About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 12:20amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Having studied the history of the crusades from the perspective of an Atheist, I would summarize them as the actualization of a central Christianist principle: "Kill them all; God will know his own." That is a principle that the Moslems - or at least the Islamists among them - learned only too well.

The advertising of Christianist propaganda on SOLO reminds me of the occasional use of Libertarian magazines as fora for neo-Nazi propaganda, "we are all anti-Communists" etc. Just as Nazi and Communist dictatorships delighted in presenting themselves as the only alternative to the other, we now see the farce of Christianism being advertised as the alternative to Islamism. Just as the Nazis learned from the Gulag, the Islamists learned from the Crusades. They "learned" the same thing. The same lie.



Post 1

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 6:54amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Adam wrote:
Having studied the history of the crusades from the perspective of an Atheist, I would summarize them as the actualization of a central Christianist principle: "Kill them all; God will know his own."
Please explain the source of this principle.  Biblical text?  Theological exposition?  It clearly conflicts with the Golden Rule common in scriptures across many ancient religions and philosophies, including Judeo-Christianity:

You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Judaism and Christianity. Bible, Leviticus 19.18
 
Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them.
Christianity. Bible, Matthew 7.12

Notice I did not say that religion did not riddle itself with contradictions.  However, the sweeping assertion you make that Christianity advocates blind mass murder demands substantiation.  They never taught me that in Sunday school!   ;-)

(Edited by Luke Setzer on 8/14, 7:06am)




Post 2

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 7:17amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ahhh, Luker, that's a common misconception, because you have to define MAN. In the medieval Christian sense, this could only be christians. Of course, this has changed slightly today, but if you look at the Islam world, you will see the same attitude: Only Muslim are proper men.

Also, the interpretation of the Bible was solely in the hands of the Church and thus they could go about this dogmatic crusade. The same is true for the Koran, where the Imams and other Islamist heads are the true interpreters of Mohammed's scripture.

Also, they never come about saying: You shall do mass-murder unto thee.
They have to find new clothes for those words in the modern times. They bind it to democracy or culture and even on freedom. This is what makes it so hard to decipher today, but it is still in existence as can be observed during the NAZI regime.
I think that Christianity is more peaceful today, especially on an individual level, but the Church is still dogmatic and anti-freedom on many levels. And the Islam is in the same stage as the Church has been during Crusades, hopefully they will also do the transition peacefully.




Post 3

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 7:50amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Max wrote:
Ahhh, Luker, that's a common misconception, because you have to define MAN. In the medieval Christian sense, this could only be Christians. Of course, this has changed slightly today, but if you look at the Islam world, you will see the same attitude: Only Muslim are proper men.
Thank you, Max, for that clarification.  I suspected this, but the modern Lutheran church in which I received Catechism training treated all human beings, regardless of race, gender, etc., as members of the species "Man."  I hope that some day the Islam world will receive its versions of Aquinas and Luther to mitigate their dogma with independent reasoning.

Speaking of "Man," an old feminist I know through the local freethought group holds "sexist" language as one of her pet peeves, arguing that the medievalist mindset only treats males as proper members of "Man" with commensurate rights to life, etc.  I respectfully disagree with her, but I understand her point of view given the historical abuse of the word.  I still prefer the all-inclusive masculine convention that Ayn Rand used: "Man," "men," "his," "he," etc. as including both genders of the human species.

(Edited by Luke Setzer on 8/14, 7:51am)




Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 4

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 10:23amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Luke,

In pre-reformation Christianity, "Slay them all, God will know his own" was the standard interpretation of 2 Tim. 2:19 which in part reads, "The Lord knoweth them that are his." This is pretty much standard history; Google points first to www.military-quotes.com/misc%20quotes.htm which says:
"It derives from "Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset", or "Kill them all. God will know His own.". This was a misunderstood reference to 2 Tim. 2:19 which in part reads, "The Lord knoweth them that are his". I think this comes from around 1210AD, when Pope Innocent III unleashed "orders of fire and sword" against heretics throughout Europe... This was actually said by Arnaud-Armaury, the Abbot of Citeaux, the Papal Legate. Though his exact words are not known, the latin equivalent, "Neca ecos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet." was recorded by a monk who was present at the time. The Abbot had been asked by the military commander of the crusade, one Simon of Montfort, Earl of Leicester, how best to deal with the heretics. He complied readily, and so the crusade was carried out for twenty years.
At that time, the Koran was interpreted fairly liberally. Moslem emirates in Spain presided over a thriving Aristotelian civilization that gave the world algebra, apricots, algothirms, and alembics. The bloodier interpretations of the Koran mirror the standard Christian interpretation of the Scripture during the Dark Ages, when the remnants of Hellenism were being systematically burnt and extripated in Christendom, and preserved only under Moslem rule in North Africa, Persia and Spain.



