Was Islam spread by the sword?

[paarsurrey]

Except you are not claiming "in the form of Admadiyya" now are you?
No, you claim and I quote: "I don't see any sword in spread of Islam in {insert place here}"

Please don't forget, Ahmadiyya follow the teaching of the same Quran that Muhammad followed. If Ahmadiyya Islam have spread in about 206 countries peacefully in about 150 years; why it is difficult for one to understand that Islam spread peacefully in Muhammad's time?
Your stance is not reasonable.
Regards

 

[Augustus]

But wasn't Muhammad involved in a lot of violence and bloodshed in Islam origins ?

Even with no blood Medina was taken over. The battle of Badr, and Uhud

Pretty much all culture has been spread through violence and conquest to some extent. To highlight Islam as deserving special treatment is unfair and misleading. No one talks about Buddhism being spread by the sword for example, but there were Buddhist Empires enforced through violence facilitating the spread of Buddhism.

The initial Arab conquerers, from the few non-Muslim historical records we have, made no attempt to spread a new religion, didn't appear to call themselves Muslims and were partly comprised of Christian and Jewish soldiers. There was none of this 'convert or die' type attitude, the conquests seem pretty much to have been simply conquests for the sake of power rather than religiously motivated. There are even later examples of leaders trying to prevent people from converting as it exempted them from the Jizya and lowered their tax base.

Just as Christianity developed after Jesus had died, there is at least a reasonable possibility that the same can be said about Islam. It is at least reasonably plausible that Islam emerged from the empire rather than an empire emerging from Islam.

The Arabs conquered people through violence, took slaves, demanded tribute just as the Romans and Persians and everyone else did. They didn't appear to start spreading a clearly defined new religion until nearly a century after the Empire was founded, and this spread over hundreds of years through social and economic pressures rather than violent ones.

If you say Islam was spread by the sword, you really also have to apply that label to almost all other aspects of culture, language, tradition, ideology, etc.

 

[Shad]

Pretty much all culture has been spread through violence and conquest to some extent. To highlight Islam as deserving special treatment is unfair and misleading. No one talks about Buddhism being spread by the sword for example, but there were Buddhist Empires enforced through violence facilitating the spread of Buddhism.

The initial Arab conquerers, from the few non-Muslim historical records we have, made no attempt to spread a new religion, didn't appear to call themselves Muslims and were partly comprised of Christian and Jewish soldiers. There was none of this 'convert or die' type attitude, the conquests seem pretty much to have been simply conquests for the sake of power rather than religiously motivated. There are even later examples of leaders trying to prevent people from converting as it exempted them from the Jizya and lowered their tax base.

Just as Christianity developed after Jesus had died, there is at least a reasonable possibility that the same can be said about Islam. It is at least reasonably plausible that Islam emerged from the empire rather than an empire emerging from Islam.

The Arabs conquered people through violence, took slaves, demanded tribute just as the Romans and Persians and everyone else did. They didn't appear to start spreading a clearly defined new religion until nearly a century after the Empire was founded, and this spread over hundreds of years through social and economic pressures rather than violent ones.

If you say Islam was spread by the sword, you really also have to apply that label to almost all other aspects of culture, language, tradition, ideology, etc.

A problem is religion is often mixed with politics. Under the Caliph system if one wishes to maintain is religious and not purely a political position then one must accept events like the invasion of India and forced conversions were authorized by the religious authority at the time. This separates similar events such as above from purely social based conversions which involved no political factors for the Muslim side of these social interactions. IE Muslims were not dominate politically. For example Islam spreading to America was never backed invasion nor political domination.

 

[McBell]

Please don't forget, Ahmadiyya follow the teaching of the same Quran that Muhammad followed. If Ahmadiyya Islam have spread in about 206 countries peacefully in about 150 years; why it is difficult for one to understand that Islam spread peacefully in Muhammad's time?
Your stance is not reasonable.
Regards

No, your stance is not reasonable because you have to ignore the instances of violence in order to maintain your lie.

 

[Sees]

Pretty much all culture has been spread through violence and conquestIslamifocatt. To highlight Islam as deserving special treatment is unfair and misleading. No one talks about Buddhism being spread by the sword for example, but there were Buddhist Empires enforced through violence facilitating the spread of Buddhism.

