Could have Islam exist without Judaism & Christianity?

[Caladan]

NOTE: I am going to be away for the next couple of days, so I am not going to be able to respond to all posts until I return.

 

[YmirGF]

Actually, the argument 'Islam couldn't exist without Judaism' is based upon a logical fallacy "Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because of this," that states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one."

[From : Post hoc ergo propter hoc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]

But this type of logical fallacy does not really apply in this situation. There are simply too many connections between Islam and Judaism to suggest the former was not heavily influenced by the later, so much so, that to remove the Judaic elements from Islam would remove a huge portion of Islam's foundations. Sadly, it is patently ridiculous to suggest otherwise. It is because of this that this particular logic fallacy fails when applied to this case. (It was a valiant effort though - however misguided.)

 

[YmirGF]

NOTE: I am going to be away for the next couple of days, so I am not going to be able to respond to all posts until I return.

I tremble with excitement at the prospect, Dan. I'll try to keep things amicable till then. Have a good time.

 

[YmirGF]

Do you understand I was directing this to Ymir who was talking specifically about the Jewish tribes?

Well, I understand, as I was simply responding to Arthra's (Post #117) and Kai's (Post #119) deflective nonsense. Arthra's post was in response to your musing as to my understanding of the lineage of Muhammad, whereas Kai's post was somewhat irrelevant, citing the short lived "Charter of Medina".

As I said earlier, I find these claims completely unpersuasive, regardless of the so-called "traditional" stance on the matter.

Now that we have that cleared up, perhaps we can return to the hypothetical points raised by the OP.

 

[Godobeyer]

And do not argue with the people of the Book except in the best way, unless it be with those among them who do evil. Say: 'We believe in that which is revealed to us and which was revealed to you. Our God and your God is one.

i want to reply for this verse of Quran , which talking about the People of the Book (jews and christains )
I just want to explain this , first of all , as i know you are an atheist ? ,if you still you are , which mean you don't believe in religion books (Torah or Talmud )
evidencely this verse is not talking about you

then the way of the best with who ?
with do not evil , not with whom insult and mock with Islam and muslims and Muhamamd (pbuh) in every occasions .....etc

we have the 12 rules , eye by eye ....etc .

if everyone "christians and jews " stop argue with Islam , i will stop argue with their religion

We believe in that which is revealed to us and which was revealed to you

we believe that God sent you Prophets and Messangers , and believe in them .
what is the new ?

edited : just to let you know .
in every occasion , my friends or people staring talking and insulting the jews , i told them to stop and make distingue , between the jews whom are killing the innocents muslims , and the jews whom are had no matter (innocents )
and i told there are many prophets jews (Moses (pbuh) Solomon (pbuh) ....etc )
which mean you are insutling the prophets race , jewish prophets and messangers .

 

[arthra]

I see here a motive being suggested by Caladan that Propeht Muhammad was primarily interested in breaking up the hold on the Kaaba by the Quraish tribe..

Prophet Muhammad already had status in society and recall the story of setting the stone and resolving the conflict..Had He primarily been economically motivated He would not have gone through the persecutions and trouble to reveal what He had received.

The primary motivation was not economic.. but spiritual .. It's called revelation on Mount Hira.. and what followed was the Qur'an over time.

So it's true in the context of the society where He lived the elements of previous dispensations were present and they were used to convey the Message but in a new way in the Qur'an. The stories of previous dispensations were not simply copied and pasted in a new book.

Muhammad was an orphan and shepherd later in life.. Arabic as a language was also more spoken than written.. Poets had a great influence..so the Qur'an was first verbally revealed and recited and later secretaries set it to writing.

 

[arthra]

Admittedly, it is a great PR stunt, but likely, little more.

Flip comments.

 

[Caladan]

I see here a motive being suggested by Caladan that Propeht Muhammad was primarily interested in breaking up the hold on the Kaaba by the Quraish tribe..

Prophet Muhammad already had status in society and recall the story of setting the stone and resolving the conflict..Had He primarily been economically motivated He would not have gone through the persecutions and trouble to reveal what He had received.

