Hello, new Christian here (orthodox)
Asking my fellow Christians here; what's your thoughts on the morality of the.crusades?
The most important commandment is "thou shall not kill"... yet they killed thousands (for "noble" cause though).
Was it a Catholic/political trick?
>here comes the trolls...
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
There were many crusades for various different reasons. Some good, some bad. The justification was Just War Doctrine.
Blasphemy. The commandment is thall shalt not murder and the first commandment is the most important.
If God intended to save them. They'd have been saved.
It was a defensive war against Muslim expansion.
The Byzantine Emperor begged for them for decades before the First Crusade. Pope Urban thought it might help mend the schism.
We all know how that turned out.
No, it's thou shalt not murder.
no the crusades were about securing trade routes from the east. same reason the romans were there centuries before. whoever secures the trade routes gets to collect the taxes
as always its the money lebowski
Was not Jesus himself fighting the demons?
They reached a point where it was not only their live and the lives of their families in danger, but the whole human civilization.
And the Pope proclaimed the Crusades, blessing them with the worlds "DEUS VULT" (it's the will of God).
They killed thousands because of the muslims
You are a disgrace to your ancestry OP
one crusade they were told that they would instantly go to heaven in their conquest of the holy land
that crusade they made it all the way to Jerusalem then stopped
The Crusades and Crusaders were righteous.
It's not murder if it's war. Even total war is a gray area.
Exactly. We all should be proud of people who gave Constantinople to ottomans.
en.wikipedia.org
>aim of capturing Jerusalem from Islamic rule.
"You will be forgiven by all your sins"
Is not the same as instantly go to heavens muslimes style.
Only past sins are forgiven, you still have to remain with a pure heart.
To kill an infidel is not murder, it is the path to heaven.
Oh wait, Christians are moralfags who still cuck themselves with this discussion.
Speaking of the Templars... what's the best book one can get on the Templars/Crusades?
Hello,
I am an Orthodox Christian Seminarian studying for the priesthood. Just so you know, Orthodox Christianity does permit wars of Defense. The commandment itself (in Hebrew) does not mean thou shalt not kill, but rather though shalt not murder.
Our Lord bids us to protect the innocent- "Let the Children come to me and do not hinder them." Then he adds another line, "it is better for a millstone to be fastened around the neck..." Thus, in order to defend the innocent, we are allowed to take the life of those who would harm those who cannot defend themselves.
The Crusades, when fought for the right reasons were wars of defense of the Christian population of the Holy Land.
Unfortunately, eastern Orthodox (who always made up a plurality of Christians in the Holy Land) were not helped by these wars in most cases, For example the fourth crusade.
Venetians turned out to be more greedy jew than Christian, blame them.
yeah something like that, i didn't quite remember exactly, ty
No. Making any kind of stand for yourself or your people is an expression of Satanism, Christianity commands you to lie down and take everything thrown at you like a cuck until God decides to stop it. Everything and everyone in the world is worthless, and therefore not worth fighting for.
as a non christian the crusades are one of the few truly great things christianity/the church directly did
When the first post is the best post.
I'm sure there are Christians out their who are so pozzed they belief self-defense is immoral. It's pathetic.
t. Another atheist telling Christians what their religion is about.
Yes and
These posts are made to destroy the abundant #pizzagate evidence.
Do not fall for them.
The commandment was, thou shall not murder
It's an important distinction
Yet "pious christians" followed them. And fall of Constantinople is the only permanent change that crusades made.
The most Christian thing you can do is kneel at the altar of St Michael in prayer covered in heathen blood after retaking the holy land
Fuck you user, pizzagate make me sick, I'm here for fun.
Every single one except for the first was a meme. Medieval culture was a meme too, until the Protestan Reformation catholics were really just reject pagans larping about muh Christ while killing each other in battle all the time for literally nothing. After the Reformation Christianity became pic related.
The Crusades were a belated reaction to 300+ years of Muslim aggression.
>The most important commandment is "thou shall not kill"
Does that commandment qualify that with "even if murdering non-Christian scum who worship a pedophile are murdering your family and attacking and conquering you and your kind ?" No? Then it is irrelevant with regards to a fully justified response to Muslim fanaticism and violence.
>Was it a Catholic/political trick?
Yes lad - Muhammad being a pedophile, slave trading, warmonger who founded a cheap knock-off cult based on what he'd learned about Judaism/Christianity which then went on to mindlessly attack Christian (and Zoroastrian/Hindu/Buddhist) areas endlessly was most definitely a 'Catholic trick'.
