Islam was never as peaceful as you claim.

[McKenna36]

Hi everyone,
First I would like to point that I am not here to argue or troll but I am very intersted in finding the truth(so the real God or the lack of him) and Quran-only islam really draw my strong attention. However, I try to be as critical as possible and whenever I find something controversial I try to challange(after own research of course) people who know the topic and might be smarter than me, therefore are able to straighten my supposedly false views. I will be really pleased to find out in those discussion that I am mistaken.

So my problem for now is that claim of Quran-only muslims, that islam is is rather peaceful religion is false in my opinion. Quran itself provide lines promoting both peace and war. Therefore it's quite open to interpration. I've read peaceful interpretions and they are quite covincing. However, we cannot lie to ourselves and the best way to examine how to interpret those verses is looking at the practices of Muhammad and first muslims. To check that we have to look for historic resources and we have two kinds of them:

1) Muslims resources: Hadits etc. I know they were collected many years after the Muhammad therefore many of them are fake but still they are rather not completely out of touch with reality there have to be some truth in them and they do depict attitude's of those times. And hadiths suggesting that slaying people took place.

2) Non-muslim resources:

The oldest surviving resource is a poorly preserved report of syriac christian about conquest. Report comes from 637:

"... and in January, they took the word for their lives (did) [the sons of] Emesa [i.e., Ḥimṣ)], and many villages were ruined with killing by [the Arabs of] Muḥammad and a great number of people were killed and captives [were taken] from Galilee as far as Bēth [...] and those Arabs pitched camp beside [Damascus?] [...] and we saw everywhe[re...] and o[l]ive oil which they brought and them. And on the t[wenty six]th of May went S[ac[ella]rius]... cattle [...] [...] from the vicinity of Emesa and the Romans chased them [...] and on the tenth [of August] the Romans fled from the vicinity of Damascus [...] many [people] some 10,000. And at the turn [of the ye]ar the Romans came; and on the twentieth of August in the year n[ine hundred and forty-]seven there gathered in Gabitha [...] the Romans and great many people were ki[lled of] [the R]omans, some fifty thousand [...]"

The text from bracket's is added by scholars since the document is poorly preserved.

text from 640:

"AG 945, indiction VII: On Friday, 4 February, [i.e., 634 CE / Dhul Qa?dah 12 AH] at the ninth hour, there was a battle between the Romans and the Arabs of Muḥammad [Syr. tayyāyē d-Mḥmt] in Palestine twelve miles east of Gaza. The Romans fled, leaving behind the patrician YRDN (Syr. BRYRDN), whom the Arabs killed. Some 4000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there, Christians, Jews and Samaritans. The Arabs ravaged the whole region.

AG 947, indiction IX: The Arabs invaded the whole of Syria and went down to Persia and conquered it; the Arabs climbed mountain of Mardin and killed many monks there in [the monasteries of] Kedar and Benōthō. There died the blessed man Simon, doorkeeper of Qedar, brother of Thomas the priest."

Text from 660:

At that time a certain man from along those same sons of Ismael, whose name was Mahmet [i.e., Muḥammad], a merchant, as if by God's command appeared to them as a preacher [and] the path of truth. He taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially because he was learnt and informed in the history of Moses. Now because the command was from on high, at a single order they all came together in unity of religion. Abandoning their vain cults, they turned to the living God who had appeared to their father Abraham. So, Mahmet legislated for them: not to eat carrion, not to drink wine, not to speak falsely, and not to engage in fornication. He said: 'With an oath God promised this land to Abraham and his seed after him for ever. And he brought about as he promised during that time while he loved Ismael. But now you are the sons of Abraham and God is accomplishing his promise to Abraham and his seed for you. Love sincerely only the God of Abraham, and go and seize the land which God gave to your father Abraham. No one will be able to resist you in battle, because God is with you

Another text from 660:

Then God raised up against them the sons of Ishmael, [numerous] as the sand on the sea shore, whose leader (mdabbrānā) was Muḥammad (mḥmd). Neither walls nor gates, armour or shield, withstood them, and they gained control over the entire land of the Persians. Yazdgird sent against them countless troops, but the Arabs routed them all and even killed Rustam. Yazdgird shut himself up in the walls of Mahoze and finally escaped by flight. He reached the country of the Huzaye and Mrwnaye, where he ended his life. The Arabs gained countrol of Mahoze and all the territory. They also came to Byzantine territory, plundering and ravaging the entire region of Syria. Heraclius, the Byzantine king, sent armies against them, but the Arabs killed more than 100,000 of them.

