Your thoughts on the Crusades?

Jul 26, 2009
5,666
406
Opa Locka
I never denied Christianity was in some ways spread by conquest, many other religions have been as well. What is being denied here is the historical fact that the Muslim religion is without equal. None has spread so far, so fast using the sword as its' primary spreader of the word.

It's not accurate I've ignored Christian conquests even mentioning their violent acts in driving the Muslims out of what is today central and southern France with wholesale slaughter and violence, many of the Crusades involved towns being sacked and murder by the thousands.

But history doesn't change just because some don't like it...or are just now learning it existed. Anyone can go do the homework and easily see I'm quite correct here. I can offer some great reads David.
And yet most of the new Muslims during the 1st century of Islam weren't conquered people... You're clearly confusing the Caliphate with Islam and it's making you look uneducated on the topic.
 
Dec 24, 2012
554
34
United States
And yet most of the new Muslims during the 1st century of Islam weren't conquered people... You're clearly confusing the Caliphate with Islam and it's making you look uneducated on the topic.
Mohammed died in 632 I believe, we were speaking to Islam's spread following his death. You can read about the conquests of Syria, Armenia, North Africa, Cyprus, the Byzantine Empire, Hispania, Georgia, Asian Minor, or Persia. You can read what befell their armies against Leo and Martel in East and west europe respectively.......the Christian armies slayed them by the tens of thousands.

The religion spread through most of their conquered terroritories by the sword and were prevented from taking even more....by the same weapon. Yoou should read about Charles Martel David.....you'd learn alot.
 
Dec 24, 2012
554
34
United States
716 Suleiman prepares grant attack on the empire. Revolt of Leo the Isaurian.
717 Theodosius III abdicates in favour of Leo III. Moslemah besieges Constantinople by sea and land. Leo III defeats fleet.
718 Saracens reinforced. Leo III shatters their fleet, crosses the Bosporus and cuts them off from the east. Bulgarians advance and defeat a Saracen army. Moslemah withdraws. Remnants of Saracen grand fleet destroyed in a storm. 719 Campaigns to expel Saracens from Asia Minor.
 
Jul 26, 2009
5,666
406
Opa Locka
Mohammed died in 632 I believe, we were speaking to Islam's spread following his death. You can read about the conquests of Syria, Armenia, North Africa, Cyprus, the Byzantine Empire, Hispania, Georgia, Asian Minor, or Persia. You can read what befell their armies against Leo and Martel in East and west europe respectively.......the Christian armies slayed them by the tens of thousands.

The religion spread through most of their conquered terroritories by the sword and were prevented from taking even more....by the same weapon. Yoou should read about Charles Martel David.....you'd learn alot.
Again, you're confusing the Caliphate with Islam. I never deputed the fact that the Arabs kicked Persian, Roman and Germanic ass. I actually stated as much so why you keep talking to me about a Frankish general in a war I mentioned 1st is beyond me.

Islam on the other hand, at least initially (partially due to their own efforts due to Islam's rules on taxation), found vary few converts in the conquered territories. Most of the converts to Islam in it's 1st century were in the Orient where Muslim merchants and missionaries (Christian missionaries too for that matter) found fertile ground for evangelizing. The Caliphate spread by the sword but the religion that promoted it spread by word of mouth and well placed gold.
 
Dec 24, 2012
554
34
United States
Again, you're confusing the Caliphate with Islam. I never deputed the fact that the Arabs kicked Persian, Roman and Germanic ass.
And eventually had their own asses kicked solidly to end their expansion, you did find your history book!

I actually stated as much so why you keep talking to me about a Frankish general in a war I mentioned 1st is beyond me.
I totally understand it's "beyond" you and thus I'm explaining it to you, the efforts to subdue Christian Europe was endeavored by the sword by Islam...and died by the sword as well.

Islam on the other hand, at least initially (partially due to their own efforts due to Islam's rules on taxation), found vary few converts in the conquered territories. Most of the converts to Islam in it's 1st century were in the Orient where Muslim merchants and missionaries (Christian missionaries too for that matter) found fertile ground for evangelizing. The Caliphate spread by the sword but the religion that promoted it spread by word of mouth and well placed gold.
Exactly David. Thus ends today's lesson. Moving on.
 
