Reason for The Crusades explained

[Chihuahua]

You’re talking about the anomaly of one air raid. The raids on Hirsoshima and Nagasaki were worse than a typical WW air raid and there is no doubt that nuclear weapons are far more destructive than conventional weapons in a side by side comparison.

So you are conceding you were wrong in saying: "No worse than other bombing raids? That’s preposterous."

 

[Matthias]

So you are conceding you were wrong in saying: "No worse than other bombing raids? That’s preposterous."

No. Raids is plural and I was talking big picture.

 

[Matthias]

@Chihuahua I’ve explained why I speak against Christians killing fellow Christians in war. Why haven’t you spoken against Christians killing fellow Christians in war?

 

[Matthias]

Get the metaphor?

 

[Chihuahua]

No. Raids is plural and I was talking big picture.

So the raid on Tokyo was worse and killed more people?

 

[Chihuahua]

@Chihuahua I’ve explained why I speak against Christians killing fellow Christians in war. Why haven’t you spoken against Christians killing fellow Christians in war?

So far it hasn't come up for me. I have no problems with Christians killing Christians in a just war.

 

[Chihuahua]

Get the metaphor?

You need to resort to videos to ignore that fact you wrote: "No worse than other bombing raids? That’s preposterous."
It is called a red herring, a perfect way to weasel out of a mistake. What is worse is that you'd have more honor in admitting to a mistake.

 

[Aunty Jane]

God is running the show.

He is clearly not, otherwise he is no God I would want to worship.....his permission of the devil’s evil world rulership had a purpose that you don’t seem to understand. He gave the world over to satan in order for the devil to prove that his rulership was preferable...up to date, humans have tried every single form of human rulership that this world’s ‘god’ could think up.....none have succeeded in bringing peace and security to Earth’s inhabitants....violence and bloodshed have remained all throughout human history, beginning with Cain and Abel.....and the last one (democrasy) is crumbling before our eyes....and it’s motive seemed so noble.....yet what are we witnessing? Exactly what Jesus said would take place at the time of his return.....”just like the days of Noah”. (Matt 24:37-39) Wickedness, violence and corruption still dominate this world, proving that it’s ruler is a complete failure.

Gods children are not intervening in Satan’s domain (hell) but spreading the kingdom of God, aka Christian Nation. You are living in the past with your false claim of who is the ruler of this world.

I’m sorry, what?....what do you mean by “living in the past”? And what is with “satan’s Domain (hell)”?....and how is the Kingdom of God a “Christian Nation? Please explain these statements...

This is what Jesus said.

Let’s see what he really said.....

John 16:33 (VOICE) 33 I have told you these things so that you will be whole and at peace. In this world, you will be plagued with times of trouble, but you need not fear; I have triumphed over this corrupt world order.

It amazes me how people twist Scripture to back up their patriotism....
What does this verse say in other translations?
ESV...
“I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.”

CSB...
“I have told you these things so that in me you may have peace. You will have suffering in this world. Be courageous! I have conquered the world.”

HCSB
“I have told you these things so that in Me you may have peace. You will have suffering in this world. Be courageous! I have conquered the world.”

Who was Jesus addressing? His disciples....

Jesus responded to them, “Do you now believe? Look: An hour is coming, and has come, when each of you will be scattered to his own home, and you will leave Me alone. Yet I am not alone, because the Father is with Me.

If the Father was with Jesus, in what way did he “overcome” or “conquer” the world? He did not allow the world to conquer him. He never allowed it to rope him in to become fearful or to be part of that world and it’s political squabbles, and he taught his disciples how to do the same....that even though they would flee in fear when he was arrested, they had to be completely fearless and separate from all of it.

How separate are today’s Christians from the world.....? Most are up to their necks in politics....allowing the things of the world to rob them of peace, even with each other. That is not what Christ taught.

 

[Matthias]

So far it hasn't come up for me. I have no problems with Christians killing Christians in a just war.

