for me i don't had much trust in Wikipedia and Internet much as source , since i find out it's lie about history sources .
I give you list where Muslim reach more than 80% to 99% of population . all of these people enter to Islam without war .
-
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!
Is there a complete list of countries where Islam spread by the sword?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
How do you judge whether it is lying?
No, that's incorrect Godobeyer. (Firstly, Nigeria is barely over 50% Muslim) Iran was conquered by the Rashidun Caliphate during the period 633-654, during the reigns of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman. In 930, law was passed in the Abbasid Caliphate making it a requirement for every bureaucrat to be a Muslim. So you wanna become a bureaucrat, you gotta convert. This is a pressure.
Last edited:
When i compare it to our history , i found the different .
ok , let pass Nigeria , and parts of China and Russia, i make a mistake i load it .
Do you believe that Arabs forced the all Persians to accept Islam ?
how about the others , i forget Malisia?
What sources do you trust for your history, to compare against?
No, certainly not directly. I haven't said that, I have explained myself repeatedly. If you would re-read.
I have never said that all conversions to Islam are under pressure. I have no doubt there've been plenty of people who converted to Islam in Malaysia without pressure. But this isn't what I'm claiming - I'm attempting to demonstrate that Islam has in some cases been spread as a result of conquest and subsequent socio-economic pressures. In the Maldives, there wasn't really pressure like this, it was a pretty voluntary and peaceful conversion, and I absolutely acknowledge there are many cases of that.
In Wikipedia claim Kahina was Jewish , so Berber origin is Jews !!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kahina
that's what denied by Ibn Khaldon , (Historic Muslim)
ok
My point is there are many cases when people accept Islam without any war , or may pressure , I believe pressure lead to voilence and resistence , that's not what happened at all.
But he may have been wrong. Also, I don't think some Berber-speakers being Jews means they're claiming all Berbers were Jews.
I agree, there have been many such cases. I am saying it has been a mixture. It's been socioeconomic pressures, primarily, not the direct violent pressures which would lead to violent resistance.
this is it (TOP LEADER OF BERBER was JEWISH) , when some one here agree that Kahina was Jewish by use Wikiperdia source , that's make impression that all Berber were Jews .
do you get it ?
good
so it's defintly in most of land not by Islam don't spread by sword .
in case or two cases the pressure and abuse not lead to voilence or resistance , but in all countries and cities , that impossible for my opinion .
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
How do you arrive at the idea that because Wikipedia claims that Kahina was a Jew, that means all Berbers were Jews by origin? There's no rational link between these two propositions.
in most of leaderships or may ALL , the people choice someone as leader belong to their faith.
I remember when Obama deny (the accusation) of being a Muslim
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Except the man Kahina succeeded, named Kusailia, was a Christian so it most likely rules out the 'chosen by religion' option. Maybe she succeeded as warlord because she had the right temperament and strategic mind.
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
No. The previous Berber warlord who was named Kusailia was a Christian. Kahina, a Jew, succeeded him as warlord when Kusailia was killed. Kusailia was of a different tribe from Kahina so it is reasonable to assume his religious preference would not have affected hers as he was only warlord of a federation of tribes, not king of a unified nation or empire.
Flankerl
Well-Known Member
as you german do you accept that Germans leader from Muslims ?
Do you accept that Israel leader would be an Arab ?
for Kasailia some sources just make hypothes that he is Christian ,not 100% for sure
i find it in french
http://www.wikimazigh.com/wiki/Encyclopedie-Amazighe/Encyclo/Kusayla
for Kahina same thing .some claim some other deny
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Aye, true enough. It's difficult to say with certainty. In regards to Kasaila, it's a fairly reasonable assumption to make though; the Berbers were kind of Romanised at this period in history, Christianity had become the state religion of the late Roman and then the Byzantine Empires, and some believe Kasaila was a Berber translation of a Roman name. Muslim sources like Ibn Khaldun apparently said Kahina was Jewish.
Flankerl
Well-Known Member
1. I am not German
2. If the German Parliament elects a Muslim member of the Parliament as Chancellor then that's the decision of those who voted for him/her, additionally its the decision of the German electorate who voted during the Federal Elections for the party which ran with its Muslim member as candidate for Chancellor.
3. Same is true for the Israeli Parliament and its electorate.
PS: Quite a big hero of the IDF is an Arab.
My question was person (you accept or not) , i am not talking about politic system (Parliament) agreement
Augustus
…
If you are interested in an academic summary of several historical sources for Kusayla and Kahina, I've attached an extract from Robert Hoyland. The book is excellent introduction to the time period in question based on early sources rather than later myths.
