Was Islam spread by the sword?

[outhouse]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is not a new Messenger,

Boloney

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born on 13 February 1835

That is FACTUALLY a new self proclaimed messenger.

 

[paarsurrey]

Further to Posts #2717, #2720 ,and #2722 in response to OP's Post #1 I have to add:
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 post #2430, Australia Post #2460 , Austria Post #2489, Bangladesh Post #2513, Belarus Post #2535, Belgium Post#2556, Belize #2571, Bulgaria Post #2595, Cameroon Post #2619, Canada Post #2636,Chad Post #2651,Congo #2672, Denmark #2703, Egypt #2824, Fiji #2883 .
Now I give peaceful spread of Ahmadiyya true Islam in

France.

Courtesy Google
Association Musulmane Ahmadiyya France
Address: 52-54 Rue Louis et Gérald Donzelle, 95390 Saint-Prix, France
Phone:+33 1 34 16 00 42

Published on Dec 13, 2015
Consul General of France at Ahmadiyya Muslim Mosque in Houston acknowledging the support of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community after the Paris terrorist attacks.

Mubarak Mosque
Built: 2008
Capacity: 400
Location: Saint-Prix, Paris, France
First mosque in France by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.
http://www.ahmadiyyamosques.info/2011/12/mubarak-mosque-saint-prix-france.html

"While France has the responsibility to fully integrate the Muslim population, French Muslims should step forward and offer full support to their nation in the fight against terrorism. If a Muslim man or woman is showing signs of extremism, the elders of the community such as the imam or even parents, have the responsibility to alert proper authorities. After Charlie Hebdo, the head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Mirza Masroor Ahmad, said that mosques in Europe should be monitored for extremist sermons. As Ahmadi Muslims, we believe that people who speak about harming their country and its people are not true citizens. Therefore, the government should be allowed to monitor for signs of extremism in mosques."
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-french-muslims-20151116-story.html

Country/Region:

France.
Ahmadiyya population : 1,000
Percentage (%) of Muslims :< 0.1
Percentage (%) of population :< 0.1

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

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

Fiji ?

Regards

 

[outhouse]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born on 13 February 1835

That is FACTUALLY a new self proclaimed messenger.

 

[outhouse]

. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-french-muslims-20151116-story.html

The Quran says killing one innocent person is like killing the entire mankind (5:32). Islam is very clear and precise about its message


And yet muslims murder people by the millions. For the most part other muslims

 

[paarsurrey]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born on 13 February 1835
That is FACTUALLY a new self proclaimed messenger.

It is wrong, God appointed Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, so he claimed.

“The flow of revelations and visions continued, gathering momentum, until in 1882 he received the revelation which made manifest God's design that he, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as), was to be the appointed one, the one commissioned by God to serve His cause. Part of the revelation received in 1882 was as follows:
O Ahmad, God has blessed thee......
Say, I am commanded to guide the world to the path of
righteousness and I am the first to believe......
Help shall come to thee from men whose hearts Allah has himself
prepared through revelation.2”
Tadhkira, 1969, (p.43/50). Ed
https://www.alislam.org/library/links/00000185.html
Regards

 

[outhouse]

, so he claimed.

I claim different. I have more credibility then he did.

God appointed

me not him

 

[McBell]

It is wrong, God appointed Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, so he claimed.

Pst...
The "he claimed" means "self proclaimed"...
So you basically just agreed with outhouse whilst thinking your countered him....

 

[gnostic]

It is wrong, God appointed Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, so he claimed.

So Mirza claimed. Doesn't mean what Mirza claimed to be true.

Muhammad's claim of meeting Gabriel and becoming a prophet is just as preposterous.

 

[outhouse]

Muhammad's claim of meeting Gabriel and becoming a prophet is just as preposterous.

Ive been working on this.

Funny a Christian heretical priest writing in Arabic, took in mohammad in at 5 years of age and raised him.

Waraka is also the first person who claims Muhammad is messenger prophet


Waraka was also muhammads cousin


Pieces of koran have been possibly dated to exactly Warakas time before Muhammad was born


GAME OVER.

Muhammad was raised by a heretical Christian writing bible in Arabic. he was raised in heretical biblical traditions! and he passed on Warakas heretical biblical text with bloodshed to the public

 

[Milton Platt]

Hi everyone. Some people say that Islam was spread by the sword. Others say that it was not. The Koran says that there is to be no compulsion in religion so it would seem that Islam's sacred text would condone religious freedom. But was this really the case historically? Here is the reference from the Koran which I am referring to.

There are other texts that can be interpreted to mean the opposite.....anyway, all religions (the big ones, anyway) have been spread by the sword at one time or the other. Conquering armies always take their religion with them, even if that wasn't the primary excuse for the aggression.

 

[Milton Platt]

All religions was by choice except Islam was by force,here is the evidence

[youtube]sazJFMVNX70[/youtube]

You might want to consult some actual history books rather than rely on a youtube video. Christianity was most certainly spread by the sword on more than one instance, as well as other religions.

 

[ZooGirl02]

There are other texts that can be interpreted to mean the opposite.....anyway, all religions (the big ones, anyway) have been spread by the sword at one time or the other. Conquering armies always take their religion with them, even if that wasn't the primary excuse for the aggression.