Text from 687:

Having let their dispute run its course, after much fighting had taken place between them, the Westerners, whom they call the sons of ?Ammāyē, gained the victory, and one of their number, a man called M?awyā [i.e., Mu?awiya], became king controlling the two kingdoms, of the Persians and of the Byzantines. Justice flourished in his time, and there was great peace in the regions under his control; he allowed everyone to live as they wanted. For they held, as I have said above, an ordinance, stemming from the man who was their guide (mhaddyānā), concerning the people of the Christians and concerning the monastic station. Also as a result of this man's guidance (mhaddyānūtā) they held to the worship of One God, in accordance with the customs of ancient law. At the beginnings they kept to the traditions (ma?lmānūtā) of Muḥammad, who was their instructor (tā?rā), to such an extent that they inflicted the death penalty on anyone who was seen to act brazenly against his laws.

This one is extra interesting because it's suggesting that already the first muslims who were learning from Muhammad himself were more like sunni's not quran-only muslims.

We should also keep on mind that during the first years of islam the empire spread wide by the conqests:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam#/media/File:Map_of_expansion_of_Caliphate.svg

To sum up; both possible resources(muslim and non-muslims) suggest similiar thing; that Muhammad together with first muslims were attacking, conqesting and what's most important; slaying people. While conquering lands could be somehow justified(especially quoting: " Justice flourished in his time, and there was great peace in the regions under his control; he allowed everyone to live as they wanted.") slaying monks and civilians cannot. So is islam(and Muhhamad himself) cruel religion? If all resources suggests that Muhammad started cruel wars isn't talking about peace on islam lying to your own? While the radical sunnis are those who practice islam exactly how it should be practiced?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Resource:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/earlysaw.html

[عوني]

And how do you know those text were not written by biased Christians that had the intentions of discrediting Muslims? Romans and Byzantines were also good at massacring big time. The Romans were good at killing Jews and anybody else that opposed their beliefs. The Byzantine empire had about 100,000?400,000 soldiers fighting against 24,000?40,000 Arab Muslims and better equipped too and still the Arabs won. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Yarmouk In reality there is no evidence that Muhammad even existed. Removing the Hadiths will not prove that Muhammad was a good man letalone a bad man. In reality, he could have been a good man or a bad man or he did not even exist at all. It's the same with Jesus, Moses, Abraham, etc. In my opinion, religion has not contributed anything of value to the world at all. There have been many massacres over religious beliefs. Imagine if religions did not exist at all then those things wouldn't happen. However to say that Islam is the only religion responsible is very moronic. All religions are terrible.

[hicham9]

To my knowledge, "Islam" (as per the Quran) is not a religion, but a state (of mind) ...

Abrahem was not of the "mushriks" [=most of today's (self-proclaimed) "muslims"]!

[mmkhan]

Hi,

How if you remove Muhammad from the picture of Islam?
Do you see it peaceful now?

[McKenna36]

@Friend with an arabic nickname: I am not here to compare islam to other religions so the fact that others religions did evil isn't a justify for Islam.

@hicham9 That's not really relevant to my problem.

@mmkhan I don't think it's really possible. Since Quran mentions Muhammad by his name and praise him as a good man you cannot really remove him from Islam. Also it would be beyond logic to choose as a Messanger a person who would not be a good example of how to believe. Anyway answering your question; if I remove those stories from Islam I see it as a system which advocates for peace if possible but clearly war is an important and often prefered solution in case of injustice or any aggressive attitude of an enemy.

[عوني]

I did not say that other religion did evil 'justify Islam'. I even said ALL religion is terrible in my previous post for this reason. And for a moment I assumed you were one of those people that attack Islam while barely giving focus on Christianity and Judaism too and even worse; acting as if those religion are any better. Romans and the Byzantines were both evil. So it was evil dealing with evil.

[good logic]

Peace McKenna.

Can I ask you a couple of questions please?

1- What do you mean by "peaceful"?

( For example I am very peaceful, but I have the right to defend myself. Is this "peaceful " to you?

2- What do you mean by "Islam"?

For example  I say Muhammed did not preach or /bring a religion called"Islam ? I say "true Islam" existed way before Muhammed.

