Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just for the record, I'm a moral absolutist. I believe in Jesus and what he preached as the truth, period.
The crusades were more of a group holiday with good perks.
I read it too. Don't know that it proves much more than the futility of war and the greed of man.The Crusades were much more complex than those movies you saw where the BAD BAD Christians came in an slaughtered all those innocent nice Muslims.
Battle Over the Crusades
I know that nobody will probably read it but the summary at the end describes the complicated issues of Religion, Power struggles and trade issues on both sides and other issues far more complicated than the "Christianity BAD" argument that gets used as the "Godwins Law" of religious debate.
Seems like the Christians weren't above fighting amongst themselves either.An additional part of this reformation of Christian life was to somehow end, or deter, the incessant warfare that plagued the European community. The incessant Christian slaughter of Christians had led to the "truce of God" movement in the 11th Century as part of the general attempt at creating this new Christendom. Warfare was banned on the Sabbath. Under the influence of the great abbey of Cluny, a driving force in the reformation of the church, the truce was extended to holy days. In various territories it expanded to Advent, Lent, Easter and Pentecost. By the middle of the 11th Century it was closely knit to the Peace of God movement, which protected Church property and the poor from war. Violation of the Peace or the Truce was considered grounds for excommunication. While it seems contradictory to encourage a Crusade in the interest of peace, there was certainly the papal hope that by turning the incessant warring fervor outward in the purpose of defending Christendom there was greater purpose than the continuing scandal of Christians slaughtering Christians.
I'm not sure that really pans out, John. Let me try a similar logic 'tree':
Churchill was an alcoholic
The British make an icon of Churchill
The British idolise alcoholics
You are wrong.he was a pedophile
the religion praises him
the religion praises pedophilia
What Jesus taught and how medieval humans acted are two different issues....
Then by the same arguement...comparing modern Islam practice to ancient Islamic practice are two different issues.
Absolutely..have I said otherwise?
yeah it is. It is sad that people refuse to admit that islam is a violent religion, started by a WARLORD, that preaches conversion by force, kills rape victims, endorses molesting children, endorses honor killings, and teaches it's followers that it is thier duty to kill infidels.