(1 of 2)
Do you know something?
You know a few about Islam.
Stereotyping zzzzzz
Islam is the most tolerent with local culture among relegiobs and civilization.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Oh, wait sorry, I mean هههههههههههههههههههههههههه
You're saying Prophet talked negatively about Ethiopian, big proof that you're selecting texts out of context.
Yeah, because there's
definitely a context where calling Ethiopians 'raisin heads' is not a negative and racist thing to say.
The first refuge for Muslims to escape from torment and killing was to Ethiopian Kingdom. Prophet praised and trusted his fairness and justice.
This is not news to me. Then the Arab Muslims spent the rest of time making up fantasies about 'Najashi', as they called him, converting to Islam. I told my Ethiopian friend Helen about that once, and she laughed for a solid 2 minutes. Christian Ethiopians rightly laugh at you. The conversation went something like this: "They know that's not how it works, right? If the King had converted to Islam, then the Kingdom would have converted with him, just like when King 'Ezana converted to Christianity centuries before." "No, I don't think they know that." "Well that's ridiculous." "Yeah, that's Islam for you." ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The first Muslims were mostly slaves.
That doesn't really help, in this context.
Usama bin Zaid who was a son of Prophet's slave lead an army has the most ownered Arabs.
I'm not sure what this means. Do you mean
honored? What does it matter if Muslims honor the son of one of Muhammad's slaves? Christians honor saints like St. Mary of Egypt (a former prostitute) and St. Moses the Ethiopian (a former robber and murderer), and that doesn't say anything about our religion's stance on prostitution, robbery, and murder. (We're against them all.)
You know nothing about Islam
I know enough to reject it, and that's all that really matters.
Compare how Muslims states dealt with culture and language with Christians states and non Christians.
It's actually not such a flattering comparison. The Muslims used Christian (and some Persian Zoroastrian) translators like Hunayn ibn Ishaq and others to build their "golden age", since the much-praised 'translation movement' of Baghdad in Abbasid times is what preserved the supposedly otherwise lost Greek sciences (lost to Europe, I guess) for the Arabs to the expand upon later. Christians were also used as physicians in the courts of the Muslim rulers, as they had been long before Islam was made up, and authored medical texts that were used for centuries by those of all communities.
By comparison, Christians preserved the preexisting knowledge of the people not by using the other communities to do the work for them so that they didn't have to learn anything themselves, but by actually modelling their own methods on what had come before them, but 'Christianizing' it, e.g., by building the Catechetical School of Alexandria in the time of St. Mark and modeling it on the ancient Greek
Mouseion found in that same city, which, though it had been destroyed and/or suppressed several times before and after the coming of Christianity to Egypt (by Julius Caesar, Caracalla, and Aurelian), apparently didn't disappear until the fifth century AD, if sources like Zacharias Rhetor and Aeneas of Gaza are to be believed. The Catechetical school essentially operated like a Christian version of the
Mouseion, teaching both theology and secular sciences.
So too the art and material culture of the native Egyptians was preserved in traditional Coptic iconography, and probably (there's some debate on this, academically) the chant of the pre-Christian Egyptians as well, in Coptic religious chant.
This is a crucial difference between Christianity and Islam: Christianity takes what is acceptable to God of the native cultures and baptizes it, which makes it so the people do not have to 'become Greek' (or Syriac, or Coptic, or Roman, or whatever) to become Christian, while Islam does not do that
as much (still some; obviously Pakistani Qawwali reflects that culture, just as Jilala reflects Moroccan culture, or Falak reflects the Central Asian peoples' cultures), due to its overarching reliance on Arabic for everything, itself due to
religious beliefs about Arabic language and the Qur'an. You cannot offer your ritual prayers in your own language, can you? Everything has to be Arabic. Apparently your god is an Arab and only wants to hear from you while in the mosque in his language.
Muslim ruled all Eastern Europe around 4-5 centuries but till date people keep using their language and same Christianitys relegions
Some of them, yes. The Bosniaks, Muslim Albanians, and to some extent even the Greeks (names like Hadjiakis, etc.) are evidence of the long years under the
Turkocratia. Thank God that He brought it to an end, and may He continue to preserve the Christian people of those areas.
Turks themselves kept their language and culture, can't you see?
Yes, of course. When did I ever say that nobody kept their language under Islam?
This is responding to something I never said, and never would say.
Muslims ruled India about 6-7 centuries (don't remember)
Islam spread in Africa ND South Asia but people kept their languages and relegions.
Kept their languages, yes, but as far as keeping their religions...ehhh, it is a 'mixed bag'. The people of Nuristan (formerly Kafiristan) in Afghanistan were forcibly converted to Islam only about 100 years ago, as many others have been all over the forced-to-be-Muslim world. Did the same thing happen in the Christian world? Sure it did. Usually you can tell who was forced relatively recently because they have syncretized their Christianity with their indigenous beliefs, as in parts of Africa and South America that were colonized by European (usually Roman Catholic) powers only in the past 500 years or so. I don't deny that this happened. Heck, I'm kind of a product of it happening. My grandmother was a
mestiza (mixed native and European person) from Mexico, and many countries of Latin America have large mixed populations. So you don't need to tell me about this.
