Tuesday, April 13, 2010

"Leaving Islam" Ad Campaign Kicks off in Miami

Many Muslims don't know how free they are in the United States. A network is forming to help them leave Islam. Buses around Miami have started carrying the ad.


Negeen Mayel said...

Nice. People need this.

Anonymous said...

Is there a large muslim population in Miami? Somehow I don't think this would be allowed in Dearborn...

Radical Moderate said...

We need to do this in Dearborn Michagan. David, Sam, Nabeel, Hogan I think you guys should put up a paypal link for this project

Fernando said...

Lets get this everywhere... I mean everywhere...

Yahya Snow said...


Why Dearborn..???

To offend Muslims?

In the UK, us Muslims would not do this to Christians despite having similar freedoms to the US...I guess Brits have a different mentality to Americans..OR is it a case of most ppl having a different mentality to ppl on this site and other sites evangelising to Muslims


Anonymous said...

"In the UK, us Muslims would not do this to Christians despite having similar freedoms to the US..."

since when do we kill apostates or harrass ppl who leave christianity!? one isnt born into christianity (which is not the case with islam), but one becomes christian. this is a big difference between our religions. to me being born into one religion is already sort of compulsion, especially when kids r "tabula rasa" and 2 label them as muslims for any kind of reason is beyond me. just 2 round this up. i really find this remark funny, bc i really cannot understand how some1 can even compare leaving christianity with leaving islam, when we all here r well familiar with the consequences both religions charge their apostates with (at least as far as earthly life is concerned).

Adam said...

Mr. Yahya Snow

You Kaaba Cult Worshiper. Why don't you comment on the previous articles which exposed your Kult and your intelligence or wisdom.

BTW Mr.Yahya Snow why do you fear to debate ChrisTian Bro Sam Shamoun or David Woods in public... I remember you wise comment on youtube, regarding debate with Br. Sam

minoria said...

Hello Yahya:

But the situation is different.If a person in a Christian neighborhood leaves Jesus,nobody persecutes him/her.
The same for Hindus,Buddhists.
But it's so in Muslim countries/Muslim areas in Europe.
There is a certain mentality that's not right.In the Spanish forum I participate in,I wrote that Islamophobia is criticism of IDEAS.It's no crime.A crime is MUSLIMOPHOBIA(it's against persons).

JUDEOPHOBIA/HISPANOPHOBIA is mistreating PERSONS.They are crimes,but not christianityphobia/Judaismophobia,etc.They are IDEAS.
The post was rejected.It's obvious that group is secretely for legal sanctions(if they can) against criticism of their religious ideas(Islam).

Yahya,if I had been born into a Muslim group I would say:"Others can criticize Islam all they like.I'm against legal punishment.Only thing to do is give intellectual arguments in favor,and let the public decide.That's all."I wouldn't be with the illogic of saying Islamophobia is a crime.

hugh watt said...

Yahya, Brits' are quite liberal when it comes to such matters, which is why Islam gets away with more in Europe than in the States.

John Park said...

@Yahya Snow,

How is telling Muslims that they will find protection if they leave Islam trying to ‘offend Muslims’?

it’s not Christianity that teaches death to apostle but Islam?

Sepher Shalom said...

YahyaSnow said:

"Why Dearborn..???

To offend Muslims?"

Why is it offensive to Muslims that there is a group trying to protect people who leave Islam from being harrassed and murdered?

Radical Moderate said...

YahyaSnow said:

"Why Dearborn..???

To offend Muslims?"

Interesting the Muslim finds freedom of speech and freedom of relegion is offensive.

But a little Muslim girl getting RAPED TO DEATH by her much older husband is just "SAD" to Yahya Snow.

You know Yahya Snow only gave a one word response to a little girl being raped to death. He said just "SAD"

Now what did he mean by that, what was sad? Was it Sad that David Posted the article? Was it "Sad" that the girl died? Was it sad that the little girl was raped to death? Was it "Sad" that she was married at such a early age? Either way what ever it was that was SAD to Yahya Snow we know one thing, and that was it wasn't OFFENSIVE. But what Yahya Snow does find offensive is United States Citizens using there FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

WEll thats what happens when you have a moral compass called Islam, and the needle on the compass points to Mohamed.

Nazam said...

Apostasy: What Would Jesus Do?


Sepher Shalom said...


First, I want to ask you why you think pointing us to a post by Paul Williams on how to interpret the Bible is a strong argument?

