Crusades

[ardillacid]

Yo, just read a review on Family.org about "kingdom of heaven". The writer states that the crusades could not be justified. He goes on to say (apparently) that fighting is never justified.

I guess this guy wishes that Europe was overrun by blood-thirsty turks fighting under the banner of Islam

[Curt F.]

Was the treatment under the Church during the Middle Ages any better than these so called "blood-thirsty" Turks? I think not. A conversion of Islam would have meant nothing because, right now, you all would be Islam instead of Christian. Weird thought

The Church, unjustly, initiated the attack, therefor it is unjustified.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

what is ur sig about? i don't get it. Innocent the Third initiated the crusade that sacked Constantinople. the crusades were justifiabile because the Romans had owned the Holy Land for over 1,000 years. The byzantines were forced out and the turks layed siege to Consantinople and forcefully converted people to Islam. they changed the church of the ascension on the mount of olives into a mosque, destryoed the Holy seplerchure, and killed Christian pilgrims. The Crusades were justifiabile.

Edited May 7, 2005 by Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

[MichaelFilo]

Islamic treatement of converts was never as good as Christian treatment of converts. The crusades were defensive, and if they were not justifiable, then the American revolution and the war of 1812 weren't either.

God bless,
Mikey

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='May 7 2005, 10:32 AM'] what is ur sig about? i don't get it. [/quote]
He's an atheist...

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Curt F.' date='May 7 2005, 11:19 AM'] Was the treatment under the Church during the Middle Ages any better than these so called "blood-thirsty" Turks? I think not. A conversion of Islam would have meant nothing because, right now, you all would be Islam instead of Christian. Weird thought

The Church, unjustly, initiated the attack, therefor it is unjustified. [/quote]
Wrong.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

I still don't get it... So Curt F. Are you comparing Innocent III to Adolf Hitler?

[Paladin D]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='May 7 2005, 06:26 PM'] He's an atheist... [/quote]
... and a Nazi?

[Aloysius]

I love that sig! I think it's hilarious.

see, if you don't get the humor, it is really just a harmless joke. see, he sets up to positions and basically decides which one is right with ad hominem argument, i.e. hitler believes A so A must be wrong, the Pope believes B and he's better than Hitler so B must be right. therefore the earth is flat because the pope thinks so; it couldn't be round because Adolf Hitler thinks so, and you wouldn't want to agree with hitler right?

[Q the Ninja]

You can't just make a blanket statement whether or not they were just.

I'll give you an example. Charles Martel helped keep out the Moslems a few decades before Charlemagne came to power, which means that they were most definitely a threat, especially since they were teaching another religion.

However, invading Constantinople cannot be justified. That was just stupid and I hope we never do it again.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote]However, invading Constantinople cannot be justified. That was just stupid and I hope we never do it again. [/quote]

True story. Thats why all praticipants were excommunicated by Pope Innocent III.

[Niccolò]

[quote]However, invading Constantinople cannot be justified.  That was just stupid and I hope we never do it again.[/quote]
Unless, of course, if Europe is again threatened by the Turks...which I don't see happening in the near future.

Edited May 8, 2005 by Niccolò

[MichaelFilo]

Maybe the terrorism at the moment isn't a clear cut sign. I think it is a foreshadowing of something bigger, although, I usually get my political guesses DEAD WRONG.

God bless,
Mikey

[toledo_jesus]

what the muslims failed to do at Poitiers in 732 they are accomplishing now by immigration. France? 20% Muslim.
Watch out, in a few years we will see Muslim heads of state in Western Europe.

[toledo_jesus]

oh, and the Crusades were moral. They were to open up the Holy Land to Christian pilgrims and combat an aggressive force that had repeatedly assaulted Europe, that force being Islam.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote]Watch out, in a few years we will see Muslim heads of state in Western Europe. [/quote]

i don't know. unlikely.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='May 7 2005, 09:19 PM']
i don't know. unlikely. [/quote]
With current demographic trends in Europe, a very real possibility (maybe not in literally a "few years," but within a generation.)

Edited May 8, 2005 by Socrates

[Curt F.]

Haha, no, I'm not a Nazi, I just found that banner on a website and I found it funny. I'm not meaning to offend or anything, I just find it funny how people can twist facts like that

And I stand by my position. The Crusades were an act of prejudice against the Muslims. There may have been some minor reasons, but to start a whole century worth of fighting? That's definately unjustified.

[cmotherofpirl]

The crusades were an act of justified war against the Muslims.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Curt F.' date='May 7 2005, 11:00 PM'] And I stand by my position. The Crusades were an act of prejudice against the Muslims. There may have been some minor reasons, but to start a whole century worth of fighting? That's definately unjustified. [/quote]
[QUOTE]


So maybe when the muslims were besieging Vienna we should have made friends