He says that we should bring back the death penalty for such crimes.
I wonder if he thinks bringing back the death penalty for killing someone whilst driving dangerously would be a good idea?
He is not a stupid man, he knows full well that public opinion is running very high over this recent failed Islamic bombing attack in Exeter, and he is sitting facing serious criminal charges himself which if convicted would see him go to jail for several years. So he has thrown his voice into this matter over the Exeter Moslem nail bomber as a way of trying to salvage something from his now dead public image, by calling for the death penalty for this type of crime because he knows that is a very topical public interest subject at the moment, as if it will some how prevent criminal charges being brought against him when it is a clean cut case.
Good P.R don't you think, except anyone with even the slightest bit of intelligence who knows about this matter can see straight through it for what it really is. Anyone can make wild claims to grab the headlines at a time of heightened awareness, but making them to try and save your skin and public image when you have killed someone is a little bit beyond the pale of civility don't you think.
Someone did die after all, somebodies son or brother, maybe a father now lost to a grieving family in this World because British law was broken by Mr Ahmed.
Did you hear a word out of Lord Ahmed when a down syndrome boy was used as a human bomb in Iraq, or when a little 8 year old girl had a bomb strapped to her which was detonated by remote control in Iraq? Nope not a peep out of the fellow, yet now his whole future hangs in the balance, with the very real possibility of a prison sentence for killing somebody he chirps up to score some brownie points.
The only way he can get out of this one is corruption at the highest levels but Lord Archer couldn't get out of it so Lord Ahmed shouldn't either, or does the Moslem label go in his favour more than what Lord Archer had.
Daily Mail‘Hang extremists’ call
Britain's most prominent Muslim politician last night called for the return of the death penalty for extremists who urge the weak and vulnerable to carry out terrorist acts.
Labour’s Lord Ahmed spoke out as police continued to question an Islamic convert suspected of detonating a nail bomb in Exeter city centre. They have been told that Nicky Reilly, 27, who has a history of mental health problems, was brainwashed by Muslim radicals.
Lord Ahmed said: ‘Decent law-abiding Muslims are outraged that people who claim to be followers of Islam should prey on the mentally infirm and encourage them to murder people on a large scale. We should consider hanging for this type of crime.’
blog posts
46 comments:
I agree! Bring back hanging. You can start with the murderer Lord Ahmed. And then go on to the majority of those involved in terror networks in Great Britain.
Instead of deportation, hanging. Televise it and make it a public spectacle.
No I wasn't being sarcastic. Great Britain did a great disservice to itself when it outlawed Capital Punishment.
What a spectacle.
Nu Labours patsie "moderate" mouthpiece caught with his trousers round his ankles.
Wasn't this the man that das Feurher Gordon Brown sent out to Somalia to do Britain's Foreign Policy for them, to get the silly teacher released who had dared to allow a child to call his teddy-bear "Mahamed?"
Just what is going on?
According to this article, Institutional racism in the Health Service is contributing to the high suicide rate among Asian women:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7416500.stm
Of course it is institutional racism and has nothing to do with woman having no rights under Islam and treated like property through forced marriages and beaten as the male head of household does not want the community to know of the families shame and to uphold their honour.
I think bad breath has a lot to do with it.
Dear Lionheart, my brother in Christ: Please don't criticise Lord Ahmed for calling for the death penalty for Islamic terrorists who commit murder. Genesis 9 commands all mankind to enact capital punishment for murder; and in ancient Israel where the laws were set by God, this was repeated as one of the 10 Commandments. If you want to attack Ahmed for other things, that is up to you (although we are all sinners, and please note that Israel's law recognised the differing intent in manslaughter and murder). But he is right about how to deal with murderers.
Anon @ 27-May-2008 11:59:00.
It's hard to believe him, not so much as a muslim and their use of taqiyya but as a person who has gained influence and prestige by being part of the Labour establishment whose 11 years in power have been lies, spin, deceit and perusing hidden idealogical agendas like unlimited immigration to change the demographics of this country. These were never in any official policy document but they were perused anyway.
Sorry but anybody attached to this Labour Government or the Labour party can't be trusted.
interesting blog, to add more credibility though i'd personally try and find sources other than the Daily Mail (or Daily Express). Just a thought, ta
to add more credibility to the blog i'd personally try and find sources other than the Daily Mail (or Daily Express). Just a thought not a criticism, ta
There have already been a lot of murders of teenagers this year in England. Perhaps if these murderers, some teenagers themselves, thought they would get the death penalty for committing such heinous crimes, they would refrain from murdering. I've often read that capital punishment isn't a deterrent to halt murders, but first, I do not believe this to be true; and second, at least the people wouldn't have to worry about them murdering again and about the need for more and bigger prisons.
If you knew me anonymous and what i post on here you would know that i was not criticising Lord Ahmed over the death penalty statement.
See how he now has you on side because he mentioned it recently.
Exactly what the post was about.
Read my post properly next time and see what i am actually saying.
God bless
Dear Lionheart: This is Anon of 11:59, May 27th to whom you replied, and your brother in Christ. I read your post before commenting but was unsure how your comments about Lord Ahmed help the spiritual battle against Islam. (I share your view of Islam, by the way.) What 'side' do you think he has me on? He too is in the image of God, and we are no better than him in God's eyes without the covering of the blood of Jesus Christ. I beg you to remember that in what you write about him and others.
I hear what you are saying anonymous, and it does come into my thinking, but YOU have to remember that sometimes these people are enemies of God too.
Anti-Christ.
By their actions they go against God's people and He passes justice and judgement upon the Earth.
I am just writing my perception from my perspective.
The spiritual battle against Islam is manifesting in the physical if you hadnt noticed, and God is revelaing Himself.
What do we do, roll over and let them kill us and take over?
I know that is not my role before God, i dont know about you?
People who have been following me know exactly what i mean about this post, you have jumped on board now giving your present opinion from your present perspective.
The truth will be revealed.
Lord Ahmed is an affront to God in my personal opinion.
Why is another question, but God knows, and i know God has spoken.
This post was a piece of topical subject matter for those visitors to my blog.
Those within the halls of power know what Lord Ahmed has done, and crashing his car killing someone on Christmas day whilst texting someone at the wheel whilst driving in the fast lane supports my belief.
Or was it all just a coincidence?
God bless you
p.s Is he your friend or something?
Dear Lionheart: I don't know Lord Ahmed and I don't like his works or his religion, but I will not criticise a man's character in public.
I know that Islam fights a physical battle as well as a spiritual one, but we Christians are commanded not to use force in matters of faith. We are ambassadors for Christ and we must not descend to the level of others. As for what we can do: love all men (Muslims included) and offer Christ to them non-coercively. If that means persecution, remember that the early church considered it an honour to die for Christ, as He died for us. If enough Muslims convert then the problem goes away. But if they take over, it would still be with the permission of the God whom you and I serve and trust. (In my view it would be His judgement for the sins of secularism that have wrecked our family structure since the 1960s, so that to reverse the situation we desperately need to offer Christ to the secular too - but even if I have guessed God's reasons wrong then I still trust Him.)
Every blessing.
This is my blog, this is how i write and you are preaching to the converted.
If i am wrong then God will correct me, so dont think i am not listening.
Jesus said be at peace with all men, as much as possible.
So there are times that is not possible.
I will gladly die for my Saviour, but that time is not yet, and i am not going to hand my head on a plate like you would have me do.
Before you try teaching me you should first know me!
A teacher is not above his master, and you are not my master!
Keep watching my blog because i have a good post coming about Moslem conversion, and todays 'Revivalists'.
Bishop Nazir Ali and his supporters within the Church.
You have your views and opinions and i have mine.
When i switch on the TV and have heard you have had your head cut off with it all over the internet then ill say wow, i respect that man and his beliefs, and until that time, you live out your Christianity and i will live out mine.
God is my judge not you!
Dear Lionheart: You have given people the freedom to comment on your blog and I am responding in good faith, that's all. As Christians let us continue to search Christ's scriptures for what to do in the unhappy situation in our land, and then do it. I wish you well.
Anonymous: If you comment then you should expect a reply, thats what it is all about.
Just because i gave my own opinion to your comment that was aimed at me, it seems like you are offended because i did not bow down to your view and opinion on this matter.
It would be a boring world if we all agreed on everything dont you think?
I too am responding in good faith, to your comments.
Lionheart: Not offended - glad you replied, in fact. In what I say I try to keep in mind that this is a public not a private exchange, and I respect your freedom to disagree with me. If you are willing to widen the dialogue: why do *you* think Islam is rising in UK?
Awaiting your post on Bish Ali and Conversion of Muslims.
It was mentioned on radio news today.
Too big a question with too many possibilities, but one thing is sure is that it is against God's will, but sometimes these things have to happen because the people and Nation have turned their back on Him.
So He turns away from them, then those in charge of the people go to work destroying the belief in God from the fabric of our society.
Allowing the worship of foreign god's in our midst in its place.
Look at Moses when he came down from the mountain top.
You will like it i hope, its going to be a good one.
Lionheart: Sounds like we agree, although I prefer to compare our situation with God bringing the Babylonians to trash Jerusalem for the sins that Jeremiah and other prophets warned against. Even then it's a bit different because we do not have a national covenant with God to keep a set of laws that he gave us, as Israel did. So in our case it is not for turning from Him to false gods, but for turning from his laws of morality (although people are less likely to keep God's moral laws if they don't believe in him). We desperately need to reverse the subversion by which the tax-and-welfare system now subsidises immorality and penalises marriage. A PM who did that at the same time as tackling Islam just might get God's blessing. That's what I pray for, anyway.
to the christian anonymous who is so concerned about following christs message.
i appreciate your goal of following Christ and when he said 'you have the commandments that God gave to Moses but i give you a new commandment - love one another as i have loved you'
fine....but i also abhor your liberal dose of applying christs sentiment. man shows great love for his fellow man when giving his life for his fellow man. As 1 catholic priest did by volunteering to go to execution in the nazi death camps in the place of a jew who was chosen by the guards. However showing love for your fellow man (and i mean women also when i say 'man' - i am just using 'man' as the generic term) also means standing up for your fellow man in this life - not just abandoning all .....and saying it is Gods will and that we therefore go meekly into the night and our reward will be waiting for us in the next life.
this quite frankly is islams refrain. No christianity is about justice not only in the next life but also while we are alive in this one.....Christ came for the poor, the wretched, the oppressed, those that have lost hope and no longer believe in themselves or anything else or anyone else - and are too weak to take care of themselves, he came for all those who have fallen by the wayside in our societies and whom the so-called 'pillars' of the community would cast derision at and look down their nose upon.....that is where your message coincides with what i am saying but thats also where it ends.
