In the interest of learning something is it accurate to say that Shia, Sunni etc are different denominations of Islam as Baptist, Methodist, etc are different Christian denominations. If so, what are their differances?

Don't worry, there is plenty of room and bandwidth here to provide an adequate explination

I'm under the impression they're more like Catholic and Protestant in the depth of the divide, plus there are multiple sub-denominations under each.

I need to go to sleep now, so I will put it short( I will write in depth about this tomorrow): The Sunni people believe in Prophet Mohamad, while the Shia believe that Jibril(the angel who met the Prophet at first) mistakenly landed on Mohamad instead of Ali(he's one of the first Muslim people). There are more differences, but I will write them tomorrow.

Extreme Coder

I took an introductory class to Islam in the Fall Semester of this year. From my very limited knowledge of Islam, I'd say that the majority of Muslims are not violent. Muslims have a deep commitment to prayer, giving to the poor, and modesty, all of which are honorable and which I have a great respect for. Muhammad did however lead armies and conquer in the name of Allah. People will often bring up the Crusades to criticize Christianity, but few people mention Muslims had invaded and taken over much of Spain and some of the Crusades, the earlier ones, were fought to reclaim Spain. The concept of Jihad is somewhat shaky to me, most Muslims interpret it as spiritual struggle, while some militants interpret it as authorizing military force. Because Muhammad did lead armies, it seems as though interpreting Jihad as authorizing military force is reasonable. However, I don't pretend to be a scholar of the Koran.

I definitely didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition to be brought up. (The Inquisition, properly speaking, was not one of the Crusades, and has as much to do with infighting between Christian groups (see also: "persecuting heretics") as it did Christians driving out the Muslims.)

As for Jihad, Sura 2 of the Koran makes it clear that Muslims are authorized to fight.

NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!

Regarding Christianity being "an English religion"; the population "center of gravity" for Christianity moved south of the Equator at least 10 years ago. Christianity is growing fastest in Africa, South America and parts of Asia.
NTP

That is certainly one way of putting it. Jesus was not afraid of conflict he simply did not approach it in the same manner we merely human do.

Back to the topic: The expansion of Islam was "with fire and sword." If my memory serves me well, strict application of the Koran requires Jews and Christians to be left alone in Islamic conquered areas. They are also "people of the Book." Pagans however were offered the choice of conversion to Islam or death.

On the issue of extremists. I recall interviewing some student followers of Ayatollah Khomeini. The possibility of a different opinion, much less that the Ayatollah might be wrong, was inconceivable for them. That is the single greatest danger posed by them. They are incapable of "reasonable" discussion. Before anyone asks, yes there are some like them pretending to be Christian.

NTP

Um. A Shia would put it very differently.

I'll do what I can without writing another book...

Originally the Sunni/Shia split occurred due to politics. When Mohamed died, no successor had been named. He was not only the prophet for the community, but they had named him their political leader as well. This left a power vacuum. Many in the community felt that the leadership should fall to people who were pious and held in high regard by the community, these because the Sunni. Others felt the leadership should be held by someone from the Prophet's family, these became the Shia. Ali was the husband of Mohamed's daughter and only child, as well as his nephew. It is said (not only by Shia) that being of the lineage of the Prophet bestows a special form of blessing on a person (baraka).

The first four leaders after Mohamed's death were chosen by the community, which was not in full agreement, but had not yet split. Ali was the fifth khaliph, or leader, also chosen by the community. However, he was assassinated. This led to the complete split between the factions.

The Sunni got their name by striving to use the Prophet's words and example as the rule for daily life and the basis of all authority.

The Shia got their name from shiat ali, or party of Ali, and was formed believing that the basis for leadership in the community should come from one with baraka from birth, a member of the Prophet's family, who would also be able to hear from God like he did and lead the people.

Well, that's a short introduction, anyway.

lol

Evidence pls. Not just a blanket statement - for instance wasn't the spread of Islam into SE Asia (Indochina) done by Arab traders via peaceful means?

There may have been episodes of conflict in history like any other conquesting faith, like you said history can be complex - Islamic or otherwise.

Isn't this a leading question highlighting the prejudices or bias of the OP?

