Was Islam spread by the sword?

[paarsurrey]

Was Islam spread by the sword?

No.

For example:

Spread of Islam in Tanzania: [1]

Islam is the religion of about 35% of the people of Tanzania according to CIA.[1] On the mainland, Muslim communities are concentrated in coastal areas, with some large Muslim majorities also in inland urban areas especially and along the former caravan routes. More than 99% of the population of the Zanzibar archipelago is Muslim.[2]

The majority ofMuslims in Tanzania are Sunni of Shafi school of jurisprudence, with unusually significant Shia and Ahmadi minorities in sub-Saharan Africa. According to Pew research center, two-thirds of the Muslim population of Tanzania is Sunni, while the rest is either Shia (20%) or Ahmadi (15%).[3]

History [1]

The earliest concrete evidence of a Muslim presence in the African Great Lakes is the foundation of a mosque in Shanga onPate Island, where gold, silver and copper coins dated from 830 were found during an excavation in the 1980s. Islam arrived to Tanzania with the Arab slave traders. The route from Ujiji at the shore of Lake Tanganyika to Bagamoyo, just opposite of Zanzibar on main land Tanzania was one of the main routes of Muslim slave routes according to UNESCO data.[4]


The history of Islam in the country can be traced to the establishment of the Kilwa Sultanate in the 10th century by Ali ibn al-Hassan Shirazi,[5] a Persian prince of Shiraz.[6] At the zenith of its power in the 1300s-1400s, the Kilwa Sultanate owned or claimed overlordship over the mainland cities of Malindi, Sofala, and the island-states of Mombasa, Pemba, Zanzibar, Mafia,Comoros and Inhambane -- essentially ruling what is now often referred to as the Swahili Coast.

The oldest intact building in the African Great Lakes region is the Kizimkazi Mosque in southern Zanzibar dated from 1107. It appears that Islam was widespread in the Indian Ocean area by the 14th century. In 1332, Ibn Battuta visited the Kilwa Sultanate. The coastal population was by then largely Muslim, and Arabic served as the language of literature and trade.
Islam was spread mainly through trade activities along the Swahili Coast rather than through conquest and territorial expansion.

Islam in Tanzania - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I don't see any sword in spread of Islam in Sudan.

Regards

 

[outhouse]

from your own link.

Islam spread to Sudan from the north, after the Islamic conquest of Egypt.

Address this or address honesty issues

 

[FearGod]

Unless, of course, the peaceful Sunni Muslims comes across an Ahmadiyya Muslim, then the fur begins to fly as the righteous Muslim begins to pummel the heretic.

Such deviation in the same belief itself is a proof of freedom of choice.

 

[outhouse]

Islam spread to Sudan from the north, after the Islamic conquest of Egypt.

Address this or address honesty issues

 

[YmirGF]

Such deviation in the same belief itself is a proof of freedom of choice.

Hahaha. I guess that's why particularly Sunni's love to persecute the Ahmadiyya's. It's their god given choice. Aluaha Akbar, eh?

 

[outhouse]

You have no credibility at all when history is the subject.

Muhammad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Muhammad sent a message to Mecca with three conditions, asking them to accept one of them. These were: either the Meccans would pay blood money for the slain among the Khuza'ah tribe, they disavow themselves of the Banu Bakr, or they should declare the truce of Hudaybiyyah null

pay blood money is peaceful?


In 630, Muhammad marched on Mecca with an enormous force, said to number more than 10,000 men.

peaceful??



Muhammad organized an attack against northern Arabia


peaceful??


"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".

You wont be safe if you don't follow my rules

Is that peaceful? it is a threat

 

[FearGod]

Hahaha. I guess that's why particularly Sunni's love to persecute the Ahmadiyya's. It's their god given choice. Aluaha Akbar, eh?

So if they are persecuted by Sunni's then they have to be converted already to Sunni's since the OP says that Islam was spread by force.

You are contradicting yourself here.

 

[Ryujin]

You have no credibility at all when history is the subject.

Muhammad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Muhammad sent a message to Mecca with three conditions, asking them to accept one of them. These were: either the Meccans would pay blood money for the slain among the Khuza'ah tribe, they disavow themselves of the Banu Bakr, or they should declare the truce of Hudaybiyyah null

pay blood money is peaceful?


