter questions:

Can the state discrimate against mormons who advocate polygmay?
Can the state discrimate against native americans who advocate the use of peyote in their worship?
Can the state discrimate against groups (some california group in the early 90s) who are essentially prositution cults?

If the state bears the sembalence of Gods moral law i say yes, but given the relative humanistic nature of the unregenerate who frequently hold office, these would ultimately be open to interpretation. I dont think they bear the insignia of death for such transgressions, but this none the less does not make them excusable, and still should still be subject to punishment of appropriate measure, which i will not take the liberty of deciding what that would entail. 

"The state is a minister of God against evil and bears the sword" (you will probably mention pauls exhortation in romans 13 after this post which i can address later), should be true but in fact likely would only apply to a biblical theocracy, or a nation founded on biblical statutes, since not all accept the moral law imposed by God in the Bible). while all will be judged according to the same standards, many dismiss the implications of transgression against the same

All law is moral/religious in nature and/or procedural to a moral concept. The question then becomes, "Who's morality?"

there is only one morality and all are subject to it whether governement observes it or not. otherwise morality becomes relative and men are free to behave as they wish. morals are law, and does not Paul say we become conscious of sin through the law? how do we set standards or make judgements apart from it? how can a man be punished outside of a standard? God's Law as set forth in Scripture is the only law and thus the only standard for civil law.


----------



## mgeoffriau (Mar 20, 2006)

I think something is being missed here.

First, it seems to me that even in the OT, the people of God never had a "blank check" to war against unbelievers, as Muslims claim to have. From my reading, it is apparent that every case of open war against unbelievers was specifically commanded and authorized by God.

Second, we need to keep in mind that the outward mission of Islam and Christianity (in which I will include the true remnant of Israel) are distinctly dissimilar. Even in the OT, the purpose was never to produce _only_ outward submission. Unbelievers were not simply guilty for their outward acts of sin, but for their inward rebellion against God. Therefore, while God may at times choose to use His people to bring His judgment against unbelievers, it was not _typical_, if I may use that word -- even with unbelievers, God's mercy is patently evident.

Islam, on the other hand, does not seek an inward change, or a sincere conversion, but instead seeks outward submission. And if all that is required is outward submission, then of course this can easily be accomplished by the sword. The devotion and fanaticism of Muslims is *not* a product of fervent faith and appreciative love -- it is simply the fear of punishment from a demanding, petulant god and his violent, proto-terrorist prophet.


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by fivepointcalvinist_
> ...



i think your definition of apostacy is more conducive to the definition of transgression of law. i am not aware of any time in the old testament (i may be wrong) where God specifically told the Jews to kill Gentiles ONLY on the predication of disbelief. if so, please post.

[Edited on 3-20-2006 by fivepointcalvinist]


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by mgeoffriau_
> I think something is being missed here.
> 
> First, it seems to me that even in the OT, the people of God never had a "blank check" to war against unbelievers, as Muslims claim to have. From my reading, it is apparent that every case of open war against unbelievers was specifically commanded and authorized by God.
> ...


----------



## MeanieCalvinist (Mar 20, 2006)

I will be in prayer for our Brother Abdul Rahman! 

I rejoice in the fact that he is making a stand for Christ!!!!!
How easy would it be for any of us in his situation to renounce our faith to escape certain death!

I could not fatham being in a situation like that! I only hope that I could stand as strong in My faith under such conditions

Something we should all think about....

In Christ,

MeanieCalvinist


----------



## a mere housewife (Mar 21, 2006)

Here is a petition (started by Brian Mattson- 'The Banty Rooster: http://www.thebantyrooster.com/imported-data/2006/3/21/better-distribution.html) to request intervention in the case of the Afghan Christian who is facing the death penalty for his conversion. There is a small text box off to the left if you scroll down a little, where you can sign.

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/Rahman 

"If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy, and you are that temple."

[Edited on 3-21-2006 by a mere housewife]


----------



## Cuirassier (Mar 22, 2006)

Thank you, Heidi, for steering this thread back to it's intended purpose. 

My heart is grieved and pained over this brother's plight. Indeed, as the others have mentioned, let us not, "ignore their chains" but pray for their steadfast witness.