Let me just say that I did not claim that he did not have strong convictions. Muhammad most certainly did have strong convictions. But ultimately as an Arab and as the leader of the Muhajiroun Muhammad had very clear political and strategic goals. No where am I stating that these goals may not be linked to his very intimate experiences as an Arab growing up in an unjust Meccan society in which the strong bacame stronger and the weak only weaker.

 

[F0uad]

How does the Qur'an accomplish that? I understand that there are a few basic differences between the three monotheistic tradtions and that the Qur'an may reflect it. For example an obvious one is treating Jesus as a prophet, rather than a God incarnate, big difference from Christianity. But if one reads the Hebrew Bible, you can clearly see that the Biblical elements which are brought up in the Qur'an are not as elaborative as they are in their original form, furthermore the Qur'an doesn't even go into most of the Bible but instead focuses on bringing Muhammad's message to the tribes of the Hejaz. Not much is said about Hebrew prophetic writings, about the Biblical history and chronology of the People of Israel or Biblical wisdom writing, prose, literature, or poetry. In this case, the Qur'an doesn't elaborate at all about the Hebrew Bible, but instead tries to establish Abrahamic monotheism in the Hejaz. Remember that his main efforts were focused on breaking older Arab practices of polytheism and make a simple and acceptable new monotheistic system, with new moral justice, much of it is also derived from Judaism.

The book doesn't go in detail about the previous errors or corruption, and mostly what you said i agree on.

The big problem is what can we call ''Judaism'' and what can we call ''Christianity'' did the prophets Moses(p) or Jesus(p) ever knew or heard these names.. i would argue no.

The Quran also never said something about a Talmud only the Torah but it never mentions to be the first five books of the ''Hebrew Bible'' nor a bible that contains all three.


I think people should read more into the hadiths to find there answers if wanted.

 

[F0uad]

Let me just say that I did not claim that he did not have strong convictions. Muhammad most certainly did have strong convictions. But ultimately as an Arab and as the leader of the Muhajiroun Muhammad had very clear political and strategic goals. No where am I stating that these goals may not be linked to his very intimate experiences as an Arab growing up in an unjust Meccan society in which the strong bacame stronger and the weak only weaker.

Isn't that like Moses(p) when he was commanded to free the people of Unjust?

 

[YmirGF]

I see here a motive being suggested by Caladan that Propeht Muhammad was primarily interested in breaking up the hold on the Kaaba by the Quraish tribe..

Naw, he was far more interested in bringing justice to his tormentors, even though he was, most certainly, the author of his torment. The Kaaba was likely a secondary concern.

Prophet Muhammad already had status in society and recall the story of setting the stone and resolving the conflict..

True, but that stature had already diminished with his continued preaching. In other words, he had status, but due to his incessant preaching, dovetailed with his inability to ease the residents of Mecca's concerns, that original status would, necessarily, have been greatly diminished.

The primary motivation was not economic.. but spiritual .. It's called revelation on Mount Hira.. and what followed was the Qur'an over time.

Theoretically, that should be obvious to a schoolchild, Arthra. The point is that the vast majority today do not believe in the so-called "revelations" of Muhammad, but more to the point, the people of Mecca did not buy into it either, during the time of these so-called "revelations". No doubt, the residents of Mecca only became concerned about Muhammad when he began to attract followers - which was very slowly - at first. It was only after the people of Mecca saw that some in their midst were beginning to take him seriously that they saw the proverbial writing on the wall.

So it's true in the context of the society where He lived the elements of previous dispensations were present and they were used to convey the Message but in a new way in the Qur'an. The stories of previous dispensations were not simply copied and pasted in a new book.

While technically true, and somewhat varnished for posterity, one must try to imagine the psychological effect his words would have had on those who doubted his authority. Muhammad's message was a long way from being "good news" to the non-believer, thus, it is no surprise whatsoever that they would have began to work against him.

Muhammad was an orphan and shepherd later in life.. Arabic as a language was also more spoken than written.. Poets had a great influence..so the Qur'an was first verbally revealed and recited and later secretaries set it to writing.

:sleep:

 

[Caladan]

The book doesn't go in detail about the previous errors or corruption, and mostly what you said i agree on.

I also mean something more than that, something basic. When I read the Bible I have the Biblical narratives about the People of Israel, about their Kings, their Prophets and even about their enemies. In fact sometimes in order to understand the People of Israel, you have to understand their enemies.

