Reason for The Crusades explained

[Aunty Jane]

Self defense is not returning evil for evil.

It is if your motive is to kill someone....if you are carrying a weapon, it means that you intend to use it.
Christians are not armed.

Self defense is about stopping someone from killing or injuring you, it's not getting revenge.

Self defence can be carried out without intent to do grievous bodily harm. God’s law to Israel differentiated between intentional murder and accidental manslaughter, which is reflected in the laws of most democratic countries.
In the spur of the moment, not many of us will know how to act until the situation arises.
Prov 22:3...”
3 The shrewd one sees the danger and conceals himself, But the inexperienced keep right on going and suffer the consequences.”

Taking all necessary precautions to prevent a personal attack lessens to likelihood of one taking place.

That's pretty funny coming from the JWs

Your own interpretation of Scripture is not all that great....so be careful how hard you laugh Big Boy....

I’ve been on your side of the fence and jumping ship was the best thing I ever did.....I actually found out what all those Scriptures mean.....the ones put up by people like you who also have no idea what they mean in context.......the Bible is one story, with one author, and one outcome.
I finally understood what the Lord’s Prayer meant.

Can you tell me what it means?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Friend, the early Christians - the Crusaders - have a lesson for us all. You just refuse to learn the lesson.

Sorry mate, not those “Christians”. Using them as an example is justifying what Jesus told us NOT to do....
You emulate the wrong “Christians”....

 

[Matthias]

So it's a sin for Christians to be cops and in the military?

Someone else mentioned earlier in the thread that Jesus taught his disciples to do no harm to their enemies. As church history demonstrates , the earliest Christians followed that teaching. The question I would ask is how is it possible for a Christian to follow Jesus’ teaching while serving in police departments and militaries? They are by nature organizations which inflict harm on our enemies.

Then there is the question of Christians killing fellow Christians. That has happened often in the history of Christianity. For example, in World War II Christian soldiers fought against Christian Italian soldiers. Christians on both sides of the conflict obeyed their respective Caesar. One Caesar wanted Christians in his service to kill Christians who were in service to their Caesar. The other Caesar wanted Christians in his service to kill Christians in service to their service. Christians killed Christians - something which Jesus didn’t teach his disciples to do.

Of course Christian soldiers don’t just kill enemy Christian soldiers. They also kill opposing non-Christian soldiers. And they kill Christian and non-Christian civilians - men, women, and children who are non-combatants.

Rephrasing your question, is it a sin for a follower of Jesus to disobey the teachings of Jesus (any of them, not only his teaching about how his disciples are to treat their enemies)? I would say that it is.

Hitler and Stalin would have taken over the world if Christians had not believed in self defense.

Hitler and Stalin were enemies. Setting that aside, if Christians had refused to serve Hitler and Stalin and Hitler and Stalin together managed to take over the world then that would have placed Christians living in the 20th century back in a 1st century type of setting. Persecution of Christians would have been at least as bad as, and probably worse than, it was under the pagan Roman Empire and other pagan empires. Think “Great tribulation” as a description.

Using force for self defense is not a sin and the early church is not where we are to get our doctrine from.

The early church got their doctrine from Jesus and the apostles.

We should be getting doctrine from God's Word by revelation from the Holy Spirit.

And you did know that after Paul left many false teachers and false doctrines crept in right?

Acts 20:27-30
For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Paul was right. That’s exactly what happened.

 

[walter]

Did Jesus teach his disciples a important lesson? When earlier that day he asked them to purchase swords, and later that night, when it would come natural to protect Jesus, Peter drew his sword and cut off the ear of the high priest servant.

AI Overview
Yes, Jesus taught a crucial lesson about non-violent submission to God's will versus impulsive, worldly action, contrasting the "sword" as a symbol of spiritual readiness with its literal use for physical defense, ultimately showing that His mission required sacrificial acceptance, not rebellion, and that his followers should not use force, famously telling Peter, "all who draw the sword will die by the sword".

 

[Aunty Jane]

Didn't say it was. It's the soulful use of violence that is necessary and not sinful.

There’s that word again....”soulful” means ‘of the flesh’, which the Bible says is in opposition to the spirit.
We can never substitute fleshly thinking for spiritual principles. That’s why it’s call “Faith”...the definition of that is in Heb 11:1...
“Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities that are not seen.”
If we rely only on what we see, “Faith” becomes redundant.