>orthadox
>Christian
>Byzantium begging for help
The crusaders fucking sacked Constantinople because Venetian (((Merchants))) didn't like the competition, then they were excommunicated by Innocent the 3rd. Christianity is a meme.
>Oh wait, Christians are moralfags who still cuck
Yah, cos the history of Christianity and Islam is defined by Christian violence against Muslims rather than Muslims mindlessly attacking Christians for hundreds of years and forcing them to become militant.
DEUS VULT!
ANOTHER CRUSADE WHEN?
IM IN!
RETAKE THE HOLY LAND ONCE AND FOR ALL
Crusades failed with their every goal.
>this entire post
>when you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about
...
Crusades = Catholic
>RETAKE THE HOLY LAND ONCE AND FOR ALL
Nah, let's better get drunk and sack Zagreb.
Hello,
Fuck off.
>Muhammad being a pedophile
If it bleeds, it breeds.
there was definite economic interests for italian republics/bankers.
they used christian soldiers the same way as americans have used paid jihadis to futher their goals.
He walks among us!
That's the most Catholic thing you can do. That, and suck your priest's dick.
Yup. Vatican created Islam to drive the Jews out of the Holy Land.
Welcome to [current year] knowledge.
>Muslims mindlessly attacking Christians for hundreds of years
Yeah and you are still circlejerking each other whether it is 'ethical' to defend yourself.
Literal christcucks.
Nice digits user!
Aim us to the point of The Last Crusade!
>Christian violence against Muslims
After the first Crusade? Yes absolutely. Christians were brutal to non-Christians when they had the chance. Deus Vult fags need to study early church history.
Best personal get was 41000000. Something something reject Jesus and die in hell something something.
Yes. There is a point to be made about killing some in war so that more would not be led astray by false doctrines like Islam in peace
Will do!
Read Ezekiel 38!
Yu fucking faker leaf. The orthodox church be byzantine empire fought Islam from 623 -1453 you ass hole they stood some against the animals of Islam. Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese, etc ORTHODOX people fought them and were converted via rape.
The emperor and the church asked the pathetic western euros for help and they did whatever they did.
Learn your history leafo
Don't forget
>invite niggers into Europe because muh declining membership and dwindling shekels
That wasn't mine, but I got a 1488 once. That's 1 in ten thousand, so kinda cool.
Oh, yeah, and 99199666
Something something Chaos Candidate,
Chaos President,
Chaos Warrior,
Don't see what the problem is.
Favorite gets.
>Muh brownies are on to me, better pivot to gays, muslims, blacks and atheists.
>converted via rape
>tfw one Abrahamic religion tried to kill another Abrahamic religion because they all want to be (((God's Chosen People)))
READ!?
BWAHAHA
I know the Bible in my head
And so should you
School reform when?
You're an Orthodox and you do not understand that there is no commandment against "killing"?
Just War doctrine
Wolf presented it nicely here
Maybe a little. But the crusades mostly disrupted an already profitable trade between the italian republics and the muslim coast/egypt.
The Crusade on byzantium was originally supposed to be going to egypt, but venice who was supplying the ships and who was already owed lots of money would have none of it and made deals for land on the slav coast. This also permitted venice to replace genoan influence in Constantinople.
Yes Byzantium fought for 600+ years before the first crusade and then continued to fight until 1453. The fight against Islam is the name of the game when (((scholars))) try to get you to forget Byzantium's THOUSAND YEAR war against Islam they try to divide and conquer Europe and paint the Muslim as victim
>2083
>Will be dead by then for sure
>Feels good man
Also Byzantine politics played a role in the Venetians/Crusaders sacking Constantinople. Once it was over those the dirty olive pickers didn't hold up their end of the bargain so the Venetians/Crusaders rightly crossbow whipped them into submission.
Gas the catholics. They worship crackers statues, and cum
>Once it was over those the dirty olive pickers didn't hold up their end of the bargain so the Venetians/Crusaders rightly crossbow whipped them into submission.
This is why people have been predicting the fall of Christianity since around the time of Nietzsche. Its always divide and conquer within your own race based on pointless religious quarrels. Innocent the III openly conspired with Byzantine traitors and even the muslims the crusaders were supposedly being sent to destroy on how to destroy Orthodox Christianity. Instead he just excommunicated them all after sacking Constantinople and the pillage the countryside for their troubles.
