Medieval Myths- the Crusades

Religion is a tool that is used to control thinking. When used for positive ends it can sometimes be beneficial to the less fortunate in society. When used for negative ends it can result in obscene acts of hideous violence against innocent people on a scale ranging from individuals to entire populations.

That applies to ALL religions because they all use the same tools to control thinking.

If it was up to me religion would be regulated like all other mind altering substances such as alcohol and drugs and it would be illegal to expose children to them under the age of 18.

 

I will need a definition of "religion" since I see the atheistic evolutionary liberalism we are all subjected to via regulated government mind control indoctrination centers we call schools, as the most thought-controlled areas in the world. Just one of those proper thinking guidelines is the hatred of Christianity, this is for political reasons. This indoctrination is for near-universal negative ends and has led to massive destruction by modern centralized states the makes anything done by Christians [acting as fallen men not in line with the bible] pale in comparison. I would love to dig into this can we discuss a few things? I will show the following true if you contest.


1- Atheistic worldview as taught in modern democracies has led to the most obscene acts of hideous violence against innocent people on a scale ranging from individuals to entire populations.


2- Atheists have no foundation or justification to make a claim any act of violence against innocent people no matter the scale is "obscene" or "hideous" since that assumes a moral law.

3- I dont care to defend "religion" but the truth of God the creator of the world. Whatever man makes i dont care. What God reveals I do. Atheism is false God is true.

4- A true consistent atheist cannot claim anything done on the crusades was "obscene" or "hideous"


If it was up to me religion would be regulated like all other mind altering substances such as alcohol and drugs and it would be illegal to expose children to them under the age of 18

So you do encourage mind control, so long as you are doing the controlling. You wish to regulate "religion" to how you desire it [outlawed] so as they only get your liberal atheistic religious beliefs. Tell me, how would you regulate your religious worldview beliefs? let me guess you wouldn't, that is to be forced on everyone.

 

Oh, the IRONY!

Theists indoctrinated from BIRTH are pointing fingers and accusing others of using "mind control"?



ALL of your ASSUMPTIONS above are premised upon the existence of your imaginary deity for which there is ZERO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE.

The ONUS is on YOU, since you are making the allegations, to PROVIDE the necessary credible evidence BEFORE anything else needs to be done by myself.

Look at this as a CHALLENGE to do be the FIRST theist to EVER be able to prove the existence of your imaginary deity. Fame and fortune awaits you if you succeed.

 

Not at least during the First Crusade. Give the crusader armies a reasonably able leader and a (more or less) cohesive command structure and the heavily armored Norman knights of Europe and their well equipped vassals were more than capable of besting local Islamic armies. To use your term they were a 'dismal failure' in subsequent generations only because they lacked a competent command structure.

In fact the Islamic armies of the period suffered from the same problem. Give them a unifying leader and they did well. Take it away and they had the same problems the crusaders did.

 

Don't think this is correct. Persecution occurred under (a few) fanatical Muslim leaders in localized areas, but for the most part it was minimal. The Koran itself expressly required Muslim conquerors to respect the rights of subjugated Jews and Christians because they were referred to as (People of the Book) and therefore entitled to won property, conduct trade and go about their lives with minimal interference. The principal proscriptions placed on them was that they had to pay an additional tax/levy above and beyond what local Muslim's paid and they were not allowed to bear arms.

The long term result of this was that by the time of the Turkish Caliphate in the 14th Century Jews and Christians can and did rise to very high positions in the Empires administration precisely because they were not Muslim and the Sultan could rely on their loyalty - they couldn't usurp the thrown and weren't allow to hold military positions. This made them more trustworthy than Muslim's in the same positions.

Which funnily enough put them far away and ahead of Jews and Muslems living in 'Christian' Europe way into 19th Century.

 

Let's compare indoctrination. We have both been through thousands of hours of liberalism and secularism in schools and reinforced via media. What have we and how have we been indoctrinated into theism. I had to question what it was i was told was true and believed to become theist, that is true of over 90% of the world's population. I also never accused you of mind control, other than what you yourself admitted you desired, mind control.


If it was up to me religion would be regulated like all other mind altering substances such as alcohol and drugs and it would be illegal to expose children to them under the age of 18

Its nazi Germany all over. Complete control of the mind indoctrination into ant Christian beliefs.


Your entire posts assume naturalism and athism, therefore, your posts need to prove the assumption. However, you will notice that is one of the debate offers i give to you to join in. Also I cant help but notice you run from debating those issues you brought up. A clear sign of indoctrination, you cannot support or are unwilling to defend your stance as you have been told what to believe, not come to it on your own though process.