You see, the overly-spiritualized have such contempt for all things worldly, carnal and fleshy that they automatically equate it with sinful.

The Bible shows contempt for the things of this world, because of who is running this show. (1 John 5:19)

John also wrote...1John 2:15-17....
“Do not love either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; 16  because everything in the world—the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of life—does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world. 17  Furthermore, the world is passing away and so is its desire, but the one who does the will of God remains forever.”

It seems that war and violence are desires of the flesh, for which you see no problem. And yet what will become of the world that you want to protect? Only those “doing the will of God” will get to enjoy “forever”, because they demonstrate the Christian qualities that they have allowed Jesus to teach them.
Where does “faith” enter your worldview?

This perversion flies in the face of the many Scripture verses I cited. Money is of this world, acquired through the body (an exchange for value). Donating it the church is not sinful.

Oh please...what a weak analogy.....money is just currency, something the world has used for exchange from time immemorial.....what is condemned in Scripture is “the love of money”...that is “the root of all evil”. Know the difference. It is greed that makes money evil.
Caesar demands his taxes and Christians are told to pay them because they too benefit from services offered by the governments that God allows for now. What they do with those taxes is not our concern.

The Jews gave money at the Temple and Christians too donate to their Congregations in order to pay bills that “Caesar” also demands. We comply....but Caesar cannot demand our obedience when he is telling us to do what Christ condemned. You have blurred the line to such an extent, that it disappears.

 

[Matthias]

Obviously.

I know more about the subject than you so.

We are agreed; Jesus told them to purchase swords to be prepared to use them for their intended use.

Jesus tells us why he instructed them purchase swords, said two swords in total were enough, stated why he instructed them to purchase swords, and rebuked the one who used it.

Wrong. Being overly spiritualized is what's dangerous.

Wrong. You don’t know the difference between obeying Caesar and obeying the Messiah.

 

[Matthias]

Didn't say it was. It's the soulful use of violence that is necessary and not sinful.

There is a major difference between animals and human beings. I know that you have killed human beings in your heart (and are keen on literally kill human beings, if you haven’t already) but are you in favor of euthanizing human beings?

You see, the overly-spiritualized have such contempt for all things worldly, carnal and fleshy that they automatically equate it with sinful. This perversion flies in the face of the many Scripture verses I cited. Money is of this world, acquired through the body (an exchange for value). Donating it the church is not sinful.

 

[Matthias]

Friend, …

No. Enemy.

… the early Christians - the Crusaders - have a lesson for us all. You just refuse to learn the lesson.

I‘ve directed your attention to earlier Christians, Christians who lived in the first four centuries. I’ve used multiple Christian sources (including even pagan sources which undermine your teaching) in order to give you the opportunity to learn from them.

The earliest Christians teach us a lesson. You‘ve refused to learn the lesson. No one can force you to, and I wouldn’t even if I could.

The Crusaders also teach us a lesson. I’ve probably read more about them than you have and I’ve learned the lesson of their example.

 

[Wrangler]

Did Jesus teach his disciples a important lesson? When earlier that day he asked them to purchase swords, and later that night, when it would come natural to protect Jesus, Peter drew his sword and cut off the ear of the high priest servant.

Yes, the important lesson is the sword was for their protection not his.

 

[Wrangler]

There is a major difference between animals and human beings.

Odd play coming from the guy who said violence is violence. You're all over the place.

Obviously, you don't even want to debate the moral justification for the Crusades but condemn it. Yet, you cannot express what your primary opposition is to it.

 

[Wrangler]

I‘ve directed your attention to earlier Christians, Christians who lived in the first four centuries.

This is misdirection. You are falsely equating how Christians must live when they are persecuted subjects prior to the 4th century to ruling class of the Roman Empire and in other Christian nations.

 

[Wrangler]

No. Enemy.

Fortunately for me, your pacifism renders you harmless.

 

[Matthias]

Odd play coming from the guy who said violence is violence. You're all over the place.

The common denominator of violence committed by Christians and Muslims against Christians, Muslims and Jews (and others) is violence. You’re a violent man.

Obviously, you don't even want to debate the moral justification for the Crusades but condemn it. Yet, you cannot express what your primary opposition is to it.

I don’t debate. As for my primary objection to the Crusades, I’ve supplied it in my posts.

 

[Matthias]

This is misdirection.

