The Militarization of Christianity
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 07. 2022
- Join our Discord: / discord
Support me on Patreon: / balticempire
By modern definition, the crusade is defined as a religious war conducted against the peoples and states deemed enemies of the religious authority. The crusade was a holy war ordered by God himself, and seen by many as a staple of christian history. In 2003, the Daily Express compared the American-lead attack on Iraq as a modern crusade. On the other side, Muslim writers did the exact same, only that they saw the crusade as western, christian imperialism. In both of these views, Christianity is intrinsically tied to the use of violence.
This modern perspective on the history of christianity isn't wrong by any means. We've all heard about violence conducted in the name of God. I'm not here to bash historical or modern christians, nor critique the religion, but if you look at the source material in the bible, the idea of crusades are ludicrious, heretical even. Jesus told his followers to turn the other cheek, and to even love their enemies. Yet in 1090, the crusaders had no problem with putting Jews and Muslims to the sword. How could this possibly been justified? Just what happened in those thousand years between the death of christ, and the crusades? What led to the militarization of christianity?
Source:
Gud vill det! - Dick Harrison
Featuring art from Bible Studies by Mike Hawthorne:
www.mikehawthorne.net/
profile.php?...
#christianity #history #crusades #balticempire
While personally I would have added that the Arab and Turk Jihads definitely influenced the choice to go to Holy War, still a good video
Facts.
The Arab jihad/conquests lasted literally 120 years (Jerusalem fell in 636), a long time for the holy war reaction by the way.
@Sadoyasturadoglu It was more so a reaction to the battle of Manzinkert and its aftermath. Tho the Reconquista was a crusade started in the 700s and the franks launched various campaigns against the Islamic Iberian states
@@rayzas4885 So basically the fall of Jerusalem did not cause the crusades, right?
@@rayzas4885 Also, conflicts in the Iberian peninsula were more local than "an organized religious war", right? and it doesn't seem to be directly related to Jerusalem.
3:20 you say serving in the Roman military was against Christian belief. But actually the new testament in the book of Romans teaches that the Roman soldier did not bear the sword in vain. But with it they kept the peace. (Romans chapter 13)
Many early christians were soldiers in the Roman army. When Christ spoke of Roman soldiers and how they should act, he didn't tell them to throw down their swords and become pacifists but he told them not to abuse their power and to be honest.
From what I've heard the crusaders initially went to the holy land because Alexios Komnenos called upon the western church for aid against the muslims who had been ravaging Byzantine lands for centuries.
The broad overarching reasons for being a soldier, or calling a crusade can be done with an intent on the greater good or protecting a people in need which are all easy to showcase in a spiritually fit way.
But the actions of individuals on the lowest and most minute levels who are supposed to be carrying the mantle of their altruistic and just mission are many times carried out in a heinous and arguably evil way.
It is this topic where "good christians" on a holy and admirable mission act in a way that can only be seen as someone deserving to burn in hell so to speak
@@FutureBoyWonder I’m not a Catholic so I don’t support the crusades, I do understand the history of this period and the Roman period so to me the crusades were provoked by Muslim expansion. I do support Christians joining the military.
Sola scriptura is one of the most fallacious doctrine that Martin Luther created.
@@FutureBoyWonder It generally stem to Saint Augustine "Just War" Theory then by Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas asserted that it is not always a sin to wage war, and he set out criteria for a just war. According to Aquinas, three requirements must be met. Firstly, the war must be waged upon the command of a rightful sovereign. Secondly, the war needs to be waged for just cause, on account of some wrong the attacked have committed. Thirdly, warriors must have the right intent, namely to promote good and to avoid evil. Aquinas came to the conclusion that a just war could be offensive and that injustice should not be tolerated so as to avoid war. Nevertheless, Aquinas argued that violence must only be used as a last resort. On the battlefield, violence was only justified to the extent it was necessary. Soldiers needed to avoid cruelty and a just war was limited by the conduct of just combatants. Aquinas argued that it was only in the pursuit of justice, that the good intention of a moral act could justify negative consequences, including the killing of the innocent during a war.
Mycket bra video! Älskar Kanalen. Njuter av National dagen genom att kolla på dina videos!
came for the pirates, stayed for the history lessons
super good job, keep it up, love your work
I started with the pirate channel and am happy to be here too
Good stuff again. A Good take on a complicated and very interesting subject.
There was animosity between Rome and Constantinople for a long time before the big split. Neither side acted very Christ-like. I've noticed a lot of Crusades videos don't include the details of the Eastern Emperors habit of lying, promising & not delivering and outright hostility, even narc'ing them out to the Muslim forces. By the time of the sack of Constantinople took place I have to say that Constantinople had it coming to them.
Facts.
A fair and balanced video covering a delicate subject. Well done.
This really doesn’t get the spirit of the Crusades and why they were thoroughly Christian.
Christ Himself militarized Christianity. He told us to always carry a sword
So, really no better than Muhammed
@@wiwysova Defensively, He often have to Disarm his own disciples and one (Simon) was formerly a Zealot (not the modern definition but one of the Jewish Factions around Jesus Ministry who saw violence as the only way for a independent Judea). He only permitted the carrying of weapon because the disciples wanted to protect him and as self-defense as it was a turbulent time even for Roman Judea and travelling in the Classical age ain't exactly safe.
jesus did not tell that turn another....read older versions or think yourself
Critique: Christ wasn’t even a pacifist either, this video is based on a sola scriptura-ist view, assuming the creator of this video comes from one of the Scandinavian countries, I hence say that this video wasn’t created by a historian who is neutral when it comes to historical facts and has anything clouding his judgement but, rather on the contrary, the video is just foisting one’s own perspective instead of being in accordance with historical facts and orthodox views, this video merely shows a fabricated unorthodox view of the so called “militarization of Christianity”.
We can all agree, the world would be better without Christianity
@@wiwysova Nope, it’s either idolatry or materialism. Therefore, I disagree with you but it’s understandable why you would say that since you’re a Muslim.
@@warren279 Wait, Isn't Christianity vital to the creation of Islam.
Though by all means Christ did carry around a non-violent adherence as he often have to disarm the disciples and going by his ministry tension between the Jewish Factions often made it necessary for the disciples to carry weapon, specially since some of his followers are formerly from the Zealots.
The Notre Dame looked so beautiful in flames.