We are to have respect for the souls and bodies that God gave us too. We should enhance the skills that we were given and multiply them to increase the skills we have. These skills also are the skills od defending against evil and those elements in the world which are out to do you harm, whether by soul, mind or body. We are called to protect ourselves from all evils both from within and without, for if we do not protect ourselves how are we anygood to anyone else.
Allowing others to abuse us and abuse our brothers and sisters is wrong...it is unchristian.
As Lionheart posted a video recently about the drug addicts on our streets and how these are a section of the community that is reviled - it is our christian duty to help these people in a way that is appropriate to each and every one of us according to our skills and abilities. It is our duty to help these people and others who are afflicted in other ways and have lost their way and thus the ability to see where to go or how to live with vision and purpose again, with strength. To live in the light again and find meaning - to live in Christ simply. It is our duty to support these - not condescendingly or patronisingly but to see Christ himself in each of them. If they are not shown the light and defended then they are open to the darkness to engulf them, it is our duty as Christians to be torch bearers...to fight the darkness, to fight oppression, to stand up for the weak, to stand by your fellow man when the chips are down. Not just to stand by those who have no problems and life is rosy for - it is our sacred duty as Christians to stand by those who everybody else passes by. If not then we leave them to the darkness and to the wolves. It is the oppressed whom islam first seeks out and finds to use and abuse and send into oblivion by strapping bombs onto them. Many are souls that are hurting and sought oblivion and escape from the pain that they experience daily- a pain from horrible and sometimes tortuous experiences which they have undergone in their lives, it becomes a psychological scar that becomes a real physical and deep soulful tearing that they seek to run from and so use drugs as the only answer short of suicide to find - peace. But it doesnt last and they are forever in a nightmare of trying to find that peace by using drugs to escape or numb that emptiness and pain. Islam knows this - it seeks out and will be attractive to those who are looking for help and supports, islam will offer it all. It will offer the discipline, the rigidity of a tyrannic dictatorship - which to an addict will be nothing new, as that is what they live under when living on drugs, drugs is the old dictator, so moving to islam will not be such as dramatic mind shock as you would think - they simply remain under oppression but now in a different way. And yet the upshot is islam will claim ...look...our 'religion' gets people off drugs....or whatever other affliction affects people. And those self-same people will claim it has saved them. It is easy for a dictatorship to claim such things...because there simply is no other choice under its tyrannic rule.
Islam is a darkness and it is oppression confounding those bound by it to believe that it is a divine message of light, beauty, truth and justice. It is a weave of intricate light-play devised and set spinning onto this worldly stage to entrap and snare as many souls as possible - the devils own soul catcher. Yes it is our duty to help our fellow human beings who are in thrall to islam. But that is not to be meek or timid in the approach and rebuke of it. Indeed as Christians it is our duty to store up a vigorous stubborn defiance and vehement rooting out and intolerance of anything that stalks the souls of our brethern. It is our duty and natural instinct of our Christian souls to revile any evil that would attempt to entrap and tyrannise those who are vulnerable in this world and likely prey to its grasp.
Christ sought to impart justice in this world for its inhabitants ....NOW, yes we must have faith and believe, but also we must DO. We mustn't let evil go unopposed...if it is to be that the world ends with just a few christians holding their flag on a lonely hilltop while the hordes of islam approach to overrun and kill them. Then that is how it will go but the point is to the very last christian .....there should always be the voice that says ....NO ...i oppose thee. I stand in your way, no matter if the enemy is preordained to win .... the point is the christian never does nothing, they should as christians always prepared to be the people who never let evil walk unopposed - no matter the odds.
Once we do that, once we act and do something no matter how ineffectual, that is what is important according to how Christ lived and his message. Don't let evil have an easy ride and walk the earth without so much as even a voice saying ...NO. As the saying goes "in order for evil to triumph it is sufficient that good men do nothing."
Christ lived his life actively opposing evil and saying 'get behind me Satan', he never let evil have an easy time he always harried and harassed it, and finally he died on the cross for our sins and when it looked like he was defeated he fought evil for 3 days then rose again -triumphant. Christ said this is what we also must do, take up our cross.....being christian is supposed to mean, pain, social embarrasssment, suffering, and all for the sake of our brothers and sisters so that we may help them find the peace and true fulfillment and life to the full ...which can only be achieved in Christ. It is christs message to look for our brothers salvation and freedom from oppression NOW in this life and it is our duty to stand in support, defence and offer our protection and guardianship NOW in this life so that those who are oppressed can achieve fulfillmet in Christ now. It does not mean it will happen in this life but we as christians must STRIVE for it now, that is what we will be held to account for when we meet christ in the next life. No matter the odds, no matter if the last christian is killed in this world and islam and other evils hold sway upon the earth.
So the heavenly host might put it like this:
Yup, it doesn't matter that you didn't win down there on earth, the odds were always going to be against you. Earth...its Satans backyard anyway. You're a Christian you're supposed to be outnumbered 100,000-1. It only matters to us how you conducted yourself and that you stood up for yourself and your brothers and sisters and didn't abandon them to the darkness down there.That you stood with them right to the end.
The question will be:
In the face of the inevitable evil tide and onslaught that you as a Christian were always going to face
......just what did you do to oppose injustice, oppression and tyranny and just how did you stand and defend the weaker of your brothers and sisters from that onslaught?
celtcrusader
opposer of islam through soul, mind AND body.
Dear Celtic Crusader: Here I am. I agree with all you say about Islam. I agree that we must show love to all - including, of course, the lost in our own society such as drug addicts. I agree that showing love is a practical thing (not just a warm inner glow), as Christ says in Matthew 25:34-40. That is how we fight the good fight, and I expect to be judged by such criteria.
Actually it is pre-ordained that we shall win (although it will take the bodily return of Jesus Christ before it happens, as promised in Acts 1:11); and it is pre-ordained that, however harsh the persecution, there will always be Christians around, since Christ said that the gates of Hades (meaning death, not hell) will not prevail against the church (Matthew 16:18).
If we differ, it is about what to DO about Islam in Britain. I believe that Islam is God's impending judgement for the promiscuity that has wrecked family stability since the social revolution of the 1960s. Jeremiah said something similar to the Jews about the approaching Babylonians, and that fighting them without also repenting would only be standing in the way of God's judgement. (For that he was accused of being a collaborator.) Accordingly I wish to put our own house of British society in order, but the only way I want to tackle Islam is to offer Christ to Muslims (who are, ultimately, Islam's principal victims). If you wish to do something more: remember that Christ explicitly declined to start a resistance movement to throw the Romans out. Instead he ministered to people's personal needs and told them to turn to God. For that he went from hero to zero in the eyes of the mob in just one week, and (as you put it) went "meekly into the night" - thank God.
if you have been a regular reader of this blog you would've read that i have commented before on what Christ did and didnt do
as i have put it before:
Christ declined an insurrection to save a few but accepted a resurrection to save mankind.
so i already know about exactly the nature of Christs work and method here on earth. He didn't go meekly into the night - if you understand the spirit - you will speak in terms of that language and will understand the events that unfold on this world ....how they can be interpreted and what they mean to the spirit world.
for instance when christ is saying nothing in his defence to his worldly captors - it is so he is precipitating his attack on the evil in the spirit world. That is why the devil in this world tempted him from his mission. The people and his roman captors didnt have an idea what he was on about - or what he was up to but the devil did, and he was out to tempt him not to get crucified- but to adopt his manly temple and forget the harshness that lay ahead as the Son of God and being God incarnate. As christ said to pontius - you would have no worldly power if it were not given to you from above.
Christ therefore had his eye on the ball all the time - the real fight and prize was after his bodily death ...so there was no going meekly into the night - he was always fighting temptation not to undergo death at the hands of his enemies - he was also a man after all and all the uncertainties that that brings. The inner struggle was always there and always had to be waged.
But aside from his own struggle he always rebuked evil wherever he went, casting out demons and physically casting out people from the temple at one stage. He said - whatever you do to the least of my brothers ...you do unto me. That also means however we are deficient in protecting our brothers and sisters from the evil that stalks this earth then it is also as if we left Christ to the wolves ....or more aptly it is as if we had a chance to witness the events leading up to his crucifixion and we too just like Judas, Peter, Thomas betrayed him and betrayed our trust in him, or like the crowds who shouted for Barrabbas to be set free shouted for his crucifixion and then the other crowds who looked on and didn't help him - that we too just were passive onlookers on the misery and suffering of others. This is what Christ is saying - we have to get up off our arses and help those in a worse off posotion than ourselves and that means protecting them and defending them from evil too.....every bit as much....no less. To be deficient in that protection is to be deficient in our protectiveness of the suffering Christ way back when he was carrying his cross.
Also i know it is preordained that christ and those who believe shall triumph - yet that scenario is quite unclear as to the interpretation of how those events will unfold - so it may well be that the majority of us christians have quite a lot of personal suffering and possibly torture at the hands of other faiths and evil people. in any event - those who die will have to go down resisting to the end and even if they are on the short end of insurmountable odds - they still have to be a voice that is testament to christ and says and acts to resist the smooth flow of evil ...with their souls, minds and bodies.Even if they just act as a speed bump - at least they didn't leave their weaker brothers and sisters alone to face the oncoming wave - and thats what its all about, solidarity and simply being there for those who are weaker, more vulnerable than yourself. Not betraying Christ which means not betraying your brothers and sisters....any of them, you cant pik and choose or have a preference and leaving them to face that tide. It is not enough to just oppose islam and say you oppose it, some situations call for action to physically defend yourself.