Thanks.

Is there anything Jesus himself said that leads you to believe that he has no problems with his disciples killing one another in war?

 

[Chihuahua]

Thanks.

Is there anything Jesus himself said that leads you to believe that he has no problems with his disciples killing one another in war?

I believe He would prefer they not do so or anyone regardless of faith. That does not exclude the existence of a just war between one nation that has Christians and another. What is preferred is not necessarily plausible. One could say Jesus wants us to love our enemies which never got into the context of nations at war. I can't hug and tickle Hitler into giving up. You can't bomb Japan with flowers and chocolates.

Should we use diplomacy and avoid war? Absolutely. Jesus wants us to welcome the stranger. Does that mean we should let anyone immigrate and provide them social welfare? The principles are good and should be the basis of decisions, not greed or hate.

 

[Brakelite]

Insofar as the Crusades, they were just like any modern military issue. People make one sided arguments. You could do that with Afghanistan and Iraq. It was about oil, control of the Middle East and Bin Laden was innocent and so was Hussein. It is fine to point out what was justified and if other motives existed. Christianity was being taken over. I cannot believe one poster tried to argue it was about going after Christians who disagreed with them. Say that to a professor of history even at a community college and you'd be laughed at.

I would then allow AI to inform said "professor" of the truth.

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/can-you-summarize-the-waldensi-Tz6JN55aTN.7U_cmCvNE0g

I would also mention that while the common held belief that Waldo was the genesis for the Waldensian movement, I would disagree and p point further back to such people of the alpine areas of northern Italy who s were in their time, protesting the heresies and pagan ideas of Papal Rome. People such as today are called "heretics" by Rome, but were in fact true to apostolic Christianity and were powerful missionaries. Their histories today of understood are testimonies against the overreach and war against religious liberty washed by the rulers of Rome.
These early leaders were ruthlessly persecuted by the Catholic Church, they being protogenitors to the Waldensians. There has always been one single line of apostolic Christians throughout the centuries, who protested the cruel excesses of the Roman hierarchy. Rome was never ever the "one true church", the only shop in town so to speak, and her true nature was revealed over the centuries by her bitter cruel persecuting against those who chose a different path. You have drunk too much of the Catholic Kool aid and like many others, are drunk on the wine of Babylon.

 

[Chihuahua]

That's not what your link says at all. Nice try.

That was written by a human and a very historically ignorant one at that. AI does not present material in that way.

 

[GodsGrace]

No. Hear again the good words of @GodsGrace - “DO NO HARM to our enemies” (post #85).

The Crusades inflicted a tremendous amount of harm on both sides.

Matthias,,,,
I left this thread at page 5 and wake up to page 9 due to the time difference.

PLEASE, I'm requesting you publically to stop mentioning me in your rebuttals ....
you are quoting me out of context.

Jesus taught that we are to love our enemies and by this He meant that we are to do them no harm.
I've never released an atom bomb, caused a war, or killed anyone.

There are circumstances where THIS WOULD BE NECESSARY.

THAT is my position and I resent my words being used against me.

PLEASE STOP.


Will reply to your posts as soon as I have time.

 

[GodsGrace]

I would then allow AI to inform said "professor" of the truth.

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/can-you-summarize-the-waldensi-Tz6JN55aTN.7U_cmCvNE0g

I would also mention that while the common held belief that Waldo was the genesis for the Waldensian movement, I would disagree and p point further back to such people of the alpine areas of northern Italy who s were in their time, protesting the heresies and pagan ideas of Papal Rome. People such as today are called "heretics" by Rome, but were in fact true to apostolic Christianity and were powerful missionaries. Their histories today of understood are testimonies against the overreach and war against religious liberty washed by the rulers of Rome.
These early leaders were ruthlessly persecuted by the Catholic Church, they being protogenitors to the Waldensians. There has always been one single line of apostolic Christians throughout the centuries, who protested the cruel excesses of the Roman hierarchy. Rome was never ever the "one true church", the only shop in town so to speak, and her true nature was revealed over the centuries by her bitter cruel persecuting against those who chose a different path. You have drunk too much of the Catholic Kool aid and like many others, are drunk on the wine of Babylon.