That is true. If it were not true, Radical Islam would not exist. I think I have heard it said by Muslims before that some of the Hadith are not considered to be very reliable while others are. I just wonder if the ones used by Radical Muslims for their theology are the ones that are not considered to be very reliable.

 

[Milton Platt]

That is true. If it were not true, Radical Islam would not exist. I think I have heard it said by Muslims before that some of the Hadith are not considered to be very reliable while others are. I just wonder if the ones used by Radical Muslims for their theology are the ones that are not considered to be very reliable.

Frankly, I think unreliable is the only category for religious texts....but that's just me...

 

[ZooGirl02]

Frankly, I think unreliable is the only category for religious texts....but that's just me...

I can understand where you are coming from since you are an Atheist. I am not saying that I agree with your assessment of all religious texts because I don't. However, when I was speaking about the reliability of certain Hadiths, I should have specifically said that I wonder if the ones used by Radical Muslims for their theology are considered to be reliable by mainstream Muslims, in other words, the kind of Muslims who do are not radicalized.

 

[Milton Platt]

I can understand where you are coming from since you are an Atheist. I am not saying that I agree with your assessment of all religious texts because I don't. However, when I was speaking about the reliability of certain Hadiths, I should have specifically said that I wonder if the ones used by Radical Muslims for their theology are considered to be reliable by mainstream Muslims, in other words, the kind of Muslims who do are not radicalized.

Right.....I have never bothered to study the Quran or the Hadiths. Just not interested. Did study the Bible quite a bit. I have forgotten more that most Christians ever knew. It always bothers me that most atheists seem to know more about the Bible than most Christians. I'm not trying to arbitrarily put you in that camp....just a generalization that seems to hold true.

 

[outhouse]

Christianity was most certainly spread by the sword on more than one instance,

But that has nothing to do with the OP or the origins of the religion.

The Christian movement started from normal people and the Hellenistic divorce of Judaism. They were the oppressed not the oppressors so to speak.

No bloodshed was spilled less one man, Jesus.


Islam took wars to spread its first teachings

 

[Milton Platt]

But that has nothing to do with the OP or the origins of the religion.

The Christian movement started from normal people and the Hellenistic divorce of Judaism. They were the oppressed not the oppressors so to speak.

No bloodshed was spilled less one man, Jesus.

Much blood was shed after Jesus...inquisitions, Crusades, invasion of the Americas and torture and enslavement of the indiginous populations in the name of their god....tearing down their temples and using the stones to build temples to the Christian god, Catholics versus Protestants, burning of witches.....


Islam took wars to spread its first teachings

 

[ZooGirl02]

Right.....I have never bothered to study the Quran or the Hadiths. Just not interested. Did study the Bible quite a bit. I have forgotten more that most Christians ever knew. It always bothers me that most atheists seem to know more about the Bible than most Christians. I'm not trying to arbitrarily put you in that camp....just a generalization that seems to hold true.

I will have to honestly say that I question whether or not more Atheists know more about the Bible than more Christians do although I think I seen a poll or a study or something that said something to that effect one time. Nevertheless, no poll or study is flawless. Regardless of whether or not it is true, I also find it sad that some Atheists seem to know more about the Bible than many Christians. And sadly, ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. I believe Saint Jerome was the first one to have said that and he is the one who translated what he had of the Bible back during the early days of Christianity into the Latin Vulgate.

That said, some Atheists claim to know more about Scripture than Christians but then again, do Atheists really know more about Scripture than Christians or do they just think they know more about Scripture than Christians? What I mean is that when it comes to Scripture one must take into account that there are different types of Scripture which require different types of interpretation because the type of literature is not meant to be read in the same way as another type of literature. For example, although the Bible does record historical facts, that doesn't mean it is going to be exactly accurate on all historical facts because from what I understand, the ancient Hebrews were not all that concerned with getting things exactly correct but they were more concerned about getting the overall message correct rather than the specifics. Also, many people make a huge mistake in interpreting the Bible by failing to take different parts of the Bible in context. In addition, some see contradictions where there really is none. One has to realize that even if there are multiple accounts of one event in different Gospels for example, each account was written by a different person with a different viewpoint, different audience, and even a different message to get across.

But anyway, all of that is beside the point and off topic so I will leave this here and let everyone get back to the original topic. I simply wanted to address misinterpretation of the Bible since you mentioned that many Atheists "know" (or think they know) more than Christians. It's true that some Atheists do actually know more than some Christians about the Bible but its also true that many Atheists only think they know more when in reality they don't.

Here is a link which goes into more depth on the subject:

http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/is-everything-in-the-bible-true

 

[FearGod]

You might want to consult some actual history books rather than rely on a youtube video. Christianity was most certainly spread by the sword on more than one instance, as well as other religions.

i was being sarcastic.

The video confirms that people nowadays are converting to Islam by choice.

 

[outhouse]

Much blood was shed after Jesus...inquisitions, Crusades, invasion of the Americas and torture and enslavement of the indiginous populations in the name of their god....tearing down their temples and using the stones to build temples to the Christian god, Catholics versus Protestants, burning of witches.....

That's has nothing to do with the origin of Christianity

We are talking about in context, the origins of the religion. NOT the later evolution of the religion