Hopefully ,once this is clarified,we can then pursue the discussion.
GOD bless you
Peace/

[mmkhan]

@mmkhan I don't think it's really possible. Since Quran mentions Muhammad by his name and praise him as a good man you cannot really remove him from Islam. Also it would be beyond logic to choose as a Messanger a person who would not be a good example of how to believe. Anyway answering your question; if I remove those stories from Islam I see it as a system which advocates for peace if possible but clearly war is an important and often prefered solution in case of injustice or any aggressive attitude of an enemy.

Peace brother,

I think your understanding is wrong. Please take a look at this?

May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path
mmKhan

[McKenna36]

Peace good logic

Don't confuse me with pacifist, I am not the one and I don't think pacifism is the right way to go. However according to resources first muslims crossed the limits of self-defence too far.
1. Let me make it easier and write what is NOT peaceful(makes also the concept of Divine justice ununderstandable for me);

"Some 4000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there, Christians, Jews and Samaritans. The Arabs ravaged the whole region."

"the Arabs climbed mountain of Mardin and killed many monks there in [the monasteries of] Kedar and Benōthō. There died the blessed man Simon, doorkeeper of Qedar, brother of Thomas the priest."

"The Arabs gained countrol of Mahoze and all the territory. They also came to Byzantine territory, plundering and ravaging the entire region of Syria. "

There are more.

2. The concept of world, God and everything depicted in Quran.

Peace mmkhan
I've read that, it's interesting. However do you claim that man mentioned in my non-muslim resources who is called there as Muhammad and is leader of Arabs isn't a Messanger of God who brought Quran? Where is Quran coming from then? Who and when wrote it?

[Man of Faith]

Hello McKenna36,

Thanks for bringing up point. I actually think Quran was hijacked by some man who proclaimed himself as Muhammad in the 600s AD (an impostor) but Quran actually written before that time, perhaps a 100-200 years before it. The bloodthirst of those historical fragments that you gave in your post go against what you find if you reinterpret the whole Quran and decipher it as intended by the author. Quran was exposed to some ancient plot with political motives. It is clear that Quran's interpretation is twisted to rally for war and incite strong hatred towards "disbelievers".

It is wrong to say that the Middle-Eastern communities before the Islamic onslaught had a bad time under Roman influence because I have studied many historical documents. The Roman Empire brought many inventions to the people of Arabia and the Nabeteans cooperated to a great extent with the Romans being prosperous merchants.

You know the official historical account does not add up. Most people in historical records classify the ancient Arabs as barbarians in their conquests, even if the Romans were not always any better, but they had a more sophisticated society with Laws in my opinion after been studying documents from all sides. People looked at what we call 'Human Rights' today 2015 in a different way. Critics are also not aware that the Greco-Roman Empire lasted for many centuries and there were ups and down when it came to righteousness among the authorities. While it committed atrocities, it had a varying approach by the government. There was even an era with peace that lasted for some hundred years.

The "modern" Arabic script was invented in the 5th century approximately, and I suspect Quran was one of the earliest work in this scripting language if not even the first as tailored for this Arabic text.

When deciphered using "a different methodology, and setting bias aside a, different version of Quran emerges. The emerged doctrine is however totally incompatible with the sect Islam and very Gnostic in style and follows the teachings of Jesus in very great detail. It is talking about being "One with God". Islam is not a name but it is a common descriptive word for a specific type of person who is sound (sane). People did not refer to themselves as Muslim before these heresies occurred in the 7th century and onwards even if 'salam/shalom' as been a word for thousands of years in the Semitic languages referring to healthiness. Salam as a greeting means 'Be well' or 'be healthy'.

I know people who believed in the Abrahamic monotheistic God usually referred to themselves a Jew which means 'recognized' basically, but the word Jew (Yahood) does have a hijacked meaning today. And in ancient times they saw themselves as Children of God. It is controversial, but I argue Bani Israel (Children of Israel) is a codename for Children of God where I deciphered Israel as 'chief'. Any people who acknowledges God the right way are 'Bani Israel', since it is entirely on Spirit level. Obviously God used cryptic language in all times in order to deceive the hypocrites and fools. Not even Allah is a word for God but it refers to "Who Be Such as It" while 'Rabb' is God in Arabic.

Well, you may see that many members detest me for these views and insights into the Kingdom of God. These are entirely my views and I perform independent research with as little bias as possible and I avoid taking sides including on sects but right should be right. And I think it will cause some disturbance when I say that I am a 'son of God' too and I have no qualms with it   

Be well
Emanuel