Dark Age of Christianity?

[Ed]

Maybe I'll be answering my own question here, but I've been in discussion with some people who have pointed out the "Crusades" of Christianity, where Christians basically forced people to either believe them, or die. I am trying to convince them, unsuccessfully, that first of all, the Roman Catholic church was responsible for all the murders, killings, etc. during that time. And that even then, as now, many call themselves Christians who aren't Christians.

Does anybody know what I'm talking about, has anybody done any research into this area? What have you found out?

 

[Coconut]

According to Christian History you are right Ed, as most Historical accounts that i`ve personally read, verify that the Crusades were religious holy wars conducted by individuals who were infused by utter certainty that their murderous actions aligned wholly with God's plan, and thus would have called themselves Christians. Christ however says anyone who is a murderer is not a follower of Himself but of the Devil. That pretty much negates any supposition that anyone murdering others during the Crusades was Christian in any way except in name, Catholic or otherwise.

Joh 8:31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples,
Joh 8:32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
Joh 8:33 They answered him, "We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, 'You will become free'?"
Joh 8:34 Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin.
Joh 8:35 The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever.
Joh 8:36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.
Joh 8:37 I know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you.
Joh 8:38 I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father."
Joh 8:39 They answered him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would be doing the works Abraham did,
Joh 8:40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did.
Joh 8:41 You are doing the works your father did." They said to him, "We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father--even God."
Joh 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.
Joh 8:43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
Joh 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Joh 8:45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.

 

[Ed]

Thanks Coconut! I guess it's just their misunderstanding of history. Either that, or they are trying to pin an excuse on us just so we "go away"

 

[Hekuran]

Tread carefully

The term crusades covers a series of wars waged over 200 years. In that time some truly barbaric acts were carried out by Western Christians against Muslims and Eastern Christians.

The Western Christians' fight was fuelled by Pope Urban's offer to crusaders of indulgence for past sins. If you really want to debate this with your friends, I'd suggest that you take some time over it and avoid generalised statements or judgements.

Perhaps concentrate on one of the crusades and look at the historical, political and religious background, and the military ambitions of all involved.

For myself, I would not like to defend the actions of either side of the Crusades. Its certainly a big ask to line up the actions of Western Christians with the words of Jesus.

You might find that a debate about this period of history with somebody who is antagonistic to Christianity is a bit of a dead end. At the end of the day, the fights were more about political power and military domination than about the gospel.

Perhaps the best we can get from a understanding of the Crusades is a better appreciation of the present day clash of civilisations.

 

[Ed]

Hekuran, thanks for your knowlegeable input. Unfortuantely there's so much world history involved here, and although I know this and that about it, I'm generally not into discussing it beyond anything is too involved. I mean, I know enough about the Biblical history, and enough about what Jesus said to defend the Truth.

 

[Hekuran]

Yes. I think it is honest and fair to say, "I don't know about the crusades, but I do know Jesus...."

It's much more comfortable for us to debate the rights and the wrongs our history books than it is to think about our own standing before God.

Perhaps the discussion about the crusades (and who the Nephilim were, what happens to sincere believers of other faith, and who Cain married, and how God can be omnipotent and yet give us free will etc ) is a diversion tactic to draw us away from talking about the heart of the gospel.

What I was trying to say in my last post, is that it's not wise to get into a discussion about a subject as sprawling and contentious the crusades without some fairly heavyweight historical knowledge.

Best.

 

[Ed]

Yeah I understand that. I just wish the one' that study the crusades would also study about Jesus, and the fact that he never commanded his disciples or followers to go out slaughtering anyone "in his name"

 

[petrus romanus]

I think we should avoid talking about the past when it comes to christianity and ask the those who ask the past what is wrong with the Gospel. The Gospel is a guideline that is flawless. Ask them whaT IS THE FLAW IN THE GOSPEL.

 

[Ed]

Petrus, that's where the debate lies...for too many there are questions like: "If God forbids killing, or murder why does he himself kill/murder?"
"If God commands us not to kill/murder then why does he tell people like David, and many of the Israelites to kill when they reach the new land?"

While I understand why God does command the Israelites to kill any idol worshippers, etc." I can see the point the people have with such questions...along with why they wish to argue how a God who loves all people would punish his creation and send them to hell.

I know it's because God can't stand any form of sin or unrighteousness...but many of the unbelievers/atheists don't have the holy spirit to guide them in this area.

We can't really avoid talking about the past anyways...Christianity is based on the history of Christ, and we are to be ready to answer all questions anyone may have about Christ, and Christianity. However, this is as far as I go, I don't really like talking about the history after the Bible, but sometimes we can't help it.

 

[Coconut]

Yes. I think it is honest and fair to say, "I don't know about the crusades, but I do know Jesus...."

It's much more comfortable for us to debate the rights and the wrongs our history books than it is to think about our own standing before God.

Perhaps the discussion about the crusades (and who the Nephilim were, what happens to sincere believers of other faith, and who Cain married, and how God can be omnipotent and yet give us free will etc ) is a diversion tactic to draw us away from talking about the heart of the gospel.

What I was trying to say in my last post, is that it's not wise to get into a discussion about a subject as sprawling and contentious the crusades without some fairly heavyweight historical knowledge.

Best.

Very well said!