This came up when I was closing down and I'd like to make a comment because I believe it's an imporotant and complex topic.

A few observations:

1. The CC did indeed stray from original Christianity...I'd say after the 300s or 400s,,,IOW, when it began to become involved in politics.

2. If it were NOT for the CC,,,,I strongly feel that Christianity would no longer exist today.
The reason being that they DID hold together the basic doctrines of Christianity.
I had started a thread regarding the Trinity and how a person does NOT have the right to call themselves Christian UNLESS they believe Jesus is God. Because....

3. If Christianity were not held together by accepted doctrine - orthodoxy - it would have been washed down to nothing by now.

4. Proof: The reformation was necessary,,,,but the many denominations that have been formed are not conducive to a Christianity that could endure in time due to the changes each denomination wishes to make.

 

[Chihuahua]

This came up when I was closing down and I'd like to make a comment because I believe it's an imporotant and complex topic.

A few observations:

1. The CC did indeed stray from original Christianity...I'd say after the 300s or 400s,,,IOW, when it began to become involved in politics.

When Christianity became legal and was consider an impartial source on international matters? You know, Donald Trump is such a good Christian he never needed to ask God for forgiveness?

2. If it were NOT for the CC,,,,I strongly feel that Christianity would no longer exist today.
The reason being that they DID hold together the basic doctrines of Christianity.
I had started a thread regarding the Trinity and how a person does NOT have the right to call themselves Christian UNLESS they believe Jesus is God. Because....

3. If Christianity were not held together by accepted doctrine - orthodoxy - it would have been washed down to nothing by now.

4. Proof: The reformation was necessary,,,,but the many denominations that have been formed are not conducive to a Christianity that could endure in time due to the changes each denomination wishes to make.

I agree completely in a reformation of things was needed. Powerful men played games. You had families marrying for political gain. Another adult son was sent to the military, another to be clergy.

Look at the Church of England - Henry begged to get an annulment, meaning his brother did not "cuddle" with his own brothers wife, rendering it not a completed marriage. She didn't give him a son, so after much awful things, and further awful things...
Luther, real class act.

The difference I see in the reformation/protestantism is that the apostles had their own issues, but in Christ they had their own personalities, but they were transformed.

 

[Matthias]

Matthias,,,,
I left this thread at page 5 and wake up to page 9 due to the time difference.

PLEASE, I'm requesting you publically to stop mentioning me in your rebuttals ....
you are quoting me out of context.

I only recall quoting you once and I provided the context when I did. I won’t mention you again.

Jesus taught that we are to love our enemies and by this He meant that we are to do them no harm.

That’s what I recall quoting.

I've never released an atom bomb, caused a war, or killed anyone.

I didn’t say that you had.

There are circumstances where THIS WOULD BE NECESSARY.

Under normal conditions I would ask you to elaborate.

THAT is my position and I resent my words being used against me.

I didn’t use your words against you. The only time I recall quoting you, I praised you.

PLEASE STOP.

Thanks for your time. I’m no longer interested in speaking with you.

Will reply to your posts as soon as I have time.

As far as I’m concerned, that’s not necessary.

P.S.

I went back and reviewed our conversation, beginning with your last comment addressed directly to me yesterday, post #123. I responded directly to you in post #124.

Since that time, I‘ve mentioned you in only two posts: (1) In post #127, but did not quote you in that post. I merely notified you that the person I was speaking with is not of the same spirit that I am. He knows it, I know it, I wanted you to know it. (2) In post #159, I quoted you, provided the context, and praised you for those good words - and that because you clearly captured and beautifully expressed what Jesus meant.