>b-but at least we aren't like those Shiite vs sunni morons!
They were defending their lands. You are thinking as a 21 century men but remember that back then they didn't see the Middle-East as the "shithole" of Muslims... Middle-East were Christians lands that Arabs expand and kill others.
Defending against infidels is not a sin against God since it was the Pope himself declaring the war and remember that whatever the Pope say on Earth, God will agreed on Heaven. That's the Catholic doctrine.
Hospitallers were the most aesthetic.
Also they were best order.
Stay cucked, Christfags
Please explain that battle then.
It would be much easier to kill jews if you convert to Space Islam..
>We wutz Kangz
Muslims were slaughtering and enslaving Christians for 400~ years before the first Crusade.
The entire time people were making pilgrimage to Rome in order to beg for aid.
The Church refused for 400~ years.
Year after year stories of the invading Muslim armies spread.
The Muslims took entire cities, whole states, they established sea ports around the Mediterranean to further their reach.
The Church still did nothing.
Christians were being systematically wiped out from all lands that Muslim armies passed through.
People pleaded for something to be done, they thought it was the end of days, they thought Christianity itself would end as all the faithful were being killed off.
It took 400 years for the Church to act. After seeing a considerable portion of Chistians on earth being killed and enslaved, the Catholic Church finally realized that Islam was a threat to their amassing of wealth.
Demonstrably the Church didn't care for the lives of its followers. Only when the Muslims were in a strong enough position, showing no signs of stopping advance, to invade the rest of the civilized world did the Church realize they couldn't keep ignoring the problem while milking peasants of their money.
We see the same thing happening today, only now the Pope openly embraces Islam. The natural evolution of an age old Catholic tradition.
Agree with this. All black with white detail much better than Templars or Teutonic
>Muslims were slaughtering and enslaving Christians for 400~ years before the first Crusade.
400? Citation needed. Charlemagne and the Caliph of Baghdad agreed upon a treaty recognizing Charlemagne as the defender of Jerusalem in 800 AD.
Prior to the Crusades it was Saracens out of Egypt that started raiding the "Holy Land" and attacking pilgrims which lasted for 100 years until the first actual Crusade was called.
What do you think the USA in the Middle east was all about? Same shit different smell
Christian Damascus was conquered in 635 AD, just a couple years after Muhammad died, and its not like this was the first contact a Christian had with a Muslim either. While he was alive Muhammad was a terrible warlord and slaver. Its just that after his death things really ramped up with Islam's expansion into the classical world.
In 650 AD Muslims reached Cilicia. Same year Muslim armies were attacking Crete, Cyrus, Rhodes, and Sicily where they were taking thousands of slaves.
The first Crusade was declared in 1059. Over 400 years later.
Islam was a constant threat against Christians that the Catholic Church never cared to deal with until it was affecting their pockets.
Christian Byzantine controlled most those places and were at constant war with the Muslims during all that time. Western Europe didn't have the means to assert that kind influence that far away. The Vatican was completely powerless compared to Byzantium and even that mighty empire was losing. When the western world acquired the means through the fruits of Christian social order it turned the defense into offense.
DEUS VULT
yes
killing faggots is never wrong
>muh morals, dont kill ppl xd
we arent offsprings of faggots who dont kill faggots, we are offsprings of killers and for a damn good reason. there are faggots like you on this planet who needs to be eradicated
if we serve someone, we serve god, while you serve the devil, because you lack critical thinking and only thing you care about is your own personal pleasure
Islam was already far spread by this point, and it was advancing on numerous fronts. Its true they were warring against the Byzantine Empire, an army tried to invade Constantinople in 668 AD, but this was only one front. There were dozens of notable sieges, battles, and attacks happening around the classical world. The Muslim armies were bands of raiders who killed, rape, and stole everywhere. They terrorized Christians constantly.
In 711 AD the Muslims successfully invaded Spain and within 4 years had total control over most of it. Thousands were killed. Just a few years after they tried attacking Constantinople again, after that failed they went back to focusing on taking as many slaves as they could from all of their surrounding occupied areas. Virtually excluding the practice of Christianity from them. Inside of two decades the motherfuckers were trying to invade France.
The onslaught of Islam was ceaseless. For every major defeat they faced in battle there were hundreds of smaller incidences taking place where they were gaining ground and killing Christians.
