Few days ago, in a late night discussion with my friend he said he was opposed to the Prophet SAW’s conquest of Makkah. I’d never heard any such argument before. Basically, he explained, that religion shouldn’t be enforced. People will join it by themselves if it holds any truth in it. Obviously he didn’t understand the whole history of the wars, and islam wasn’t being enforced on them, but I think his gripe wasn’t with the conquest itself but rather it was about Islam not being pacifistic. His real question, maybe, was why does Islam allow for war? Shouldn’t the religion of justice and truth have the power to convince people without using force?
My sleep deprived self wasn’t able to articulate a good enough response at that time, but how would you guys respond to him?
They’re actions and that of the those around them would speak for them.
Ask yourself, the Epstein Files reveal the extent of corruption that can infiltrate a leadership. Do you feel comfortable knowing such despicable men and women hold power? Do pacifists feel comfortable with such people in power?
The reality is ‘no’ and if such a pacifist is comfortable or committed to non-violence, they should be made aware that other people are not going to play by their rules.
There’s a reason theres the Western saying, that revolution that couldn’t be done peacefully should be done so by force inevitably. Even then, Allah commands us to not be excessive and he iterates time and time again, that no one, not even a Prophet of Allah, has control over the hearts of men except for Him alone.