How can Islam be a religion of peace when it was spread through conquest?

How can Islam be a religion of peace when it was spread through conquest?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=TChhWlM8LsE.
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>George Bush said Islam is a religion of peace
>Suddenly it's up to all Muslims to defend this one statement made by America's dumbest president

How about sage

Has any major religion not been spread by conquest, at least in part?

how can you be a peaceful person if muricans founded your land through conquest

it´s quite peaceful after you convert

It brings peace after conquest.

Buddhism

Do anyone ever call it that unironically?

Islam is peaceful. Terrorism is not. When religion mixes in with imperialism that is counterfeit religion.

Your question isn't very effective at getting a straight anwser since any cunt could just say that if a conquest was done by a country with one primary religion that was a religious conquest when it was really just a war over something other than that.

>le true Islam meme
Nice try, Ahmed, but people are starting to wake up to the fact that the problems are inherent in Islam. They're in the text. The fact that most Muslims tend to ignore what Islam demands of them (because it is incompatible with the better value system they've adopted from elsewhere) doesn't mean that those who follow the texts are "bad" Muslims.

The extent to which a Muslim ignores Islam correlates exactly with how compatible his actions and beliefs are with civilised society.

youtube.com/watch?v=TChhWlM8LsE.

How has islam mixed with imperialism. And why did you just white wash the entirety of middle eastern conflict and intricate political tension with just "terroist imperialism" which is as stupid as it sounds.

Idk man. Islam is about reading a Quran and meditating on God just like every other religion.

Now when you use the religion for conquest, then it is a counterfeit, negative side of religion.

If you use religion to kill people it is counterfeit.

>If you use religion to kill people it is counterfeit.
Untrue in cases it is lawful evil regards to Islams source material.

It's not but now you will have a bunch of assmad Mohametan satanists shitting the place up

>like every other religion
Islam is not like every other religion.

It is one thing if you have to fight a war but another thing to be the start of a war.

All religions are generally the same.

>All religions are generally the same.

>Now when you use the religion for conquest, then it is a counterfeit, negative side of religion.

>If you use religion to kill people it is counterfeit.
You do realize Mohamet himself did these things?

>All religions are generally the same.

Generally, religion is about submission to God's will and enlightenment and realization of the soul.

We can't be responsible for his actions but only our own.

Generally, all religions teach through a recorded teacher the path. It is up to the seeker to see clearly and act acoordingly.

>Generally, religion is about submission to God's will and enlightenment and realization of the soul.
I wasn't aware that all religions are Abrahamic user.
>Generally, all religions teach through a recorded teacher the path. It is up to the seeker to see clearly and act acoordingly.
I wasn't aware all religions are Abrahamic user [2]

You can be responsible for not endorsing his behavior as model and paragon which is textual and repeated.

actually terrorists are true by the book muslims, they follow the teachings of the quran correctly

all the secular muslims are just that, they're secular, they're not murdering people because they aren't as devoted.

Not all religions are Abrahamic, even the Abrahamic ones because we don't worship Abraham.

Judaism, Christianity, Vaisnava, Shaivite, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Islam etc etc etc all teach about this, ONE thing that is exclusive to itself.

The path isn't "Abrahamic" but it is a piece of "Abraham" who was a devotee to the Lord.

You can't be responsible for his behavior because it isn't like our opinion of Muhammed actually changes anything about his life path 1500 years ago or whenever.

Anyone COULD say anything, but why not just limit it to where a reasonable person would say that spreading the religion was a goal of warfare?

Islam is shit but not all muslims are inherently shit, same with christianity, judaism, buddishm, hinduism, sikhism and all the others, the only good religion was greek and persian religion

Islam make Muhammad the supreme example of man you can't be daft that the fanboys of a general get all martial that there is nothing causal.

What

Beheaded people don't fight. Hence religion of peace.

Anyone who has read the Old Testament cannot possibly believe Islam is unique in being shit.

All the Abrahamic religions are disgusting Bronze-age barbarism.

Orthodox Christianity.

It sounds as if you want to get conquered and occupied.

>OT
>God physically ousts the pagan nations from the land of Cannan
>many miracles are performed to show the invasion is legit
>Israel told not to expand beyond their borders
>leaders of Israel are also shown to be flawed, and much of the violence stems from this
>'seek peace and pursue it' - Psalm 34:14

>Quran
>warlord named Muhammed makes up some religion in order to inspire his followers to conquer
>performs literally no miracles
>when called out on this he says 'my revelations are miracles' (lel)
>commands followers to conquer the whole world, killing anyone who doesn't convert (unless you are a Jew or a Christian, in which case you may have the option to pay a special tax instead of being slaughtered)
>hadiths also record many colorful episodes of abuse, torture, needless killing etc
>Islam venerates Muhammed as the most perfect man to ever live
>'fight those who do not believe in Allah or the last day' - Surah 9:29

Fight doesn't have to be physical.

You are being disingenuous.

There is literally no book more bloody or deranged than the OT.

"Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." - Psalm 137:9

but in the case of the spread of early islam it was

And also political and psychological warfare like taqiyya religious dissimilation.

Now you're being disingenuous. This is not a direct command to fight non-believers. In the context of the verse it is talking about a hypothetical vengeance against Babylon, which destroyed Jerusalem and sent Israel into exile.

No, I'm not being disingenuous at all.

I'm pointing out the fallacy of putting the Qur'an in a bad light, while ignoring all the barbarism in the OT.

Do you think it matters to me, if the injunction to murder or enslave, applies to the Amalekites or the Midianites, or just non-believers in general?

It's still barbaric tribalism anyway and should've stayed in the desert from whence it came.

>Do you think it matters to me, if the injunction to murder or enslave, applies to the Amalekites or the Midianites, or just non-believers in general?

It should, being that there are still infidels, but there aren't a lot of Midianites.

Look.

Some significant minority of Muslims are violent barbarians right now, and they are behaving worse than Christians and Jews in general.

But don't think anyone has forgotten what Christianity and Judaism is really like, and that you're any less worse historically, just because you aren't behaving shit today.