 

[GodsGrace]

I only recall quoting you once and I provided the context when I did. I won’t mention you again.



That’s what I recall quoting.



I didn’t say that you had.



Under normal conditions I would ask you to elaborate.



I didn’t use your words against you. The only time I recall quoting you, I praised you.



Thanks for your time. I’m no longer interested in speaking with you.



As far as I’m concerned, that’s not necessary.

P.S.

I went back and reviewed our conversation, beginning with your last comment addressed directly to me yesterday, post #123. I responded directly to you in post #124.

Since that time, I‘ve mentioned you in only two posts: (1) In post #127, but did not quote you in that post. I merely notified you that the person I was speaking with is not of the same spirit that I am. He knows it, I know it, I wanted you to know it. (2) In post #159, I quoted you, provided the context, and praised you for those good words - and that because you clearly captured and beautifully expressed what Jesus meant.

It sounded very sarcastic.
And since we never finished our convo due to the time difference...
I wasn't sure how you meant it.

You repeated what I said about Jesus meaning that we are to do no harm to our enemies....
then posted something about the atomic bomb....
that DOES do harm to our enemies.

The bomb is a horrifying invention of man.
But I hear it saved hundreds of thousands of lives.
It did end the war.
It also began a new era.
Was it good or bad?
I don't have a solid opinion....I don't think we'll ever know.

We DID create something that could end life on earth.

So we'll end it here - just want you to know that I was only upset because of the lack of context.

Plus, this thread is about the Crusades and we're derailing too much.

Here's how I feel about the crusades....
they were NECESSARY....
but, as usual, MAN gets involved - so many mistakes are made.

Kind of how I feel about the reformation.

 

[Brakelite]

If it were NOT for the CC,,,,I strongly feel that Christianity would no longer exist today.
The reason being that they DID hold together the basic doctrines of Christianity.
I had started a thread regarding the Trinity and how a person does NOT have the right to call themselves Christian UNLESS they believe Jesus is God. Because....

Two things. First, the Celtic church in Britain, (the Middle East, and later elsewhere ask through Asia), which began through the gospel being carried there by the (Celtic) Galatians in the first century, was a powerful Christian force in Britain for over a 1000 years, sending missionaries into Europe for centuries. The Celtic church's greatest foe was the Catholic Church, which promoted and arranged marriages between Catholic princes and the daughters of Celtic leaders creating compromise and political confusion which affected true practice. Demands from such as Augustine for the Celtic church to submit to Papal authority was accompanied with threats of war. Those threats were carried forward with devastating results to the Celtic way of life.

Second, one doesn't have to believe in the trinity to believe Jesus is the Son of God and therefore divine, in fact, His Sonship is the greatest evidence to His divinity. You don't need the 3 in 1 formula and extraneous complicated and associated doctrinal presumptions and compulsion to accept in order to believe in the Father and the Son.

When Christianity became legal and was consider an impartial source on international matters?

Christianity as a general system of belief and practice may have been relatively impartial. The same could not possibly be said for Catholicism.

 

[Brakelite]

It sounded very sarcastic.
And since we never finished our convo due to the time difference...
I wasn't sure how you meant it.

You repeated what I said about Jesus meaning that we are to do no harm to our enemies....
then posted something about the atomic bomb....
that DOES do harm to our enemies.

So we'll end it here - just want you to know that I was only upset because of the lack of context.

Plus, this thread is about the Crusades and we're derailing too much.

Here's how I feel about the crusades....
they were NECESSARY....
but, as usual, MAN gets involved - so many mistakes are made.

Kind of how I feel about the reformation.

The main motive for the crusades in Palestine were to take back Jerusalem for Christianity. Why would that be necessary?

 

[GodsGrace]

The main motive for the crusades in Palestine were to take back Jerusalem for Christianity. Why would that be necessary?

I agree.