This is Islam and Muslims Footprint, what about yours ?
What
about 'mine'? The point is never 'only Muslims have done anything bad', but rather the underpinnings of what is done. You cannot seriously compare the coming of St. Mark to Egypt, for instance, by which the majority of Egyptians were eventually converted to Christianity by the fourth century (but still the temples were kept open until later in the 6th century, when the temple at Philae was finally closed; and even after the order of the Emperor to close the temples in the 380s, laws were passed to criminalize any actions taken against pagans in their homes or at their shrines) to the coming of Muhammad's warriors in the 7th century to rape, pillage, and completely transform the societies which they invaded. For one thing, the Egyptian Church is made of native people, and you can't 'conquer' yourself. It would be akin to saying Muhammad's original followers, who came to Islam before he had any military or political power, were somehow 'forced'. No. Obviously not. The same was true for Christianity for approximately 313 years (this is when the last of the open persecutions done by the Roman empire, under the emperor Maximinus Daia who succeeded the hated oppressor Diocletian, finally ended in Egypt), as opposed to being true for Islam...what...19 years? If I remember correctly, Muhammad received his first communication from "Jibril" in the cave around 610, and by 629 had conquered Mecca. I believe this huge disparity in the relative time that each religion spent oppressed in its place(s) of origin in large part explains why your religion is as it is, and why mine is as it is. Perhaps if Christianity had conquered by force large swaths of the world within 20-30 years of its founding, it would have an outlook more like Islam when it comes to matters of conquest, the supposed place it should have in societies, and so on.
Do you know ? Or pertaining ignorance?
Well, it depends on what aspect you are asking about. About languages and their histories and the cultures they were formed by, I'd like to think I know something since I have a master's degree in linguistics, but you're right if you want to talk about specifics of Islamic or Christian conquests.
50 millions red Indians have been vanished.
Do you assume this to be by
Christian religious imperative? Again, there is a vast difference between coming somewhere as an outsider and conquering it and forcibly converting the people there to your religion (as the Spanish did in the Americas, for instance) and being yourselves the native people of the place in which the religion is established, as in the Coptic, Syriac (Aramean/Assyrian), Armenian, and Ethiopian cases. (This is my Church -- this communion of individual churches -- so it's the only one I can really confidently talk about.)
Language and culture of north and south America were wiped, including history and personality.
This, like the Islamic case, is definitely a 'mixed bag'. Some indigenous languages have been lost, yes (not usually during the conquistador times, but later as the people themselves switched to the national or local/regional language, often for economic reasons), but many of them have not been. The situation in America and Canada is very bad compared to that of Latin America, I'll grant you that, but still it is very much overreaching to write as though they were all wiped out. The healthiest Native language of the USA is definitely Navajo, which has over 200,000 native speakers in the Southwest of the USA, and having lived in Albuquerque, New Mexico for four years while I was getting my masters degree (NM is, together with Arizona, a stronghold of the Navajo and several other indigenous people) I can tell you that you can hear it everyday on the streets, in stores, and even on TV where they have their own soap operas (dramas) and news programs.
In Latin America, indigenous languages often have official status either regionally or sometimes nationally. In Paraguay, which is quite anomalous in this regard, more people actually speak the Guarani indigenous language than Spanish (though almost everyone is bilingual in Spanish; I think it's something like 95% speak Guarani vs. 90% Spanish; I would have to look it up), even though the ethnic Guarani themselves are a very small population. Even in states where that is not the case, like Mexico where only a small population speaks a native language, still over one million people speak Nahuatl. In Guatemala 42% of the population speak an indigenous language (forms of Mayan, I'm assuming), in Peru 35%, and in Ecuador and Panama almost 10% (9.4% and 8.3%, respectively). I didn't do the math, but knowing the population sizes of these countries alone, that is millions of people. And then you have a case like Bolivia, where
35 native languages are recognized by the government, even though only a few of them have a large percentage of speakers (Quechua 21.2%, Aymara 14.6%).
So again, I recognize that it is not ideal, but the situation should not be painted as though they are all gone. It is much better than in the Middle East, anyway. How many Syriac-identifying people are there, the descendants of the native Mesopotamians? From Assyrian historian Fred Aprim in the introduction to his book
Assyrians: The Continuous Saga (2004), maybe 4 million total. How many actually speak a form of their language? Not four million. Not even close. The largest, "Assyrian Neo-Aramaic" (Eastern Neo-Aramaic dialect) has about 500,000 speakers, and the next largest, "Chaldean Neo-Aramaic" (essentially the same thing; divided for political/church reasons) has about 240,000. The speakers of "Western" Neo-Aramaic (Turoyo/Surayt) are about 100,000, and the speakers of all other varieties (Jewish, Mandaic, etc.) are a few thousand. There are less than a million total of all varieties, and they are mostly in diasporas in Sweden, Germany, the USA, etc.
All african languages have been disappeared.
What? I don't even know what that means, but if you mean it literally that's a crazy claim. If all African languages have disappeared under Christianity, then why can I read and type in Amharic አሁን? And that's just one language of one people who have been officially Christian since the fourth century, many centuries before any European or for that matter Arab colonialist came to Africa. እብድ አትሁን።
