Reason for The Crusades explained
- Thread starter Debp
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
NayborBear
Active Member
You should continue laughing at hell as much as you can. One day, it will laugh at you and its laughter will never end.Awwww!...........Go color yer easter eggs!
You have revealed to all exactly who you follow and why you cannot do otherwise.
“Never, never use the sword. Better a thousand times to die than for a Christian to kill his fellow.” - C.H. Spurgeon
@Armour of God @NayborBear
“We are up to the hilt advocates for peace, and we earnestly war against war. I wish that Christian men would insist more on the unrighteousness of war, believing that Christianity means no sword, no cannon, no bloodshed, and that, if a nation is driven to fight for its own defense, Christianity stands by to weep and to intervene as soon as possible, and not to join in the cruel shouts which celebrate an enemy’s slaughter.” - C.H. Spurgeon
@Armour of God @NayborBear
”Catherine Booth, cofounder of the Salvation army, was a pacifist, as was Charles Haddon Spurgeon, one of the most popular preachers of mid-nineteenth century Britain. ‘I always mourn to find a Christian soldier, for it seems to me that when I take up Christ Jesus, I hear one of His Laws: I say unto you, resist not evil. Put up your sword into its sheath.’”
Christian Nonviolence and Church History
Ronald J. Sider explores the church’s commitment to nonviolence, from the earliest apostles when this was commonly accepted, to pacifist dissenters from the just war tradition including the Hussites, Unity of Brethren or Moravians, Anabaptists or Radical Reformers, Quakers or Society of Friends...
www.plough.com
@Wrangler, given your attitude toward Christians using the sword and Spurgeon’s opposite attitude on the matter, why exactly is it that Spurgeon is one of your favorite Christian authors?
Spurgeon, according to your view on conscientious objectors, is “a man in form but not substance.”
@Armour of God @NayborBear
“Ours is battling for peace, and fighting for rest. We disturb the world to make it quiet,mand turn it upside down to set it right ... We have no sympathy with any other war, but count it an evil of the direst sort, let it be disguised as it may. Now with that caution, whatever I shall seem to say will not sound as though I loved or excused ordinary warfare - for nothing can be more abhorrent to the Christian man than wholesale slaughter.” - C.H. Spurgeon
The Crusades were “wholesale slaughter”. Spurgeon thinks you should find it abhorrent, yet you find it admirable and attractive.
@Wrangler @Armour of God @NayborBear
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,731
- 8,987
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
In making that accusation against us, you’re making that accusation against Spurgeon.
I question that you’ve actually read him. That he would be one of your favorite Christian authors is certainly ironic.
You will surely know then that Spurgeon wasn’t a Quaker. (You also know that I’m not a Quaker.)
Did Spurgeon agree with the pacifism of the Quakers?
AI Overview had this to say about it -
“Yes, Charles Spurgeon strongly agreed with the Quaker pacifist stance against war and militarism. He frequently condemned war as a great crime and murder. However, he did not adopt their strict, blanket pacifism regarding a nation’s use of force to stop murders and violent criminals.
The distinction between Spurgeon’s views and traditional Quaker pacifism include:
• Shared Anti-War Sentiments: Like the Quakers, Spurgeon believed the spirit of war was fundamentally opposite to the spirit of the Gospel. He famously declared, ‘Killing is not the path to prosperity … Christianity means no sword, no cannon, no bloodshed.’
• Militarism and Empire: He fiercely condemned British imperialism and militarism, including the Crimea War and British actions in Afghanistan, famously arguing that bayonets and guns are not promoters of the Gospel.
• The State’s Role: While the Quakers generally held absolute pacifism, Spurgeon made exceptions for civil government. Referencing Romans 13, he acknowledged that ruling authorities do not bear the sword in vain. For example, during the 1857 Indian Rebellion, Spurgeon supported state military action, noting that sometimes the government must step in to punish murderous criminals and protect the innocent.”
My position is virtually the same as Spurgeon’s position on the issue of Christian participation in war. I’ve mentioned in passing that Spurgeon played a significant role in the formation of my (primitive) Christian identity.
@Armour of God @NayborBear
I don’t see much of Spurgeon's influence on you.
P.S.
”You are not following Jesus if you aren’t armed, ready to kill.” - Wrangler and his concealed identity church
Spurgeon was not “armed, ready to kill.” Nor did he teach others that they are not following Jesus if they “aren’t armed, ready to kill.” He would find that teaching repugnant and rebuked those who are propagating it.
