The history of Muslim (Islam) as rulers

[Cooky]

Well my statement includes Islam but also Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, etc.

Why? Why not just stick to the topic? Why can we never just discuss Islam by itself?

 

[Cooky]

Let's remember that Christians are not above resorting to force to promote Christianity.

Distractions, distractions... always distractions.

 

[Altfish]

Why? Why not just stick to the topic? Why can we never just discuss Islam by itself?

It was posted under "General Religious Debates", not under "Islam".

 

[Pastek]

And you find that ok?

Coming from north africa we just have abrahamic religions there but I think it's good that in other places like Singapour or Indonesia they all live together.

I did mention the Sikh place of worship in Dubai - in my post above #28

Ah ok, I missed it. Sikhs are monotheists right ? Maybe that's why, I think that's great.

 

[Cooky]

ecco said: ↑
Let's remember that Christians are not above resorting to force to promote Christianity.



But it really doesn't matter what Jesus did or did not say. What matters is what people did "In Jesus' Name"

You do know about the Crusades, don't you?
You do know about the Inquisitions, don't you?
You do know what American Christians did to Native American children, don't you?

It all started very early...

Forced conversion - Wikipedia

In the view of many historians, the Constantinian shift turned Christianity from a persecuted religion into one capable of persecution and sometimes eager to persecute.

It is Our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the administration of Our Clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans.... The rest, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative (Codex Theodosianus XVI 1.2.).[14]​

So ridiculous the efforts you go to to distract.

 

[Cooky]

It was posted under "General Religious Debates", not under "Islam".

That doesn't make any sense. What a desperate attempt to justify the distractions that you people always resort to.

 

[ManSinha]

Sikhs are monotheists right

Thank you - that is what we get classified as - but I think the word pan-en-theistic is more apt

"The Lord is in everything and everything is in the Lord"

 

[Altfish]

That doesn't make any sense. What a desperate attempt to justify the distractions that you people always resort to.

"You People" ???

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We have groups in the all the major religions ISLAM that want the country's laws to follow their scripture.

In the US, it's not Muslims trying to force everyone to follow their religion's laws!

 

[icehorse]

There you are.

Jordan has churches too and so do Lebanon, Egypt and Turkey. I expect there are others. Indonesia?

It's my understanding that the number of churches in Muslim majority countries around the world is steadily declining. If you have information that contradicts that I'd - sincerely - like to see it.

 

[icehorse]

With all due respect sir - it is not just the fringe Islamic elements - I have seen, in my all too brief time here, the same kind of posturing from others as well - I guess I have to be thankful that they live in what are considered civilized societies - and cannot use more than words to compel

The link below is from a very large poll (~40,000) of Muslims from around the world. It indicates that roughly half of the world's Muslims think Sharia - in other words theocracy - is the way things ought to be run:

The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

 

[ManSinha]

The link below is from a very large poll (~40,000) of Muslims from around the world. It indicates that roughly half of the world's Muslims think Sharia - in other words theocracy - is the way things ought to be run:

The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society

Hence the title of my thread - you would appear to be making my point for me

However a glance at the article you linked (thank you) also reveals this

Overwhelming percentages of Muslims in many countries want Islamic law (sharia) to be the official law of the land, according to a worldwide survey by the Pew Research Center. But many supporters of sharia say it should apply only to their country’s Muslim population.

 

[dybmh]

@ecco ,

May I ask a question?

In the document you cited it says:

Before his death two years later, he forcefully converted most of the Arabian Peninsula to his new faith and built a small empire.

How did Muhammad accomplish that himself in 2 years?

 

[Vinayaka]

It's my understanding that the number of churches in Muslim majority countries around the world is steadily declining. If you have information that contradicts that I'd - sincerely - like to see it.

Not just churches. Any non-Muslim faith. Hinduism might as well not exist any more in Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Afghanistan. Malaysia and Indonesia are well on their way too. Islamisation happens everywhere the Muslims are.