1- Atheistic worldview as taught in modern democracies has led to the most obscene acts of hideous violence against innocent people on a scale ranging from individuals to entire populations.


2- Atheists have no foundation or justification to make a claim any act of violence against innocent people no matter the scale is "obscene" or "hideous" since that assumes a moral law.

3- I dont care to defend "religion" but the truth of God the creator of the world. Whatever man makes i dont care. What God reveals I do. Atheism is false God is true.

4- A true consistent atheist cannot claim anything done on the crusades was "obscene" or "hideous"



If you wish to debate I will say the god of the bible is true, atheism is false. But that needs its own thread in a 1 v1 format. I will be doing many threads showing God is true in this forum but all in good time. This thread is on the crusades. That deserves its own thread. Do you accept the debate or will you run as you did the other topics?

 

Predictable BS strawman and ad hom response ignored for obvious reasons.

The ONUS remains entirely on YOU to prove the existence of your imaginary deity.

Without evidence you have SQUAT!

 

Don't think this is correct. It is a historical fact they were persecuted and I mention some of those instances one example when the 12,000 unarmed german pilgrims were slaughtered to me is not "minimal." Think of 9/11 in America. only 2,000 died yet few blame us for war in response. Persecution of Christian pilgrims and Christians under Muslim rule was far, far worse. Think of the protest over any conceived "discrimination" today, nothing as compared to under Muslim rule for Christians at this time.

The Koran says much more on the issues does it not? it all depends on the situation of the Muslims. When they are in power as they were after taking control, that slight discrimination aginst Christians turns into tyranny and death under Muslim rule.

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...t-islam-from-a-christian-perspective.8101897/


In fact, that is not true at all is it? This book directly refutes that myth.

https://www.amazon.com/Bearing-Fals...4?keywords=rodney+stark&qid=1581949206&sr=8-4

First I must point out the crusades started in the 11th century not the 14th. So if as you claim hundreds of years later when the Muslims are fully in control and cant trust other Muslims as a threat to his power, he allows a nonthreat to power, my guess this has nothing to do with the crusades hundreds of years earlier. It would be once more false to claim jews could not rise to power. I would recommend Thomas Madden for this.

https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Schol...+madden+modern+scholar&qid=1581949622&sr=8-10

What we here are concerned with, either way, is how Christians were treated leading up to the crusades. As we know Muslims are notorious for treating them well today [sarcasim] as was Muhammad [more sarcasim]. So lets say Muslims played nice disregarded the koran starting in the 14 th century and Christians persecuted Muslims in Europe. That does not change the persecution of Christians under Muslims [read any crusade book] leading up to the call for crusade or its part as a motivator.

 

I see you are one to run and make excuses, let's do this simple.


Debate offer topic

"prove the existence of your imaginary deity. Without evidence you have SQUAT!"

You can prove your deity of atheism as the creator of the world however you wish to do so, I will for the God of the bible. Deabte forum

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?forums/debates-contests.79/

 

Utterly wrong premise!

You are fallaciously ASSUMING that the universe was "created". The Laws of Physics stipulate that matter can neither be created nor destroyed ergo the universe has ALWAYS existed in one form or another.

What makes it even WORSE for your imaginary "creator" is the LOGICAL PARADOX of OMNIPOTENCE.

If matter cannot be destroyed then your imaginary "creator" cannot be omnipotent since there is now something that he cannot do. But if he couldn't "create" matter that could NOT be destroyed then that would have been another strike against his imaginary omnipotence.

Try starting a thread with EVIDENCE for the existence of your imaginary deity. I recommend the Religion & Philosophy forum because it won't survive the Science forum. It probably won't survive (for lack of actual evidence) in the R&P forum either but at least you will have a few other theists around to support your imaginary deity.

 

So, in other words, you decline the debate. Is there any debate you would do in a 1v1? I am rather itching for one with you and you wont on any i offered so far.

 

Do I really have to go into the gory details of the the aftermaths of the Crusader sieges of Antioch and Jerusalem? History isn't a score card there were more than enough acts of barbarism committed by both sides to prevent anyone from claiming the high moral ground.

And it all depended on the situation in the Christian realms as well. The Byzantines had for a long time more of less treated Muslim visitors to the Empire respectfully as did some of the Crusader Kingdoms. Spain on the other hand exiled, confiscated land & property, forced conversation upon them or massacred this entire local Muslim population into local extinction.

And they were ongoing in the middle east well into the 13th Century. As were crusades in Europe against pagan Balts in the north and heretics in southern Europe. The Reconquista itself wasn't completed until 1492.