By the 830s they were in Italy, where they were slaying monks, and raping nuns to death. In 846 AD they reached the Vatican and forced the Pope to pay them tribute. Just a couple years after they tried invading France again.
Muslims remained in control of Sicily until 1091, 32 years after the first Crusade was declared. That is how entrenched they were.
Obviously it was Christian, in the literal sense. In the moral sense, some Crusades were just and morally Christian, some were not. When talking about all Crusades lumped together, it is obvious that some of the end result was not Christian morally, but the motivating factors and the situation that caused the very beginning of the Crusades especially mean that the Crusades as a whole were justified and morally Christian.
Yep, my point is Christians didn't just wait around because Christ teaches compassion or whatever, they were in chaos and only just starting to rebuild Civilization. Islam is simplified Christianity lite focused on rapid growth and expansion but they couldn't sustain like Christianity did.
Islam is a threat, even in the 1600s we had a Turkish raid here in Iceland but the secularists of the Enlightenment subdued the threat for a while until it's political rise again now as a result of the cold war and global nihilism.
I don't think we have to gas everyone, we can subdue islam through meme warfare. Christianity is not only objective truth it's also the ultimate meme, dominating all the international meme markets.
>The first Crusade was declared in 1059.
1095 ftfy
Also I see what you mean. I was basing it off of direct assaults against Europeans coming to the Holy Land that flared up after the Saracens broke the peace established.
This seems like an ok thread to ask this in.
Christians and self defense. I have my chl, and concealed carry almost every day. Is it morally right for me to shoot and injure/possibly kill someone who is robbing myself/family? Should I only utilize it if they are threatening me w/ a weapon? I have less reservations if they are breaking into my house.
I am quite sure the 1st crusade was a huge help to the Orthodox, pushing back the Turks by several centuries.
That was my point, I was correcting him.
Yes, obviously it is right to use force to protect yourself, your family and your property. Also, always aim for center mass when shooting at someone.
What about the northern crusades?
Don't need to tell me twice, but does it go against the "turn the other cheek" teachings? I figured that stood more for rebukes/minor things, not actual threats of robbery/violence w/ weapons.
I remember reading a very detailed breakdown as to how "turn the other cheek" essentially means turn and strike the other's cheek in retaliation, or something to that effect. That does tend to support the notion of "an eye for an eye."
Killing a member of Christian society has consequences, doing it for money is a sin even if you are just protecting your own hard earned money. Not finding a way to diffuse a situation without needing to revert to killing in self defense is on your conscience but justifiable. It should not be taken lightly and reasoned away with a thought.
Even just thinking about murdering someone is a sin but the world isn't so black and white, Christ said when pressed that these rules were guides and gave the golden rule as an example of principles you should be getting from them, words can't paint the whole picture you have to allow the meaning to connect with your God given intuition about the world.
"Turn the other cheek" are words of guidance to help you avoid violence when possible and prefer subtler more advanced methods of enforcing your will.
Completely unrelated to any under taking in the Middle East. Mostly carried out by the Teutonic Knights to bring pagans back into the fold of the Church. Was not very successful.
Inconclusive. I do not believe the Crusaders even engaged the Turks during the 1st Crusade as it was mostly Saracens trickling up from Egypt and inciting the locals to jihad (Muslims travel well, I mean, we're seeing that shit to this day even right?)
The First Crusade was massively successful, despite what West-guilt history teachers preach. The Crusader states were established well enough that for decades they brokered peace in the region and even opened up trade with their Muslim "enemies" once things calmed down.
The movie "Kingdom of Heaven" while a great pump up film is a historian's worst nightmare.....especially with Saladin's dozens of trebuchets lol
Lad, we first need to start the reconquest again, and this time the moors reach Sweden, so u know, fuck the middle east and the fucking gas pipe, just trow away muslims from Europe
I mean, "Turks" didn't really exist at the time I don't think. My understanding is that modern Turks are a mixture of Central and West Asian (steppes), Mediterranean Europe, Arabs, and South Slavs. Saracen was just what they called Arabs.
No Turks existed at the time but they were still moving westward out of Near Asia directly into Asia Minor rather than the "Holy Land"
Byzantines were BTFO by the Turks at Manzikert 24 years prior to the First Crusade.
Turks are just another Near East Asian people who were nomads.
Debatable on the Saracen thing. I could be wrong but I think it's one of those "All Saracens are Arab, but not all Arabs are Saracen" kind of deals.