The initial Arab conquerers, from the few non-Muslim historical records we have, made no attempt to spread a new religion, didn't appear to call themselves Muslims and were partly comprised of Christian and Jewish soldiers. There was none of this 'convert or die' type attitude, the conquests seem pretty much to have been simply conquests for the sake of power rather than religiously motivated. There are even later examples of leaders trying to prevent people from converting as it exempted them from the Jizya and lowered their tax base.

Just as Christianity developed after Jesus had died, there is at least a reasonable possibility that the same can be said about Islam. It is at least reasonably plausible that Islam emerged from the empire rather than an empire emerging from Islam.

The Arabs conquered people through violence, took slaves, demanded tribute just as the Romans and Persians and everyone else did. They didn't appear to start spreading a clearly defined new religion until nearly a century after the Empire was founded, and this spread over hundreds of years through social and economic pressures rather than violent ones.

If you say Islam was spread by the sword, you really also have to apply that label to almost all other aspects of culture, language, tradition, ideology, etc.

How did the whole Arabs = Muslims thing kick off to begin with? It's the place to start from.

Does any source portray the Arabian peninsula takeover/unification during Muhammad's lifetime as peaceful? History's pagan Arabs and their culture tend to be demonized and then forgotten.

 

[paarsurrey]

Was Islam spread by the sword?
No.
For example:
Spread of Islam in Belize:

The statistics for Islam in Belize estimate a total Muslim population of 2,794, representing 1 percent of the total population. The Muslim community is led by the Islamic Mission of Belize (IMB) headquartered in Belize City. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community was established in Belize in 2013.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Belize

Belize
Country in Central America
Belize is a nation on the eastern coast of Central America, with Caribbean Sea shorelines to the east and dense jungle to the west. It's known for its beaches, eco-lodges, scuba diving and sportfishing. Offshore, the massive Belize Barrier Reef, dotted with hundreds of cayes, hosts rich marine life. Belize’s jungle areas are rich with Mayan ruins.
https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=location of belize
Ahmadiyya Muslims plan to extend Humanity First to Belize

Naveed Mangla, a missionary of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, told Amandala that his group, established in Belize 6 months ago, plans to set up an arm of Humanity First in Belize.
The organization says that it is a humanitarian relief organization, registered in 41 countries across 6 continents. It said that it has been working on human development projects and responding to disasters since 1995.
Mangla moved to Belize from Canada last year. Also with him when he visited our newspaper on Tuesday were his colleagues, Mubashar Ahmed, also of Canada, and Abdul Nunez, a Belizean who joined the group when they came here last year.
The Ahmadiyya group said that they are different from the Muslims already established in Belize because they are the only ones who believe the promised reformer has come. That promised reformer, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of India, fulfills the second coming of Muhammed, said Mangla.
However, he told us that, “When we serve people, we don’t connect the Ahmadiyya with Humanity First.”
He said that Humanity First is working for the sake of the Almighty, just to help people.
“Humanity First also provides humanitarian aid to those affected by natural disasters and undertakes emergency relief operations around the world providing medical assistance, shelter, water, food, clothing and sanitation to affected populations,” the organization says.
“Our plan is to remind people that whichever religion you belong to, if you take a U-turn and go back to your founder, you will find peace,” Mangla said. “None preached hatred, killing or any of these crimes going on in the world.”
As for their plans for work in Belize, Mangla said, “We don’t want to make big promises and not live up to them. We have only been here for 6-7 months and we are trying our best to first register…”
The group of men had just returned from a trip to Guatemala, where they said the community is established and working with locals to teach English, Spanish and computer science.
Mangla could be assigned to missionary duties only after attending seminary for 7 years at the University of Theology in Canada. Similar institutions exist in England, Africa, India and Pakistan.
Mangla said that they study not only Islam but all other religions, so that they can relate to other people.
Ahmed, his comrade, told us that they have had a great experience interacting with Belizeans. He said that they have found Belizeans to be very attentive, as people would listen and talk to them – which they don’t see in other countries, because people simply don’t have time. Last year, 9 people joined the community and they quickly registered with the help of a local attorney.
The men said that members of their community spend a lot of time doing volunteer activities, and their mantra is “love for all; hate for none.”
They are involved in running soup kitchens, cleaning parks and roads, and visiting the elderly, the men said.
They told us that their group numbers tens of millions, with large populations in Pakistan, Indonesia and India.
Ahmed said that they don’t just stay in the mosque and pray but they help people.
“We are here in Belize to stay, to help our Belizean brothers and sisters…” Ahmed said.
“Everything in life has a purpose and we are here for a purpose,” Mangla commented.
Nuñez, a well-known Muslim in Belize, said that he has heard negative things about the Ahmadiyya from some other Muslims in Belize; but, he said, “…don’t beat the horse until you ride it. Find out before you flag it…”
http://amandala.com.bz/news/ahmadiyya-muslims-plan-extend-humanity-belize/