The system was initiated after the establishment of the Ottoman Empire in 1453 with the fall of Constantinople and its establishment as the new capital of the empire (although the empire technically came into existence at the ens of 13th century). Note these dates and the end of the Reconquista - they overlap. Non-Muslims could and did rise to great heights in the Administration of the empire. It is simply fact that (most of the time in most locations) within the empire Christians and Jews had more rights as (scorned) second class citizens than Muslims did in any European nation of the period.

 

And no I'm am not singing the praises of the Moslem Empire. Anyone studying the history of Europe and the middle east with an open mind will see more enough evidence of mass murder, rapine and looting, treason, revolt, prejudice and bigotry etc on both 'sides' to make one despair of human nature. No-one comes out of that period of history (or for that matter most other periods) without blood on their hands.

And no-one gets to moralize afterwards about how one side was always worse than the other - because it simply wasn't and isn't true.

It is also fact that Western civilization owes a great debt to the Moslem Empires of the East in terms of their contribution to astronomy, medicine, engineering and mathematics etc at a time when the Western world was recovering from the collapse of its classical civilizations. In the end the Muslim empires of the day get to own both their successes and their failures just like the old Kingdoms of Europe. In the case of the Ottomans, the last and greatest of the Moslem Empires - its internal flaws were IMO largely responsible for its downfall.

 

To date you have offered nothing worthy of a one on one debate as far as I am concerned. I have no need to prove that there is zero evidence for any imaginary deity or that everything based upon the fallacy of an imaginary deity is anything other than superstition.

Try reading my posts on other topics if you desperately want to find something to debate but I rarely make claims that I cannot substantiate.

 

and yet you make such claims and baseless statements as above but chose not to defend those claims in a debate. You have claimed there is no evidence for the God of the bible, care to defend such a claim in a debate?

 

Why would I engage in a debate that is patently illogical?

You cannot prove a NEGATIVE!

The ONUS is entirely on YOU to provide the EVIDENCE that your imaginary deity EXISTS.

If you could you would have done so already.

You haven't because you can't ergo there is nothing to debate.

 

What does it have to do with Christian persecution as a cause of the crusades? when did i say the crusaders were perfect at all times? this was the standard practice in siege warfare in its day. When a besieged city chose to try and hold out for help, and the besiegers were dying of starvation, they when unwilling to leave, accepted the standard warfare consequences. I cover in my op the Jerslum "massacre."

History tells us the facts of what has happened, it is not moral relativism of the classrooms. All are sinners yes, but to claim the german massacer of unarmed pilgrims and the persecution suffered by Christians under Muslim rule is the same as the sieges of Antioch and Jerusalem is to allow our desire for relativism to be placed above history. And yet if relativism is true, you must deny your own self the pleasure of thinking you are better than any Muslim or crusader.

You had made the claim the Koran said to treat Christians well, this is not so. Yes some variation in treatment among Christians to Muslim under their control varied. This was not based on the bible nor the koran. But to correct you false claims of the muslims under spanish rule see here

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/medieval-myths-the-inquisitions.564748/

I was pointing out that citing events hundreds of years later cannot be the original cause of the crusades to the holy lands, the ones i focus on.

I think Madden would correct your false ideas of Spain.





So after looking over your posts and thaks for them. What is your main objection? just what are you wanted to show?

 

You keep wanting to talk about an imaginary deity, I told you I don't care to do this. I care to debate god as revealed in the bible. This debate you chose not to join. If as you say there is no evidence for God as i am sure your liberal indoctrination informs you, then why refuse the debate so many times? as you are so confident, there is none. Easy victory for you since you won't have to do anything. You can then feel good that what you desire [no God] is true and live happily ever after.

But we both know you won't because you wish not to be so embarrassed as your indoctrination has left you the proper theology [athsim] but not the ability to defend the faith. Since only one indoctrinated could hold fast to the claims you have made. A sound atheist cannot be to careful in his discussion who wishes to remain one, you are proving this.

 

Agreed all mankind are sinners. However, our modern wars and crimes far out due the Muslims and crusaders put together. All I have argued was the basic crusader motives were justified. Their sins exaggerated.

Except I guess your side vs the crusaders and Muslims. But I never said "one side" was always worse. I said the crusaders were justified in their actions. I would say as a whole no question the Christians were the better as i would so today.

More myths. I highly recommend this book for you.

https://www.amazon.com/Bearing-Fals...s=bearing+false+witness&qid=1582033071&sr=8-1
https://www.amazon.com/Atheist-Delu...swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1582033140&sr=8-1

 

Yet ANOTHER inane FALLACY?