The big problem is what can we call ''Judaism'' and what can we call ''Christianity'' did the prophets Moses(p) or Jesus(p) ever knew or heard these names.. i would argue no.

You are correct. Christianity is based on a sole Jewish man, in a great deal without focusing on the message of this man, which can be seen much more clearly in the context of Jewish society during the first century. as for Judaism, you are again correct. Judaism emerged as a religion at a certain historical stage, The term Yehudi or Jew emerged in the Biblical context as a man who is of the Tribe of Judah. In the most ancient origins in the Bible the word Judah relates to a geographical landscape, a Tribe of the 12 tribes of Israel, and as one of the sons of Jacob. Israelite kings such as David and Solomon are ethnically from the tribe of Judah.

The Quran also never said something about a Talmud only the Torah but it never mentions to be the first five books of the ''Hebrew Bible'' nor a bible that contains all three.

The Talmud is not part of the Hebrew Bible. The Talmud contains oral tradition and writings which expand on the Hebrew Bible. However you may be surprised that the Qur'anic verses which teach that God tought the Children of Israel that whosoever kills a human being, it is as if he killed all humanity, and whosoever saves a life, save the entire human race is derived word to word from the Talmud. In addition there are other examples in the Qur'an which can be traced to non Biblical Jewish teachings.

Isn't that like Moses(p) when he was commanded to free the people of Unjust?

Do you mean when the Children of Israel were enslaved to build cities to the Pharaoh?

 

[loverOfTruth]

I think after the last 3,4 pages worth of exchange we need to review some things.

First lets try to clear the air.

You call that clearing the air? I would say rather it convoluted the air with some unfounded claims.

I also think that one of the most important things to remember about this debate is that Muhammad's aim was to break an economic-political monopoly.

That is one of the most egregious and outlandish claim that goes against the very foundation of Islam and the mission of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) as recognized by even non-muslims.

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not come to preach a new religion as clearly stated in the Holy Qur'an :
"O People of the Scripture, there has come to you Our Messenger to make clear to you [the religion] after a period [of suspension] of messengers, lest you say, 'There came not to us any bringer of good tidings or a warner.' But there has come to you a bringer of good tidings and a warner. And Allah(God) is over all things competent." (Al-Qur'an 5:19)

Prophet's (pbuh) mission was to confirm and restore the principles of Monotheism as God states in the Holy Qur'an :
"Say(O Muhammad): 'O men! I am sent unto you all, as the Messenger of Allah, to Whom belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth: there is no god but He: it is He That giveth both life and death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the Unlettered Prophet, who believeth in Allah and His words: follow him that (so) ye may be guided'." (Al Qur'an 7:158)

"Just as We have sent among you a messenger from yourselves reciting to you Our verses and purifying you and teaching you the Book and wisdom and teaching you that which you did not know.So remember Me; I will remember you. And be grateful to Me and do not deny Me." (Al-Qur'an 2:151-152)

Why quote from the Qur'an ? If you know anything about Islam - you should know that Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) was a walking Qur'an embodying the commands of the Almighty God - that was his mission statement.

Since you have a pretty distorted view about the mission of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh), let me give you few quotes from some non-muslim writers:

"And more wonderful still is what the reverend Bosworth Smith remarks, "Head of the state as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was pope without the pope's claims, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without an standing army, without a bodyguard, without a palace, without a fixed revenue. If ever any man had the right to say that he ruled by a right divine It was Mohammad, for he had all the power without instruments and without its support. He cared not for dressing of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life."

"Historical records show that all the contemporaries of Mohammad both friends foes, acknowledged the sterling qualities, the spotless honesty, the noble virtues, the absolute sincerity and every trustworthiness of the apostle of Islam in all walks of life and in every sphere of human activity. Even the Jews and those who did not believe in his message, adopted him as the arbiter in their personal disputes by virtue of his perfect impartiality. Even those who did not believe in his message were forced to say "O Mohammad, we do not call you a liar, but we deny him who has given you a book and inspired you with a message."

"The principles of universal brotherhood and doctrine of the equality of mankind which he proclaimed represents one very great contribution of Mohammad to the social uplift of humanity. All great religions have preached the same doctrine but the prophet of Islam had put this theory into actual practice and its value will be fully recognized, perhaps centuries hence, when international consciousness being awakened, racial prejudices may disappear and greater brotherhood of humanity come into existence."

