Title: The Truth About The Crusades Source:
YouTube.com URL Source:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ilFbbk9jw4 Published:Dec 17, 2015 Author:Stefan Molyneux Post Date:2017-07-03 08:35:00 by GreyLmist Keywords:Crusades, Islamic Conquest, Christian Defense, PC Cultism Views:240 Comments:2
[33 minutes] Published on Dec 17, 2015 by Stefan Molyneux
Were the Crusades an unprovoked act of aggression on behalf of bloodthirsty Christians? Did the First Crusade mark the beginning of close to a millennium of hostility between Christianity and Islam, or did the conflict begin centuries earlier?
Stefan Molyneux takes a closer look at the historical background of the Crusades and presents shocking information that is often hidden from the general population. What is the truth about the origins of the Crusades?
Historical facts and Comparisons: How many times Muslims invaded Europe vs. Europeans invaded Muslim countries.
Islamics Launched their Crusades in 630 A.D. Western Crusades started in 1095 A.D. to Stop Muslim Invasion. Crusades were a defensive action against the forcible expansion of Islam into territories that had been part of Christendom for centuries.
The Crusades were started by the Muslims in the year 630 A.D. when Muhammad invaded and conquered Mecca. Later on, Muslims invaded Syria, Iraq, Jerusalem, Iran, Egypt, Africa, Spain, Italy, France, etc. The Western Crusades started around 1095 to try to stop the Islamic aggressive invasions. Islamic Crusades continued even after the Western Crusade. Islam has killed about 270 million people: 120 million Africans*, 60 million Christians, 80 million Hindus, 10 million Buddhists, etc.
The author stresses that the Crusades (or any other historical event) must be understood in light of the times in which they occurred, not from the perspective of the time during which the history is written. This [modernization] will always give a false impression of the incidents or movements. One must know the medieval Catholic way of thinking — that the Faith was everything, that the lands were stolen by unbelieving and brutal marauders, and that it was important to amass large groups of believers to go on armed pilgrimage to the Holy Land to take that land back for the Christians from whom it was stolen. The Crusades (a term only coined in the early 1700’s) were truly religious pilgrimages, but this time armed, the first armed pilgrimages in the history of Catholicism.
the pilgrim had to “take the Cross.” This meant taking a binding publicly-stated vow to God to engage in an armed pilgrimage to help retake the Holy Land. The pilgrim so vowed was marked by wearing a cloth cross upon his clothing which could be removed only upon completion of his journey.
papal approval of the expedition [a prerequisite]. The Church in turn promised to provide for and protect the pilgrim’s lands and family while he was away. There were certain spiritual and temporal privileges (such as non-payment of taxes) during his absence. The main spiritual privilege was the indulgence granted of the remission of temporal punishment due to sins already forgiven in the Sacrament of Penance. (Note that unconfessed sins were not forgiven by the indulgence.) One must never consider this seven hundred year period in the Church’s history an aberration; it was an integral part of being a Catholic during the Middle Ages.
Blessed Pope Urban II must have been some kind of amazing orator because the speech he gave at the Council of Clermont, France, in November of 1095 changed the world. He spoke to the assembly of bishops, priests, and nobles in the open air on three main themes: the liberation of the holy city of Jerusalem, the cruelty and violence of the Turks toward the Christians, and the exhortation to the Christian warriors to take up arms against the usurpers. The offer of a plenary indulgence to those who did so and completed the journey was the main drawing card for the knights and their men. Remember, this was still the age of Faith when everyone knew that the most important thing a Christian could do for himself was to save his own soul. (Of course, it is still our most important job, but this modern world has lost sight of that.)
The author includes an interesting explanation of the Church’s just war doctrine as it came down through the centuries from both the Old and the New Testaments. He also explains that the major influence on Christian thinking regarding warfare was the great Saint Augustine of Hippo. Here, too, is explained the difference between the jihad warfare of the Muslims, which is offensive warfare for the purpose of conquering territory, and the defensive warfare allowed by the Church to regain territory taken from Christians. This is all very enlightening and interesting.
Even more interesting is the response that Urban elicited from the faithful, including royalty, the knightly classes, and the common people. Estimates of those who “took the cross” are upwards of 100,000 people — 60,000 warriors including 6,000 to 7,000 knights. The expense of such an undertaking was immense, mostly paid for by increased taxes and donations on the part of the wealthy who were elderly and those in poor health and unable to make the pilgrimage. All the sacrifices, besides affecting the primary purpose of regaining the Holy Land, earned merit for individual souls in their journey to Heaven. Very few who made it to the holy land stayed there. Most returned home to their families and properties, which debunks the theory that they were engaged in a land grab. Some made the journey as a penance for their sins. Certainly there were some greedy and selfish travelers who thought such a journey would enrich them, and some evil sinners masquerading as Christian pilgrims engaged in violence
The story of the pilgrims who “took the cross” is an [...] edifying one. It is time that Catholics [and all Christians] know that they do not have to apologize for these centuries of holy wars to regain Christian lands
Appending 4um Title: 181,543 Invaders Land in Europe [Re: info on the 17th century Christian-Interfaith Defensive Alliance for the protection of Vienna and Europe]
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Islamics Launched their Crusades in 630 A.D. Western Crusades started in 1095 A.D. to Stop Muslim Invasion. Crusades were a defensive action against the forcible expansion of Islam into territories that had been part of Christendom for centuries.