Post 5

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 10:37amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Adam,
Having studied the history of the crusades from the perspective of an Atheist, I would summarize them as the actualization of a central Christianist principle: "Kill them all; God will know his own."
Would I be correct to assume that by "Christianist" you mean something distinct from Christian?  Factually I think it is well established that Christian morality is founded upon the principle of turn-the-other-cheek.  Whether or not Christians practice that principle is another matter.

I also have a question about interpreting history from as a capital-A atheist.  Why would that lens be superior to that of a Christian, a Muslim, or a Marxist?  Are making a polemical point or do you believe that history is best understood from an "Atheist" perspective as opposed to an objective survey of the facts?

I'm not trying to yank your chain.  I'm new here and trying to cut to the chase.

Andy




Post 6

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 10:45amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I can see no evidence of one Islam, only disparate factions with even more disparate and fractional agendas. In the city that I live, London, we even have Muslim street gangs - various groups of disaffected youth, in the same moulds of gangs on down the ages, but, with a generous sprinkling of interpreted fundamentalism. And on a scale of 1-10, these aren't even the dangerous ones (relatively speaking). Scary. And then there is the open toed sandal wearing, tree hugging, lentil burger eating, politically correct liberal (the type that, as a teacher, would walk into the classroom, sit on the desk and say "call me Tim") trotting out all the usual feeble cliché's "They're not all terrorists". No, this is true and any reasonably clear thinking individual would recognise this. But it might also be prudent to take on board a SureGov poll shortly after the bomb attacks where almost 25% of Muslims polled sympathised with the bombings and one in three thought that western society was decadent and should be put to an end. And they live HERE! There are a lot of things that have to be worked out between our cultures and I can't help thinking that Tierra del Fuego might be a nice place to raise your kids for the next few decades.



Post 7

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 12:44pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Adam,

You really need to get this book.  Much of what you think you know about the Crusades and the Christian role in it, is wrong.  This book sets the record straight... but only for those who read it. 




Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 8

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 1:43pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
As Adam has not mentioned anything about the crusades, how is it that much of what he thinks is wrong? And as for the book, have you researched it or mearly read it? I am trying to take a balanced view here and, after some poking around on the internet, I found the following - oddly enough at the Conservative Book Service - it is as follows:

 
REVEALED, at long last: the whole "politically incorrect" truth about Islam's violent teachings, bloody history, backward culture, and morally depraved founder

PLUS: Why the Crusades were justified wars of Christian self-defense against centuries of Muslim aggression

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)
by Robert Spencer

Exclusive hardcover edition -- not available in stores!
When PC propagandists assure us that jihadist terror doesn't reflect "true," "peaceful" Islam, they're not only wrong, they're dangerous -- because they lull America and the West into letting their guard down against their mortal enemy. And not only do self-appointed "experts" lie elaborately and persistently about Islam -- they have also replaced the truth about Christian Europe and the Crusades with an all-pervasive historical fantasy that is designed to make you ashamed of your own culture and heritage -- and thus less determined to defend it. But now there's a remedy: in The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), Robert Spencer reveals all the disturbing facts about Islam and its murderous hostility to the West that other books ignore, soft-pedal -- or simply lie about.

What say you?



Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 9

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 2:48pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Let’s see Daniel. Muslims from 638AD to the time of the Crusades conquered all of North Africa – populated by Christians and Jews. They conquered Spain, previously Christian and invaded France but were defeated by Charles Martel. They conquered most of the Eastern Roman Empire including Palestine, Syria and parts of Asia Minor. They also conquered southern Italy including Sicily. (We’ll skip over the slaughter of Persians, Hindus, and Buddhists during the conquests to the East as this is not relevant to our purpose.) Several attacks were made on Constantinople – the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire and center of Orthodox Christianity. The Christians in the East continued fighting the Muslims for 4 centuries. All of this happened before the Crusades.

 

Finally, the Orthodox Christians asked the Latin Church for help. Thus, the Crusades were born. Now, Daniel does Spencer’s claim appear totally unreasonable?




Sanction: 1, No Sanction: 0
Post 10

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 3:03pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
A better book to read is McNeill's Rise of the West, even tho written many years ago...