Next, Deuteronomy 13:6-10 says nothing about killing apostates. It speaks of killing someone in the promised land of Israel that tries to convince a fellow Israelite to worship a false god. This is in no way the same as Islam's command to kill people who leave the cult anywhere on the earth.

Secondly, both of our faiths teach the concept of "progressive revelation" of Scripture. Yours even goes so far as to have abrogation, outright canceling of verses. Based on our shared belief in progressive revelation you must interpret Deuteronomy 13:6-10 in light of ALL of Scripture. This includes Yeshua's words and actions in the Nazarene Writings. These writings include explicit commands to love your neighbor as yourself, and to do to others as you would have done to you, forgive others if you want to be forgiven by the Father, etc (shall I bring the MANY applicable verses from the Gospels & Epsitles or are you at least honest enough to concede this point?). I am Torah observant, but I must follow the Torah according to the Halacha and example of Yeshua Ha'Mashiyach. Yeshua's Halacha prohibits us from killing apostates like you do in Islam.

Please stop misrepresenting our text, and ignoring progressive revelation and its impact on how we follow YHWH's Torah.

Sepher Shalom said...

Something interesting I noticed from Nazam's link to Paul Williams' blog: He writes the following -

"Muslim philosopher Shabbir Akhtar in his book The Quran and the Secular Mind (2008) comments provocatively:

‘We must note that there are now few authentically religious Jews and Christians in the West even among the clergy and the rabbinate. All intellectually sophisticated Jews and Christians are secularised and, in their attitudes towards domestic issues, as opposed to foreign policy, are typically humane capitalists whose religious beliefs serve as a decorative veneer on their underlying secularised religious humanism. All charges are variations on the stock Muslim accusation, rooted in the Qur’an, that Jews and Christians have achieved a cosy accommodation with the world – or with modern secularism, in our day – at the cost of being unfaithful to their dogmatic traditions. Modern versions of Christianity and Judaism appear to be carefully disguised variants of secular humanism. Predictably, therefore, many Jews and Christians, unlike virtually all Muslims, live conscientiously and comfortably within the arrangements of the liberal secular humanist state. Islam is now unique in its existential decision, though not intellectual capacity, to confront rather than accommodate the secularist world-view. It is a faith whose adherents are sounding a lone note of courageous defiance in the battle against secularism while other trumpets are blowing retreat. (Page 7)"

...and in the post immediately preceding that he says-

"Eaton decried the despots and human rights abuses in the Muslim world, and, closer to home, held a hard line on Muslim immigrants: “It is time for the Muslims in Britain to settle down, to find their own way, to form a real community and to discover a specifically British way of living Islam,” he noted. “The constant arrival of uneducated, non English-speaking immigrants from the subcontinent makes that more difficult. This is no curry island.”"

So, he fondly quotes a man that supports converts to Islam leaving the historic roots and worldview of their faith to innovate a "uniquely British" Islam, but in his next post he quotes a man that chides Christians and Jews for having left the historic roots and worldview and Westernizing and secularizing the faith.

This man's double standards have not improved a single bit since his debate with Nabeel.

minoria said...

Hello Nazam:
Glad to see around again.I read Paul William's article in general.But it's more nuanced regarding Jesus than he puts it.

MATT 23:2-3(I had already pointed it out in his blog before knowing it would come up)has Jesus saying to follow the PHARISEES.There were 3 groups in Palestine:zealots,sadducees,pharisees.

The PHARISEES accepted Roman abolition of their right to carry out capital punishment.Death for apostasy was non-existant since 6 AD(according to the TALMUD).

Also,as DINESH D'SOUZA pointed out,and others Jesus said "Give to CEASER what is Ceaser's,give to GOD what is God's."Separation of church/synagogue and State.
He said obey Roman law.So MATT 5:17-20 applies to an ideal situation,it says "Kingdom of God".It's God's rule on earth.It doesn't say "rule of the Romans."I hope this helps.There's more but this is the essence.One thing is for sure,we have TWO Jesuses:the Jesus of the NT and the Jesus of ISLAM.

Nazam said...

I genially wanted to know how Christians might answer to the arguments made in the article.

Fernando said...

@Yahya Snow

Why islam..???

To offend all non-muslims?

hugh watt said...

Sepher, ah but, what's missing from Akhtar's comments are, they live a British way of life until the birth rate amongst Muslims increases to a level where they have Muslim representatives as councillor's, members of Parliament etc. Basically, move in, settle down, breed up, take over, then, 'Allahu Akbar!'

Hiwot said...