 

[ManSinha]

Those of you with Facebook accounts - there is physician in the UK who goes by Gudi - he likes to discuss theology and Deism and is many many times more learned than me. This gentleman mentioned to me that the plan is to get significant majorities of the population in India, Europe and the US to convert and then demand laws compatible with Shari'ah

Not sure to what extent this is true - but France is already seeing some of this with the pockets of immigrants from the African subcontinent - hence their policy of prohibiting ALL manner of headdress - which got the Sikhs in trouble as well

 

[Cooky]

In the US, it's not Muslims trying to force everyone to follow their religion's laws!

Yes, but I humbly recommend referring to the title of the thread, and the commentary located in post #1 (as well as the others by the OP) before getting our favorite points across.

This thread seems to be about something specific.

 

[ecco]

We have groups in the all the major religions ISLAM that want the country's laws to follow their scripture.



The question to me becomes "how do we prevent such "true believers" from trying to turn nations back into outmoded and obsolete systems?

Why just make comments against Islam. There are far more stupid laws in this Country based on Christianity...
No alcohol sales on The Lords Day
No Fornication
Anti-Gay

And, until recently, racial discrimination.

 

[ecco]

@ecco ,

May I ask a question?

In the document you cited it says:

How did Muhammad accomplish that himself in 2 years?

"himself"?

 

[dybmh]

the best Islam was while Muhammad PBUH was alive. He authored "The Constitution of Medina" and I think must have been a sweet man. Sadly, I think that Islam largely died with him.

A very sweet man who "forcefully converted " most of the Arabian Peninsula to his new faith"

@ecco,

In your reply to Ellen, you cited a document to support your statement that Muhammad was a man who "forcefully converted" most of the Arabian Peninsula to his new faith.

I think Ellen's point was that other people NOT Muhammad, himself, have been the cause of hostile behavior in the name of Islam. That's why she said, "Islam largely died with him".

Looking at the document you cited, it states that the conquest / conversion of the Arabian Peninsula occurred in 2 years.

It seems like, please correct me if I'm wrong, the document you are citing supports Ellen's point even though it was intended to discredit it.

How did Muhammad, the man himself, do the forceful conversion of the Arabian Peninsula in 2 years? Ellen said, "I think he must have been a sweet man". You said "A very sweet man who..."

Weren't you trying to show that Muhammad wasn't a sweet man? And the evidence for this was in the document you cited?

Am I misunderstanding your intended message and the support you were intending to bring?

Ellen's evidence, The Constitution of Medina, "A book of the Prophet Muhammad" strongly supports the idea that Muhammad would not have supported forcibly converting the Arabian Peninsula himself. The Constitution of Medina prohibits forced conversion.

hyperlink >>> Constitution of Medina - Wikipedia

What happened in the Arabian Peninsula approx. 630 AD? It's hard to prove that Muhammad's intention was forced conversion because of The Constitution of Medina.

In the document you provided there is only 1 sentence making a claim that, in my opinion, is very hard to attribute directly to Muhammad himself.

So the document you cited is weak evidence that Muhammad himself was NOT sweet. That was your assessment? And your reason for this assessment is that Muhammad forcibly converted the Arabian Peninsula?

If we are looking for clues to the sort of person Muhammad was, "sweet" or "not sweet", I think Ellen's evidence is stronger than yours.

That's why I asked the question about how Muhammad could have forcibly converted the Arabian Peninsula in 2 years, himself. It's because you used the forcible conversion of the Arabian Peninsula as a measure of Muhammad's character.

If Muhammad did not forcibly convert the Arabian peninsula himself, then the document you provided is not very strong indicator of Muhammad's character. Ellen's evidence of Muhammad's character is much stronger.

 

[Cooky]

Why just make comments against Islam. There are far mor..

You need to just let us do it. You're acting like a dictator, trying to navigate the discussion into what you want to discuss.