Is this real?

[ncountry]

They weren't actually Christian then, if this behavior is true. You fail to see this obviously, but then we know why.

 

Ha Ha..   enlighten me ? My point is.. Claiming to be something doesn't necessarily make it so..People can take just about any info(religion,etc..) and twist it around to fit their agenda.

[ATbuckhunter]

Laughable ignorance which you can't prove either.

Of course I can. The Crusades were driven by the greed of the Catholic church who wanted to gain more wealth and used the rouse of of liberating the holy ground as their reason.

[The_Field_Ager]

Ha Ha..   enlighten me ? My point is.. Claiming to be something doesn't necessarily make it so..People can take just about any info(religion,etc..) and twist it around to fit their agenda.

 

Show us in the New Testament where Jesus says that beating your wife is God's will.

  There are plenty of Qu'ranic texts dealing with the violence and slavery that Allah wills on the conquered Kafir.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Papist

[Mr VJP]

This is all very interesting as far as debate goes.  However, the truth about that compound outside of Hancock is very simply verified.  Any of you guys who believe it is a peaceful place should go there and approach the front gate.  See what happens when you do.  Then get back to us with the truth about what happened to you there.

[The_Field_Ager]

Of course I can. The Crusades were driven by the greed of the Catholic church who wanted to gain more wealth and used the rouse of of liberating the holy ground as their reason.

 

I'm afraid your word does not constitute any form of proof. Certainly not in any academic sense. Here are some interesting reviews of Professor Stark's book on the Crusades. 

 

 

 

Very few people have much good to say about the Crusades nowadays. Most think it was a terrible blight on Christian history, and cannot be condoned or justified in any way. Certainly during the past few centuries, Christianity has been attacked, and people have sought to discredit the faith, partly on the basis of the Crusades.

In such an atmosphere, this new book by Rodney Stark is as about as revolutionary as they come. He takes head on myth after myth surrounding the Crusades, and makes the case that the Crusades not only had a place, but were in fact in many ways justifiable. He clearly demonstrates that modern histories about the Crusades are among the great hatchet jobs of recent times.

Dispelling the many myths about the Crusades takes guts, and someone with the right intellectual and academic qualifications. Stark is certainly the man for the job: he has become one of our finest writers on the sociology and history of religion, and is unafraid to go against the tide.

In this important volume he debunks the historical revisionism (which is often coupled with anti-Christian bigotry) about the Crusades to offer us a more sober and clear picture of what in fact took place. He notes that it was especially during the time of the Enlightenment and onwards that critics claimed that the Crusaders were mainly Western imperialists, those who set out after land and loot.

Moreover, the contrast is often made between the bloodthirsty barbaric Christians, and the peace-loving Muslims. But as Stark persuasively documents, none of this is close to the truth. The real story is this: the Crusades were certainly provoked, and the Crusaders were mainly concerned to free the Holy Lands from Muslim oppression and to protect religious pilgrims who travelled there

 

 

 

 

Dr Rodney Stark, who has written some of the most intelligent and readable books on religion in the last 20 years, has done it again. "God's Battalions" is an explosive retelling of the Crusades. And it will no doubt overturn the smug assumptions of many people.

Stark points out that the Crusades were not Christian wars of aggression. Pope Urban called for a Crusade because the emperor of Byzantium had written to him, begging for help. The letter "detailed gruesome tortures of Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land and vile desecrations of churches, altars, and baptismal fonts" (p 2). Moreover, Islamic armies stood within one hundred miles of Constantinople.

Vast stretches of once Christian lands were now in Muslim hands. The entire of North Africa, once so solidly Christian it had produced a pope and boasted of 500 bishoprics, now lay under Islamic rule. Egypt was lost, save for some pockets of Coptic Christians. Much of the Middle East was lost. Now, Muslim armies seemed poised to attack a weak Byzantium, and after that, a fractious, divided Europe. The situation appeared dire.

This is the background that so many of the modern critics of the Crusades ignore.

 

 

More excellent reviews here:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Battalions-The-Case-Crusades/dp/0061582603

Edited January 20, 2015 by Papist

[The_Field_Ager]

This is all very interesting as far as debate goes.  However, the truth about that compound outside of Hancock is very simply verified.  Any of you guys who believe it is a peaceful place should go there and approach the front gate.  See what happens when you do.  Then get back to us with the truth about what happened to you there.

 

 

You won't find any of the liberal keyboard warriors here going near the place. They are scared witless of Islam and prefer to attack Christians long since dead.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Papist

[ATbuckhunter]

If it was announced, tomorrow, that an immanent attack on innocent men, woman, children and babies was going to be carried out in the name of a religion, what religion would most people (world wide) first think of  and why???

 

Im going with Christianity because of Timothy McVee and the Crusades. It only makes sense….

