Part 5 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

All I can say is I sympathise with the Chinese people just how much now we know how they are still being racially stereotype in this 21st century, I guess if I say I am not Chinese you will switch to Koreans? By the way, Korea mainly South Korea has the fastest and largest growing Christian population in fact Korean missionaries were beheaded by the Taliban for sharing the Bible.

 

That is true, but as we know it Muslims are not being oppress in any Christian countries or in the Holy Land in fact it is Muslims who oppressing Muslims and it is we the none Muslims who are defending and protecting them against other Muslims.

 

It did happen they try to drop God and Stalin.Mao and Pol Pot started to massacre all who refuse not to worship them.In fact sometime in 1925 atheist Mexican President Plutarco Elías Calles went on a repressive policy against religion mainly against the Catholic church. All these anti God leaders who try to do what you suggest which is to drop God were all repressive people and not peaceful. There is more peace in a Christian country than an atheist one.

 

No, it was a pretty transparent landgrab. The Crusaders vowed to give the lands they conquered back to the Byzantine Empire (because the land from Anatolia down to the the southern Levant used to be provinces of the Byzantine Empire). Turns out, all the various Crusaders kept the land to themselves and formed their own nations from it, directly violating their own vows. Because it was primarily about land, glory, and wealth.

The Reconquista was a campaign of brutality against the Moors and Jews living in Iberia.

The Spanish Inquisition was a paranoid witch hunt (quite literally) against converted Jews and Moors and their children.

The Crusades were generally bloody land grabs (hey, the 4th Crusade didn't even fight against the Islamic infidel, and instead simply stole Constantinople from the Byzantine Empire).

Firstly: a lot of that is due to historical contingency as a result of European colonialism; generally, the only native resistance from colonial outsiders were hardcore Islamists (take a look at Iran after the overthrow of Mussadegh and how the only resistance against the CIA-backed Shah and his secret police were Ayatollah Khomeini and his Islamic Revolution, for a quite illuminating example).

Secondly: women's rights, LGBTQ rights, and so forth weren't acquired by slavish devotion to Christianity, but to a thoroughly secular understanding of society that explicitly rejects interference from religious influences on the state and legality.

It's not like I wrote a 50 page thesis on the relations between the Byzantine Empire and its eastern neighbors from the 5th century CE until 1453 or anything for my degree in history.

Oh, wait, that's exactly what I did. So, yes, I think I'm a bit more qualified to comment on the history of the Crusades than the average person and have a much more accurate picture of how things work because I did extensive study for over a year on that specific subject. You're fawning over the Catholic Church and denial of any wrongdoing on the part of the Crusaders is glaring and you're completely wrong about the subject.

 

The Crusades were called because the Byzantine Empire was explicitly requesting assistance from Catholic nations in order to help push back the Seljuk Turks. The Crusaders then used this as an excuse to grab as much land as possible, as the Crusaders made a vow before their deity to give the land back to the Byzantine Empire (as the Levant was originally a number of Byzantine provinces), which they never did, instead making independent nations out of the land they took.

Are you familiar with what France and Britain did to the Middle East, North Africa, and West Asia? Look up the Pied Noirs in Algeria and the Algerian Independence. European colonial governments were routinely brutal and horrifying to the people living there.

Arabs have been living in that region of the Levant for over 1500 years. It's more their home than Iceland is to Icelanders.

Also, the Crusades had massive support among all the nations which participated. It's just there was very little ability for the Crusaders to project their force across an entire continent, given how supply trains had to work at the time.

HA! They weren't really that good then and a Crusade now is the last thing America needs to be engaged in, unless you're fond of colonialism. If you are, then you're probably as bad as Leopold II.

 

What racial stereotyping would that be?
What does korea's christian anything have to do with the price of tea in china?
You can say you're from canada for all I care. It doesn't change the fact you can't use proper english to communicate.

All I wanted to know was if the bible was translated in your native language for you to read. It may help with your understanding of the written words.

 

It is either allow the Muslim grab the lands from the Byzantine or Western Christians. The Byzantine decided against the Muslims.

The Reconquista was a necessary campaign to stop the Moors from conquering Europe, and I remember you said Muslims are not interested in Europe???

The Inquisition is a counter step against Muslim jihadist.

The Crusaders was a response against the bloody and brutal Muslim land grabbers. Without Muslim aggression, no Crusade. The Byzantine Empire of Middle East Christendom was a progressive empire until Muslims conquered it and now we see what Muslims have done to the Middle East especially the maltreatment of women, none Muslims, other Muslims and homosexuals, is that the kind of civilization you are referring to that the Catholic church should have submitted it self to?

Even before the birth of the USA, Muslim countries are already very backwards and full of extremism the kind of extremism that we are witnessing now.

