Christian Forums

The purpose of this thread is to have an open debate on whether the Crusades did more good or harm.
 
What is your oppinion about the Crusades?

You are surely ashamed of the atrocities, as I am.

These might not seem like advantages to you, but they clearly benefitted the Christians of that time,

The failed Crusades at the Holy land caused the Muslims to concentrate their forces at the Holy land rather than being able to concentrate forces on counquering mainland European countries.

The First Crusade achieved its military objectives, postponing the Muslim expansionists for many years.

Crusades brought Christendom into contact awith more advanced east that they learned much from.
New priceless relics from the Holy land were taken back to Europe.
New supplies and inventions from the East were brought back to Europe.

Also, because of the Crusades, Christians were able to have control of the Holy Sepulchre and other pilgramedge sites which they still had control over up until the 20th century.

I dont understand this because the Crusades cost so much, but the wealth and power of the Church increased dramatically during and because of the Crusades, according to what I read.

Improved navigational knowledge allowed Europeans such as Marco Polo to explore more of the world and to have better trade routs to Asia.

Western hygiene improved.
Thousands of the crusaders, returning broken in spirits and in health, having seen their brethren die,
realized how short, fragile and vain this life is, and began entering monetaries and becoming consecrated religious brothers, priests, and deacons.

War ussually produces more vocations. For example, after World War 2 there was a huge boom in religious vocations.

In addition to this, the increase of piety, prayer, and penance among Europeans back home exploded with unprecedented fervor and religious entusiasm that dominated this period in Church History.

Even in the failed Crusade to save the Byzantine Empire and Constantinople, by repeatedly repelling the advancing Turks, the fall of Constantinople was postponed for more than three centuries.

This gave the early Christian civilization of Germany time to acquire sufficient strength to defeat the tide of Mohammedan invaders who assaulted Europe in the fifteenth century.

The Crusades also humbled Christians and brought back many men who had great sympathy for their enemies.
They brought these sympathies back to Christendom which prevented future mistakes, and still exists to this day.


Well, the Christian armies that went on the Crusades hadnt come from countries that had been evangelized much, and the Church still had alot of growing to do.

Many of the soldiers who went on the Crusades had a lust for luxury, Glory, and adventure.
They were not going there for God or with purity of intention. And for the most part, many of them were Christian by name and not by deed.

In fact, when they sacked Constantinople, they were disobeying the orders of the Pope. God let it become a disaster just like he let the Israelites fall into military disasters when they were unfaithful and disobediant.

However, many of the Crusaders, who were corrupt and immoral men before the Crusades, found God, repented, and lived penitential lives as a result of the Crusades.

Consider this, the Crusades defeated the Muslim expansionists at Spain, France, Italy, and Austria.

Spain and France literally had to be reconquered.

Had there been no organized military force to combat the Muslims, Europe would today be Muslim.

Also, the feast of our Lady of the Rosary was instituded on the Day (oct 7) that the Christians defeated the Turks at Lepanto, saving Rome from being conquered.

It was God and our Lady's will that the Christians should win that battle.

This proves that God was at least some of the time, on the side of the Crusaders.

Saint Louis IX, king, confessor of the Faith, a leader of a crusade and model of a Catholic head of state, died fighting for this cause.

Could it be that great Saints were lead into fighting and dying for an evil cause or an unjust war?

People accuse the Crusades as being unprovoked agressors. Interesting, the Crusades were all fought on Christian soil or land that had been Christian and was conquered by the Muslims.

Long before the Crusades began the Muslims had conquered more than 25% of Christendom. In fact, Muslims have been unceasingly at war.

War that began when Muhammed was alive and continues to this day in many countries.

Shouldnt it be considered just for people to defend themselves?

And does the Church not to this day believe in a just war.

I personally think we owe a debt of gratitude to the Christians soldiers who payed the ultimate sacrifice which prevented all of Christendom from being conquered, our religion made illegal, and the Koran replacing the Bible.

Please refute whatever you may object to.

