• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Was Islam spread by the sword?

Status
Not open for further replies.

gnostic

The Lost One
We are neither here to impress one another, nor to convert one, we could just help one another to find the Truth. Ant Truth starts with One person and then others join in to sing the song of Truth. Truth cannot be judged in terms of minority or majority. Will one kindly understand the point? Please
Regards
That's not true.

I can tell you the truth, but you will never accept that my opinion to being just as valid as yours.

I have been very open and frank, but you can't or you don't want to see that.

Since I have met you, I have not seen you once, admitting that you are in error or that your arguments/views are sometimes flawed or illogical.

You seemed to make assumptions about things you don't understand, and when people try to correct or educate you, you would often ignore them.

You say that are interested in other people's view, but the truth is that you are only interested with people who agree with you. Those who disagree with you, you either ignored or try to change subject on them.

That doesn't sound like a person who is interested in the truth.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Paarsurrey.

If a Muslim bring an army into another country, then it is "by the sword", regardless if there were any fighting or not. Even if the country (or kingdom) surrender without fighting, the mere presence of an army is to intimidate.

Mecca didn't surrender to Muhammad because he came alone to offer peace to them, Muhammad arrived with a large army. Without an army, I doubt very much that Muhammad would have receive their surrender.

Then Muhammad had his army marched through out the Arabian peninsula, and most of them surrender because he had army at his back. That's not the sign of peace, but a method of intimidation, because he had more armed men than the towns and cities that he came across before he died in 632.

Sorry, but history showed that he wasn't just a prophet, he was also a warlord, with men willing to fight any opposition.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Was Islam spread by the sword?
No.
For example:
Spread of Islam in Bosnia and Herzegovina: [4]
Increased religious identification[edit]
Religious leaders from the three major faiths claim that observance is increasing among younger persons as an expression of increased identification with their ethnic heritage, in large part due to the national religious revival that occurred as a result of the Bosnian war.[8]Many Muslim women have adopted Islamic dress styles that had not been common, especially in cities, before the war. Leaders from the three main religious communities observed that they enjoy greater support from their believers in rural areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina rather than urban centres such as the capital Sarajevo or Banja Luka.[8] In Bosnia and Herzegovina, there are eight Muftis located in major municipalities across the country: Sarajevo, Bihać, Travnik, Tuzla, Goražde, Zenica, Mostar, and Banja Luka. The acting head of the Islamic Community of Bosnia and Herzegovina is Husein Kavazović.[9]

In a 1998 public opinion poll, 78.3% of Bosniaks in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina declared themselves to be religious.[10]

Secularism[edit]

For a few number of Bosniaks that identify themselves as Bosnian Muslims, religion often serves as a community linkage, and religious practice is confined to occasional visits to the mosque or significant rites of passage such as birth, marriage, and death. Headscarves for women, or the hijab is worn only by a minority of Bosniak women, and otherwise mostly for religious obligations. Bosnians who participate in or are children of ethnically mixed marriages between the Bosniak, Serb and Croat populations in Bosnia and Herzegovina are often irreligious.

Status of religious freedom[edit]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2014)
The State Constitution provides freedom of religion,[11] and individuals generally enjoy this right in ethnically mixed areas or in areas where they were adherents of the majority religion.

Religious education in Bosnia and Herzegovina is largely decentralized, as is the education system generally. The canton and entity governments and the Brčko District authorities have responsibility for education; there is no national education ministry or policy. Public schools offer religious education classes, but with the exception of Brcko, schools generally offer religious instruction only in the area's majority religion. In theory, students have the option not to attend, but in practice, students of the majority religion face pressure from teachers and peers to attend the classes.[citation needed] For example, the RS requires Serbs to attend religion classes but does not require attendance for Bosniaks and Croats. If more than 20 Bosniaks or Croats attend a particular school in the RS, the school is required to organize religion classes on their behalf. However, in the rural RS, there is usually no qualified religious representative available to teach religious studies to the handful of Bosniak or Croat students. It is similar in the Federation, where students of the ethnic majority are required to attend religious classes,[citation needed]either Bosniak or Croat, while the minority is not required to attend. In the Federation's five cantons with Bosniak majorities, schools offer Islamic religious instruction as a 2-hour-per-week elective course.

Acts of anti-Semitism against the small Bosnian Jewish community in the country are practically non-existent. However, Jewish leaders state that there is a growing tendency in the country to mix anti-Israeli sentiment with rare acts of anti-Semitism. Following the 2003 Istanbul Bombings, the Jewish community was quickly granted police security at its synagogues and no incidents were reported.