That was made possible due to Christian teachings just like Christians will stand up against slavery that is why the USA had to fight a bloody and tragic civil war in order to stop slavery, from slavery to women's rights and now homosexual rights also science progresses because of Christianity.

Constantinople or what is now Turkey as well as the Middle East would be better of under the Byzantine empire.

I doubt if you are qualified historian especially regarding the Christian church or theology. You have only display your bias opinion ignoring the very fact that if the Muslim armies have accepted the tributes and ransom money that Catholic West as well as the Byzantine have been paying the Muslim warlords there would be no Crusade, you ignore the very fact that Muslim warlords have every plans and intention of conquering Europe and the world but most of all you ignore the very fact of present current events and situation that clearly demonstrated that countries under Muslim rule are regressive and oppressive instead you blame the West for Muslim problems, Muslim problems that have been in existence since Mohammed founded islam.

 

What racial stereotyping you tell me, and now you are saying Koreans are tea bags?
Eh??, it's a Canadian expression just in case you don't know.
Are you white-Aryan supremacist?

I don't think you can ever understand the Holy Bible until you rid yourself of your prejudices.
And yes, the Holy Bible is translated in many languages that include English, Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, Arabic, Spanish, Indonesian, Russian, French, etc. etc. etc. And no matter what language it is translated to it has one core message Jesus Christ is the Son of God and God exist very simple English I don't understand why you an English person can not understand??? Maybe it is you who need to try a none English Bible and maybe you will understand then.

 

A request that was made due to Muslim clear and present threat, without Muslim aggression no Byzantine request for Western help.

Are you familiar with what Muslim did in India, and yes Middle East too and presently most of all what they are doing PRESENTLY in Somalia, Mali and Africa? In case you don't know we are helping good Muslim defend themselves against the thousands of bad Muslims, the same bad Muslims that started the problem back in 680 AD.

Arabs not Muslims.

The Crusaders were always outnumber by the more massive Muslim armies and their arsenals. As a historians you should now the Battle of Vienna, Battle of Lepanto, and many more.

Between America or Western colonialism and Muslim colonialism, the world is better of under Western colonialism.

 

Come on, admit you were wrong. Post 638 shows that you are unfamiliar with even the language being used in Scripture.

 

How about a third option like requesting a highly trained select group of mercenaries from the pope that Alexius could command, which is precisely what the Emperor asked for. Instead, he got an entire army of soldiers and peasants.

The Reconquista and the Spanish Inquisition were necessary for uniting Spain under one faith, not necessarily about Muslim Jihadists.

No. Not really. It's not that black and white.

For centuries, Christians were allowed to visit the holy land, things changed with the Turks. How progressive was the Byzantine Empire? You're over generalizing an entire Empire that lasted over a thousand years. Emperor Justinian closed Plato's Academy .

How could you posibly know that?

 

Good, no racial stereotyping then. Now you're in agreement. I am saying nothing about koreans except what you believe.
I am who you think I am. But who you think I am is likely wrong.

 

To the greedy lords that conquered those lands, maybe, but sending knights on the crusades kept them from killing each other and harassing innocent peeple in Europe. The Pope believed that the crusades would lead to healing the schism between the Catholics and Orthodox.

 

So, why did they kick out the Jews or murder them? Was that necessary to stop the Moors? If so, how was it necessary?

You can't seriously be comparing today's modern theocracies to the Caliphates... oh, you are? How funny. Also, the Crusades were NOT aimed at dealing with aggression. If they were, they would have simply attacked the Seljuk Turks who were attacking the Byzantine Empire. Did they do that? No. They retook land that had been captured hundreds of years ago by the Caliphates. They provoked an all out war against the Muslim world.

 

When one knows everything it's easy.

 

The Pope may have thought that, but given that accounts of the knights, men-at-arms, and peasant soldiers of the Crusades were looting and raping their way through central Europe prior to reaching the borders of the Byzantine Empire forced the hand of the ERE to have an armed escort follow the Crusaders throughout the Empire until they reached the other side. That doesn't exactly scream "holy warrior" to me. Now, were there pious knights wanting to be pilgrim-warriors trying to restore the Holy Land to Christ? Undoubtedly. I'm not even necessarily saying that most of them didn't feel that way. However, their actions certainly show a much baser instinct to them; I wouldn't call most of the Crusaders good people. Rape, pillage, land theft, breaking promises, and so forth don't really say to me that they were good guys.