After reading the article, I was wondering that who would fall for this weak argument, a cover-up for Islam’s explicit order to kill non-believers and apostates. Not only it is weak, it also shows that the writer does not have clue what the verses are saying. Definitely, the writer has not studied the life of Jesus and his teachings or he ignores the truth to defend Islam and its teachings desperately.

I don’t want to repeat Sepher Shalom explanation for Deut 13:6-10. I want to add one thing though. If Muhammad was from the Israelite during Moses time, he would have been killed for misleading people to a false god and for speaking of other gods.

otto said...

Hello Nazam,

This is how I might genially answer the 'arguments' brought up in Pauls article.

Either Paul takes his brothers in Islam for complete dopes (did you bother to cross check the Biblical scripture quoted?) or Paul is one very misguided man. While quoting Deuteronomy 13:6-10 Paul conveniently leaves out Deuteronomy 13:6 (some Bibles Deut. 13:5) changing the meaning of the passage altogether.

Deuteronomy 13:6 And that prophet, or dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; for he hath spoken perversions against the Lord your God, who brought you out from the land of Mizraim, and delivered you from the house of bondage, to make you go astray from the path in which the Lord thy God hath commanded thee to walk; and so shalt thou put away the evil doer from the midst of thee. OKE

Deuteronomy 13:6 And that prophet of lies, or that dreamer of dreams... PJE

Deuteronomy 13:6 As for that prophet or dream-diviner... TNK

Deuteronomy 13:6 That prophet or that dreamer of dreams must be put to death... NJB

And if you really did your homework Nazam, you would realize Deuteronomy 13:6-10 is talking about a ‘mesith’ - one who incites idolatry, a seducer, necromancer, wizard, sorcerer, someone who entices individuals or even whole towns to idolatry. An apostate would be a mesitim or maybe a mumar, but not a mesith. This is nothing like the Quran which states ' whoever changes his religion, then kill him'. Personally, if I was a Muslim I would not pick those passages for my anti-Christian polemic on apostasy.

Hence, Im sorry to say, shoddy scholarship on Pauls part since one cannot even begin to take his work seriously if there are egregious errors right off the bat. Thus, there is no 'answer' to his argument, it's a non argument.

As for Pauls double standard, quoting from his article: "The story of the woman caught in adultery in John chapter 8 is sometimes believed to imply that Jesus abolished the death penalty. However, this story probably does not go back to Jesus as the most ancient manuscripts of the gospel lack this passage and it is almost certainly a scribal insertion into John’s narrative." - talk about pick and choose and setting your own standards! He doesn't like it, so throw it out! Sounds like the law of abrogation to me XD.

As for Pauls other arguments, I really don't care what St. Thomas said or did, same with Calvin (well maybe a little), I care about what Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ said and did!

otto said...

Nazam, I encourage you to re-read Deuteronomy 13 in light of these passages

Mat 10:19-23 'When they hand you over , do not worry about how you are to speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you at that time; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death ; and you will be hated by all because of my name. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly I tell you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.'

Mar 13:9-13 'As for yourselves, beware; for they will hand you over to councils; and you will be beaten in synagogues; and you will stand before governors and kings because of me, as a testimony to them. And the good news must first be proclaimed to all nations. When they bring you to trial and hand you over, do not worry beforehand about what you are to say; but say whatever is given you at that time, for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death ; and you will be hated by all because of my name. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.'

Luk 21:12-19 'But before all this occurs, they will arrest you and persecute you; they will hand you over to synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors because of my name. This will give you an opportunity to testify. So make up your minds not to prepare your defense in advance; for I will give you words and a wisdom that none of your opponents will be able to withstand or contradict. You will be betrayed even by parents and brothers, by relatives and friends; and they will put some of you to death. You will be hated by all because of my name. But not a hair of your head will perish. By your endurance you will gain your souls.'

Unknown said...

Leaving Islam is a huge issue.So much so that even in the US, fear and oppression still haunt those who MIGHT be thinking about leaving. I know someone who lives in the us, and is so afraid to tell their parents they have become a Christian, because violence has already been mentioned in the home regarding the possibility that this person has switched loyalties.Do you see that I do not mention even the gender of this person? This is the kind of heavy burden one has to deal with when a religion states plainly "NO ONE leaves", and backs up this threat often with violence. What a truly GREAT idea, this ad campaign is.

hugh watt said...

Patstroke. My prayers will be with that soul. Here's the Bible take on this. Matt'10:28-39

28And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

29Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.

30But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.

31Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

32Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.

33But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

34Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

35For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

36And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

37He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

38And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

39He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

Christians in China, N.Korea etc face this every day. In the west not as much, but it's coming.

minoria said...