I may think that killing is wrong but i'm sure as shit not going to baby talk some burglar who comes into my home and threatens my wife and kids. No. you may say well you cant just shoot him. And i'll say yeah...really...and what about your concern for the welfare of my wife and kids, the guy might have a previous conviction for rape - it is not unknown, just like it is not unknown for some types to break into your home tie up the family and systematically rape the female members of the family and then proceed to murder them.....any sign of the guy not freezing and getting down on the ground and then its my family i think of first ...not this guy, he will be stopped.
The same for islam....we give them warnings, we try to reason, to show the error of islam . the koran and their devil-prophet after that when they continue on their threatening course, to mutilate our land, corrupt our people, enslave women, prey on the weaker vulnerable individuals in our society and capture souls..... then as a christian it is my duty to get in the way, to resist, to stop, to wage opposition to the evil that persecutes our people - and it is our duty to actively oppose that which enslaves our brothers and sisters - and that however much you dislike it - at times means using appropriate force -necessary to the situation. Unlike muslims as christians we look not to use it - but there are times it will and must and is your duty to use it - in defence of yourself and your loved brothers and sisters around you when there very lives and souls are physically threatened, and with islam this is a reality - a reality in which many are bullied or subtley coerced into moving into then staying in it. Our Christian duty is to stand up for them and free them, this is not always possible with words ....and that is the reality of the street and the real world.
anything else is the unreality of those who live in pristine towers, like that bishop who declared that we should be more accommodating and more welcoming to islam. absolute living in a world that he doesnt have to deal with muslims who take over streets and then areas of a town and soon make the non-muslims very uncomfortable iin even walking down that street. People need to get real.
celtcrusader
Dear Celtic Crusader: I agree with all you say about Christ's actions. He never once backed off from confronting Satan and evil, but he did it in a way that was radically different. In particular, he chose not to fight his captors and tormentors physically.
I agree that I have the right to defend my family physically from burglars and rapists, and the obligation to defend others physically if I see them under physical attack. I do not believe, however, that Christians should be pro-active in physical confrontation. That is the start down a slippery slope toward Christian violence.
What, please, do you think Christians living in secular Britain should realistically DO about the threat of Islam?
i fully am aware of christs 'way'.
i have posted before that all the people were waiting for this great saviour who would be a leader of leaders...but that was them using their worldly way of thinking. They were looking for a rebel leader who was also spiritual and would lead an uprising, when he said no to their prompting to which no doubt they did to pep him into taking the position they all were hoping for. As i've posted before when he said no....then no doubt they felt...well who is this damp squib, and soon dropped him like a hot potato. little did they realise the uprising christ was aiming for. And as is no surprise it was a path with no celebrity and no cheering crowds, well cheering alright ....for him to be put to death. Only those who were now thinking and operating in the language of the spirit understood the language of Christ. So there were only a few who saw who he was and understood what he was saying. And that is no different today.
part of the key to understanding where we as christians stand and just what status we are on as regards the threat we face and what to do about it is to be found in your statement:
"and the obligation to defend others physically if I see them under physical attack. "
the other part is to be found in the reality of what is happening out there.
if we see that firstly islam is waging a war on anything non-islamic on every conceiveable front by every conceiveable means. Then we see that christianity and being christian means you are an enemy of islam. If we look at Lionhearts blog and the news, we see that non-muslims are under physical threat and indeed have suffered outright attack ranging from bombings to young girls being targetted for sexual exploitation, and the community being dealt drugs by the muslim criminals.Lets make no mistake about this - this is a physical attack, this is an attack on our more vulnerable members of society and our society as a whole. Call a spade a spade, we are under attack.
So we see already that individuals and the communities are already under physical attack. Our communities are being overtaken by muslims and the original inhabitants are leaving.More muslims come in and house by house they take over a street. Street by street they occupy an area. If you look at the suburbs in France they are now no-go areas for the police. If you look at Lionhearts blog you will see an incident in which the police were surrounded after simply asking a muslim orator to stop while they brief him.The crowd shouts...'how dare they...' That is 1 incident it is only a matter of time before this becomes the norm - the police are already afraid and it is already out of control - its a bit like global warming the damage is done its only that the effects come a lot later and have yet to come home to roost. wherever the muslims are ....depending on the population where they then the non-muslim is not welcome and they are made to feel not welcome. Whether you like it or not that is the same as an all out invasion of a country except it is done differently, no beachead, no paratroopers, just insidious invasion more like invasion of the bodysnatchers. We are at war, evil is upon us, it is stalking our children, dealing them drugs, assailing our women and trying to convert non-muslims. And yes the secular society has screwed our immune system and made us open to attack. Its time to defend ourselves.
Now how to go about it - well this is not a conventional war, the enemy is here, we pass him/her everyday on the street, and for the most part they don't just wip out their Ak's and start blasting (not yet anyway). Yet quietly in their mosques and homes and when they meet amongst themselves they preach their hatred of all things unislamic and what must be done to destroy their host land. And some individuals take that to the violence end, others take it to actively engage in converting and recruiting the non-believers in universities and young girls on the street, others supply the cancer of drugs to our streets while yet others engage in financial economic war. Others seek to change our culture and our norms, traditions, and heritage by changing and amending our laws and putting bans and new meanings on words that once meant something else. We are under attack ...right now. And therefore we have the christian duty to defend ourselves and our loved ones.
As it is an unconventional war then we too must be unconventional. 1) Get the message out there about the nature of islam, become aware of what is happening the length and breadth of these islands, and make it your duty to inform as many people in as many ways as you can, no matter whether people want to listen or not, deal in facts and relate the facts and disperse them. know the facts on islam and the crusades and challenge any muslim who counters your arguments - their cult is based on lies,irrationality and hysteria and christianity is based on truth, and the gift of reason so you cannot lose. just be certain of those facts. know your bible and Christ to arm yourself and many other sites that are an armoury against the lies of islam. Print stuff out on an anonymous printer and put flyers up with factual 1 liners about islam, that make people stop and think. And use the fingers and voice that God gave you to spread this message.
2) Get info and intel on the goings on of your local mosque and its leaders and be familiar with your local muslim community - what is the score with them, who is who , who is new and where do they come from and what do they do. Keep tabs on them and any news events of criminality or anything that strikes you as odd and report it to your police....then spread the word of those events -yourself, do not rely on the newspapers or society at tlarge to help -they wont they do not understand islam or the extent of its tentacles in Britain.
3) see if there is any link to local drug dealing/ prostitution to muslims in your area. See if there are local voluntary groups/charities who deal with these vulnerables and ask them what the score is, who is involved in the dealing - what gangs are involved, do they need volunteers to go around with the soup runs etc.drug rehab or outreach centres it is critical that you find out info of your own local area. Info on the street will be totally unknown to vast number of ordinary middle-class types. If there is a link with local muslims and crime like drugs or prostitutes then do the odd patrol with your own car - see if they are pimping women or smoothing talking young girls grooming to be prostitutes for them. they groom them , they give them compliments , alcohol, drugs and shower attention on them - these girls are usually from broken homes and are very needy of male attention - these muslims know this and these girls lap up that attention. Call any suspicious goings on to the cops and see that they arrive. It is going to be up to all of us to police our communities - to put in whatever few odd hours we can spare to be on the watch to help our brothers and sisters. After that see what you can do to make a personal difference in someone elses life in your community that is disadvantaged to help them find themselves again - you are his/her brother/sister so make sure you be exactly that- that will be one less soul for the grinder of islam, and hopefully one person feeling more found and whole again.
4)lobby your local politicians to make them aware of islam, scientology was banned in Germany - why not islam. lobby them and agitate those around you to seek freedom and security to have the freedom to criticise religion and that means islam. vote for individuals and parties who have these ideals and the ideals of a Britain of its forefathers. Make donations to these parties. Dont shop in islamic businesses or buy islamic produce, don't shop in Harrods.
5)raise objections to planning permissions and council proposals to mosques or mosque extensions or islamic owned buildings that can be delayed or stopped.
6)if you can post christian fliers in muslim areas that preach christs message and show a way to life and liberty.
7)prepare yourself spiritually, mentally and physically to be capable of defending yourself and your loved ones. Enrol in self-defence classes, become a member of a martial art school, learn how to shoot, become self-schooled in art and article of war,learn how to barricade your home effectively against a mob, learn survival techniques. seek and form groups of like minded people - form a community loyal in Christ and to the tenets of these islands traditional christian heritage. Be loyal to each other and those traditions and culture on which these islands cultures were founded. Seek to patrol your streets now and defend physically those who are under physical attack now. If the police do not respond to calls to suspicious activity then as a group go harry and harass those such as pimps and islamic dealers- make it hard and uneasy for them to go about their business. If they retaliate against you and your homes - then respond as a loyal united group in kind, you do not have to harm anyone but you can upset their places of comfort and unsettle the places where they take comfort and refuge, they will then become, nervous, vexed and agitated whilst also unable to operate with the same ease they once did- they will escalate threats and violence so then your group will have to escalate its defence measures. The police will do nothing, just as they are doing nothing now, in fact right now the police offer them succour and protection...unwittingly. You must care and protect yourselves, NOBODY will do it for you...EVER.
Do not relent, show why your mettle and constitution was once renowned - show the christian British bulldog and celtic wolfhound in response to the
islamic hounds of hell.
Become physically fit, stay that way, become mentally tough stay that way, become spiritually attuned - keep praying to God and repent. This is a spiritual war as much as anything else...no, it is more so. Ask for guidance and protection from the Holy Spirit. Keep your mind clean, your heart pure and your spirit true.
If you see anyone under physical attack or even being intimidated -though they be strangers -go to their aid, defend them, look to protect them, stand with them and stay with them until they are no longer in harms way, even though it might mean your death, then offer thanks to God and offer Christs blessing upon them. Tell them that what you did was done in the name of Christ. You are his servant and all such acts are done by the power and grace of God alone. Christ said such times would come.
celtcrusader
Dear Celtic Crusader: I agree with almost all of your savvy program. I would add only two things: to keep sin out of our own lives, and to preach the gospel impartially to secular people and Muslims.
