https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/  Informing Minds. Moving Hearts. Directing Hands. Mon, 23 Feb 2026 18:08:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.41 https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2075 Sat, 13 Aug 2011 22:55:13 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2075 I totally missed the update #2 from James :”Yes, Christianity certainly teaches me to turn the other cheek when it is only my life or property that is at stake. But it also teaches me to love my brother and to love my neighbor, even unto the laying down of my life. And, sometimes, if it is the last option available to me in defense of brother and neighbor, loving my enemy will mean taking his life to prevent him from the bloodguilt of yet another murder at the judgment.”Loving your enemy sometimes means killing him so he doesn’t sin again? That is utterly unsupportable from Scripture and is a perversion of the words of Christ.

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2074 Sat, 13 Aug 2011 19:56:27 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2074 What Scot said!

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2073 Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:15:04 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2073 not really

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2072 Sat, 13 Aug 2011 00:53:19 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2072 I think before we ask if Christianity is responsible for the Crusades, we need to ask if the Crusades were all that bad? Which takes us into the just war issue and what the Bible says about this? It appears that everyone today believers the Crusades were indeed reprehensible. I think the two updates above address these issues better than the video.Even if one presupposes the Crusades were all evil, the question asked in this video is akin to asking” Was “Christianity” responsible for slavery?” or “Were the Nazi’s “Christians”? What about the Norway terrorist recently, wasn’t he a Christian?

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2071 Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:46:12 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2071 good point, well madeFrom: Posterous <

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2070 Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:33:30 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2070 you are right, no matter what this guy says or the legacy of Bush or any other person in charge

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2069 Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:27:23 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2069 “soldiers who are Christians are called to be good soldiers”Being a good soldier means obeying orders, orders which often include taking the life of someone because they live in one country and the person they are to kill lives in another country. How exactly is any Christian called to be a “good solider”? The distinction you make is every bit as baffling. “Preachers”, i.e. professional clergy, are called to preach sermons and not take up the sword but other Christians are called to kill? The notion that some members of the church are called to a different standard of morality on such a huge issue, killing another human being, is indefensible.

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2068 Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:37:30 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2068 this stuff is so bogus, and far from the truth

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2067 Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:31:02 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2067 It was a challenging question on the Crusades! The answers given certainly contribute to the discussion. However, there is one point that has not been made. Although some good people were caught up in the these issues [as in other instances of so-called Christian warfare] yet significant underlying factors should be noted. The Church of the Crusading era was far from being spiritually healthy. In the prolonged era of the Inquisition and during the Covenanting times in Scotland Christianity was used as a battering ram by enemies of the Gospel. I am not aware of the Christian Church being involved in crusading-type conduct whenever the focus was on declaring Christ crucified. The conduct of true Christians during the persecuting eras of Europe was always defensive. Certainly there was always an associated lunatic fringe claiming to be fighting for Christ. But Christians of a Reformed persuasion live by the philosophy established by the Master:John 18:36 My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

]]> https://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2066 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:20:50 +0000 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/08/10/was-christianity-responsible-for-the-crusades/#comment-2066 Was the Muslim conquest of lands a just conquest? If not, was the defense of these lands permissible?

]]>