 

The war between the Byzantine Empire and the Seljuk Turks was not a religiously motivated war; the Seljuks were very similar to most steppe horsemen empires: to acquire the wealth of large, sedentary nations for themselves. The Huns of 600 years before, the Mongols of 200 years after, and numerous other steppe horsemen empires show this sort of pattern. The Seljuks weren't irreligious, per se, and the Byzantines certainly weren't, but neither side saw this as a holy war to decide whether or not Islam or Christianity were correct. The Byzantines had had rocky relations with many Islamic nations, but that was seldom different from how they related to the earlier Zoroastrian Persian empire before the rise of Islam. The main thing is that the Byzantine Empire was very rich and everyone wanted the wealth they had. Pagans to the north and Christians to the west were trying to grab their land and wealth just as often as the Muslims to the east.

Are you totally unfamiliar with what European colonialism did to Dar al-Islam? There's a reason that various fundamentalist Islamic groups have so much power. I urge you to look up what Britain and the US were doing in Iran from 1900-1978. There's a reason Ayatollah Khomeini was so popular.

The religion is irrelevant; otherwise, Sweden should kick out all the Christians in favor of people who worship the Aesir and Israel should kick out people who worship a monotheistic deity instead of the original proto-Judaic deities, including El, YHWH, and Asherah.

That was due to logistical reasons and Europe being a backwater until about the 1300s-1400s.

The Ottoman Empire in the late 1500s and 1600s was already on the long road to decline, due to a poorly centralized government and the mismanagement of the Janissaries. Europe was already beginning to realign its various social structures into supporting professional national armies, which the Ottoman Empire (and the rest of the world, in fact) were not really doing.

Or we could just not engage in colonialism, period.

 

Quote Posted by dairyair:

Show how the canaanites heard about God of Jews. Before they were slaughtered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Canaanites were aware of God’s power and they could have repented. Even so, God had patiently waited over 400 years until the Canaanites would be ripe for judgment (Genesis 15:16) — though this would mean Israel’s enslavement in Egypt in the meantime.

Refer also to (Joshua 2:10, 11; 9:9)

So they were justifiably punished for their sins and not "slaughtered" as you put it. You make it sound like they were murdered when in reality it was really deserving punishment that was way overdue...400 yrs. to be exact.

 

Korea. Sanest nation on earth.

You'll pardon the rest of humanity for not considering this a recommendation.

 

The situation is the same today.

The USA and Europe KNOW that muslims are offended by the sexual promiscuity and available pornography that is filtering into their societies.

This same stance today, billions of people insisting that sexual promiscuity destroys families and nations are fighting against the secular amoral sexually licensed nations that promote sexual amorality everywhere.

It is simply a matter of war settling this ancient dispute again and again.

 

How can I admit I am wrong when you can't even admit the Holy Bible is right.

 

Esteemed Mitt.

I was just browsing around (fairly new here), and saw this thread.

Out of curiosity, are you an expert on the Bible (a Biblical technologist)? Are you a pastor? What are your credentials?

Okay, take a crack at this one: Why are the great, highly conspicuous and imposing pyramids and temples never mentioned in the Bible? After all, they sit right smack-dab and in the middle of the Holy Land.

Thanks and have a blessed day.

 

An army of soldiers, peasants and monks to face up against the jihadist-zealots of thousands of Muslim armies

One faith under Catholicism to counter Islamic sharia and jihadist.

It is more than black and white it is crystal clear the threat of Islam to the stability, security and most of all freedom of Spain.

For centuries Christians submitted to Muslim rule paying Muslim tax, tribute, bribes, trusting that Muslim will respect their Christian freedom and access to the Holy Land that didn't happen. Under the Byzantine philosophy, culture, economy, transportation and science progresses.

Constantinople or what is now Turkey as well as the Middle East would be better of under the Byzantine empire.

Because we already seen what Turkey and the Middle East has become under Muslim rule very regressive, oppressive and total lack of freedom and respect to human life, in fact Turkey for decades have been trying to modernize by de-Islamizing their nation that started back in mid 1900's to very little to no success their stagnant to slow growth has been pointed to the the fact that Muslim leaders are against modernization especially their oppressive policies against the growth or rebirth of Christianity that has been part of their culture for thousand of years.

 

What I believe is what you have reveal yourself to be.
You are what you are not what I think of you.

 

Was it necessary to stop the Moors? Maybe just like how Muslim wipe out Jewish and Christian villages and deny Christian access to the Holy Land. The action of kicking out Jews or attacking them were the actions of individual leaders of certain crusade groups and the Catholic church condemn their actions which eventually did stop.

Yes, I am, the Caliphates they were self glorifying themselves, self decorated their palaces with gold and riches, capture from conquered people and ignore the threat of Islamic extremism. The Crusades main goal was the securing of Jerusalem that is why they did not advance towards Syria, Egypt or Saudi Arabia. The Byzantine want the recovery of their empire not just Jerusalem.

And you said the Crusade provoke an all out war from the Muslim for responding to Muslims!!! Muslim have been provoking and aggressively waging wars since 680 AD, another clear Islamic apologetics that have their facts or intentionally have their facts wrong.