The crusades had absolutely nothign to do with christianity .

It was more about the pide piper of hamlin than anything else.

The silvery tounged words of a pope who needed all the Lords of europe out of the way or dead so that the 'church' may have all the dominion.

It was about the preservation of rome not preaching of  the gospel.

It was but the forrunner of the antichrist who will have his eyes on jersualem  to set himself up as God and by force of arms will seek to do so.
It neither benifited Christians or the directly the gospel.

Priceless relics!?

God has no such truck with such folly its idolitory at the very best. Deceit of a great lie at worse.

If any good came of it  or from it it is because God is able to change a curse into a blessing.

It was still a curse to those who by wanton lies and hypocracy encouraged and went there.
It was in the end a blessing to Gods people and to the cause of the gospel.Which wa snot why it iwas instigated.

Matt said:

You are surely ashamed of the atrocities, as I am.

KNOWLEDGE BOMB replies:

now why would we have shame over something the catholic church did.....

And as for New? Priceless relics brought back to Rome you mean right.... And if you take something that belongs to someone else it's called what?
If I go over to someones house and find money under a rock who's money is it? Certainly not mine! God is not impressed by man made relics only the catholic church is....


(Matt said:
Also, because of the Crusades, Christians were able to have control of the Holy Sepulchre and other pilgramedge sites which they still had control over up until the 20th century.)


Control of a site that Catholics say is where Jesus was, yet you have no proof and it's just another RCC attempt of keeping god to themselfs...


(Matt also said:
I dont understand this because the Crusades cost so much, but the wealth and power of the Church increased dramatically during and because of the Crusades, according to what I read.)

see it's all about getting that treasure for Rome

MO MONEY MO MONEY!!!

Knowledgebomb,

What are you talking about? Honestly have you even studied the Crusades? Maybe read a book on them at all?

What about the Holy Sepulchure? Ever read up on just how many churches actually own mutual possession of the church?

In all manner of brotherly love, you are about as clueless as they come to the stuff you shout about.

It used to be funny because I just thought you wanted attention but now that it appears that you actually believe these inaccurate things about history and Christianity it kind of makes me pity you.

I like Luthers opinion on this matter



On the other hand, in keeping with his doctrine of the two kingdoms, Luther did support non-religious war against the Turks.[159] In 1526, he argued in Whether Soldiers can be in a State of Grace that national defence is reason for a just war.[160] By 1529, in On War against the Turk, he was actively urging Emperor Charles V and the German people to fight a secular war against the Turks.[161] He made clear, however, that the spiritual war against an alien faith was separate, to be waged through prayer and repentance.[162] Around the time of the Siege of Vienna, Luther wrote a prayer for national deliverance from the Turks, asking God to "give to our emperor perpetual victory over our enemies".[163]
In 1542, Luther read a Latin translation of the Qur'an.[164] He went on to produce several critical pamphlets on Islam, which he called "Mohammedanism" or "the Turk".[165] Though Luther saw the Muslim faith as a tool of the devil, he was indifferent to its practice: "Let the Turk believe and live as he will, just as one lets the papacy and other false Christians live."[166] He opposed banning the publication of the Qur'an, wanting it exposed to scrutiny.[167]

Quote from: gbzone on Fri Jun 15, 2012 - 07:38:01
The crusades had absolutely nothign to do with christianity .

It was more about the pide piper of hamlin than anything else.

The silvery tounged words of a pope who needed all the Lords of europe out of the way or dead so that the 'church' may have all the dominion.

It was about the preservation of rome not preaching of  the gospel.

It was but the forrunner of the antichrist who will have his eyes on jersualem  to set himself up as God and by force of arms will seek to do so.
It neither benifited Christians or the directly the gospel.

Priceless relics!?

God has no such truck with such folly its idolitory at the very best. Deceit of a great lie at worse.

If any good came of it  or from it it is because God is able to change a curse into a blessing.

It was still a curse to those who by wanton lies and hypocracy encouraged and went there.
It was in the end a blessing to Gods people and to the cause of the gospel.Which wa snot why it iwas instigated.