Country/Region[1] : Belize
Muslim population 2010 Pew Report[1] : < 1,000
Muslim percentage (%) of total population 2010 Pew Report[1] : 0.1
Percentage (%) of World Muslim population 2010 Pew Report[1] : < 0.1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

I don't see any sword in spread of Islam in Belize :

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Regards

 

[Augustus]

How did the whole Arabs = Muslims thing kick off to begin with? It's the place to start from.

Does any source portray the Arabian peninsula takeover/unification during Muhammad's lifetime as peaceful? History's pagan Arabs and their culture tend to be demonized and then forgotten.

This question is one of the big talking points. If you believe Islamic history, then Islam emerged fully formed from the time of Muhammed and the Arab conquerers were all true believers acting in God's name. The limited evidence we have from near contemporary sources (all non-Muslim because there are no Muslim ones) don't seem to support this.

For example, a 7th Century Christian Monk, John of Fenek complained that, after his region was conquered, “there was no distinction between pagan and Christian, the believer was not known from a Jew.”

Then you get strangely ambiguous evidence such as the inscription shown on this link http://www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/hammat.html

It is an early example using the Islamic dating system AH, but the inscription starts with a Christian cross (unconvincingly explained on the site as "This was written by a Christian who had the sign of cross engraved in the beginning of the inscription" which seems an unlikely act of defiance form a lowly tradesman writing an Islamic religious dedication)

The Arab unification was likely a process that started long before Muhammed as a result of their interaction with the Roman and Persian empires, and the favoured Arab leaders receiving favour a patronage allowing them to consolidate their power.

The same thing happened in regard to the Goths and the Western Roman Empire, disparate tribes gradually consolidated until only 2 major groups were left and then they turned on their master's who had grown over-reliant on their manpower to defend the frontiers of the Empire.

Muslim history is more theology than historiography but we have almost nothing else to go on regarding the life of Muhammed. We know he existed, fought some battles and had a religious message but little else. Much of the Quran seems to be addressed towards Christians rather than pagans, and displays a degree of theological sophistication regarding the religious issues of the time. As such, it clearly doesn't reflect an environment of rampant paganism, although a smaller number of passages do seem to reflect some degree of paganism.

Muhammed did have a distinct religious message, and obviously was a significant figure, but when the Arabs became overwhelmingly Muslims is highly debatable. They seem to have preferred the term muhajirun at first, as far as we can tell.

Muhammed's leadership came at the end of a long process though, rather than being this single catalyst for all that followed.

 

[Shad]

The anti-Chaldean movements during the eras before the conquest period of Islam provides some of the background regarding Augustus posts for those interested in the sources. Also look up the east schism following the council of Chaldean.

 

[paarsurrey]

Please focus on the following points.

1. Islam has been reformed under the Ahmadiyya and is one of the fastest spreading religious community in the world.
2. Ahmadiyya or true Islam has peacefully spread in about 206 countries/territories of the world. In about 150 years Ahmadiyya are already more than the Zoroastrians and perhaps the Judaism people, no disrespect intended to anybody.
3. if one is truthful one would increase despite the opposition, persecution and killings done by the opponents.
4. Ahmadiyya Muslims follow teachings of Quran as did Muhammad follow. In fact Ahmadiyya follow in Muhammad’s footsteps.
5. Those who doubt that Islam spread peacefully in times of Muhammad they should focus on spread of Ahmadiyya true Islam, If it has happened now peacefully, it should be a clear sign for the doubtful that Islam spread peacefully in times of Muhammad.

I gave how Ahmadiyya spread peacefully in Argentina in post #2430, in Australia Post #2460 .
Now I give peaceful spread of Ahmadiyya true Islam in Austria.

• Country:
  
  Austria
• Ahmadiyya population : 300 [[6]*:The actual figure as stated in the 1996 census is 1,976.]