I am at ease with your use of the rhetoric of war provided it is not misinterpreted to mean pro-active violence toward Muslims. (What do you mean by 'upset' and 'unsettle' their places of refuge and comfort?) When I wrote that we have an obligation to defend physically people who are under physical attack, I mean people who are actually being beaten up, not just under threat.
One more point (not in reply): the Christian's first loyalty is to God and his commands. Hopefully this does not conflict with loyalty to nation, but where it does we must put God first.
PS If you would like me to read your previous postings, please say where they are on Lionheart's blog, which is rather large.
"Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you" - Jesus Christ, from the Sermon on the Mount, St Matthew's gospel, chapter 5, verse 44.
"whatever you do to the least of my brethern you do unto me" remember that one? we can all cite scripture.
if you let your brethern and weaker brothers and sisters live in suffering and if you leave them vulnerable to the open predations of evil. If you look away while they are the ones at the coal face suffering the evil lures and whisperings of beguilement from islam and that they are more open to it because of their weakened psychological state and lack of spiritual fortification in the God of their ancestors. Then you are betraying them, abandoning them, and it is if you were doing it to Christ.
We are undergoing attack right now - you talk of just reacting to a physical attack on the street, but you fail to realise that before any physical attack happens the thought and motivation to assail your opponent occurs and is fantasised, invested in and planned long before that in the spirit and mind- in essence the attack begins in the realm of the spiritual and mental with the final steps being realised in the physical world. if you say you will only react to the physical then you are failing to combat all stages of the attack. An attack on your brethern, brothers and sisters, and your society, an attack on christ. If you say i will only react to a physical attack on the street then you are failing to react to the forces that lead to that attack in the first place and those physical attacks can be allowed to surface again and again. you are like the ambulance that can always be relied upon to arrive but always when the victim has died and so the evil spirits and natures in people are allowed to grow and given freer reign and take comfort in the fact that they can act whenever and wherever they like - even though you know the attack starts long before the physical manifestation of the thought, you wait until after the physical manifestation has happened to react and defend, when your defence should have started immediately. so you are failing your brethern and failing Christ. This attack has begun and it is ongoing. Every now and again it manifests itself physically but it is constantly being waged spiritually and mentally on the offensive - picking off our more vulnerable brothers and sisters.
they are under attack NOW, you have a duty to protect them NOW, in the ways i have already described. However you know where the attack is coming from so measures should be taken to stop it at source. When you patrol around with your group in the areas where these guys are pimping and dealing - you are going to harry and harass them and unsettle and upset them, simply by being there and voicing your opposition to them, they won't like it - neither will the ungodly men who pay for the women or the naive, or vulnerable addicts who go there for there fix, simply being there will cause disruption to there ability to operate smoothly and without obstruction- they will up the ante - then in defence of their reaction you can up your defence.
it seems to me that you might characterise the crusades as 'pro-active', when in fact the muslims had been attacking christans and their land long before that and then threatened eastern europe. The crusades were a 'reaction' to that constant muslim aggression and constant muslim attack and threat. To not have crusaded would have been actually neglectful of all those immediately under threat from the next muslim attacks on christian areas, with the longer term result of all of europe then finally succumbing and we would quite possible be now speaking arabic and on bended knee to a false god...allah, kneeling towards mecca.
How do you think God would view our custodianship of his covenant with us if we were now worshipping this false allah - God might ask - what did you do with the faith and path i gave to you what did you do with that gift i gave you - how did you safeguard it and how exactly did you look after your brothers and sisters spiritual welfare and safekeeping.
And we will be left answering 'well God ...eh...we were peaceful i guess you could say to a fault. We ..uh...reacted to all physical acts, thereby allowing the scourge that you sent us for our secular ways to come right in to our living rooms and places of worship. We didnt defend in the fullest way possible and therefore we didnt 'react' to the spiritual and mental aggression of those who sought to wrest our faith in you.'
our vulnerable brothers and sisters are out there on the streets right now being preyed upon - our society is being converted and turned, the menace of a false god grows and you say only react to physical acts of violence - that is to fail to understand that the violence occurs before the physical act happens. That must be countered.
the crusades were just - apparently some actions were over- zealous. I wouldn't agree. When god chooses to vanquish then it is usually absolute and ....and to our worldly 'human' minds -extreme. some secularists and athiests call it barbaric...who are to understand the mind of God. Then you might say then we are no different to islam - yes we are the big difference is Gods vengeance is usually in reaction to our betrayal of Him. Islams violence is usually initiated to acquire new adherents and land. Under God if you dont choose to go back to Him then you can live out your life but you will endure a death of the soul. The crusaders defended those who were being bullied and under the tyranny of an oppressor that sought to subdue their souls and turn them from the 1 true living God, and turn them from the His only begotton Son - The Christ the Son of the living God. The crusaders defended those who couldn't defend themselves from this islamic predation and tryanny - God would've damned us if we hadn't. Instead europe may now be sinking but it gave rise to the U.S - our brothers and sisters in Christ who still have the idea of properly defending Christs children, and may yet be our salvation -as you say it is ordained that we shall prevail.
Not your way of combatting this evil which besets us now - your way is not applying struggle to every facet available to you as a christian - it is picking and choosing. You must sacrifice all.
your way allows you to feel false humility but is actually pride at the fact that you think you are following the true path of Christ by being reactive only to physical violence. Ask any abuse victim they will tell you that the mental abuse is far worse and i am sure the spiritual torture will be worse again. your way has a chink in that it allows 'unwittingly ' the suffering of your brethern to go on, your way does not make use of doing all you can to defend them.
The crusaders were true christians - they truly stood by the vulnerable christian pilgrims to every extent, and were reactive to a threat which was ongoing, constant and manifested in different forms constantly, which meant their reaction to combat that aggression and properly defend the pilgrims was the the use of proaction - proaction was reaction. It is one and the same when your enemy has declared itself or when you have identified him and identified you are undergoing attack - then you are at war, then your loved ones ARE under attack and you are dutybound to defend. The crusaders did exactly that to the proper extent that that requires and as those who live in reality of the real world can only too well experience the crusaders were willing to sacrifice their lives to that end. They were exemplary Christians.
take from that what you will.
celtcrusader.
Dear Celtic Crusader: I am very glad if we DO quote scripture at each other, in an effort to understand what Christ would have us do. That is why I do not agree that the Crusaders of old were exemplary Christians. When they reached Jerusalem they massacred every Muslim and Jew in the place. Christ is the exemplar for Christians. Do you think He would have joined in the massacre?
I will fight physically only when I see the defenceless being physically attacked (or get a phone call that they are being attacked). You might do otherwise, and if you can square that with the scriptures which bind us both then that is up to you. But please do not think that by declining to fight in other circumstances I am doing nothing. I approve of much of your 7-point program, and I would add to it preaching the gospel to people who do not believe, secular people and Muslims. The best way to deal with an enemy is to make him your friend, if you can. (If not, I have to accept that the God I serve has given him freedom to reject my preaching.) That is fighting a battle too, of the kind that St Paul means. But to get phsical against your enemy because you believe he is planning a raid is to start a blood feud of the kind that even God found hard to wind down among his people - look at the provisions in Mosaic Law. If that is what you mean by Upsetting and Unsettling Muslims (is it?) then I cannot join you on such trips and I hope to dissuade you from them.
You and I agree about much - the same Lord, the same view of Islam, and 90% of how to respond in common. Can we keep our differences in perspective?
firstly i wouldn't quote scripture 'at' anybody but rather 'to' them - the devil may also quote scripture to propagate his designs. I'm sure you know that saying.
you say to look at Mosaic law- do you mean Gods law as brought to us by His messanger Moses. Also when Moses came down from the mountain did he not slaughter many of the jews who had worshipped the calf and were fornicating etc - there was an outright slaughter - you would say massacre -is that what God called it? - i would say dealt Gods retribution and punishment-God was alone in the universe, decided to create us out of love, but it is He who can take away whenever we have transgressed His laws. He is love, He has always been just right from the beginning, it is us who have been disloyal and broken faith with Him, all His punishments have stemmed from our breaking from Him therefore when He has been wrathful in the early days -it has been fierce to behold and still is to the human mind. The human mind in its arrogance, decries it and holds itself up as more sophisticated. This sophistication is called evil it is from the devil - people who focus on being intellectual and too smart by far - start objecting and saying ....'well what sort of God is that....' they judge by 'human' standards. They do not recognise God is absolute He is the alpha and omega ....our mercy coincides with His mercy just as a straight line can be called part of a larger circle. God has the bigger picture. When God decides to obliterate whole nations -it seems that the obliterated become so because they have transgressed His laws - those that have not been made aware of Him...why were they obliterated...why were the jews made the chosen people ...why not some other peoples in the area, why were all other peoples either beaten in war by the jews or made as scourges to the jews. Why?
I would propose He picked the jews because He is all-knowing and therefore knew they were His people - meaning ...they would be the people who would keep His covenant more than all others...yes there would be deviations and partial rejections but in the whole they would be His people and remain faithful. Being all-knowing He knew His people and they knew and came to know Him. All other peoples would have broken the covenant -fully. I surmise that when they would've had their wanderings of faith and rejections that it would have led to a full break with their God...remember the devil walks the earth, so either there is one people whom God knows His covenant will always be carried with, no matter what partial rents and tears occur in that journey of loyalty - in the main those people will always know Him and acknowledge Him as the 1 and only true God. Other peoples wouldn't have held out - their partial ruptures and tears would have led to the total tearing between man and their 1 true living God. Perhaps the massacre you speak of was Gods retribution for allowing the desecration of the new calf of allah and its followers to be on holy ground - ground ordained by God for His people- ground He is giving to them, and in return He is saying , now this is yours, it is hallowed, keep it and do not let others have it, they have their own or can find other ground -this specific ground, I give to you, this specific ground and no other, it is yours. Dont you see, He is saying ....'now I've gone to trouble to giving you this land, other people have been shifted, blood has been spilt. So now i give it to you, so after all this trouble, you had better treat it with the respect it deserves - so are you going to look after it. No it is not up for charity - this is ground i have given to you and you alone. I want you to do as i ask ..do you think you can do something i tell you to do ...exactly and to the letter...do this request, i am leaving this responsibility to you now, lets see if you can do it. This ground is given to you by Me - it is ground that the people I have chosen to keep my covenant and to worship Me. Let no others on this ground in doing so the way is open for false gods to be set up and worshipped on the one ground i designate to 1 specific people to worship the 1 true God, if you cannot do this - what else can you or can you not do?