Directing people to Christian history isn’t misdirection. You’ve directed my attention to the Middle Age era of Christianity and I’ve directed my readers to the primitive era of Christianity without neglecting the Middle Age era.

You are falsely equating how Christians must live when they are persecuted subjects prior to the 4th century to ruling class of the Roman Empire and in other Christian nations.

I’m pointing out that the earliest Christians didn’t think like you, didn’t teach like you, and didn’t act like you.

 

[Matthias]

Fortunately for me, your pacifism renders you harmless.

You would kill me. Your weapons are worldly. There is no possibility of me killing you. My weapons are spiritual.

 

[walter]

Yes, the important lesson is the sword was for their protection not his.

That's what you say, what was Jesus response to Peter?

To whom much is given, much is expected.
Luke 12:48

is this scripture to be in conflict with what Jesus said in response? Are you trying to change the meaning of Jesus words?

He trains my hands for war. 2 Samuel 22:35 (REV) For who is God besides Yahweh? David, v32

Yes you are correct, in Genesis and other books there is specific instructions for war!

Prophecy says there will be a time when they will beat their swords in the plowshares. Isaiah 2:4, Micah 4:3

Then several hundred years later Jesus gives specific instructions for us to love our enemy and be a peacemaker.

Some people like to argue the point was Jesus a pacifist? But I think this is a better question: Did Jesus give specific instructions for peace or War?

 

[Wrangler]

Then several hundred years later Jesus gives specific instructions for us to love our enemy and be a peacemaker.

Are you changing the meaning of Jesus words? Jesus gives specific instructions be a peacemaker OR merely that peacemakers are blessed?

Some people like to argue the point was Jesus a pacifist? But I think this is a better question: Did Jesus give specific instructions for peace or War?

Good question.

Matthew 10:34​

Not Peace, but a Sword​

34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.​

 

[walter]

Matthew 10:34​

Not Peace, but a Sword​

34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.​

If we read all of Jesus words what is Jesus talking about at Matthew 10:34 Not Peace, but a Sword 34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. Hebrews 4:12

AI Overview

In Matthew 10:34, Jesus means
His message and call to follow Him will cause division and conflict, not the absence of strife, because His truth forces people to choose between Him and worldly loyalties (like family), creating deep divides even within households, rather than a simple, superficial peace. The "sword" symbolizes this profound, often painful, separation and upheaval caused by accepting His radical message, which prioritizes God above all earthly bonds, leading to opposition and persecution for His followers, not literal violence from them.

Key Meanings of the "Sword":

• Division: Jesus's call to absolute allegiance to Him creates a split between believers and non-believers, even among family members (father against daughter, etc.).
• Testing Allegiance: It highlights that devotion to Jesus must surpass love for family, forcing difficult choices and disruptions to traditional bonds.
• Consequence, Not Purpose: The division is an effect or consequence of His coming, not His primary goal; His purpose is salvation, but the result is conflict.
• Spiritual Warfare: The sword can also represent the Word of God cutting through deception and sin, challenging the status quo and disrupting false peace.
• Persecution: This division leads to persecution, where followers face hatred and opposition from their own households for choosing Christ, as Jesus warns in the verses that follow (Matthew 10:36-39).
• Connection to Hebrews 4:12
  • Hebrews 4:12 describes God's word as "living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword," piercing to the division of soul and spirit, joints and marrow, discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. This aligns perfectly with Matthew 10:34, showing the "sword" Jesus brings is His divine Word, which powerfully separates and judges.

In essence, Jesus is warning His disciples that His arrival isn't a political or social pacifier but a divine disruption that reveals true hearts and forces allegiance, bringing spiritual conflict and upheaval.

 

[Wrangler]

If we read all of Jesus words what is Jesus talking about at Matthew 10:34

So predictable of the over-spiritualized. Jesus explicitly says, "I did not come to bring peace," which is a direct answer to your question. Somehow, you're going to turn Jesus words to mean THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what he explicitly said.

Now, returning this thread back to the OP, do you know the reasons for the Crusades?

 

[Matthias]

You have it right @walter. Stay the course. It is the worldly man, the one has killing his enemies so deeply ingrained in his psyche that he would kill the disciples of Jesus, who is urging upon us the exact opposite of what the Messiah is teaching in Matthew 10:24.

The Messiah doesn’t want his disciples killing one another. The devil does.