I also cannot help but feel apalled and disgusted at the hypocrisy of the American response: "The US made a subdued appeal for him to be allowed to practise his faith - but stressed it did not want to interfere." -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4832872.stm

For that matter, my own country, Canada, and the others whose troops are deployed there have made equally weak-kneed "protests" - only loud enough to demonstrate pathetic lip service to "human" rights (to be read God's laws and rights), but not so strong as to actually produce a tangible result that reflects the reasons for why they intervened in the first place. 

How true that brother Rahman's plight is not reason enough to "interfere". We need more pressing reasons to "interfere". We need ready access to cheap products, cheap energy, and cheap labour as reasons to either interfere or collude with oppresive governments in China, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, India, and others. Never mind that in all of these (and dozens more), Christian believers are being persecuted--with nothing more than nauseatingly feeble diplomatic protests from the so-called "bastions of democracy".

But hey, at least they have mass-produced our Sony DVD players and Nike runners for a killer price ... 

No, I say! It is an insult to Almight God to think He can be hoodwinked by the "rationalisations" of which we seem so fond. His hatred of injustice and oppression is clearly spelled out:

Psalm 12:5
Psalm 62:10
Psalm 72:4, 14
Proverbs 3:31
Ecclesiastes 5:8
Isaiah 1:17
Isaiah 5:7
Isaiah 30:12
Jeremiah 22:3, 17

We ought never to think that the Lord sees oppression (and especially of His children) as an acceptable cost of doing any business--political or economic.


dl

[Edited on 3-22-2006 by Cuirassier]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 22, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Cuirassier_
> Thank you, Heidi, for steering this thread back to it's intended purpose.
> 
> My heart is grieved and pained over this brother's plight. Indeed, as the others have mentioned, let us not, "ignore their chains" but pray for their steadfast witness.
> ...


----------



## SRoper (Mar 23, 2006)

Mental fitness new twist in Afghan man's religion trial

"But prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari said questions have been raised about his mental fitness.

"'We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person,' Zamari said.

"Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai, said Rahman would undergo a psychological examination.

"'If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped,' Baluch said."


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 23, 2006)

"A Western diplomat in Kabul and a human rights advocate -- both of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity -- said the government was desparately searching for a way to drop the case." -- _Express_, March 23, 2006

I think the mental illness claim may be a convenient way to drop or modify the charges under Sharia law and keep the US happy.


----------



## BobVigneault (Mar 23, 2006)

This brings up an interesting question. If this were you, would you insist that you are sane and seek to have it proven that your faith is perfectly rational even though it may end in your physical death? Or do you accept pardon at the expense of bringing ridicule to your faith?

[Edited on 3-23-2006 by BobVigneault]


----------



## mgeoffriau (Mar 23, 2006)

I hope that I would have the courage to accept death. I hope I would not disgrace my Savior.

Nevertheless, better men than me have failed that test -- Peter, among them.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 23, 2006)

Top Muslim clerics: Convert must die - Religious leaders urge courts to ignore West, hang Christian


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 24, 2006)

From CNN (3/24/06):



> An Afghan man possibly facing execution for converting from Islam to Christianity is expected "to be released in the coming days," a source with detailed knowledge of the case said Friday.
> 
> Word of Abdul Rahman's release comes after days of international pressure and the day before the Afghan Cabinet was scheduled to discuss the case of the 41-year-old father of two. On Thursday, top Afghan clerics urged Muslims to kill Rahman if the government freed him.
> 
> ...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 26, 2006)

From Associated Press (3/26/06):



> KABUL, Afghanistan - An Afghan court on Sunday dismissed a case against a man who converted from Islam to Christianity because of a lack of evidence, and he will be released soon, an official said.
> 
> The official told The Associated Press that the case had been returned to the prosecutors for more investigation, but that in the meantime, Abdul Rahman would be released.
> 
> "The court dismissed today the case against Abdul Rahman for a lack of information and a lot of legal gaps in the case," the official said Sunday, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 30, 2006)

Abdul Rahman is now a free man in Italy. But the Taliban and others in Afghanistan have called for a 'jihad' against the West because of his release.


----------



## BobVigneault (Mar 30, 2006)

Yeah but the Taliban traditionally calls for a Jihad on every day of the week that ends with a 'y' already.


----------