You can read the full article here ...
The Simple Message of GOD: About Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) - By a non-muslim


Finally, my point regarding your double standard still stands. Unless you deny that God spoke to Moses(pbuh), you cannot deny the notion of revelation of the historical events of the past in the Qur'an to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh).

By the way, why quote just one verse from the Qur'an when you don't believe in the Quran to be the revealed word of God ? And if you do believe in it, quote at least the next few relevant verses :
And do not argue with the People of the Scripture except in a way that is best, except for those who commit injustice among them, and say, "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our God and your God is one; and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."
And thus We have sent down to you the Qur'an. And those to whom We [previously] gave the Scripture believe in it. And among these [people of Makkah] are those who believe in it. And none reject Our verses except the disbelievers. And you did not recite before it any scripture, nor did you inscribe one with your right hand. Otherwise the falsifiers would have had [cause for] doubt.(Al Qur'an 29:46-48)

 

[F0uad]

I also mean something more than that, something basic. When I read the Bible I have the Biblical narratives about the People of Israel, about their Kings, their Prophets and even about their enemies. In fact sometimes in order to understand the People of Israel, you have to understand their enemies.

Yes that's why we have hadiths off-course, and sometimes the Quran does address those things. But as i understand the Quran is a direct revelation instead of detailed information about how other people lived or did.

You are correct. Christianity is based on a sole Jewish man, in a great deal without focusing on the message of this man, which can be seen much more clearly in the context of Jewish society during the first century. as for Judaism, you are again correct. Judaism emerged as a religion at a certain historical stage, The term Yehudi or Jew emerged in the Biblical context as a man who is of the Tribe of Judah. In the most ancient origins in the Bible the word Judah relates to a geographical landscape, a Tribe of the 12 tribes of Israel, and as one of the sons of Jacob. Israelite kings such as David and Solomon are ethnically from the tribe of Judah.

I know this, but then we have to ask if Moses(p) and Jesus(p) never named there religion or at least according to the scriptures why should we?
And why can Muslims not say its Islam when the simply definition of Islam is ''Peace in submission to god'' for example you described what Judaism meant and Christianity and they both have nothing to do with the Religion of God but instead what People were named who followed and after that a religion was named. We also have that its called: Mohammedian but we do not use it.

The Talmud is not part of the Hebrew Bible. The Talmud contains oral tradition and writings which expand on the Hebrew Bible. However you may be surprised that the Qur'anic verses which teach that God tought the Children of Israel that whosoever kills a human being, it is as if he killed all humanity, and whosoever saves a life, save the entire human race is derived word to word from the Talmud. In addition there are other examples in the Qur'an which can be traced to non Biblical Jewish teachings.

Yes i know that The Talmud for example contains oral tradition and writings like for example the hadiths and there are muslims that belief that some hadiths are also the word of god and i think some of the jews belief that The Talmud also has it.

Now you know as a jew that Muslims belief that God has indeed send a revelation to Moses(p) and the Jewish prophets so therefore that Verse or Sentence we still see as god's word because its in agreement with the Quran and actually its only confirmed in the Quran that not everything has been lost from the Jewish scriptures (in a muslim perspective off-course).

There are also some things from the Hebrew bible that can be traced down to other things before it, but that doesn't mean its not god's word or it is simply copied from somewhere else. I would say if God revealed something to Moses(p) and it still is in the Torah and its also mentioned by the Quran does that mean Mohammed(saws) simply copied it or does that mean its a ''REAL'' revelation given to Moses(p) and later confirmed by Mohammed(saws)

Do you mean when the Children of Israel were enslaved to build cities to the Pharaoh?

Yes and the horrible lives they had because of the Egyptians who used them as slaves and taught them to worship the Egyptian Gods. (this is going off-topic)

 

[Caladan]

To Godobeyer and loverOfTruth, get back to me when you can address my posts in your own words, without quoting scriptures at me or directing me to read on line articles. I want to hear what you have to say about the subject in your own words, without your typical polemic about my personal beliefs, which by the way you have plenty of wrong assumptions about, or in other words which you openly distort instead of focuing on the debate at hand. Trust me I will only find it more constructive and even honourable.