Post 11

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 3:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jason-
No, not by any stretch. Not having read the book and having a limited detailed knowledge of the Crusades, I feel it best, as a rule, to be as informed as possible in order to avoid inserting my foot into my mouth. My point or question to Celeste is - are you informed or merely parroting what you read? I live in London. It seems that there are more Muslims here than in the middle east. And they don't integrate fully into British society which is a big, big problem. You engage them when you buy a newspaper, petrol or eat in their restaurant but you generally don't go out clubbing together or have them around for poker or cinema nights. I cannot profess to know all there is about Islam but it does appear to be a "my way or the highway" religion. You go to an Islamist state and you live by their rules. When they come to the west you bend over backwards not to offend them. At least here in England (I was born and raised in America) they alter their own culture and laws to accommodate them. Hence in Birmingham, which has a very large asian community, we have "Winterland" instead of Christmas. It's all a nonsense. Have you read the book?



Post 12

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 4:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I've read half of the book. I prefer Trifkovic. Thanks for sharing your experiences of life in London.




Post 13

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 4:53pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Was half enough or will you finish it? I've investigated getting it and can get it here online. It might be available in the bookshops (I suspect that it is) but I don't think I'll get to one at least until the weekend. I checked out your blog and left a comment.



Post 14

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 5:47pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here are my recommendations on what to read about Islam. Since Spencer is covering the same material but in less detail than Trifkovic, it's unlikely that I'll finish reading his book. I've enjoyed Spencer's earlier book, Islam Unveiled, but list Ibn Warraq's "Why I Am Not a Muslim" as a particular favorite. Both Spencer and Trifkovic rely on Warraq to some degree. Hope that helps.



Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 15

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 7:10pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Daniel,

Thanks for posting that.  It's going to be a long battle to get this suppressed information to the world, but because it will explain much more than the mainstream propaganda does, it's going to catch on like wildfire.

The reason we're losing this war, is because most of us don't believe we're in the right to even resist the enemy.  We've been tricked for generations through mainstream historical lies, to believe that we "have it coming" because "we" started the Crusades.

Once the world realizes that this was always false, then the world will actually WANT to fight this thing... something it hasn't done yet.




Post 16

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 7:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Daniel,

Are you asking if I've read the book, to somehow chop away at the credibility of the book or my endorsement of it?  Somehow I think you're asking a rhetorical question here, to have a certain effect... I don't think the answer really matters somehow.

And I'm actually surprised that you're so naive about their "accommodating" themselves in England.  You seem to only process things on the most shallow of levels.  Are you not aware of all the imams in London, vociferously preaching that the flag of Islam must soon fly over 10 Downing Street?  How "accommodating" is that?  You really seem to be stretching for reasons to dismiss all this.

In his book, Spencer reveals that the Quran instructs its followers to be accommodating in any society, until they have gathered enough power and positioning to unleash overt aggression.  And that's exactly what you see happening. 

I'm sorry, but it's going to be very hard to ever have a discussion with you, if you're going to continue to try and promote the notion that reality doesn't exist.  I would naturally assume that's what objectivism is all about after all. 




Post 17

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 7:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jason,

It's nice to see someone who really understands this crisis.  I'll have to check out Trifkovic.  I've already read Warraq.




Post 18

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 11:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I have had my copy arrive today and will start reading it tomorrow.
I will look into the others mentioned also.



Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 19

Monday, August 15, 2005 - 1:43amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Don't be so defensive and go back and re-read what I wrote. There you should see that it is the BRITISH who are accommodating NOT the Muslims. Where do you live? Where I live, I pass by more Muslims in a day than most Americans see in a year (or more). Am I aware of all the Imams preaching hate? It frustrates me to no end for this to be tolerated. A lot of these people come here from half way around the world, claim asylum since they are being sought after at home, live a cushy life on benefits and then have the cheek to preach their poison. Hard to have a discussion as I "promote the idea that reality doesn't exist"? You're not a freshman in High School are you? Give me a break. I have no need to "make an effect". I feel quite comfortable in my life and I don't need to come to these pages to "pose" and pretend that I'm flexing some intellectual muscle. My initial point regarding your statement to Adam was that it was a sweeping generalisation and I wanted to find out whether this was the tip of an iceberg or just a small mind expressing itself. Can you blame me? Here, they are too soft on these people. But there, they teach them to fly.
(Edited by Daniel Maurer
on 8/15, 11:23am)




Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page
User ID Password reminder or create a free account.