In 630, Muhammad marched on Mecca with an enormous force, said to number more than 10,000 men.

peaceful??



Muhammad organized an attack against northern Arabia


peaceful??


"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".

You wont be safe if you don't follow my rules

Is that peaceful? it is a threat

Some would argue, though, that the culture and people of Hedjaz at the time were so violent, so ignorant, and so stubborn that only Harsh and uncompromising, non-peaceful methods would be effective in civilizing them and giving them a unified code. And things did improve for the Arabs under Mohammed's harsh governance. They were, for example, burying newborns girls in Hedjaz at birth before Mohammed came and imposed rules on them forcing them to stop that and other cruel practices. I'm just saying that an argument could be made that ,whatever cruelties he committed, he ended and stopped many more, far worse ones from being done. It may be in that context that people say Mohammed was peaceful.

But, I don't know for sure. These are just the thoughts that came to mind on the matter. What do you think, outhouse?

 

[paarsurrey]

Some would argue, though, that the culture and people of Hedjaz at the time were so violent, so ignorant, and so stubborn that only Harsh and uncompromising, non-peaceful methods would be effective in civilizing them and giving them a unified code. And things did improve for the Arabs under Mohammed's harsh governance. They were, for example, burying newborns girls in Hedjaz at birth before Mohammed came and imposed rules on them forcing them to stop that and other cruel practices. I'm just saying that an argument could be made that ,whatever cruelties he committed, he ended and stopped many more, far worse ones from being done. It may be in that context that people say Mohammed was peaceful.

But, I don't know for sure. These are just the thoughts that came to mind on the matter. What do you think, outhouse?

They were, for example, burying newborns girls in Hedjaz at birth before Mohammed came and imposed rules on them forcing them to stop that and other cruel practices.

That is correct on its own merit what I have colored in magenta.
Muhammad established rule of law.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

So if they are persecuted by Sunni's then they have to be converted already to Sunni's since the OP says that Islam was spread by force.

You are contradicting yourself here.

I quote from OP:

Some people say that Islam was spread by the sword. Others say that it was not.

Even if the Sunnis/Shias etc are persecuting Ahmadis; Ahmadis remain steadfast on their faith.
In fact Ahmadis have flourished in 206 countries of the world by remaining peaceful and not retaliating.

Regards

 

[outhouse]

Some would argue, though, that the culture and people of Hedjaz at the time were so violent, so ignorant, and so stubborn that only Harsh and uncompromising, non-peaceful methods would be effective in civilizing them and giving them a unified code.

that religion is anything but unified


YOUR MAKING EXCUSES

And things did improve for the Arabs under Mohammed's harsh governance. They were, for example, burying newborns girls in Hedjaz at birth before Mohammed came and imposed rules on them forcing them to stop that and other cruel practices. I'm just saying that an argument could be made that ,whatever cruelties he committed, he ended and stopped many more, far worse ones from being done. It may be in that context that people say Mohammed was peaceful.

Wrong context, you cannot be peaceful with a sword in one hand and blood in the other. he was a warrior first


And maybe your right, maybe it was better for the people. But hat does not make HIS spread of the religion not by sword, which is what we are debating.

But, I don't know for sure. These are just the thoughts that came to mind on the matter

I think you bring up great questions. I like to see intellect and the use of reason you bring

What do you think, outhouse?

I think he factually spread the religion with a sword.


I think SOME people here may be a minor child who is refusing all reason and knowledge and giving muslims a bad name.

Thank you for not being like him

 

[paarsurrey]

Was Islam spread by the sword?

No.

For example:

Spread of Islam in Tanzania: [2]

Islam is the religion of about 35% of the people of Tanzania according to CIA.[1] On the mainland, Muslim communities are concentrated in coastal areas, with some large Muslim majorities also in inland urban areas especially and along the former caravan routes. More than 99% of the population of the Zanzibar archipelago is Muslim.[2]

The majority ofMuslims in Tanzania are Sunni of Shafi school of jurisprudence, with unusually significant Shia and Ahmadi minorities in sub-Saharan Africa. According to Pew research center, two-thirds of the Muslim population of Tanzania is Sunni, while the rest is either Shia (20%) or Ahmadi (15%).[3]

History [2]

Islam was spread mainly through trade activities along the Swahili Coast rather than through conquest and territorial expansion. However, the faith remained an urban littoral phenomenon for a long time. When the violent Portuguese intrusions in the coastal areas occurred in the 16th century, Islam was already well established there.