F0uad, I recognize your post, and I'll consider several things that you've said and which I find constructive and relevant to get this discussion on the right track. Just a quick note, I don't believe that Islam or the Qur'an were 'copied', I believe the Qur'an brought plenty of new perspective to the Hejaz of the 7th century. You will find that my premise is more elaborative, I want to focus on the background for the society during the days of Muhammad, and the way the movement of Muhammad interacted with this cultural baggage. You'll find I have the same interest in early Christianity, and even in the development of Israel as a nation or a culture during the Iron Age.

Also, please remember that I will be away for the next couple days, so my replies will arrive only when I return.

 

[F0uad]

F0uad, I recognize your post, and I'll consider several things that you've said and which I find constructive and relevant to get this discussion on the right track. Just a quick note, I don't believe that Islam or the Qur'an were 'copied', I believe the Qur'an brought plenty of new perspective to the Hejaz of the 7th century. You will find that my premise is more elaborative, I want to focus on the background for the society during the days of Muhammad, and the way the movement of Muhammad interacted with this cultural baggage. You'll find I have the same interest in early Christianity, and even in the development of Israel as a nation or a culture during the Iron Age.

Also, please remember that I will be away for the next couple days, so my replies will arrive only when I return.

Yes there were some ''New'' perspectives for example when the Quran was revealed there were only some people who could ''write and read'' after Quran everything changed people started to educate themselves as is commanded in the Quran and the society changed and became healthy, rich, a unity and more.

As revelation i do belief there can be change because we belief that each Prophet was send to a different time read post above written by someone else.


Thanks for your reply.

 

[gnostic]

No that is not true and you should shy away from making such definative statements on the Qur'an if you are unfamiliar with it. Taha Husayn, [10] a prominent Egyptian Litterateur, during the course of a public lecture summarised
how the Qur’an achieves this unique form: Quote:
Originally Posted by Taha Hussein
“But you know that the Qur’an is not prose and that it is not verse either. It is rather Qur’an, and it cannot be called by any other name but this. It is not verse, and that is clear; for it does not bind itself to the bonds of verse. And it is not prose, for it is bound by bonds peculiar to itself, not found elsewhere; some of the binds are related to the endings of its verses and some to that musical sound which is all its own. It is therefore neither verse nor prose, but it is “a Book whose verses have been perfected the expounded, from One Who is Wise, All-Aware.”

An in depth study here

A verse is a single metrical line. Any metrical line.

Although verses are usually associate with poetry, there are several different types of verses, but there are even more different types of poetry.

While it is true that all poetry are written in verses, DO NOT ASSUME that all verses are poetry.

Free verses, for example, doesn't require the metres to be fixed in length, nor rhyme at all. This is what I've used, in the few verses that I've created for my website Timeless Myths.

In a society without writing, the verses are the best method of remembering anything, whether it be wisdom writing or sayings, lyrics/songs, poetry, etc. It is used for singing, reciting, or to pass the craft/learning from master to apprentice (generation to generation).

The Qur'an was written in the form of Ayah, which are verses. Even though I can't read Arabic, when it is translated into English, like in Yusuf Ali, I see verses.

 

[loverOfTruth]

To Godobeyer and loverOfTruth, get back to me when you can address my posts in your own words, without quoting scriptures at me or directing me to read on line articles. I want to hear what you have to say about the subject in your own words, without your typical polemic about my personal beliefs, which by the way you have plenty of wrong assumptions about, or in other words which you openly distort instead of focuing on the debate at hand. Trust me I will only find it more constructive and even honourable.

Once again avoided answering relevant questions.

... Just a quick note, I don't believe that Islam or the Qur'an were 'copied', I believe the Qur'an brought plenty of new perspective to the Hejaz of the 7th century...

Ok, so according to you the Qur'an is neither copied from the Jews nor is it a verbatim word of God as believed by the Muslims. I am not sure what other alternatives are left here ...

 

[arthra]

Originally Posted by arthra
The primary motivation was not economic.. but spiritual .. It's called revelation on Mount Hira.. and what followed was the Qur'an over time.