I know he or she has acknowledged this fact in their post, but surely it could be reworded better, in a more neutral, polite manner, such as:

"Is Islam perceived as a violent religion by non muslims?" or
"Does Islam have an image problem of being seen as violent?"

Maybe others could do better. But with the current headline you isolate Muslims and cause them to immediately be put on the defensive, rather than starting the whole debate on the right foot.

Hmmm...wonder why there hasn't been much input from Muslims yet..?

I'm working from memory here. There are historic accounts of events I'm describing from the movement into India, north Africa, Spain and the Balkans. One account was an ancient document in which the writer claims to have witnessed the forced conversion of African tribesmen. (Granted I only saw a translated copy!)

I no longer live near a university library, which I would need to cite chapter and verse. (And I understand why you would like them.) Some of the references I encountered while living and working in Somalia back in the 80's.

I'll keep your question in mind and do so more research.

In any case I would not say all Islamic expansion was by force. Just that it was a part, just as, sadly, forced conversion was part of Spanish and Portuguese expansion.

NTP

Disclaimer: I was raised a Muslim.

Actually, I almost feel like that's all I have to say on the subject.

What else is there to say? I was raised by parents, who taught me to do good, and treat other people as I wanted to be treated, and to fast during Ramadan. Except for the last part, I was like any other Immigrant/American kid (My father was an immigrant, my mother American).

I think that religion does play a large part in terrorism. But I think that this does not make Islam a violent religion. If the situation were swapped, the "Civilized" Muslim countries would be expressing outrage at how the barbarous Christians were decapitating people.

The problem in Iraq and elsewhere is influenced by religion, and in many ways shaped by it, but it is not caused by it. It was caused by colossally stupid decisions made by a colossally stupid populace, and whenever you have that, bad things happen, no matter what religions are involved.

First, I'm a Muslims. And proud to be so.

It's a political issue.

From my point of view, there is nothing such a violent religion. But there is a violent group in every religion, belief and country. Sometimes these small violent groups are used by others to give a bad image about the religion, belief or country which they belong to.

If Islam is violent religion, why do we just hear this since the 19th century? Putting in mind that it exists since the 7th century.

I don't doubt their has been bloody conquests in Islamic history, just like any other civilisation. It's just blanket statements that I referred to and the thread title that I object to really.

I'm sure you can get proof, it would be useful if people back up sweeping statements with credible sources first before making them.

Some of the Islamic expansions were made by war and force, other Islamic expansions were made by 'enlightenment'(don't know the exact word for it in English)
But I doubt any religion could've spread easily without some force. I could be wrong though.

Extreme Coder

Have any of you read the koran? definitely not as bloody or bigoted as the Bible, but still a violent book. Is-Lame is, like all monotheistic relgions, a violent religion.

Contrary to the teachings of Jesus? I'm not sure that Jesus mentioned race at all- the Good Samaritan parable regards other religions rather than other races.

The Old Testament certainly gives plenty of justification for followers of Yahweh to be racist fucks.

Buddhism is an example of a religion which expended with very little violence .
I am not familliar with any example of violence commited 'in the name of Buddhism'. Buddhism spread mainly through scholars and through the fact that it was adopted by China (thus influencing Japan, Korea , Vietnam....)

One of the problems I have with monotheistic religions (Judaism, Islam, Christianity) is that their One-God-Policy often extends into a monopoly over the truth. "There is only one God and if you belive in something else ,you must be wrong". It is very difficult to be tolerant (though not impossible) with this attitude.
Looking at history , I think the Christians were usually the least tolerant , untill the 20th century they often had a 'convert or die' policy ,a Christian South America is one of the results.
The Muslims were more tolerant , they were especially kind to Jews (again ,until the 20th century) and to Christians living among them. However they were not very nice to 'heathens', hence the burning of temples and killing of Buddhists and Hindus in North India. Buddhist culture in North India and Afghanistan virtually disappeared after the Muslim invasion . It is difficult to find non-Muslims in Muslim countries these

The Muslims were tolerant of Jews untill the problem of the Jews and Palestine came along. and how can you believe in more than one god?

@I_am_god: Not that nice saying Islam that way..

Extreme Coder