[I've spoilered it as it is a bit long]
One achievement of the reign of Justinian II, according to the biographer of Pope John V (685–86), was that “the province of Africa was subjugated and restored to Roman rule.” No explanation is given in this or any other Christian source, but there is a possible allusion here to the success of a Berber chief called Kusayla. We only know of him from Muslim sources, which give a very confused picture of his career, complicated by his later image as a heroic defender of his native lands and people.
The earliest writer simply says that he was a Christian and that in 683 he fought and killed two of the Arab heroes of the conquest of Africa: ‘Uqba ibn Nafi‘ and Abu al-Muhajir. The next source chronologically adds a few important details: Kusayla’s army consisted of “Byzantines and Berbers,” it won a victory at Tahuda, ancient Thabudeos, in Numidia (eastern Algeria), and it then went on to capture Qayrawan.
Muslim sources tend to say that Kusayla was defeated very soon afterward, but the notice from Pope John V’s biographer implies that Kusayla achieved something more lasting. Moreover, it is unlikely that the Arab governor in Egypt would have had troops to spare during the civil war years.
A later historian makes the reasonable observation that Kusayla was in charge of Africa and resided in Qayrawan until ‘Abd al-Malik’s rule was consolidated, and then, in 689, he sent the general in charge of the frontier at Barqa to regain control of Africa. As this Arab general advanced on Qayrawan, Kusayla withdrew from the city, since it did not yet have defensive walls, and took up position at nearby Mammis, which allowed easy escape into the Dorsal Mountains. It was the site chosen by the Berber leader Cusina to confront the Byzantines in 534 and unfortunately for Kusayla he suffered the same fate as Cusina: defeat by his enemy after a long and hard-fought battle.
...
There was one remaining task for Hassan to accomplish in Africa, namely, to remove the last Berber challenger to the Arabs, a woman most often referred to simply as “the prophetess” (kahina). Kusayla is sometimes referred to as “son of the prophetess,” which may mean that this enigmatic Berber woman who takes up his mantle was actually his mother. It is extremely difficult, however, to get any sense of whom she represented and what she stood for, since the earliest sources are very brief and the later ones tend to be imbued with a sense of legend and mystery.
Our earliest Muslim source notes only that in 692 Hassan ibn Nu‘man raided and conquered the Aures and that in 694 “the prophetess was killed,” while a tenth-century Christian chronicler places under the year 697 the notice: “Hassan ibn Nu‘man engaged in battle the queen of the Berbers and she defeated him and all his men.” Possibly Hassan twice fought this queen of the Berbers—the first time he was defeated and the second time he was victorious and killed her; but given the confusion, all one can do is assign a loose date to her rebellion of the mid-690s. The Aures, the mountain range of eastern Algeria, is the place where a Berber leader named Iaudas had held sway in the 530s and 540s, and it is possible that an independent Berber polity had survived in this region from the early sixth to the late seventh century. Besides these meager scraps of information, there are lengthy tales of the prophetess’s gift of second sight, which allowed her to foresee her defeat at the hands of Hassan, and of her tragic aspect, riding heroically into battle, her long hair splayed out behind her, doomed to fight to the last all the while aware of her fate. Yet she is not just a symbol of the old, but also of the new, for she commends her two sons to the care of an Arab she had captured, who did as she predicted and ensured that these boys received a guarantee of protection from Hassan and posts in the new conquering armies. Not just her immediate family, therefore, but also her people survived and continued to prosper, enjoying a new future marching alongside the Arab conquerors.5
Having achieved both his objectives, Hassan returned to Qayrawan and set about the task of establishing a functioning government in this large and unwieldy province. He built a congregational mosque, set up a chancellery, and fixed the tax to be paid by “the Africans and the Berbers who were, like them, devotees of Christianity.” Muslim sources at this point make the casual but curious remark that “most of these Christian Berbers were baranis, with only a few from the butr.” Unfortunately it is never explained what is meant by this and the Romans/Byzantines before them never made such a distinction, but rather spoke simply of Moors, occasionally of barbarians...
We cannot be sure how this distinction relates to the people themselves, but it is likely to be connected with the fact that the butr Berbers hail from Cyrenaica and Tripolitania in the east (modern Libya), where the desert predominated, Romanization was weak, and paganism lingered on, whereas the baranis were principally in the west, which had greater agricultural wealth and was more thoroughly Romanized and Christianized. During the great Berber revolt of the 540s the Byzantines had striven to pacify and win over those in the western interior, but those in the east—especially the Luwata tribe, whose ferocity and barbarity was recalled with horror—had to be “banished beyond our borders.” In the time of the Arab conquests it was the east that saw peaceful acquiescence, especially from the Luwata, whereas in the west there were the major insurrections of Kusayla and “the prophetess” involving Byzantine and Berber troops. Plausibly, then, the less Romanized/Christianized easterners were more willing to collaborate with the Arabs than their western neighbors, and the Arabs may have noticed the hooded/shaven-headed distinction between some of the Berbers and applied it as a rough-and-ready way to distinguish between the many.