You can help other peoples even invite them in for tea, but do not give up this ground -it is yours, you own it - so do not rent it out, loan it out, it is yours - you live and breathe on it and worship your God on it, and no other false gods can be entertained here, therefore it is hallowed ground.
muslims in jerusalem worshipping a false god - idol worshippers desecrating hallowed ground, this is a transgression of Gods law and request to us. How do you know the crusaders weren't Gods retribution, just as you declare that muslims are Gods scourge to the secular west?
When Christ was first here on earth his mission was to die on the cross for our sins and to resurrect and ascend into heaven thereby defeating death and Satan, anything that deviated from fulfilling that would've meant his failure. Partaking in a retaliatory purge of idol-worshippers and their appeasers would've played into Satans hand and the sanheddrin and pharisees who were looking to have him labelled,arrested and killed with a legitimate crime -he was killed with no label over him and no crime.
Christ did get enraged at the moneylenders and marketeers in Gods temple - throwing them all out, saying this is my Fathers house, recognising the denigration of hallowed ground. So how do you know that after the death of Christ in following centuries that the crusaders purging - was an echoing of christs purging in the temple, except the context of their purging was war, and remember war is a state where your enemies are already trying to kill you, so when they entered jerusalem - the defilers (the muslim defilers of a cult who ambushed them and attacked them on their way to the holy land) and their appeasers (those jews who were content to live with and leave these idolators desecrate their and our Gods holy ground) were on holy ground together. They were contentedly living side by side, this is reminiscent of the sight Moses saw when he came back down from the mountain - Gods covenant with us broken, our duty to be faithful and fulfill properly our guardianship and stewardship over that which we have been granted custody - defiled, desecrated and broken. They were at war with these muslims. On their way - they were harried, harrassed, ambushed, attacked - food and land was destroyed by the muslim armies so as not to give leave anything to the crusaders. So when they get to jerusalem there is the enemy, safe with food and shelter and being given succour by some misguided jews - what do you think is going to happen - ok enemy, you are allowed go. Or slap on the back, fair one matey....no ....you are not living in the real world where guys are sacrificing limb and life and enduring, disease, starvation and gut wrenching marches carrying heavy, heavy loads in sweltering heat, at the end of which is a battle to do and the possibility of death. the people who are killing you are in that city. Talking with the devil is actually irresponsible - it does nothing except give him more time to destroy and corrupt more souls and create more misery on the planet. The more you talk with the devil the more you actually prolong the war and more people will die in the longer term - and that is all because of misguided liberal, goody two-shoeness, which deals in ideals and not reality.
Christ will come again and it is ordained that there will be a war between the heavenly host and the evil hordes. you ask: "Do you think He would have joined in the massacre?" and i ask: post resurrection - do you think that he wouldn't? or what part do you think he will play in that war, i am sure there will be millions slaughtered or 'massacred' as you put it.
you can call my comments - rhetoric all you want, but the reality is, my views and opinions coincide with the reality of biblical history, Christs freedom from oppression, and the reality of the world we live in.
you said: " The best way to deal with an enemy is to make him your friend, if you can. (If not, I have to accept that the God I serve has given him freedom to reject my preaching.) That is fighting a battle too, of the kind that St Paul means."
what if your enemy is the devil- what if your enemy is plotting against you while you try to befriend him and is using that time to simply prepare the best way to come into your house and slit your throat while you sleep. God gave us a brain and Christ was no fool, he had a specific mission but strove for justice in this life not to be imbecilic naive pawns. God and his son Christ have given us the gift of reason and cop-on to be able to spot the devil and not be out-played by him. yes it is christian to reason and talk first and to preach and convince, even the devil. But it is also our duty to make sure that while that is happening - that the devil isnt keeping us in 1 place while he defiles and corrupts our brothers- so while we've been busy being self-absorbed by entering into converting the devil - he has been busy making mince meat out of those you were supposed to defend. No - once you know that the enemy is not changing their spots - then you have to deal with them.
yes preaching etc, is fighting. But it is not doing everything to the fullest of your ability to protect.
you say"I will fight physically only when I see the defenceless being physically attacked (or get a phone call that they are being attacked). You might do otherwise, and if you can square that with the scriptures which bind us both then that is up to you."
do you not see the defenceless being preyed upon already - start up your groups now, and at least patrol with your groups NOW. You dont have to start anything physical, but simply by being around with others of your network, in a patrolling fashion means there is a physical presence. Then you can call police if there is suspicious loitering or activity, you will see them pimping, dealing or grooming young white females - do something about it NOW. Dont you get it....all those activities ARE the attack that you are talking about...and its happening now...so start developing some network of like-minded individuals and doing those patrols. Those patrols get in the way of these activities from happening smoothly. If the police then don't arrive you and your group can stick about and voice opposition, talk to the vulnerable ones -ask what they need. The wolves will be annoyed, they will get agitated - but you have done nothing to them, except get in the way of their devious iniquitous activity, that is christian. If they up their evil actions then you are right to up your defence, if they attack your home then you will have to defend it. remember even going to their place of activity is not a violent action, being around in your group, voicing your opposition, talking to your weaker brothers and sisters, is getting in their way, it still is not violence, keep talking and voicing talk to them and try converting by all means, but do not take your eye off the ball. The reality of that action is that they will not like it - they will react violently, in that situation , defend yourself, which again is simply reaction to their dislike of christs light.
at the end of the day you have to be a torch - go and shine it on them and their evil activities and light the way for those weaker brothers and sisters already travelling to their dens and nests in those areas. Your weaker brothers and sisters are already under attack - they need you to shine that torch ....NOW. doing it the way i described is not being violent - no violence need be initiated from your end. You are however getting in the way of evil being allowed to happen unhindered - that will cause evil to react to you, that will require you to then defend yourself, or those you are shining the torch for. The crusaders lit such a torch but had to deal with the realities of all out war and the harshness of where they found themselves and the predicament they were in and the duplicitous, tricky enemy they faced which no doubt like many unchristian enemy down through history - has used the local populace for safezones and solace, quite like the taliban in afghanistan...its called guerilla warfare. Go out to the field...pick up the hidden rpg, loose off a round, drop and hide it, go back into the farmhouses and resume making butter. Soldiers come....who did it, don't know, but they sure as shit are going to do it again on our next patrol. Thats the enemy we all face, thats what the crusaders faced, as well as fixed battle lines. So was jeruslam a massacre it was a purging of desecrated hallowed ground....given the context and their predicament... i think the latter.... if you can say other wise and square that with defence of your brethern....that also is up to you....and your god.
celtcrusader
Dear Celtic Crusader: Your God is my God, Jesus Christ. Let's search his scriptures together and see if we can agree what he is saying to us. And if not, let us part as brothers. "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, that you love one another" - Christ, at John 13:35.
"Mosaic Law" is a fairly common phrase within the church (and Judaism) for the laws that God gave to the Israelites through Moses at Mt Sinai. I was referring to the parts about "cities of refuge" for people who commit murder as part of a blood feud: see Numbers 35.
Deuteronomy 32:35 is a famous verse that seems to sum up our difference, in which God says: "It is up to me to avenge - and I do ultimately repay." In other words, revenge is God's business, not ours. Jesus told his followers to give up all calls for revenge, in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:43-47). I worry that, on the day of judgement, the Crusaders who massacred every Muslim and Jewish man, woman and child they could find in Jerusalem in 1099 will have a conversation with Christ like that in Matthew 7:21-23. (See also Matt 25:37-46 for how Christ decides, and please note that these are warnings addressed specifically to his followers, not unbelievers).
One of the Popes long ago said that it was fine to go Jew-bashing because the church was executing God's judgement on the Jews (who were not agitating for political power or causing any civil unrest). That is typical of the horror that happens when people decide that they are God's sword.
Someday Jesus Christ will be back, and that is when he will indeed act in power and massacre a world army sent against Jerusalem. (Globalisation and Mideast politics suggest that we are closer to this event than a century ago, excitingly.) But it will still be God, not man, taking revenge, since Christ is God. And until that time comes we are told to serve him by following the example he set and the commands he gave during his first visit 2000 years ago: Love your enemies, do not take revenge [Sermon on the Mount], follow the nonretributional path all the way to your own Cross if necessary. Christ didn't do violence on a single human being when he cleansed the Temple courts of corrupt moneychangers, if you read the gospel accounts closely.
About God's gift of land. The whole world belongs to him. He gave the Holy Land to the Israelites "as long as the earth endures" (Jeremiah 31:35-36). He told them that they could and should fight for it, and made clear that he would fight on their side, making them invincible, if they kept to his laws and kept sin out of their lives. (The first battle they lost was because of the sin of Achan: see Joshua 7.)
Their very occupancy of the land depended on their obedience (Deuteronomy 28), and he exiled them from it twice - for 70 years in Babylon for idolatry and corruption, and for 18 centuries, ending only in our own time, for rejecting his son Jesus Christ. (So they weren't very obedient at all, although the root problem was human sin and no other nation would have done very differently.) Muslims too claim territory for Allah but, since the crucifixion, the true God's own territory on earth has been the hearts of believers in Christ, in whom God the Holy Spirit lives. God has never granted any other part of his earth to any other tribe of people. We Anglo-Saxons and Celts are in Britain by His grace; we have no national covenant, and plenty of tribes are named in the Old Testament whose cultural identity has vanished from history. The only guarantee that we shall not follow them is to keep God's moral laws, for "righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people" (Proverbs 14:34). That is why I think it is not a coincidence that we face a mortal threat (Islam) at the same time as our family structure has collapsed due to a promiscuity that is historically unprecedented - the cohabitation, divorce, extramarital birth and abortion statistics have NEVER looked like this in hundreds of years and it has all happened at the same time as Islam is rising in a single generation. We are NOT a Christian nation today, whatever the Coronation Oath says. That is why I put preaching to the secular as top priority, and preaching to Muslims close behind. Anything else is just a rearguard action.
