[Quranic Reflection]: (2) The Romans have been defeated

[Anomalocaris]

Rome was a big empire. Their systems in architecture, agriculture and even their political method is enough to keep one baffled.

It was an empire way ahead of its time, with achievements reaching to the standards of modern culture.

In the Quran; they are mentioned by the name:

Sura 30, The Quran:
https://quran.com/30/1-11

Dr. Mustafa Khattab

(1) Alif-Lãm-Mĩm.
(2) The Romans have been defeated
(3) in a nearby land. Yet following their defeat, they will triumph

Dr. Ghali

(4) Within several years. To Allah belongs the Command ever before and ever after, and upon that day the believers will exult.

Dr. Mustafa Khattab

(5) at the victory willed by Allah. He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful.
(6) ˹This is˺ the promise of Allah. ˹And˺ Allah never fails in His promise. But most people do not know.
(7) They ˹only˺ know the worldly affairs of this life, but are ˹totally˺ oblivious to the Hereafter.

Verse "2" specified the Romans by the name: الروم. That is utterly important; actually the prophecy it made in verse "3" did come true. The Romans might lost their empire, but their empire did triumph, and today we see their shadow everywhere; America; Europe; Asia and Africa.

I'm happy that the Roman civilization triumphed. I mean we saw what other civilizations do to Muslims and believers in God. The Roman-style allowed for fair elections, allowed for multi-cultural world; allowed for respect to the law -which Rome did-.

Let us not forget how China burned our books; while Britain kept the oldest Quran in its museums.

The ethic that sees Multi-cultural as a desirable thing is a modern concept certainly not inherited from Rome.   If anything, it was created on an ad Hoc basis to better attract old world population from where ever it can get it to more quickly exploit the land the successors of romans had taken from the native Americans.   

 The fact that “multi-culturalness” of the old world managed to exist through the period when the world had been dominated by the west, the putative successor of Rome, the survival was not because of any influence of the heritage of Rome, but because the West was beset by internal strife, and had insufficient population needing to emigrate,  to be able brush aside other long established and populous cultures of the old world, such as those of India, China, and your own, and not because of any value any in the western world placed on “multi-cultural” because of Rome.  You might say that a multi-cultural world exists because Rome fell and therefore the west was divided. 

If Rome had not fallen but had instead retained its internal dynamism and cohesion and continued its expansion, the old world today would very likely be a mono-culture roman world in which Islamic civilization certainly would not exist, or perhaps a bipolar world with Roman culture dominating the western half of euroasia and Chinese culture dominating the eastern half, again in which no Islamic civilization is likely to exist.   So if Rome had Prospered, there would not none of your books in any hallowed museums.   There would be none of you, so to speak. 

To see how multi-cultural the legacy of the Rome permitted when it it had a population advantage and it was within its power to do brush aside other cultures, look at how well the indigenous cultures of north and South America, and Australia flourished under the successors of Rome.

Yes, Chinese government today is much more likely to take a lethal view of dissension, political, social or religious, than the leading western powers.  But that is a transient phenomenon when seen over thousands-year life span of major cultures.  If we were to go back back a fraction of that span, we would find leading western powers to viciously more intolerant of political, social and religious than the Chinese now, or then.    Crusades and inquisition sound familiar?