• Percentage (%) of Muslims : 0.1 %

• Percentage (%) of population :< < 0.1 %

• Notes/Sources : Estimate[6]*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya_by_country

Does one see any sword used for spread of Ahmadiyya true Islam in Austria?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I am happy that the friends have accepted that Islam/Quran/Muhammad never wanted sword for spread of Islam. Islam spread naturally for its inner strength of rich and convincing arguments in every society from tribal to monarchy to democracy, whatever be the form of government.
It is the Meccans who wanted to suppress Islam with sword so did some other societies in Muhammad's time.
Islam spread continuously in all times.
Regards

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Please don't forget, Ahmadiyya follow the teaching of the same Quran that Muhammad followed. If Ahmadiyya Islam have spread in about 206 countries peacefully in about 150 years; why it is difficult for one to understand that Islam spread peacefully in Muhammad's time?
Your stance is not reasonable.
Regards

Because history doesn't bear this out - not that it matters as you have shown wilful ignorance on the subject.

 

[Augustus]

I am happy that the friends have accepted that Islam/Quran/Muhammad never wanted sword for spread of Islam. Islam spread naturally for its inner strength of rich and convincing arguments in every society from tribal to monarchy to democracy, whatever be the form of government.
It is the Meccans who wanted to suppress Islam with sword so did some other societies in Muhammad's time.
Islam spread continuously in all times.
Regards

The problem is there are 2 things that overlap - the spread of Islam and the Arab conquests. Succinctly described thus:

Patricia Crone: "No scholar believes that the Muslim conquerors were out to impose their religion by force; even going back a century or more I cannot think of any who has espoused this view. Yet [almost] all scholars... accept that the Muslims engaged in “violent conquest.” Laymen may still need to be reminded that the Muslims were not out to impose their beliefs by force."

 

[Flankerl]

The answer to these two posts will be about some random country and Islam in said country.

For that is the way this thread works.

 

[paarsurrey]

The problem is there are 2 things that overlap - the spread of Islam and the Arab conquests. Succinctly described thus:

Patricia Crone: "No scholar believes that the Muslim conquerors were out to impose their religion by force; even going back a century or more I cannot think of any who has espoused this view. Yet [almost] all scholars... accept that the Muslims engaged in “violent conquest.” Laymen may still need to be reminded that the Muslims were not out to impose their beliefs by force."

I like your post.

AMONG THE BELIEVERS
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/42023/among-the-believers
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

The answer to these two posts will be about some random country and Islam in said country.
For that is the way this thread works.

You may express your thoughts freely, even if you differ strongly. You know every body in this forum, I consider them my friends and I value their opinion.
It is a wrong notion that any religion, be it Judaism even, could be spread with sword.
It does not work.
Regards

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

The problem is that there Flana of people when any suspicion about Islam begins to distort and justify it comes out of her justifications do not

Islam spread by the sword .. Yes spread by the sword, but when believers are fighting starts or is there a correspondence with opponents before that? !!This talk of a single Islamic Forums
Do you want more

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

The problem is there are 2 things that overlap - the spread of Islam and the Arab conquests. Succinctly described thus:

Patricia Crone: "No scholar believes that the Muslim conquerors were out to impose their religion by force; even going back a century or more I cannot think of any who has espoused this view. Yet [almost] all scholars... accept that the Muslims engaged in “violent conquest.” Laymen may still need to be reminded that the Muslims were not out to impose their beliefs by force.

We must say Muslims invadersThat's not right words
Many of evidence
To impose tribute, one of the means of coercion to accept IslamThe beginning of the spread of Islam by the sword
But then they used other means, a carrot and stick

 

[Kirran]

Surely it's been a great mixture. There are certainly cases where it's spread by migration and peaceful conversion, and cases where conversion has been primarily due to post-conquest social pressures and discrimination, and outright coercion in some cases. True of any religion, especially those which proselytise a lot.

 

[paarsurrey]

Surely it's been a great mixture. There are certainly cases where it's spread by migration and peaceful conversion, and cases where conversion has been primarily due to post-conquest social pressures and discrimination, and outright coercion in some cases. True of any religion, especially those which proselytise a lot.

But you won't find any such coercion in spread of reformed Islam called Ahmadiyya. Ahmadiyya are coerced to leave but they remain steadfast.
This is a clear sign that this happened also in the time of Muhammad, Islam did not spread with sword but spread peacefully.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

We must say Muslims invadersThat's not right words
Many of evidence
To impose tribute, one of the means of coercion to accept IslamThe beginning of the spread of Islam by the sword
But then they used other means, a carrot and stick

What carrot and stick?
Regards