Dec 24, 2012
554
34
United States
Why didn't you bold the 2nd 1/2 of my point? ;)
Because the first part of your sentence is where Islam has no equal, word of mouth and well placed gold is an equal common denominator in nearly all religions. Islam's violent expansion well recorded, easily researched. It stands at the top of the mountain. I ca recommend some fabulous reads.
 
Last edited:
Dec 24, 2012
554
34
United States
That part did not support his argument.
A reread will show his point was addresssed. Many trade routes(well placed gold) were discussed, the fact that China has historically had the highest population discussed as well. David's point well taken and speaking to numbers alone, China's Moslem population was covered here. The religion's meteoric rise however, it's ability to growmso far so fast with promises of gift in the afterlife for killing any infidel.....is without equal. Other religions including Christianity have violent pasts, other nations have the most citizens who are Islamic per capita.....but the religion spread across the known world at the time threatening Christianity's formation and tackling empire after nation-state and those facts cannot be denied. You're entitled to your own opinions, we're not entitled to our own facts.
 
Dec 25, 2012
121
5
space
I have history books in my home, was this question a joke?



I didn't.



The Turks invaded eastern europe.....the Ottoman Empire had its' wars, yes you are wrong, the Turks had no right to invade anyone.
like the westerners had no right to colonize the rest of the world ?
,
:giggle::giggle:
 
Oct 25, 2012
3,775
614
Louisville, Ky
A reread will show his point was addresssed. Many trade routes(well placed gold) were discussed, the fact that China has historically had the highest population discussed as well. David's point well taken and speaking to numbers alone, China's Moslem population was covered here. The religion's meteoric rise however, it's ability to growmso far so fast with promises of gift in the afterlife for killing any infidel.....is without equal. Other religions including Christianity have violent pasts, other nations have the most citizens who are Islamic per capita.....but the religion spread across the known world at the time threatening Christianity's formation and tackling empire after nation-state and those facts cannot be denied. You're entitled to your own opinions, we're not entitled to our own facts.

If I understand your point (correct me if wrong), it is not so much the impact on nations, as the impact on Christian expansion.

Should this be the case, I cannot see an inequality in brutality, expansion, or influence that garners such a reaction. Think about it...Christianity has it's foothold in the sections of the world poised to destroy everything else if required. Islam has it's base in the areas so backwards and militant is cannot possibly succeed.

Basically, you have already won this pointless battle....it is simply taking place in your lifetime.


Go Jehovah
 
Dec 24, 2012
554
34
United States
If I understand your point (correct me if wrong), it is not so much the impact on nations, as the impact on Christian expansion.
You're wrong, many empires and nation states were mentioned, Christianity a religion that had to use equal and even more brutal violence to turn back Moslem expansion. It's in the history books.

Should this be the case, I cannot see an inequality in brutality, expansion, or influence that garners such a reaction. Think about it...Christianity has it's foothold in the sections of the world poised to destroy everything else if required. Islam has it's base in the areas so backwards and militant is cannot possibly succeed.
Couldn't disagree more. Christianity has it's foothold in free nations. Many who separate their church and state doctrines but recognize religion or worship as a right. Islam remains with a foothold in suppressed nations, nations that do not separate their church doctrine from their state governments.

Basically, you have already won this pointless battle....it is simply taking place in your lifetime.
Been taking place...and I've been pointing out to the forum that all of this can be found in history books.

How about those Ravens.
 
Jul 5, 2013
10
0
Tallahassee
I think it depends on

A) if you believe in a just war
and B) If you believe this was a just war

It is easy to say just let other people kill your people, but the reality is that you will feel an incentive to fight back

John
The Standard
 
Dec 20, 2012
677
12
Florida
I see nothing justified in an attempt to dominate one culture over another by instituting war.

They weren't there to save those who were enslaved, free other people from degradation or torture.

They used to the church as an excuse to dominate a culture, and invade their lands.
What you say is exactly correct >> AS APPLIED TO THE MUSLIM CONQUEST OF SOUTH EUROPE, ASIA, AND NORTH AFRICA, except that Islam is not a "church", it is a satanic, vile ideology masquerading as a religion.
 

Similar Discussions