Last edited:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,731
- 8,987
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
What a contradiction! Because I'm against war, I war against war. TRANSLATION. You're a warrior just like those you condemn. What a hypocrite! Righteous war for me not for thee.
Your own sources CONFESS Christian men recognize the righteousness of war in some manner, shape or form, proving Spurgeon does not speak for "we" Christians who don't insist to Spurgeon's satisfaction. To suggest war is inherently unrighteous is to suggest all efforts of establishing justice is unrighteous.
The almighty is a warrior and this quip implies God is unrighteousness for waging war against evil. Because you fanatically promote evil, I am disgusted by you.
I’ve commented elsewhere that I wage war on war. That’s not a contradiction. I don’t use the weapons of the world in waging the war against war. It is spiritual warfare.
I wrote, for example, on August 17, 2024: “Waging spiritual warfare on physical war.”
Spurgeon and I are very much alike in our waging war on war. We’re nothing like you on the subject.
If you have read Spurgeon, you’ve misread him.
I “fanatically” promote peace, not evil. I’m a pastor. I teach, preach, and practice the gospel of peace.
I think everyone who has followed our conversation is aware of that fact.
NayborBear
Active Member
NayborBear
Active Member
"Pacifism?" Is NOT a correct way in the "Physical Application/s" of "Righteous Indignation!"
You’re free to criticize Spurgeon. You think he’s wrong. I think he’s right, and applaud him. Note that Spurgeon and I differ in degree with the pacifism of the Quakers.
@Wrangler told us that Spurgeon is one of his favorite Christian authors, but he declined to say why when asked.
Romans 13 is the correct way for those holding on to the teaching of, and following the example set by, Jesus and the apostles.
“We do not use the weapons of the world.”
That’s a principle, a conviction, that I stand by.
Last edited:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,731
- 8,987
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Once again, you are totally wrong! "Yet, you find" is a pathetic attempt to try to shame me for following the soulful model of God and Christ that millions of Christians have acted out over the centuries. The Crusades were a reaction to centuries of “wholesale slaughter.”I believe @Armour of God has taken you to task of what you advocate for, in practice, other than extermination of the Christian faith.
Regarding what I find admirable and attractive; yes, I find heroes attractive. No, I do not admire war but recognize it as necessary at times to sustain a just society. From Merriam-Webster:
hero
1 a: a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or abilityThese records recount a rich collection of mythic heroes, gods, and goddesses.—Miriam Van Scott
b : an illustrious warrior or soldier
… explaining that he was at work on behalf of the war hero Andres Alvino Cáceres …—Maria Arana
c: a person who shows great courage
the hero of the hurricane rescue
d: a person admired for achievements and noble qualities
By definition, a hero is an illustrious warrior and after 120 pages, the Crusaders are certainly courageous, illustrated warriors, thank you very much!
“War is evil” -> a sentiment attributable to many people; people who support war and people who oppose war. I’ve provided a few quotes, in this thread and others, from representatives of both positions expressing it. I’ve provided more quotes of this nature from the group that supports war because I’m speaking with people who support war.
The evil consequences of war are well-known and well-documented.
Few in the group which supports war would say that spiritual war against physical war is evil. I invite my readers to post quotes from those who do.
@Wrangler @Armour of God @NayborBear
The evil consequences of war are well-known and well-documented.
Few in the group which supports war would say that spiritual war against physical war is evil. I invite my readers to post quotes from those who do.
@Wrangler @Armour of God @NayborBear
I’ve posted dozens of quotes from Christian authors of articles and books which agree with me and disagree with you; Spurgeon - a favorite Christian author of yours, you’ve said - being but one such example.
I’ve posted a few quotes from non-Christian authors of articles and books which agree with me and disagree with you.
NayborBear
Active Member
Yeah? Matthias, and others, are of a (how can I say) "Brand of churcianitists" that are usually referred to as "Buffet christians", or "Cherry Picking" christians, operating under the more generalized umbrella aka "C.I.N.O.'s!"
It is because of their "arduous endeavors" of abiding"strictly (cherry picking)" Jesus and the Apostles "pacifistic" role, while at the same time "totally ignoring and rejecting" ANY and ALL ways and means of employing "Righteous Indignation?" aka "LEGALISM!"
One could well say to in very accurate assessment? They have?........Well basically? "Hamstrung Themselves" from any and
all efforts of offering up those Spiritual Sacrifices that Jesus Christ of Nazareth would, or will accept as being "Accepted" BY God!
Similar threads