You will understand where I am coming from if you 'get' the difference between Muslims and Islam. Islam is an enemy; Muslims aren't - in fact they are Islam's biggest victims, for Christians will end up with Christ and Muslims with Satan. St Paul said that the Christian battle "is not agaisnt flesh and blood, but... against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms" (Ephesians 6:12). May I ask you to see whether in your heart you hate Muslims, or want to offer them rescue out of love for them? I do not expect you to post the answer, but if your answer is the first of these then please consider whether your attitude differs from Christ's.
The man who thought he was most loyal to Christ was Peter, who, when they came to arrest Jesus, drew his sword and used it. Instead of thanking him, Christ rebuked him, repaired the damage, and fought Satan by standing for truth and righteousness heedless of personal cost. He had more physical power at his fingertips than all the nuclear arsenals ever made. But he declined to use it. Do we follow the way of Peter or the way of Christ?
We are to follow Christs example, but in this living scene Jesus had to be arrested and then crucified so that the scriptures could be fulfilled.
Jesus said that those who live by the sword will die by the sword.
So that is a decision we must make and accept.
I personally have wrestled long and hard, ever since i entered the Church about this very situation i am now in.
What do i do?
Let them kill me, roll over and run away never to be seen again, or stand up and defend myself and those innocent people around me?
Jesus said to be at peace with all men as much as possble.
So there are times when peace is not an option, not by our choosing but because of others intent towards us and our neighbours.
We must each walk out our calling before God with fear and trembling so decisions we make before Him are very hard perplexing decisions that we take slowly so as to not be wrong in our actions.
If we are wrong He will correct us, because He loves us.
The fight is not against flesh and blood but powers in heavenly places, but that battle is manifesting itself in the physical with God's enemies seeking to destroy His Church and Kingdom on Earth.
Do we step back and let it happen and let ourselves, our families and our neighbours perish?
Or are we justified in defending ourselves?
There are many arguments to this, all we can do is trust God for His guidance because He is our Judge when the day of judgment arrives, as it will for all mankind.
Nobody wants to be in this position, we want to live life and enjoy God's green and pleasent Earth, but there are those out there who are seeking to take that away from us and destroy God's Kingdom.
It can never be achieved because our God is the King of King's and Lord of Lord's, who holds all power and authority in His hands, He is the one true God, there is no other.
Is there a point, or at what point are Christians justified in physically protecting themselves?
Or are we meant to just be fed to the lions for others enjoyment?
i will answer the anonymous answer eventually and his/her quoting of scripture and what 1 pope apparently said about 'jew-bashing' as he/she put it.
but for now - a leading monk who was a leading organiser of one of the crusades said it was not alright to commit violence against the jews, and that they must not harm the jews on their crusade.
also you say Peter was most loyal to Christ...really, in the same breath he denied Him three times. So even though The holy spirit spoke through Peter and allowed him to ackowledge that jesus was the christ -the son of the living God and because of that he was blessed, Satan also entered Peters heart when he denied christ three times and also when he asked jesus to let him carry the burden of what christ had to suffer - christ had to say 'get behind me Satan'. So he may have been the most 'appropriate' ...the rock upon which christ would have a following ...or church in common parlance. But the sobriquet of 'most loyal' is not easily upheld. He was human like the rest of us and had to walk a tightrope of a journey in the struggle of finding his better nature which is at odds with our animal nature.
thats my offering for now - i will get back to you on the rest of your response at some stage.
celtcrusader
Dear Celtic Crusader: Me again; I appreciate your replies and look forward to your further comments as and when. I would certainly agree with the monk who said it was not alright to harm Jews on the Crusades, but you previously suggested the Crusaders were exemplary Christians, and I don't think their behaviour in massacring every Jewish (and Muslim, though that's not my point just now) man, woman and child they could find in Jerusalem was OK. Nor was it exemplary to sack Constantinople (4th Crusade) which was full of Eastern Orthodox Christians...
I wrote that Peter "thought he was most loyal to Christ" and I quite agree that, on that dark night, he was not!
Let us both continue to search the scriptures in deciding how to respond to Islam, and let us consider the key question: WHY are Christ and His omnipotent Father permitting the rise of Islam in Britain today? That to me is the key to formulating a response.
Shalom.
do you not remember that on various crusades as i have said before - the muslims were behind the walls of jerusalem ....jeering at the crusaders trying to get in to wrest their grasp of it....and the jews living with them, in that place ....AND the christians were living with them.
now dont get me wrong - i do know the jews are semites, as are the arabs - and actually have more in common then both have with christians - but i do not advocate hate to them. What i am talking about here is a section of jews AND christians who lived side by side at one stage with the muslims - who are the followers of a false god. So both those sections of jews and christians were living shamefully and as appeasers to idolators....you can liken them to secular jews and christians of today - they are in fact only that in name....they are not fully paid up subscribers to their religions. And therefore they are not followers of God or Christ ....AT ALL. In Jerusalem - they did nothing to harry and harass the enemy...you would've thought that when the time came they might've secretly opened the gates for the crusaders...but they did nothing and lived with idolators who at one stage laughed at the crusaders as they walked barefoot around the walls. Remember those outside the walls are at war with the idolators inside...any who do not oppose these muslims inside the walls surely are giving succour to them otherwise the walls would've been vulnerable before then...but that didnt happen so the crusaders fought there way in .....and continued to vanquish an idolator enemy and its 'supporters'-
Remember they are at war having been ambushed and attacked by the muslims- who knows what they are to come up against when they enter ground that is held by an enemy that is sly, weasely and does not hold to any decent convention in wartime.Also the fact that anyone in that city who was there - was there onthe premise of living secularly ..having allowed muslim idolators to go about their business unhindered and allowed to harry and oppose the crusaders unhindered....these types of people are called traitors and when the breach arrives - they will be caught up in the pursuit and vanquish of the enemy - as they are totally part of the enemy.
they were fighting for ages to breach the walls and finally when they do get in against a cunning foe - do you think it is .....'ah great, ok , put away your swords lads we have breached the walls and therefore wqe win....ok muslims ...do you agree...ok time for tea. That wont happen especially fighting a sly opponent who chnages the rules to suit himself and to appear magnanimous at the same time.
Also you have the practical fact that when you breach the walls -you must push on to take and hold ground to secure your position- in a walled city ...that is the whols city, nowhere can be considered safe until all areas are taken, and against a foe as cunning as muslims that must've meant to vanquish them and the people who aided them, lived by them without any oppositon. We know this otherwise they would've been expelled or killed.
The crusaders were men- who pledged their lives and DEATHS to christ and to stop the unholy advancement islam and protection of christs brethern and pilgrims - this is no simple task , with clear cut lines especially in the context of war and with jews and christians who are not living as opposers to your enemy. The only line was to oppose that which opposes Christ. In those conditions they did the best they could and therefore were exemplary Christians, sacrificing all for what many didn't then as today.
i do not consider those jews and christians who lived inside the walls while the muslim invader idolators held sway there as proper christians and jews. In fact i consider them as secularists, co-idolators by default of not opposing idolators on holy ground.
I will answer your scriptural quotes eventually but i will be away for couple weeks so time is tight.
The crusaders knew death was a very real possibility for them. They were prepared to sacrifice their lives to protect pilgrims and others and to honour the ground that had been designated by God as a place for His worship and His alone.....where does that preparedness to sacrifice oneself fit into your equation of damning them.
celtcrusader.
Dear Celtic Crusader:
I acknowledge the bravery of the Crusaders while disagreeing that their cause was godly - just as
many German soldiers who perished in World War 2 were brave men.
I've already set out (above) why I disagree with the Crusaders' cause. But even if you think the Jewish and Muslim men in Jerusalem deserved the massacre of AD1099, what about the women and children?
The Christians of the early church accepted persecution, often to death, from the Roman Emperors, and after 250 years of oppression they found that they had won the Roman Empire and become its dominant faith - without ever resorting to force. THAT is how Christians should fight.
Celtic Crusader.
What a very interesting comment.
Food for thought.
Those times were harsher and the choices clearer, live or die.
Win or lose.
Live or die, win or lose... and also heaven or hell. The Bible speaks of a 'second death,' meaning hell. Christ sets the rules of the game for winning and losing, as in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:38-48), and He will be our judge. He even gives examples of what wins His favour on the day of judgement; see Matthew 25:34-46, and remember that these verses are about people who claim to be believers, not pagans.
to the anonymous to whom i am having the debate - could you assign a name so as i can clearly identify which anonymous is which
i am back from a trip abroad and will carry on to answer, soon enough, your earlier posts which mentioned some biblical quotes as well as your latest reply- however an alias or other identifying blog nickname would be appreciated.
celtcrusader
Hope you enjoyed it Celtic Crusader, there is no other place like it in the world.
God bless you and God bless Israel
Lionheart
Dear Celtic Crusader: Point taken. I am the author of the following anonymous comments (and no others) left on this thread: May 27th at 11:59; May 28th at 11:11, 13:00, 14:11, 14:43, 15:13,18:24, 22:20; May 29th at 10:15, 13:43; May 30th at 13:56; May 31st at 16:09 and 18:05; June 3rd at 23:02; June 4th at 16:17; June 8th at 08:53. Henceforth I shall sign myself "Gospeller" at the end of my anonymous postings.
To Lionheart and others: Yes indeed, God bless Israel.
Gospeller
hello Gospeller
i apologise for the delay but here some of my reply is:
you said earlier
""cities of refuge" for people who commit murder as part of a blood feud: see Numbers 35."