The Crusades were started by the Muslims in the year 630 A.D. when Muhammad invaded and conquered Mecca. Later on, Muslims invaded Syria, Iraq, Jerusalem, Iran, Egypt, Africa, Spain, Italy, France, etc. The Western Crusades started around 1095 to try to stop the Islamic aggressive invasions. ... [MUSLIM CRUSADES Started Four Centuries Before the Western Crusades]
despite the many differences between the East and West, most people in both cultures are in agreement about the Crusades. It is commonly accepted that the Crusades are a black mark on the history of Western civilization generally and the Catholic Church in particular. Anyone eager to bash Catholics will not long tarry before brandishing the Crusades and the Inquisition. The Crusades are often used as a classic example of the evil that organized religion can do. Your average man on the street in both New York and Cairo would agree that the Crusades were an insidious, cynical, and unprovoked attack by religious zealots against a peaceful, prosperous, and sophisticated Muslim world.
It was not always so. [Insert: 6.25 minute YouTube re: The Myth of 'Al-Andalus': Jihad against Spain (and Portugal) /the Iberian Peninsula of Europe/Hispania] During the Middle Ages you could not find a Christian in Europe who did not believe that the Crusades were an act of highest good. Even the Muslims respected the ideals of the Crusades and the piety of the men who fought them. But that all changed with the Protestant Reformation. For Martin Luther, who had already jettisoned the Christian doctrines of papal authority and indulgences, the Crusades were nothing more than a ploy by a power-hungry papacy. Indeed, he argued that to fight the Muslims was to fight Christ himself, for it was he who had sent the Turks to punish Christendom for its faithlessness. When Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent and his armies began to invade Austria [Insert:4um Ref. re: Siege of Vienna - 1529], Luther changed his mind about the need to fight, but he stuck to his condemnation of the Crusades. During the next two centuries people tended to view the Crusades through a confessional lens: [...]
So, what is the real story of the Crusades? As you might imagine, it is a long story. [Insert:4um Ref. re: Battle of Vienna - 1683; + additional sources @ gatesofvienna and 6.5 minute YouTube: Muslim invasion of Europe (Gates of Vienna 1683)] For the moment, [...] it might be best to consider just what the Crusades were not. Here, then, are some of the most common myths and why they are wrong.
Myth 1: The Crusades were wars of unprovoked aggression against a peaceful Muslim world.
This is as wrong as wrong can be. From the time of Mohammed, Muslims had sought to conquer the Christian world. They did a pretty good job of it, too. After a few centuries of steady conquests, Muslim armies had taken all of North Africa, the Middle East, Asia Minor, and most of Spain. In other words, by the end of the eleventh century the forces of Islam had captured two-thirds of the Christian world. Palestine, the home of Jesus Christ; Egypt, the birthplace of Christian monasticism; Asia Minor, where St. Paul planted the seeds of the first Christian communities: These were not the periphery of Christianity but its very core. And the Muslim empires were not finished yet. They continued to press westward toward Constantinople, ultimately passing it and entering Europe itself. As far as unprovoked aggression goes, it was all on the Muslim side. At some point what was left of the Christian world would have to defend itself or simply succumb to Islamic conquest. The First Crusade was called by Pope Urban II in 1095 in response to an urgent plea for help from the Byzantine emperor in Constantinople. Urban called the knights of Christendom to come to the aid of their eastern brethren. It was to be an errand of mercy, liberating the Christians of the East from their Muslim conquerors. In other words, the Crusades were from the beginning a defensive war. The entire history of the eastern Crusades is one of response to Muslim aggression.
Q: In terms of Spain and the Reconquista, when did the Reconquista become a part of the Crusades Movement?
A: The answer to that is: After the First Crusade.; [i.e. Circa 1095, officially.] ... before the late 11th century, the Reconquista was much more of a localized concept. [Continued to 6:33]
Published on Jun 6, 2013 by Real Crusades History
The Reconquista: Every Year - YouTube, 3.75 minutes. This link set to start @ 2:05 for a map of the Reconquista territorially as of the year 1095:
Published on Dec 28, 2015 by Ollie Bye
In the early Eighth Century, the Umayyad Caliphate began an invasion of Christian Iberia. Although losing control half a century later, their legacy would spark a conflict to last almost 800 years, to decide the peninsula's future as either an Islamic or Christian state. With the destruction of the last Islamic Kingdom in Iberia, Granada, the Reconquista is complete. Three of the remaining Christian kingdoms, Castile, Navarre, and Aragon would unite shortly after to form Spain, and ultimately the Spanish Empire.
This song is from the original banjo & guitar tablature book and DVD - The Sparrow and the Hawk (available at meanmary.com and Amazon). Song written and arranged by Mary James & Frank James.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC