>>15296500Islam was promoted by the sword. It is exactly the opposite for Christianity.
Many of the early Christians were severely persecuted and martyred for their commitment to Christ
When islam spread, faith was not required, only surrender.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizyahttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Muslim_conquestshttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_IslamThis is disingenuous and oppressive. Christians are instructed to submit to the governing authorities (Romans 13) and to work within the political system.
The government was never intended to be a means of evangelism. The church is. And the church must be flexible enough to adapt to any culture.
Christianity translates, whereas Islam dominates. Any religion that relies on the power of the state to ensure adherence obviously has no confidence in the power of its God to rule hearts.
Christians do not seek a theocracy nor will the church overly concern itself with civil/legal issues.
Enforcing civil law is not our business. By the same token, respect for God, contributions, church attendance and other outward expressions of personal piety are not civil concerns.
Jesus nullified the theocratic approach because it had served its purpose. He in turn established an ecclesiastical approach because only God's organization can effectively reach local peoples within the context of their particular customs and circumstances.