Said like a true ignoramus when it came to history.

I suggest you do a quick google of the crusades, then get a book about it.

Peace and All Good

Teresa

I think you make a few good excuses there matt1 but it was quite complicated & I would credit the Mongols for crushing the Muslim will, more than the Crusades........


I would also credit the rulers of Rome east-Constantinople for getting the Pope to declare "jihad"............. 


I have always been disappointed in mankind, & especially the church @ this time.........


While Islam had a tradition & teachings regarding jihad-holy war, Christianity did not-but they proved they didn't need one either........


Like much of western backward Europe @ the time, the first thing they did was set up their own petty kingdumbs & squabbled amongst themselves....... Glory, power, wealth, honor had as much, if not more to do w/ most of these men IMHO, then God......

I'll ask a question 1st...

IF God's original intent for Christianity is that it would not be a physical place, and/or a physical Kingdom, and/or named after an earthly King, and therefore would not own real possessions like gold and expensive artifacts...but is a spiritual Kingdom, where the King resides and rules in people's hearts...and battles therefore, that God has said, are not against flesh and blood....then, how could the crusades have been of God? 

There has been many things in life that have happened that are not from God, yet, God can use them....because He can use what the enemy meant for our destruction, for our good. But, I can't see at all that this in any way came from Him...

Thanks for this topic....interesting!

Sure, God can take something bad and cause some good to come of it. But that doesn't mean that the bad thing is somehow good. Just because a few more people prayed more intensely, or Europe had better hygiene, doesn't mean that it was good for the Church to wield the sword.

Had the Crusades never taken place, there may have been a chance for the Western Church to be reconciled to the rest of the Church. But the Crusades made that a permanent rift.

So they did far more harm than good.

It's difficult to perceive true history, due to biased facts, flawed interpretations or missing facts etc and faith adds another problem to the equation. e.g ww1 was it down to punishment for sins or was it an act of evil.

I'll just say some things for now, but here are a few facts, that the people of Jerusalem were saved from slaughter, because of the negotiations between saladin and Richard the lionheart. For those christians and Jews living in Jerusalem the crusading army were the answer to their prayers.

There also might have been priceless documents and relics saved too, by the refugees.

The Muslim writer Baha wrote about Richard while the Third Crusade was going on:

    "......a very powerful man of great courage........a king of wisdom, courage and energy.....brave and clever."

Matt,

Were the Crusades justified? I believe they were. You may be interested in watching this short video which I believe highlights some of the most important aspects concerning the Crusades:

What were the Crusades, and were they justified?

The crusades killed millions of Christians. It is a time when Satan was loosed. The RCC have the sign of Satan everywhere -HEXAGRAM.   We know the papacy is part of the Antichrist system and the false prophet.

The pope uses an Antichrist symbol - up-side-down cross........ why; because with it also are carried the name STUR   That is the ancient name for Saturn.      Note this: But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves
Amos 5:26 (KJV)

The preist have the hexagram on their robes and the Chiun ---------- S = 60    T = 400    U = 6     R = 200     Both the name STUR and the Hexagram are the mark of the beast 666.   

If it wasn't for the knights of Malta Europe would be  Islamic currently by force

Bro

Quote from: Bro Sam on Fri Dec 14, 2012 - 19:12:58
The pope uses an Antichrist symbol - up-side-down cross........

The preist have the hexagram on their robes and the Chiun ---------- S = 60    T = 400    U = 6     R = 200     Both the name STUR and the Hexagram are the mark of the beast 666.   

I am fairly certain, that he uses an upside down cross because Peter (the first pope) asked to be crucified upside down as to not become confused with Christ. 

And where did those numbers come from?  I could just as easily say that you carry the mark of the beast and point out that if you add up random numbers from your life, it would come out to 666 even though the bible says it will be 616, and -like the pope- you fail to meet other requirements for being the anti-christ, such as uniting the world under your leadership, causing all monies to bear your likeness, or requiring your mark for economic status. 