Ymir wrote:

Theoretically, that should be obvious to a schoolchild, Arthra. The point is that the vast majority today do not believe in the so-called "revelations" of Muhammad, but more to the point, the people of Mecca did not buy into it either, during the time of these so-called "revelations". No doubt, the residents of Mecca only became concerned about Muhammad when he began to attract followers - which was very slowly - at first. It was only after the people of Mecca saw that some in their midst were beginning to take him seriously that they saw the proverbial writing on the wall.


My reply:

The vast majority of people did not believe in the teachings of Jesus in HIs time...The vast majority of people may not have accepted the revelations received by Prophet Muhammad when they were given.. be that as it may, Christianity and Islam as religions have had more sway in the world than most others regardless and that is important...

More to the point the majority of the people of Mecca eventually did recognize Prophet Muhammad and it occurred without bloodshed:

On the eve of the conquest, Abu Sufyan adopted Islam. When asked by Muhammad, he conceded that the Meccan gods had proved powerless and that there was indeed "no god but Allah", the first part of the Islamic confession of faith. In turn, Muhammad declared Abu Sufyan's house a sanctuary because he was the present chief, and that all the others were gathered over his territory, therefore:
"Even he Who enters the house of Abu Sufyan will be safe, He who lays down arms will be safe, He who locks his door will be safe".[5]He also declared:
Allah has made Mecca a sanctuary since the day He created the Heavens and the Earth, and it will remain a sanctuary by virtue of the sanctity Allah has bestowed on it until the Day of Resurrection. It (fighting in it) was not made lawful to anyone before me. Nor will it be made lawful to anyone after me, and it was not made lawful for me except for a short period of time. Its animals (that can be hunted) should not be chased, nor should its trees be cut, nor its vegetation or grass uprooted, nor its Luqata (most things) picked up except by one who makes a public announcement about it.'[6]

Conquest of Mecca - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Muhammad and his companions, now 10,000 strong, decided to march into Mecca. However, instead of continuing their fight, the city of Mecca surrendered to Muhammad and his followers who declared peace and amnesty for the inhabitants.

Mecca - The Islamic Encyclopedia, History, People, Places

 

[gnostic]

My reply:

The vast majority of people did not believe in the teachings of Jesus in HIs time...The vast majority of people may not have accepted the revelations received by Prophet Muhammad when they were given.. be that as it may, Christianity and Islam as religions have had more sway in the world than most others regardless and that is important...

More to the point the majority of the people of Mecca eventually did recognize Prophet Muhammad and it occurred without bloodshed:

On the eve of the conquest, Abu Sufyan adopted Islam. When asked by Muhammad, he conceded that the Meccan gods had proved powerless and that there was indeed "no god but Allah", the first part of the Islamic confession of faith. In turn, Muhammad declared Abu Sufyan's house a sanctuary because he was the present chief, and that all the others were gathered over his territory, therefore:
"Even he Who enters the house of Abu Sufyan will be safe, He who lays down arms will be safe, He who locks his door will be safe".[5]He also declared:
Allah has made Mecca a sanctuary since the day He created the Heavens and the Earth, and it will remain a sanctuary by virtue of the sanctity Allah has bestowed on it until the Day of Resurrection. It (fighting in it) was not made lawful to anyone before me. Nor will it be made lawful to anyone after me, and it was not made lawful for me except for a short period of time. Its animals (that can be hunted) should not be chased, nor should its trees be cut, nor its vegetation or grass uprooted, nor its Luqata (most things) picked up except by one who makes a public announcement about it.'[6]

Conquest of Mecca - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Muhammad and his companions, now 10,000 strong, decided to march into Mecca. However, instead of continuing their fight, the city of Mecca surrendered to Muhammad and his followers who declared peace and amnesty for the inhabitants.

Mecca - The Islamic Encyclopedia, History, People, Places

If I was living at Mecca at that time, I would have surrendered too, particularly after what the Muslims did to the Banu Qurayza in the siege of Medina. With an army of 10,000, you would surrender too.

But let face it, Muhammad won Mecca in 630 without bloodshed, not because of his status as a prophet, but from military number, and his success in Medina.

And it was completely without bloodshed. In 630 it was bloodless, but Muslims have raided Meccan caravans for years, as early as 624. It was ongoing conflicts between Muslims and Meccans.

But all this is pointless and irrelevant for this thread.