The government's census bureau today does not collect data on religious affiliation and the percentages given are the estimates in the U.N. Development Program's Human Development Report 2002 as quoted by the Bosnia and Herzegovina report.[2]

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

One could see that in spite of the persecution Muslims are stead-fast in their religion and killings have made them more staunch Muslim than before:
"Many Muslim women have adopted Islamic dress styles that had not been common, especially in cities, before the war"

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Paarsurrey.
If a Muslim bring an army into another country, then it is "by the sword", regardless if there were any fighting or not. Even if the country (or kingdom) surrender without fighting, the mere presence of an army is to intimidate.
Mecca didn't surrender to Muhammad because he came alone to offer peace to them, Muhammad arrived with a large army. Without an army, I doubt very much that Muhammad would have receive their surrender.
Then Muhammad had his army marched through out the Arabian peninsula, and most of them surrender because he had army at his back. That's not the sign of peace, but a method of intimidation, because he had more armed men than the towns and cities that he came across before he died in 632.
Sorry, but history showed that he wasn't just a prophet, he was also a warlord, with men willing to fight any opposition.
Islam is a religion, not a political entity. Do religions have armies? No.
Religion is like an ideology. Do ideologies have armies? Does Atheism has an army? Does Agnosticism has an army? Does Skepticism has an army? Does humanism has an army?
No, for each of them. Right?
Regards
 
Last edited:

gnostic

The Lost One
Islam is a religion, not a political entity. Do religions have armies? No

Good grief! :facepalm: You are trying to move the goalpost again.

If you know know the biography of Muhammad's life, then you would know that between the time of Muhammad's arrival in Medina and that of his death, you would know that Muhammad was pretty much playing politics and wars.

Muhammad becoming mediator between feuding tribes...he's playing politics.

Drafting the constitution of Medina...he's playing politics.

Muhammad making wars upon Jewish tribes...he's playing politics.

Muhammad making wars upon Mecca...he's playing politics.

Muhammad having ordered destruction of all idols in Mecca...he's playing politics.

Muhammad telling his men to march here or there. Can you guess what I am going to say? Yep...he's playing politics.

Your ignorance utterly amazes me. :eek:
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Good grief! :facepalm: You are trying to move the goalpost again.
If you know know the biography of Muhammad's life, then you would know that between the time of Muhammad's arrival in Medina and that of his death, you would know that Muhammad was pretty much playing politics and wars.
Your ignorance utterly amazes me. :eek:
I revised the post. Do you have anything to add, now, in response? Please
Regards
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Muhammad did have a large army. So yes, religion can have an army.

Muhammad wasn't just a prophet. He was also a politician and warlord, in Medina, and later on in Mecca.
 

Sees

Dragonslayer
Islam is a religion, not a political entity. Do religions have armies? No.
Religion is like an ideology. Do ideologies have armies? Does Atheism has an army? Does Agnosticism has an army? Does Skepticism has an army? Does humanism has an army?
No, for each of them. Right?
Regards

Did any of those individuals band together as a community and systematically take over huge areas of land to form empires within the first two hundred years of their existence? Do they have founders and closest companions of the founders leading the group in such a way? How many ideologies fit that scenario in all of history?
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
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 , in Austria Post #2489, in Bangladesh Post #2513, in Belarus Post #2535, in Belgium Post #2556, in Belize #2571 .

Now I give peaceful spread of Ahmadiyya true Islam in
23px-Flag_of_Bulgaria.svg.png
Bulgaria
.

Bulgaria ( i/bʌlˈɡɛəriə/, /bʊlˈ-/; Bulgarian: България, tr. Bǎlgarija, IPA: [bɐɫˈɡarijɐ]), officially the Republic of Bulgaria (Bulgarian:Република България, tr. Republika Bǎlgarija), is a country in southeastern Europe. It is bordered by Romania to the north, Serbia andMacedonia to the west, Greece and Turkey to the south, and the Black Sea to the east. With a
territory of 110,994 square kilometres (42,855 sq mi), Bulgaria is Europe's 16th-largest country.
125px-Flag_of_Bulgaria.svg.png


Religion
Main article: Religion in Bulgaria
The Constitution of Bulgaria defines it as a secular state with guaranteed religious freedom, but designates Orthodoxy as a "traditional" religion.[288] The Bulgarian Orthodox Church gainedautocephalous status in 927 AD,[289][290] and currently has 12 dioceses and over 2,000 priests.[291] More than three-quarters of Bulgarians subscribe to Eastern Orthodoxy.[292] Sunni Muslimsare the second-largest community and constitute 10 per cent of the religious makeup, although a majority of them do not pray and find the use of Islamic veils in schools unacceptable.[293]Less than three per cent are affiliated with other religions, 11.8 per cent do not self-identify with a religion and 21.8 per cent refused to state their beliefs.[292]
220px-Sofia_university_library.jpg

The library of Sofia University.

