Reason for The Crusades explained

[Matthias]

“Kill all Christians.”

“I really hate Christians.”

“I long for the death of Christianity.”

“Death to Christianity.“

Is hell too good for that person?

If the person who uttered those words had lived at the time of the Crusades and had come into contact with the crusaders, they would have killed him. Would you have rejoiced if that had happened?

Close your eyes. Hear the words.

Do you hear a Muslim speaking?

Do you hear a Jew speaking?

Do you hear a Christian speaking?

He is none of those things.

Do you hear an enemy of Jesus and his followers?

That he is.

Would Jesus kill this enemy or love this enemy?

He was an agnostic member of CB, and he was banned less than two weeks ago.

***

As I finished writing the first four lines of this message, someone in the New Testament came to mind. Maybe that someone came, or will, to your mind too. Who is that someone? Saul of Tarsus.

 

[Matthias]

You’re a follower of Jesus, living in an area populated with Christians and non-Christians. Saul of Tarsus is coming, and he’s coming for you and your family members.

What do you, who counsel violence and killing your enemies, do?

What did the followers of Jesus do? They remained faithful to the teaching and example of Jesus and the apostles. Saul showed them no mercy.

 

[Matthias]

What if we sub out Saul of Tarsus and sub in Khalid ibn al-Walid (aka “Sayf Allah” -> “The Sword of Allah”)? What if at the same time we also sub out the earliest followers of Jesus living in Damascus and sub in the Byzantine Christians?

Do we get the same outcome or a different outcome?

Khalid ibn al-Walid - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Matthias]

“Kill Saul of Tarsus!”



No. God does not will it.

”You are not a follower of Jesus if you aren’t armed, ready to kill.” - @Wrangler

That’s not true.

 

[Fred J]

Weren't the crusaders formed from the knights of the Templer?

Those who went on their own from the rule of the papacy as well, like Protestant and the Reformers?

Aren't the crusader army formed from Europe, formerly known as the Roman Empire, since ruled by kings and queens and were under the rule and authority of papacy?

Didn't the crusaders attacked the last stand of the Roman Greek Orthodox church in Bizantina opposed to the Catholic church, and ended up escaping to Russia.

Didn't also the crusaders persecuted the Protestant and Reformers' church due to opposed against the rule and authority of papacy?

After king Constantine the Roman Empire church divided into two, the Greek Orthodox church on one side and the Roman Catholic church on the other.

Frequently the Roman Catholic church had a series of attacks beginning from the neighboring barbaric forces, and to the muslim Caliphate leading up to Israel.

Yes indeed the crusaders and the British army later did stop the islamic quests and goal by the Caliphates from taking over the Christian and Israel nation.

And the Heathen nations should be thankful because if they would have been successful , the next target is them, since the quest and goal is to conquer the world.

To force everyone into Islam or pay a heavy tax, and be enslaved, likewise impose on everyone syariah law, therefore many to be on the safe side become muslims themselves.

There's a deceitful catch to the muslim phrase, claiming that muslim is a peaceful relegion, that is provided the world comply to everything they demand in leaderdhip.

In our nation having the majority of them and they are not Arabs but proselytes of other nation, and they claim themselves in their language bahasa, as in English, 'prince of the earth'.

It's a religion where the false prophet teaches them is ok to lie and deceive unbelieverrs in their minority, but when majority is achieved they are to wage war and take over.

One of their warfare in modern time began with the mass migration to Europe and America, and how they multiplied by birth in numbers using their enemies' tax payer money.

As a result that's what you're witnessing today in the nations they've migrated, the brewing of violence and by force to take over.

And establish themselves in dominance of the places they've multiplyed and taken over, by errecting mosques as a symbol of victory, even victorious on the foundation where once a glorious church stood or for closure.

Therefore church watch the signs of time and mystery, whether anti-Christ should come from one of the muslim caliphate?

Shalom in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord

 

[Wrangler]

Weren't the crusaders formed from the knights of the Templer?

The origins of the Crusades was a call by the Pope. From that speech, I'm sure the mobilization of forces took time and were centered in many places. The Templars are one group among many.

