Jesus didn't hang out in Europe. And he spread Christianity through his death on the cross - in the middle east.
2006-09-16 18:59:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by chris 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
Given the facts that exist, the question you have posed is erroneous thus irrelevant from the get go. Since the criteria you have used is founders. We shall look at the founders of both religions and observe how they spread the religion. 1. Jesus s.a.w and the Bible He died before he could even spread it in its full form. What you are getting today is not even his original message of Christianity, but what people 200 years later think is his message of Christianity. He did have followers, but I doubt given the fact he didn't live very long, they could even spread it formally as "CHRISTIANITY", this is the message of god... there's no such thing. They followed his way of life, and what he did. And that's that. Go and ask your local priest and pastor what are the J, K , L books, why there is old testament and new testament and who wrote it? 2. Muhammad s.a.w and the Qur'an Go and read Karen Armstrong's Muhammad. To assert that Islam spread only because of military conquest wouldn't make sense even in today's reality. Islam spread in various modes actually, and yes, indirectly through military conquest. Let me give you a walk through, during that time, everyone was conquering lands, and it was a very troubling period to live in. It's either the Mongols or the Muslims or the Crusaders, and etc. so of course people preferred the Muslims. And why not? Muslims put in place a lot of structure, stability and organization to the land. Look at Spain and compare that to what the Vyzygots did before Islam. Would Baghdad be what it was without the Muslims, and Egypt, rose from the dust again. But then again, it gained popularity as the ideal form of governance and system.. but then again, it didn't necessarily take a political form everywhere. For instance, China and the silk route, only made possible because of interaction and the strong need for business and trade because of all the development going on in the Muslim world. A huge community in Western China are Muslim, the community thrived in China even till this day even without dominating politically. They were happy because their governments basically just left them alone. Islam came to South East Asia, through trade and commerce too. No forced mass conversions. There is no such history of Islamic conquest. What history tells us instead is that there was a sudden movement from Buddhism and Hinduism to Islam, even among its leaders. If I were a leader, I would prefer to be Hindu because it would mean that I was always going to remain at the top. But these people changed their faith. Why? The power then in South East Asia was China, not Arabia, or the Islamic Empire. If you read South East Asian history, Muslims only played some trading role and had some missionaries drop by. The chinese were the ones that the kingdoms feared then. In arabia itself, many non muslim tribes joined forces and supported the prophet and embraced Islam. It meant a lot of things. Starting afresh in terms of networks, putting the bloodshed past behind them and move towards progress and peace in unity. Worldwide Islam doesn't try to impose on their cultural ways, everyone could be Muslim without having to be Arab.. and they could benefit from the faith still. No more banding, no more looting. No more men having 10000000 wives, no more killing of baby girls, no more vigilante style blood shed, there is a central community court system all following the Qur'an and Sunnah. No more nepotism and cronyism. Only the best. No more class and caste system. Everyone had the same share of the pie. Everyone was equal in the eyes of god, except for the one who is good. The playing field was fair and just. All the factors needed to build a progressive modern society.
2016-03-27 04:50:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Elizabeth 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
This isn't even worth answering, but I'll grab the two points.
You're wrong about her age, though. She may have been betrothed at an early age, but they did not marry until she was 14 or 15. Which was the norm for women of all faiths at that time.
2006-09-16 19:07:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by milomax 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
And the Pope spread Christianity through unsolid words. *wink* Then and now.
Can I just say the Crusades, I mean really. Surely Christians see the simularities between the Crusades and the Jihads, right?
2006-09-16 19:05:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
NO. You are a racist cult.
If Christians are so love and peaceful, the Crusaders were Christians and they massacred 5 million Jews and Muslims(including women and children) and even ate their flesh during their capture of Jerusalem. Yeah, I thought you know that
2006-09-16 19:11:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Muslim 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Thank you for the link, Ahmad. Your own Muslim apologists confirm that Mohammed's sex with a 9-year-old is an absolutely true fact. You obviously did not even read through it, but put all trust in its mere existence. I respect your zeal for truth, and pray, trusting, that you find it. I actually read through yours. Here are a couple for you: http://www.lamblion.com/New08.php
http://members.aol.com/alnour/index2.html
http://www.africanaquatics.co.za/_christian/_articles/islam_and_the_koran.htm
2006-09-16 19:45:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
full of lies and very immature.
If you really want to get real answers.. perhaps you wanna do some research before opening your mouth.
If you read the books of history... you'd find who started majority of the holy war.
2006-09-16 19:06:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Spidergurl 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
The Crusades
The Inquisition
Witch Trials
Next stupid question?
2006-09-16 19:06:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Stop being so ignorant
2006-09-16 19:19:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Scheherazade 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
thats lie about the prophet mohammad(PBUH) here is aproofshttp://www.answering-christianity.com/links.htm
2006-09-16 18:59:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