The earliest writer simply says that he was a Christian and that in 683 he fought and killed two of the Arab heroes of the conquest of Africa: ‘Uqba ibn Nafi‘ and Abu al-Muhajir. The next source chronologically adds a few important details: Kusayla’s army consisted of “Byzantines and Berbers,” it won a victory at Tahuda, ancient Thabudeos, in Numidia (eastern Algeria), and it then went on to capture Qayrawan.
Muslim sources tend to say that Kusayla was defeated very soon afterward, but the notice from Pope John V’s biographer implies that Kusayla achieved something more lasting. Moreover, it is unlikely that the Arab governor in Egypt would have had troops to spare during the civil war years.
A later historian makes the reasonable observation that Kusayla was in charge of Africa and resided in Qayrawan until ‘Abd al-Malik’s rule was consolidated, and then, in 689, he sent the general in charge of the frontier at Barqa to regain control of Africa. As this Arab general advanced on Qayrawan, Kusayla withdrew from the city, since it did not yet have defensive walls, and took up position at nearby Mammis, which allowed easy escape into the Dorsal Mountains. It was the site chosen by the Berber leader Cusina to confront the Byzantines in 534 and unfortunately for Kusayla he suffered the same fate as Cusina: defeat by his enemy after a long and hard-fought battle.
...
There was one remaining task for Hassan to accomplish in Africa, namely, to remove the last Berber challenger to the Arabs, a woman most often referred to simply as “the prophetess” (kahina). Kusayla is sometimes referred to as “son of the prophetess,” which may mean that this enigmatic Berber woman who takes up his mantle was actually his mother. It is extremely difficult, however, to get any sense of whom she represented and what she stood for, since the earliest sources are very brief and the later ones tend to be imbued with a sense of legend and mystery.
Our earliest Muslim source notes only that in 692 Hassan ibn Nu‘man raided and conquered the Aures and that in 694 “the prophetess was killed,” while a tenth-century Christian chronicler places under the year 697 the notice: “Hassan ibn Nu‘man engaged in battle the queen of the Berbers and she defeated him and all his men.” Possibly Hassan twice fought this queen of the Berbers—the first time he was defeated and the second time he was victorious and killed her; but given the confusion, all one can do is assign a loose date to her rebellion of the mid-690s. The Aures, the mountain range of eastern Algeria, is the place where a Berber leader named Iaudas had held sway in the 530s and 540s, and it is possible that an independent Berber polity had survived in this region from the early sixth to the late seventh century. Besides these meager scraps of information, there are lengthy tales of the prophetess’s gift of second sight, which allowed her to foresee her defeat at the hands of Hassan, and of her tragic aspect, riding heroically into battle, her long hair splayed out behind her, doomed to fight to the last all the while aware of her fate. Yet she is not just a symbol of the old, but also of the new, for she commends her two sons to the care of an Arab she had captured, who did as she predicted and ensured that these boys received a guarantee of protection from Hassan and posts in the new conquering armies. Not just her immediate family, therefore, but also her people survived and continued to prosper, enjoying a new future marching alongside the Arab conquerors.5
Having achieved both his objectives, Hassan returned to Qayrawan and set about the task of establishing a functioning government in this large and unwieldy province. He built a congregational mosque, set up a chancellery, and fixed the tax to be paid by “the Africans and the Berbers who were, like them, devotees of Christianity.” Muslim sources at this point make the casual but curious remark that “most of these Christian Berbers were baranis, with only a few from the butr.” Unfortunately it is never explained what is meant by this and the Romans/Byzantines before them never made such a distinction, but rather spoke simply of Moors, occasionally of barbarians...
We cannot be sure how this distinction relates to the people themselves, but it is likely to be connected with the fact that the butr Berbers hail from Cyrenaica and Tripolitania in the east (modern Libya), where the desert predominated, Romanization was weak, and paganism lingered on, whereas the baranis were principally in the west, which had greater agricultural wealth and was more thoroughly Romanized and Christianized. During the great Berber revolt of the 540s the Byzantines had striven to pacify and win over those in the western interior, but those in the east—especially the Luwata tribe, whose ferocity and barbarity was recalled with horror—had to be “banished beyond our borders.” In the time of the Arab conquests it was the east that saw peaceful acquiescence, especially from the Luwata, whereas in the west there were the major insurrections of Kusayla and “the prophetess” involving Byzantine and Berber troops. Plausibly, then, the less Romanized/Christianized easterners were more willing to collaborate with the Arabs than their western neighbors, and the Arabs may have noticed the hooded/shaven-headed distinction between some of the Berbers and applied it as a rough-and-ready way to distinguish between the many.