Please expound on this imaginary "atheism theology" of yours. What are "holy books"? Where can one purchase and study atheist hymnals and prayers? Which colleges offer degrees of "atheism divinity"? Where are the atheist houses of worship? Do the "high priests of atheism" wear silly clothes and intone mindless litanies? What atheist "rituals" and "ceremonies" are performed on atheist "holy days"?



Once again YOU are the one LACKING the EVIDENCE to support your imaginary superstitions.

And please REFRAIN from PROJECTING your own insecurities WRT to your beliefs onto others in future.

As a devout atheist I am more than willing to examine whatever CREDIBLE EVIDENCE that is provided for the existence of your imaginary deity. However in order to be credible it cannot be hearsay or self referencing. It just be able to withstand both critical thinking and intense scrutiny. Surely your imaginary deity can provide you something of that irrefutable nature that you could hold up and use to embarrass atheists like myself?

So what is stopping you and your imaginary deity? Is it that YOUR FAITH is not "strong enough" for your imaginary deity to share it with you?

 

Thanks for accepting the debates i started them.


1stvermont vs Derideo_Te -Evidence for the God of the Bible and Atheism

This debate was accepted on post 70 of this thread

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...hs-the-crusades.564749/page-3#post-1071441391

1stvermont will argue for the existence of the God of the Derideo_Te will argue for atheism.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-for-the-god-of-the-bible-and-atheism.568331/


Derideo_Te vs 1stvermont - Does Liberal Naturalistic philosophy Exists

I [1stVermont] will show that indoctrination into one system of belief exists. My case study will be Derideo_Te himself. I will show my his posts that he has received and swallowed the blu pill of indoctrination via state schools. I will also show that schools by what and how they teach, are centers of indoctrination. Derideo_Te will argue there is no such thing as atheistic philosophy/beliefs/worldview pushed in education. This debate started on this thread post 70.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...hs-the-crusades.564749/page-3#post-1071441391

I will allow Derideo_Te the first post unless he takes to long.

 

I would strongly suggest people having a look if they are interested

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-for-the-god-of-the-bible-and-atheism.568331/

 

I would strongly recommend that you don't waste your time since it is just the same massive load of bovine excrement that Usfan and Chemical engineer post in the Religion & Philosophy forum.

OTOH if you cannot get enough of that creationist drivel there is more than sufficient to fertilize a farm and grow vegetables to stock Whole Foods for an entire state.

Your choice.

 

Stvermont, the problem I have with this line of argument is that in the end you can't just address the issue of one crusade, you have to address the issue of ALL the crusades. Crusaders fought Muslims, pagans and what are today regarded (because they are all dead) heretics. And Muslims launched Jihad against coreligionists (called Fitna) and that's not including the Shia Sunni divide.

Yes there were some Crusaders motivated by their love of God and desire to protect co-religionists. But they were intermingled and apparently outnumbered in every crusade by men whose motivation was a desire for land gold and political power. Just like on the other side.

No, I don't place myself in judgement. Nothing has changed over history. Given the right (or wrong) upbringing, environment and circumstances there is nothing potentially stopping me or you (or any other person) from committing that same kind of egregious acts. As much as it would be nice to believe we are 'different' now and that we as individuals would never, ever sink to that kind of level the truth is anyone could have been a guard at Dachau or Auschwitz give the right circumstances. One simple act of acquiescence is all it takes to start someone down that a long, dark, slippery road to atrocity and the divide between 'sinner' and 'saint' is paper thin.

So as far as the Crusades go I would say yes, there were good, decent men of faith involved but whatever their intentions they were overwhelmed by and the actions of other men with baser motives. Motives that resulted in atrocities that would make Christ weep. (Allah I can't speak for or about.)

https://www.amazon.com/Bearing-Fals...s=bearing+false+witness&qid=1582033071&sr=8-1
https://www.amazon.com/Atheist-Delu...swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1582033140&sr=8-1[/QUOTE]

I will look at these titles if you look at 'The First Crusade' by Steven Runciman.

 

Thanks for your thoughtful posts.

That is true of course and good point. But my area of study and interest really is on the first crusade and lesser, the first three. I tried to make this the topic of my study and op.

Could you support this? did you read my op related to this under the first half of post 3? I would say just the opposite, the majority were of good motives but the few make the headlines. Of course, I am here referring to the first 3 crusades.

Nice.

Yes and thanks, he is a great scholar just added it to my amazon list. Thanks for the recommendation. Might I recommend a book on the first crusade? I would rather you read the two I already cited but i am of the opinion the more books the better. Feel free to ignore.

https://www.amazon.com/First-Crusad...+Christianity+and+Islam&qid=1582125211&sr=8-1