Almost all the ruling families had ties of kinship with other Muslim potentates in the Arabian peninsula, Persia, the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia, owing to their maritime contacts and political connections with the northern and eastern parts of the Indian Ocean. At the end of the 17th century and beginning of the 18th century, the coastal Muslims managed to oust the Portuguese with the help ofOman. The Omanis gradually increased their political influence until the end of the 19th century when Europeans arrived at the Swahili Coast.

During the time when Oman dominated the coast politically, the spread of Islam intensified also in the interior of the African Great Lakes region. Trade contacts with peoples in the hinterland, especially the Nyamwezi, gained importance. Places like Tabora in Nyamwezi territory and Ujiji at Lake Tanganyika became important centers in the ever-increasing trade in slaves and ivory. Many chiefs, even in parts of Uganda, converted to Islam and cooperated with the coastal Muslims.

Trade served to spread not only Islam, but also the Bantu Swahili language and culture. Before the establishment of German East Africa in the 1880s the influence of the Swahiliswas mainly limited to the areas along the caravan routes and around their destinations.

There is also a large number of people who adhere to the Ahmadiyya Islam, who believe in the 19th century reformer, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, originating in India who claimed to be the Messiah.

Islam in Tanzania - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I don't see any sword in spread of Islam in Sudan.

Regards

 

[outhouse]

Was Islam spread by the sword?

I think SOME people here may be a minor child who is refusing all reason and knowledge and giving muslims a bad name.

 

[Ryujin]

I think he factually spread the religion with a sword.

Ah, yes, I lost sight of what the debate was about for a moment. My bad, lol. It can be pretty easy to do, though, when the threads go on this long.

 

[outhouse]

Ah, yes, I lost sight of what the debate was about for a moment. My bad, lol. It can be pretty easy to do, though, when the threads go on this long.

Its OK there was a popular thread here, "best replies have been off topic" or something close to that effect


A rational and reasonable discussion has been a little hard to find lately, your welcome here in my book

 

[paarsurrey]

Muhammad established rule of law.
Regards

 

[1robin]

Paar linked a source which shows there were forced conversions. He has refuted his own argument pages ago.

It would be such a great relief to find a Muslim that did not feel compelled to revise well known history. Especially the history recorded by Muhammad's own companions.

 

[1robin]

Muhammad forgave them when he entered Mecca.

Regards

No he did not. He was given soldier by Medina's warlords to settle tribal disputes among them. Instead he marched them back to Mecca and perpetuated bloody revenge against those that had insulted him. He raided their caravans, killed poets simply for writing unflatteringly about him, a time or two a companion of his would kill someone without having any instructions to do so, when Muhammad heard he said Allah rejoiced over it. This is what blood thirsty tyrants do with thin skin. Revenge is all too human and Christ never resorted to it.

Ask these guys where the forgiveness was: (1) Ikrimah Ibn Abi Jahl, (2) Habbar Ibn al-Aswad, (3) Abd Allah Ibn Sa'd Ibn Abi Sarh, (4) Miqyas Ibn Sababah al-Laythi, (5) al-Huwayrith Ibn Nuqaydh, (6) Abd Abbah Ibn Hilal Ibn Khatal al-Adrami, (7) Hind Bint Utbah, (8) Sarah, the mawlat (enfranchised girl) of Amr Ibn Hashim, (9) Fartana and (10) Qaribah.

These were killed for either leaving Islam or speaking negatively about the prophet. How many were killed by Christ for any reason?


You not need to march 10,000 of your bloodiest caravan raiders to a city to forgive it and embrace it. You do only to subdue it. Khalid's column did anything but forgive. Why did a huge portion of Mecca's citizens flee for their lives and live in the hills as hermits? There are no mass Exoduses away from forgiveness. There is no debate whether he took vengeance on Mecca, only to what extent he did.

 

[paarsurrey]

Originally Posted by paarsurrey
Muhammad forgave them when he entered Mecca.

