The Crusades

[Whyme]

21 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

I didn’t say Jesus would have called people to become Miltes Christi (Soldiers of Christ) ready to wage war. I did say we need to take into context any anti-war attitudes in The New Testament, which I argue are not prevalent, are because the goal was a) to spread the gospel, and b) raising up arms would make Rome crush the early church. 

 

Rome can still crush the Church. But God doesn't allow it. Our weapons are not carnal

Edited March 4, 2021 by Whyme

[Fidei Defensor]

1 hour ago, Whyme said:

Rome can still crush the Church. But God doesn't allow it. Our weapons are not carnal

Actually Rome did crush the church, people were fed to lions and used as torches. Nero even had Christian’s skinned alive and he wore their skin as clothes. In Cappadocia Christians hiding from persecution lived in caves with cielings only  1 meter (3 feet) high! 

[Whyme]

2 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

 raising up arms would make Rome crush the early church. 

 

 

31 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Actually Rome did crush the church

ok

[Fidei Defensor]

33 minutes ago, Whyme said:

 

ok

You quoted my words out of the paragraph they were in: 

1 hour ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Actually Rome did crush the church, people were fed to lions and used as torches. Nero even had Christian’s skinned alive and he wore their skin as clothes. In Cappadocia Christians hiding from persecution lived in caves with cielings only  1 meter (3 feet) high! 

 

[David1701]

21 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

I didn’t say Jesus would have called people to become Miltes Christi (Soldiers of Christ) ready to wage war. I did say we need to take into context any anti-war attitudes in The New Testament, which I argue are not prevalent, are because the goal was a) to spread the gospel, and b) raising up arms would make Rome crush the early church. 

 

Also, the gospel in one hand and a flashing blade in the other, does not sit well...

[Starise]

War is mentioned in the Bible in several different contexts which can easily be confused. 

The crusades are a much deeper study than I initially believed. There were many popes involved. Not all wars or "crusades" were fought for the same reasons. It would seem from my studies that more wars were fought for conquest by popes than for defense, although sometimes the opposition retaliated which might have looked like those poor RCC knights had to defend themselves all depending on the slant the history books give the events.

When knights went out for conquest they were under no authority but the pope's.They need not ask permission from any king. This amounts to bandits claiming lands. This was often very lucrative for those involved. Not something commonly mentioned in many historical records. This was often a money game. No one cared about God or His ways. This was an OPPORTUNITY to pillage.

I would want to re write the history books too if I were Catholic. It's all bad. Very bad.

The religion was often forced on those who were plundered. Not to convert was to be a heritic and be condemned to death. No wonder the pagans hated the so called "Christians".

Jesus would NEVER have taken this approach.

[debrakay]

Great thread to read.  My only thought is that mankind's lust for, greed, power, war, are all things that Jesus referred to when he said,

"Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do."

[teddyv]

I'm sure it's been mentioned already, but the armies of the east reached the gates of Vienna before they were finally turned back. In a political sense, the wars of the crusades could be framed as a defense of much of Europe from the east. Dressing it up as a holy war, however...

 

[Whyme]

fighting to liberate the Holy land was a carnal waste. Our city is in heaven not earth, so says scripture.