There's a deceitful catch to the muslim phrase, claiming that muslim is a peaceful relegion, that is provided the world comply to everything they demand in leaderdhip.

Yes, when they say they are a religion of peace, that is in their world view that Islam is a house of peace and all others are in the house of war. In other words, they blame infidels existence for war. There can only be peace in Islam when all submit to its ideology. But this does not hold up to scrutiny because Muslims fight amongst themselves also.

 

[Matthias]

View attachment 85537

What if we sub out Saul of Tarsus and sub in Khalid ibn al-Walid (aka “Sayf Allah” -> “The Sword of Allah”)? What if at the same time we also sub out the earliest followers of Jesus living in Damascus and sub in the Byzantine Christians?

Do we get the same outcome or a different outcome?

Khalid ibn al-Walid - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Different. Very different.

Obedience to the teaching of Jesus and the apostles doesn’t look like the Crusades.

It isn’t followers of Jesus using the sword - “We do not use the weapons of the world” - that makes Christianity viable.

 

[Matthias]

“Muslims have MELTDOWN After Learning These Historical Facts l Crusades”

Was the man speaking to the Muslim “armed, ready to kill” the Muslim?

If he wasn’t, @Wrangler would have you believe that he isn’t a Christian.

 

[Matthias]

Was the man speaking to the Muslim “armed, ready to kill” the Muslim?

If he wasn’t, @Wrangler would have you believe that he isn’t a Christian.

The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations 1997

These Regulations apply to and regulate the conduct of persons using all the parks, gardens and other land under the control or management of the Secretary of State for National Heritage which are specified in Schedule 1.

www.legislation.gov.uk

The speaker was not “armed, ready to kill” the Muslim.

The speaker was, in fact, a Christian.

 

[Matthias]

“The question was, ‘Am I saying that with Christianity comes peace?’

No. I’m not.

I’m saying that with Christ comes peace.”

What would the Christian speaker have said if the Muslim had asked him if the crusaders loved their Muslim, Jewish, and Christian enemies?

 

[Matthias]

“The question was, ‘Am I saying that with Christianity comes peace?’

No. I’m not.

I’m saying that with Christ comes peace.”

Islam is the religion of peace

The second question asked by the Muslim - “What about the Crusades?” …

The speaker should not have omitted what history documents -> the Crusades were horrific. What would the Muslim have said in response to that? Wouldn’t he have agreed?

With that agreement secured, the speaker would have skillfully positioned himself to do the work of an evangelist.

 

[Matthias]

Evangelism tool

***



Weapons of the world

***

”We [followers of Jesus] do not use the weapons of the world.” - Evangelism tool

 

[Matthias]

 

[Wrangler]

View attachment 85571

As always, you have things backwards In dealing with a brute, who is inclined to club you while you make an argument. As a pacifist, you have no answer to his clubbing you.

 

[Matthias]

As always, you have things backwards In dealing with a brute …

I’m not J. Gresham Machen. I’m a pacifist; he wasn’t.

... who is inclined to clunk you while you make an argument.

I run the same risk as Jesus and the apostles did, as well as the church for the first three centuries of Christian history.

As a pacifist, you have no answer to his clubbing you.

I have the same answer that Jesus, the apostles, and the early church have.

You’re assuming that my enemies will club me. I’ve been threatened a few times, but none of my enemies have clubbed me yet.

 

[Matthias]

I’m not J. Gresham Machen. I’m a pacifist; he wasn’t.

“Shortly before America entered the war he wrote to his Congressman complaining about the draft. He was keen to make clear that he was not a pacifist but was convinced that compulsory military service brought not a danger of militarism but was militarism.”

http://www.evangelical-library.org.uk/articles/Machens_Wars.pdf

Bold is mine.

Feel free to check for confirmation from other sources @Wrangler. I’ll provide another witness upon request.

 

[Matthias]

Violence against the followers of Jesus didn’t begin with Islam. It began centuries before then with Judaism and paganism.

Jesus, the apostles and the early Christians were attacked by evil men with weapons of the world. They responded to the attacks without resorting to using the weapons of the world against their enemies. (“We do not use the weapons of the world.”)

The Muslim in the video in post #1 wasn’t ever going to ask the Christian speaker about that. Someone should.