No he did not. He was given soldier by Medina's warlords to settle tribal disputes among them. Instead he marched them back to Mecca and perpetuated bloody revenge against those that had insulted him. He raided their caravans, killed poets simply for writing unflatteringly about him, a time or two a companion of his would kill someone without having any instructions to do so, when Muhammad heard he said Allah rejoiced over it. This is what blood thirsty tyrants do with thin skin. Revenge is all too human and Christ never resorted to it.

Ask these guys where the forgiveness was: (1) Ikrimah Ibn Abi Jahl, (2) Habbar Ibn al-Aswad, (3) Abd Allah Ibn Sa'd Ibn Abi Sarh, (4) Miqyas Ibn Sababah al-Laythi, (5) al-Huwayrith Ibn Nuqaydh, (6) Abd Abbah Ibn Hilal Ibn Khatal al-Adrami, (7) Hind Bint Utbah, (8) Sarah, the mawlat (enfranchised girl) of Amr Ibn Hashim, (9) Fartana and (10) Qaribah.

These were killed for either leaving Islam or speaking negatively about the prophet. How many were killed by Christ for any reason?


You not need to march 10,000 of your bloodiest caravan raiders to a city to forgive it and embrace it. You do only to subdue it. Khalid's column did anything but forgive. Why did a huge portion of Mecca's citizens flee for their lives and live in the hills as hermits? There are no mass Exoduses away from forgiveness. There is no debate whether he took vengeance on Mecca, only to what extent he did.

I quote for the first name mentioned by you:

Ikrimah ibn Abi Jahl (d. 636 CE), was an important early Muslim leader and companion of Muhammad. As the son of Amr ibn Hisham, Ikrimah was at first, one of the chief Mecca opponents to Muhammad.

Ikrimah was the husband of Umm Hakim. In the battle of Uhud she accompanied Ikrimah and other Quraish of Mecca who fought against the Muslims.[1][2] In 630 CE when the Muslims conquered Mecca, Umm Hakim along with Quraish converted to Islam.[1][2][3] Subsequently Umm Hakim convinced Ikramah to accept Islam.[4]

Ikrimah after converting to Islam became an important civil and military leader in the early Islamic state. Abu Bakr sent Ikrimah against Musaylimah, in Yamamah.

He died in 636 CE in the Battle of Yarmouk.

Ikrimah ibn Abi-Jahl - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please get corrected.

Regards

 

[1robin]

I quote for the first name mentioned by you:

Ikrimah ibn Abi Jahl (d. 636 CE), was an important early Muslim leader and companion of Muhammad. As the son of Amr ibn Hisham, Ikrimah was at first, one of the chief Mecca opponents to Muhammad.

Ikrimah was the husband of Umm Hakim. In the battle of Uhud she accompanied Ikrimah and other Quraish of Mecca who fought against the Muslims.[1][2] In 630 CE when the Muslims conquered Mecca, Umm Hakim along with Quraish converted to Islam.[1][2][3] Subsequently Umm Hakim convinced Ikramah to accept Islam.[4]

Ikrimah after converting to Islam became an important civil and military leader in the early Islamic state. Abu Bakr sent Ikrimah against Musaylimah, in Yamamah.

He died in 636 CE in the Battle of Yarmouk.

Ikrimah ibn Abi-Jahl - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please get corrected.

Regards

I would have never said Islam has ever been good about killing anyone. They lose battles when they outnumber others 80-1. The point was those men were targeting by Muhammad for execution.

The quote is from the Tabaqat, Vol 2, page 168.



"The apostle of Allah entered through Adhakhir, [into Mecca], and prohibited fighting. He ordered six men and four women to be killed, they were (1) Ikrimah Ibn Abi Jahl, (2) Habbar Ibn al-Aswad, (3) Abd Allah Ibn Sa'd Ibn Abi Sarh, (4) Miqyas Ibn Sababah al-Laythi, (5) al-Huwayrith Ibn Nuqaydh, (6) Abd Abbah Ibn Hilal Ibn Khatal al-Adrami, (7) Hind Bint Utbah, (8) Sarah, the mawlat (enfranchised girl) of Amr Ibn Hashim, (9) Fartana and (10) Qaribah.

That was the kill order and is what matters. Whether Muhammad's hit men were any good is not. The point is Muhammad killed for personal vengeance here. However none of this has anything do so with the point. I was not talking about the single murder here and there he did or ordered. I was talking about his battles.