Deuteronomy 32:35 is a famous verse that seems to sum up our difference, in which God says: "It is up to me to avenge - and I do ultimately repay." In other words, revenge is God's business, not ours.
you quote the old testament as well as the sermon on the mount when establishing a non-violent charter for proper practising christians. yet if you make use of the old testament for this , one can then use the old testament for citing the case for - incest e.g Lot and his daughter in the wilderness, ploygamy e.g Abraham and his maid Hagar -their offspring Ismael of which the accursed islam now falls on his descendants. Much of Gods wrath was visited on the tribes rival to the Israelites by the Israelites being Gods tool for that wrath and defeating their enemies in battle.
If we have opened the way to use examples or simply to refer to the old testament then you allow me to do so also. Let me illustrate by reference to the old testament that war as a retro-defensive action is necessary and in accordance with Gods will and that once it is Gods will and not our own then we are on firm ground.
A retro-defensive action is my own made up term and basically what i am getting at is ...a good offence is the best defence, but also because this is a religious context- it is done recognising that the enemy has transgressed Gods will and desecrated His creation and laws and is therefore beyond communion with Him, but also often they actively engage the worship of false gods be they mammon, allah or pagan gods or secular ideas to the zeal of a worshipper which is in itself a false god of the vacuum i.e atheism. God of the old testament has told us He is a jealous God and one of the commandments were -we shall not have false gods before Him, so many times His wrath was visited on the jews who strayed & the heathen tribes who worshipped false gods. Many times the loyal Israelites were the instrument of that wrath.
I will quote a piece of scriptural analysis I have in my bible about Joshua "In spite of Moses' strong leadership, Israel was not an organised nation. Those who crossed the Jordan in Joshuas time, for the most part entered in a peaceful manner. With their tents and their sheep, they settled in the hills surrounding the fortified cities of the Canaanites. They left the plains to the Canaanites. they lived side by side with the Canaanite farmers & interacted with them. As the inhabitants of Canaan were richer & superior in culture many of the Israelites adopted their practices & their gods, incurring the risk of disappearing as a people."
Note: on my visit to Israel i found this to also be true in Tel Aviv. the whole vibe is totally different to other cities in Israel- it is beside Jaffa a town the muslims have always been hankering after and finally got when they kicked out the jews and brits numbers wise in the 1920's. Tel aviv - very secular and unGodly and a lot of hand in hand with the muslims- totally different atmosphere - a lot more disrespectful & leery as i've come to see from muslim dominated countries. The israelites in tel aviv are living like the isaelites in Canaan.
Back to the bible analysis quote:
"those who saved Israel were the more courageous ones who, together with Joshua, decided to conquer the country.We look with repugnance at the violence they committed" ( i do not - i know that freedom is built on pro action and in the real world you are going to rub shoulders with others who despise your bid for it. rubbing shoulders in the real world in such contexts can mean death & in exceptional circumstances torture. that is fact and simply reality)
"Yet, they did carry out Gods design, using means proper to that time. The cities & kings of Canaan( who were no more than local chieftains) were very disunited. So Joshua carried out against them a series of raids & blows through which he raised the national consciousness of Israel. Then began the slow conquest of the country- an undertaking that would reach its happy conclusion only after two centuries & under Davids leadership."
such actions by the minority in the Israelite camp after centuries paved the way for a messiah from the line of David.
such actions were Gods will & righteous & part of Gods design. yet they were violent and unprovoked .....unprovoked being a word a secularist in this context would use.
i clearly see a provocation if the people God has chosen are straying and living alongside heathen worshippers of pagan gods...there is the provocation....the problem is that is too unsophisticated for the modern mind and is derided as 'childish or immature' .....and that derision is something i would expect the devil to say after all it was the serpent who egged mankind on to pursue 'knowledge' in the garden of eden. only it was knowledge at the expense of wisdom.
sophisticated knowledge with its trappings of arrogance versus simple wisdom and its liberating innocence.
now this is my argument using the old testament - there is no shortage of violence seeming to occur on mans initiative...yet on closer inspection we see it is by Gods guiding hand. So i do not think you can use the old testament to advance the idea that pro active violence is wrong.
so we move on to Gods possible evolving relation with his human creations and children in the form of Him becoming man as the Son of God Jesus Christ. I will give my thoughts about this later.
but before i go - about the threat of islam ...i do recognise that it may well be Gods wrath on us for having betrayed Him yet again and as such we cannot win against it ...until the final battle where His Son Jesus Christ will come again as our saviour and redeemer as He did already to defeat the forces of satan and darkness, but that is not to say that those of us in the faithful minority should not struggle to our every fibre and ability right up until the end and that is what my stance is - i have always thougth that when we are going to be punished - we are going to be punished and that will be Gods design so we cannot hope to oppose the inevitable, however that does not mean i cannot struggle against and continuwe to fight against evil even if it is a foregone conclusion. in fact i believe it is more incumbent as a matter of record that we even upped the ante when the ante was upped against us as a testament to our faith and the individual challenges we face alone against this tsunami islamic tide. God will ask how we went down. I will answer i went down fighting and still believing that You are the Christ the Son of the Living God. Amen.
celtcrusader
Hi Celtic Crusader
Thanks for that...
As a Christian I read the Old Testament to learn more about the God whom I worship, because He has an identical personality to his Son, my saviour Jesus Christ. But I am not bound by the Law of Moses, which God gave to Israel as a legal code. (I *am* bound by what Jesus said to his followers, plus some supplementary commands in the New Testament. Of course there is overlap between that and the Law of Moses.)
In the OT God is running a nation, whereas in the NT he is running a church comprising people "called out" from their own nations yet still living in those nations and under their respective legal codes - which they should obey unless it means denying God, eg as in emperor-worship in the Roman Empire on pain of death. It is good to love your country, but you are a citizen of heaven first and foremost.
The command against worshipping false gods was given to Israel (specifically) as part of their covenant with God. Gentile nations have no national covenant with God. The nub of your argument for being "pro-active" is that we are Christian and they worship a false god, so that if we kill them then we are God's sword of judgement. Apart from the fact that they are not breaking any covenant with God, the issue is between Him and them, and for us to step in and give God some help is a bit presumptuous. Mopreover, they use exactly the same argument about us, which is why I quoted God as saying (in the OT) "leave it to me to avenge". Otherwise, blood feuds just go on and on and nobody can remember or care who first did what to whom but people still kill each other.
In my Bible it says Christians are meant to offer Christ to pagans, not kill them. That is our course as citizens of heaven. As citizens of Britain, which is still a democracy (just), we also have a public voice, and we should use it loudly - but we must act within the law.
Gospeller
To Gospeller
you said
"I am not bound by the Law of Moses, which God gave to Israel as a legal code. (I *am* bound by what Jesus said to his followers, plus some supplementary commands in the New Testament. Of course there is overlap between that and the Law of Moses.)"
but you quoted numbers & deut. to point out to me why violence cannot be used- you cannot quote old test. instances which advance your argument only to then be wishy-washy by saying you are not bound by old test. law. - this is being disingenuous. my point in using old test. to further my argument was simply because you set the precedent of dabbling with the old testament- i too can cite the old testament to you to further my argument- you contradictorily go to say that you are not bound by the law of moses although nodding to the bit of overlap yet that is after you quote and use it to lay down the law to me to say vengence is Gods etc. you cannot do that- that is saying whatever to suit yourself.
i have said before in comments- that nothing from the old test. is needed in order to be a christian. it is simply a reference for the history of the people that christ came from but also a reference to our God in his relation to his chosen nation and a starting point as to how he would come to relate to all of us through christ. i used the old test. in an argument simply because you did- so if you are going to quote the old test. to further your argument , as you did, then i will do the same, negating your use of those non-violent references by showing that there are other quotes that show a myriad of actions that we would find hard to understand - them being violent and at the hands of men on the initiative of men, but being approved by God.
what i did say was that those instances were part of Gods design and that if violance happens then it must only happen when it is Gods will and not our own then we are on firm ground.
you use the old test. to bolster your argument yet when i use the old test. in the same way and doing exactly as you have done to bolster my argument- you change your tune and say ....well no you cant really use the old test. i was just using the old test. to know our God a bit more.... we are not bound by it.
yet you tried to bind me by quoting
"I was referring to the parts about "cities of refuge" for people who commit murder as part of a blood feud: see Numbers 35.
and
Deuteronomy 32:35 is a famous verse that seems to sum up our difference, in which God says: "It is up to me to avenge - and I do ultimately repay." In other words, revenge is God's business, not ours."
your 'cities of refuge' reference was also a pointer to me to refer to 'mosaic law'
you stated earlier
"But to get phsical against your enemy because you believe he is planning a raid is to start a blood feud of the kind that even God found hard to wind down among his people - look at the provisions in Mosaic Law."
is a clear reference to the old test. in a bid to bolster your argument, you direct me to it therefore binding me by a mosaic law reference yet after all that you then come along and say that i have to accept an argument made by you using reference to the old test. therefore binding me yet you are not bound by the same old test. usage in my arguments when you state "But I am not bound by the Law of Moses". this point has simply to do with consistancy which you are not being.
i personally do not hold that i am bound by mosaic law but the law and example of christ. but i was not the one who used mosaic law and old test. scripture to further my argument - you did.
to quote fully what happened in jericho, josha 6;21
"The people shouted and the trumpets blew. At this precise moment, the walls of the city fell.Then everyone went straight into the city to the place before him. They seized Jericho. And with sword in hand, they killed all the men and women, both young and old, as well as the oxen, sheep and asses, and they gave these as anathema or, rather, sacrificed them to God."
to quote some analysis "with the capture of jericho the conquest begins. Jericho is made anathema i.e set apart for God. The people renounce all booty, entrust the spoils to yahweh's treasury and kill all living beings instead of taking possession of the animals & reducing the inhabitants to slavery. This same word 'anathema' will eventually be used to refer to someone who bears the curse of God. This was a practice among a number of peoples - by destroying everything Canaanite, Israel safeguarded itself from adopting the culture & materialism of the Canaanites.