Quote from: Adamski on Tue Jan 15, 2013 - 18:46:20
If it wasn't for the knights of Malta Europe would be  Islamic currently by force

That is correct.  Many people do not realize that the crusades were a respone to muslim aggression in Europe.

I'm going with more harm than good. 

One of the offshoots of the Crusades was the re-discovery of the money-changing systems of the Saducees (the ones Jesus threw out of the temple), and usury on usury (aka compound interest).  The modern banking system, with its habit of enslaving people to debt, was essentially founded then and there.

Jarrod

Awesome topic.
I must agree with most people on here that it was to do with the Pope and money.
The first crusade was to help the Byzantine emperor who was being seiged by the Muslim Turks. We had every right to send those men to help.
But after this it turned into military conquest and plunder. The Byzantine emperor wanted his old land back but the "Christians" kept pushing forward slaughtering every Muslim in their path.
The Popes were corrupt and evil who wanted land and power instead of peace. Look up the Borgia who came into power in the 15th-16th century!
The Knights Templar who came into power were just as bad. They weren't Christians. When they were disbanded they came up with modern day free masonry.
So yeah it was a useless conquest, a sham and gave Christians a bad name.
That's my opinion anyway :)
God bless peeps.

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Fri Mar 08, 2013 - 17:40:28
I'm going with more harm than good. 

One of the offshoots of the Crusades was the re-discovery of the money-changing systems of the Saducees (the ones Jesus threw out of the temple), and usury on usury (aka compound interest).  The modern banking system, with its habit of enslaving people to debt, was essentially founded then and there.

Jarrod

The banking system of the templars was one of the finest.

Most people are in debt today because of consumerism I think. Eventually people can no longer consume so much, so the markets go to other developing countries.

Today people can buy their own house, because of mortgages. In the industrial revolution people would live in cramped houses with no toilets.
Today's houses should be much cheaper though, because of innovation and team work, but interest and taxes, regulations have made them expensive.
A poor person in Brazil can build their own slum, in the uk they'd be knocked down for health and safety reasons and let them sleep on the streets.

In America we used to have a barn-raising and help each other put up solid structures fit for living in, over the course of just a few days.

Now we pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to have a few professionals do it over the course of several months.

I guess that's progress, but maybe we should ask whether we're progressing in the right direction. 

In my opinion the Crusades were far more political in nature than religious.  The Muslims had already been attacking and conquering for many years and were growing closer to Europe all the time.  They had already occupied Spain since 709 and no doubt many in Europe feared their expansion.  The fact that the Pope authorized it is not a surprise since at the time almost nothing could be done without his approval.  That being said, I offer the thought just because something is done in the name of God it does not mean that He approves of it.

As for the consequences I perfer to take broad look at the situation.  It was the Crusades that spurred an interest in the area (especially by merchants) which led to a great deal of trade.  That trade eventually included the East Indies which, I'm sure you'll recall, is what Mr. Columbus was searching for. In a sense the Crusades were a beginning to the events that would lead to the colonization of the New World and later the United States.

Makes me think of Romans 8:28

The crusades were evil wars, fought by the papacy to control Jerusalem.  Later crusades were against Christians, like the Waldensians, the Albigenses and other churches. The papal church is an evil organisation that has murdered millions of faithful believers.   

In my opinion crusaders were just wrong. It was all done for money and plunder (arabic countries were quite wealthy at those times) and later crusaders were even done against christians like invasion on Constantinopole or against Waldensians.

And the pope's official high hat has the inscription...   VICARIUS FILLI DEI     is also 666 in Latin, Hebrew and Greek

The Crusades resulted in the killing of not only Muslim people, but also real Christians who were living peacefully in the area as well..the church of Rome considered them heretics because they would not join that pagan church..and then there is the matter of the Inquisitions in Europe where the pagan Roman church brutally murdered tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children for the same reason..they would not join the Roman church and bow to the pope...now do you think this is a christian organization?