Hello Odo:
Nice arguement,I am better on the NT than the Hebrew Scriptures.I tried 3X to post a comment on Paul William's blog about the article,it was blocked out.I am out.
Why don't you post your commet there.So the Muslims can see a counter-argument?

otto said...

Thank you for your kind words Minoria. I did as you suggested, but from my prior experience on Muslim blogs I doubt it will be approved.

minoria said...

Hello Odo:
Your post is on Paul William's blog,it got through.Great.

Verumi said...

Hello, everyone. It looks like the battle is on. The "Leaving Islam" ads have been pulled down and the parties involved are now preparing to go to court.

Nazam said...

I am sorry I've not been ably to write a reply to any of the points that have been made regarding Apostasy in the Bible as I've been suffering from a flu for the last couple of days.

However, I was not convince to the interpretation that was offered to Deut. Ch.13:6 but still believe that this passage is speaking about someone who has apostatize to a different religion and is enticing others to do likewise.

Even in one of the translation that Odo offered (The New Jerusalem Bible) it says apostasy.

"6 That prophet or that dreamer of dreams must be put to death, since he has preached APOSTASY from Yahweh your God who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the place of slave-labour; and he would have diverted you from the way in which Yahweh your God has commanded you to walk. You must banish this evil from among you." (my own emphasis added)

I also went to the trouble of consulting two different Bible commentaries (The New Jerome Biblical Commentary and The Interpreters Bible Commentary) and both of them interpret the passages to speaking about apostasy.

Second, I am not convince of the progressive revelation argument in light of what is reported about Jesus as having said about the law of Moses not being abolish until all things are accomplish (Mt 5:17-20). I agree with James Dunn as quoted in Paul's article that what ever fulfil or accomplish means in these verse it doesn't mean abolish.

As mention in Paul's article, Jesus maintain the punishment for Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' (Mt 15:3-6)
If Jesus upheld the commandment of punishing those kids who curse their parents then I don't see why he would not have believe in punishing apostates as mention in Deut. ch. 13.

Sepher Shalom said...


I don't think you read my statements (or those of others) very carefully. Let me further clarify some of the differences between Islam and what the Bible teaches.

First, the command in Duet. 13 applies only within the land of Israel. God, through his abundant mercy, allowed a number of sins to go unpunished in this life in the Torah so long as they were not committed within Israel, because Israel is YHWH's land. Secondly, this command is only binding on Israelites, because YHWH purchased us when He redeemed us out of Egypt. Thirdly, despite your use of capitals letters, you are still misinterpreting the Deuteronomy passage. "since he has PREACHED apostasy from Yahweh your God who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the place of slave-labour" [emphasis mine]. What reason is there for you to completely ignore that the punishment requires preaching, and what reason is there to ignore the context that it's a rule only within Israel and only for people that partook of the Covenant at Sinai (Israelites)? Also, Odo's comments were extensive on some passages from the Nazarene Writings that deal with this issue, as well as correcting some of your other errors. For some reason you gave no response to what he provided. Before I offer my verses on this issue to you, please comment on his.

Lastly, I don't see how a Muslim can claim to believe that Yeshua didn't abolish some of the Torah without denying the authority of the Quran:

"3:49 (Y. Ali) "And (appoint him) an apostle to the Children of Israel, (with this message): "'I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave: And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead, by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe; :50"'(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me."

According to this passage, anything Yeshua said was only applicable for the children of Israel (3:49), and Allah allowed Yeshua to abolish some of the Torah (3:50). Muslim theology also claims Muhammad had the right to change any laws revealed before him. The Quran does not explain what Yeshua's position on apostasy was, so a Muslim has no basis to claim what His position on that law was, or what the binding law of for apostasy was in the period between Yeshua and Muhammad, unless you appeal to the words found in the Bible (as you already have). Since your case requires Matt. chapter 5 Matt. chapter 15 to contain the true words of Yeshua, I am going to ask you if you accept the other verses from those chapters? If not, how can you claim the ability to do this since it is the exact same manuscripts and sources that transmit the words you need in order to claim to know what Yeshua taught about apostasy (according to your interpretation)?

Lest you think I misrepresenting Surah 3:50, refer here to Tafsir Ibn Abbas where he says Allah allowed Yeshua to abolish portions of the Torah. Why are you making a claim that contradicts Islamic theology in order to try to co-opt Yeshua as a source of defending killing of all apostates, everywhere on earth, in Islam? To me this looks intellectually deceptive.