Country/Region:
23px-Flag_of_Bulgaria.svg.png
Bulgaria
Ahmadiyya population : 400
Percentage (%) of Muslims : < 0.1
Percentage (%) of population : < 0.1
Notes/Sources :Estimate [11]*

*[11]BULGARIA: Ahmadis barred "because it is against the religions that people follow here" : http://www.refworld.org/docid/468919c80.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya_by_country
Does one see any sword used for spread of Ahmadiyya true Islam in
23px-Flag_of_Bulgaria.svg.png
Bulgaria ?


Regards
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Islam has been reformed under the Ahmadiyya and is one of the fastest spreading religious community in the world.
No one is denying that the Ahmadiyya is more peaceful sect, but the Ahmadis only comprise of less than 1 percent of Muslim world population, so you stating that Ahmad had reformed Islam is only meaningful to the Ahmadis, but it is utterly meaningless to the 87% to 90% of Sunni.

And you are trying to rewrite history, because the billion of Muslims are not Ahmadis, so the history of Ahmadiyya is not significant, considering its size and very short history.

And no one said that the Ahmadiyya were ever an empire. That you keep claiming it, is nothing more than you attacking straw man.

Islam didn't start with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835–1908), no matter how much you believe it or wish it so, paarsurrey...you are just lying to yourself.
 

The Emperor of Mankind

Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Islam is a religion, not a political entity.

Islam, as an ideology encompasses many if not all aspects of life. What is the Sharia if not Islamic doctrine interpreted in the political sphere?

Do religions have armies? No.

Christianity had the Crusaders and the Islamic world had the Mujahideen. So yes.

Religion is like an ideology. Do ideologies have armies?

Yes. Communism has had many armies, as has fascism. Capitalism today has armies of nations spreading across the world trying to to add gain control of natural resources for national & market advantage.


... isn't an ideology.

Agnosticism

... is not an ideology.

Skepticism

...is not an ideology.


...is an ideology but has never been spread through violence because

  1. It is relatively young
  2. It is not an inherently violent or intolerant system of thought.

Geez, you're just not very good at this.
 
Last edited:

gnostic

The Lost One
Does humanism has an army?
...is an ideology but has never been spread through violence because

  1. It is relatively young
  2. It is not an inherently violent or intolerant system of thought.
Is an ideology, but it never promoted itself, in their literature, to fight in a war for humanism's sake. Well, at least not as far as I can see.

What paarsurrey doesn't seem to understand is that Muhammad himself did get involve in wars and politics, and he did have army to do whatever he ordered, including fighting those who resist his rule.

To paarsurrey:

He even sent his army to eastern Arabia (629 - 632), to have pagan idols and temples destroyed. Is that not politics and not intimidation then what are they.

Take the city of Ta'if as an example. They resisted Muhammad and his new religion, and suffered a siege in 630, but it wasn't a successful siege, so he had army to retreat. But he still vowed to return, to take Ta'if.

Muhammad's army did, larger than before. This time Ta'if did surrender.

You like Wikipedia, then read the Siege of Ta'if. This is what the article say in the Aftermath:

Wikipedia said:
Aftermath

Although the siege was unsuccessful, Muhammad vowed to return to Ta'if after the sacred months in which fighting was forbidden were over. During this period, the inhabitants of Ta'if, the Banu Thaqif, sent a delegation to Mecca; they demanded that Muhammad let them continue to worship their goddess Al-lāt for a period of three years, Muhammad refused the proposal, he would only accept their surrender if they agreed to adopt Islam and let the Muslims destroy their temple, eventually the Banu Thaqif consented to Muhammad's requests, so they then surrendered and allowed the Muslims into their city to destroy the temple.

This clearly showed Muhammad don't believe in religious freedom and religious tolerance.

Muhammad used his army to force Ta'if to submit to him, allowed him not only to destroy the temple, but take their autonomy away from them. Muslims moved into Ta'if, any privileges they had were stripped away...unless they converted to Islam.

The Ta'if never attacked Muslims, but the Muslims did attack them. It was never a defensive war, so any Muslim claiming that it was "in self defense" is lying to himself.

Please don't try to change the subject to Ahmadiyya, because they exist in Muhammad's time. This post is about how Muhammad spread Islam, while he was still alive, so I am not talking about your bloody Ahmadiyya, paarsurrey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top