Its true that it would be terrorists using the banner of Islam but like paptist said about the Christian man who would beat his wife, these are not Muslims in the eyes of Islam. We do not have a Muslim problem but instead a problem with radical people since what they do is against Islam. All of these arguments don't matter since the people committing these horrible acts are not real Muslims.

[Mr VJP]

AT, you've never read the Koran, have you?

[ATbuckhunter]

I'm afraid your word does not constitute any form of proof. Certainly not in any academic sense. Here are some interesting reviews of Professor Stark's book on the Crusades. 

 

 

 

 

 

More excellent reviews here:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Battalions-The-Case-Crusades/dp/0061582603

I understand that and I would feel the same if you said something about it to me. At the same time I have the same view of the links you provide. 

[The_Field_Ager]

AT, you've never read the Koran, have you?

 

Even if he did the veil would not lift. He would continue to claim that Islamic extremists are not living by the book, despite the book's endless calls for violence. Over 60% of the Qu'ran is focused on denigrating non-Muslims. AT is one of those people just better left to stew in their own fantasy life.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Papist

[ATbuckhunter]

AT, you've never read the Koran, have you?

Yes I have but that is irrelevant. 

[ncountry]

“Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them. “

Proverbs 13:24

 

  1st one that come to mind . Heck , the best running back in the NFL is sitting home because he followed this ..Not going to bother finding the exact wordings that abusers use to justify their beatings, If you are a devout christian you can probably find them quicker than me ( agnostic)

[The_Field_Ager]

 

“Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them. “

Proverbs 13:24

 

  1st one that come to mind . Heck , the best running back in the NFL is sitting home because he followed this ..Not going to bother finding the exact wordings that abusers use to justify their beatings, If you are a devout christian you can probably find them quicker than me ( agnostic)

 

 

 

That's old testament Judaism. Not from the New, Christian Testament, like I asked. Keep trying. 

Edited January 20, 2015 by Papist

[The_Field_Ager]

Yes I have but that is irrelevant. 

 

No you haven't. And it's completely relevant. This is the text that fuels your so-called 'extremism'. Only a blind liberal would call that Irrelevant . Hilarious stuff. How can you claim to understand motivation when you haven't read the motivating text?

Edited January 20, 2015 by Papist

[ncountry]

That's old testament Judaism. Not from the New, Christian Testament, like I asked. Keep trying. 

 

 

 

No thanks......   I will just "watch" from afar.  You actually do make me lol.

I simply believe you are waaay of base and feel no need to debate the point. You drive it home all on your own.

[Mr VJP]

Yes I have but that is irrelevant. 

 

No, it's totally relevant.  If you've read it, you're not correctly presenting it's violence in your posts.

 

Here's a great question I would love to see a Muslim answer honestly.  But the Koran also states lying to infidels is what you must do as a devout Muslim.

 

[ATbuckhunter]

Even if he did the veil would not lift. He would continue to claim that Islamic extremists are not living by the book, despite the book's endless calls for violence. Over 60% of the Qu'ran is focused on denigrating non-Muslims. AT is one of those people just better left to stew in their own fantasy life.

That's funny because the book promotes religious freedoms and non-violence, which is seen in the Umayyad and Abbasid empires. The people committing these atrocities are not real Muslims.  

[The_Field_Ager]

  You actually do make me lol.

 

 

 

You mean like this?

 

[ncountry]

You mean like this?

 

 

Oh Christ!!! lol... just like that!! You looking in my window... still laughing... thanks

 

[Mr VJP]

That's funny because the book promotes religious freedoms and non-violence, which is seen in the Umayyad and Abbasid empires. The people committing these atrocities are not real Muslims.  

 

Then it should be very easy to single them out and pick them off, solving the whole terrorist problem, shouldn't it?  Tell me how we do that.

[The_Field_Ager]

That's funny because the book promotes religious freedoms and non-violence

 

 

So much for that piece of fantasy and myth:

 

Question:

Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?

 

  

Summary Answer:

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule.  Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding.  Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text.  They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.  

 

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

[The_Field_Ager]

Ben Shapiro takes on Ben Affleck and the myth that only a tiny minority of Muslims worldwide are radical.

 

[ATbuckhunter]

Then it should be very easy to single them out and pick them off, solving the whole terrorist problem, shouldn't it?  Tell me how we do that.

Its obvious that its not easy to get rid of thees whack jobs but it is not my job in finding a way to get rid of them, 

[ATbuckhunter]

No you haven't. And it's completely relevant. This is the text that fuels your so-called 'extremism'. Only a blind liberal would call that Irrelevant . Hilarious stuff. How can you claim to understand motivation when you haven't read the motivating text?

Until you have read the Qu'ran. I will not argue about what or what is not in it. 

[The_Field_Ager]

 it is not my job in finding a way to get rid of them, 

 

No indeed, your too busy being an apologist for these maniacs in attempting to obfuscate their deeds, and turn attention away from Islam and onto dead Crusaders and mythical Christian Home-schooled extremists.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Papist