We ask -how could God order such a war.How could joshua think of pleasing God by ordering the killing of all inhabitants including babies? the conquest took place in the 13th cent. BC. In Canaan babies were burned in offering to pagan gods, in assyria
prisoners were skinned alive. Israel conquered Palestine by force like any nomadic people of the world. God was beginning to instruct his people. To start with he could not expect that they had already been educated. the bloody victories were a step on the way to the shaping of a national conscience. in this sense we cannot in the name of peace despise heroes of the past. joshua was written in the 7th cent.BC in the small kingdom of judah which was surrounded by powerful neighbours with whom they tried to be at peace.the accounts of past victories and massacres were amplified. the author wanted to show his contemporaries that they had nothing to fear since God was with them.By imaginatively amplifying the massacreshe wanted to say to his compatriots :do not follow any pagan practices but preserve the holy germ of Israels faith. Using these bloody examples the scripture says since the people of God had the unique hope of the world no sacrifice would be too big to keep it intact. Joshua influenced by the mentality of his own times (how God related to us in those times) decided to declare & implement the anathema, in so doing preserved Israel's faith from idolatry, a situation even more contradictory to Gods plans. But they did this as a people who did not yet know the value of human life"
the crusaders were people like us with similar faults and failings yet thay were also people of a different age - they were also a people put upon, hard pressed and at war .thus they drew inspiration from the seige of jericho as the following shows:
"Faced with a seemingly impossible task, their spirits were raised when a priest by the name of Peter Desiderius claimed to have a divine vision in which the ghost of Adhemar instructed them to fast for three days and then march in a barefoot procession around the city walls, after which the city would fall in nine days, following the Biblical example of Joshua at the siege of Jericho"
To emphasise the calibre of person the crusader was and the character and fortitude they had you should note that in the 1st crusade-
" Of the estimated 7,000 knights who took part in the Princes' Crusade, only about 1,500 remained, along with another 12,000 healthy foot-soldiers (out of perhaps as many as 20,000). Many cried upon seeing the city they had journeyed so long to reach.As with Antioch the crusaders put the city to a siege, in which the crusaders themselves probably suffered more than the citizens of the city, due to the lack of food and water around Jerusalem."
"Without water or food, both men and animals were quickly dying of thirst and starvation and the crusaders knew time was not on their side."
"They were still short on food and water, and by the end of June there was news that a Fatimid army was marching north from Egypt."
though they were already starving they proceded to fast...oh that todays non-violent christians would show such faith and acts worthy of it
"Although they were already starving, they fasted, and on July 8 they made the procession, with the clergy blowing trumpets and singing psalms"
they even resorted to sipping dew from the grass.
whilst they were marching around jerusalem an insight into the people behind the walls-"being mocked by the defenders of Jerusalem all the while."
"While the Christian soldiers engaged in the barefoot procession, they were subjected to the insults and incantations of Muslim sorcerers."
they were also soldiers in the height of a battle- so when the seige got underway or rather the storming of the walls- as said previously, all neccessary force is harnessed, to not do so is actually dangerous and can lead to the initiative being lost and many maore lives on your side being lost and from that in fact the battle. So being in a battle like that - all is not so clear cut, the only thing that is certain is that you are fighting for your life with full aggression and fury, anything less and your side is open to losing momemtum and the other side regaining their wits and countering. you are simply ignoring the reality of warfare- especially when it comes to men who are in a corner, desperate and facing another enemy army on the outside - not to mention the hardships and battles they faced from that enemy whom they knew to be treacherous and sneaky- an all out purge was probably the only way the seige of jerusalem could have ever ended - even if you wanted it to end differently- the crusader leaders did not in any way approve of the sack of the city- but it is like saying that there will be no friendly fire incidents when modern war happens- it will happen, it is unavoidable. If you wanted to avoid such massacres back then, then one must hold that the crusades shouldn't have happened at all. If thats the case then bow down to mecca now and praise the false god allah- because thats where europe was heading before our heroic crusaders put justice and protection and defence into a long awaited active response. Remember it was centuries of naked muslim aggression on christian land and christians which finally led to a very belated response from christendom- that is the action which i say is just and what i look to. defence in response to a first attack from others-
in fact the seige of jerusalem was not all the slaughter that jericho was - it was less - the crusaders were acting on what was convention of the rules of warfare at the time
"In fact, it is of note that although the rules of war at the time dictated that all inhabitants of a resisting city could be killed, this is not what happened in the Siege of Jerusalem."
"Once the Crusaders had breached the outer walls and entered they killed many of the citizens about 40,000 to some accounts, the killing was for the most part indiscriminate both of Muslims and Jews."
"Additionally, though this number seems like a lot, it is less than half the number of Christians that were slaughted by the joint Persian and Jewish siege and capture of Jerusalem in 614 A.D."
Finally, though the crime is heinous, especially by today's standards, it must be remembered that the Christian population of Jerusalem had been forcibly invaded and subjected to treatment which would qualify as genocide under the law of nations. An example of what images must have been coarsing through the minds of the Crusaders as they took the city was this report of the treatment of Christians in Jerusalem:
"They [the Muslim Turks] have invaded the lands of those Christians and have depopulated them by the sword, pillage and fire; they have led away a part of the captives into their own country, and a part they have destroyed by cruel tortures .… They circumcise the Christians, and the blood of the circumcision they either spread upon the altars or pour into the vases of the baptismal font. When they wish to torture people by a base death, they perforate their navels, and dragging forth the extremity of the intestines, bind it to a stake; then with flogging they lead the victim around until the viscera having gushed forth the victim falls prostrate upon the ground. Others they bind to a post and pierce with arrows. Others they compel to extend their necks and then, attacking them with naked swords, attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow. What shall I say of the abominable rape of the women? To speak of it is worse than to be silent .… On whom therefore is the labor of avenging these wrongs and of recovering this territory incumbent, if not upon you?"
the crusaders set out to defend their fellow christians from slavery and oppression, europe from invading muslims, to defend christian lands and lands that were once christian but now under islamic oppression, to defend vulnerable pilgrims on their pilgrimmages to jerusalem, to offer their lives up in service of the above in service to God.
Christ espouses non-violence but more importantly He espouses justice for all mankind and freedom from tyranny and oppression not just in the next life and salvation of our souls but in this life and justice ...NOW. I have already said this. When Christ talks of turning the other cheek and love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, it is about God seeing and doing better than our own justice. However there are many occasions where we must resist the oppressor, because it is the only way to educate him and force him to act in a more human manner. If i accept the abuses of another, i encourage him to do the same to my neighbour and i become an accomplice in social injustice. I have talked about this before. The right to defend oneself and ones neighbours who may be under tyranny. You say you will only defend those who are under physical attack. Then it is a matter of what does it mean to be under attack, what about those who are under mental abuse or psychological bullying, is that where you stop your defence.
what about Hitlers germany- was it right to fight the nazis, or was d-day not allowed under your terms because technically it is an invasion as the germans were occupying a france that had capitulated. the concentration camps were not known in general by the public so the reason for d-day was not to stop human rights abuses but to liberate the countries - by your modus operandi then this is a retro-active violent action. it was a counter offensive which involved much bloodshed after a settling down period in france of living with the nazis- and it also involved the carnage of dresden- so as you put it to me would christ approved of WWII and d-day landings and the allied effort to free europe?
the crusades were no different- the only difference was that mediaeval europe was much more fractious and beset with rival factions that its D-day was a belated affair and much less organised with the systems of command and control and communications that were bound to hamper and lead to frustrations and ventings of human emotions that come to the fore in war.....namely anger, fury, fear, humour, zeal. this is part of warfare and far more chaotic and turbulent in structures of command available to the crusaders at the time.
as regards - the sack of constantinople a fellow yet rival christian city. consider what the crusaders perception of who was friend and foe and what they then had to consider it was a reflection of the times.
"At the height of the crusading spirit in Europe, Frederick Barbarossa assembled a large force of Germans for what is now known as the third Crusade. To ease his way, he negotiated treaties for safe passage through Europe and Anatolia, even getting permission from Muslim Turks to pass unhampered. On the other hand, the Christian Emperor of Byzantium, Isaac II, secretly agreed with Saladin to harass Frederick's crusaders through his territory. When it was deemed helpful, both Muslim and Christian made pacts with anyone who might further their own cause. At one point the sultan of Egypt offered to help the Crusaders in their struggle with the Muslim Turks, and the Turks failed to come to the rescue of the Shi'ite Fatimid Muslims who controlled Palestine."
so again it is not just a matter of condemning crusaders for sacking constantinople- there was history of wrongs done by constantinople a couple of years before the actual sacking on the fourth crusade.
to get back to christs way and teaching his path for us- yes ultimately it means non-violence and striving to overcome darkness by our christian witness, but that also means witness to others suffering and our struggle to stop injustice in the world on every level, - local, national & international, that means spreading the word and message of christ trying to live his example of non-violence but where that has been exhausted to defend ourselves and our brothers and sisters physically. especially where inaction physically leads to an increase in the suffering of those who are victim to it. the crusaders set out with this intention - to defend the pilgrims, to defend their brother christian in former christian lands, muslim aggression had been allowed to go on long enough- now enough was enough.
here again we see the crusaders as fulfilling their duty to their fellow men in seeting out on that crusade as opposed to the following usual argument:
"The Crusaders wore crosses, but they were really only interested in capturing booty and land. Their pious platitudes were just a cover for rapacious greed.
Historians used to believe that a rise in Europe's population led to a crisis of too many noble "second sons," those who were trained in chivalric warfare but who had no feudal lands to inherit. The Crusades, therefore, were seen as a safety valve, sending these belligerent men far from Europe where they could carve out lands for themselves at someone else's expense.
Modern scholarship, assisted by the advent of computer databases, has exploded this myth. We now know that it was the "first sons" of Europe that answered the Pope's call in 1095, as well as in subsequent Crusades.
Crusading was an enormously expensive operation. Lords were forced to sell off or mortgage their lands to gather the necessary funds. Most were also not interested in an overseas kingdom. Much like a soldier today, the medieval Crusader was proud to do his duty but longed to return home.
After the spectacular successes of the First Crusade, with Jerusalem and much of Palestine in Crusader hands, virtually all of the Crusaders went home. Only a tiny handful remained behind to consolidate and govern the newly won territories.
Booty was also scarce. In fact, although Crusaders no doubt dreamed of vast wealth in opulent Eastern cities, virtually none of them ever even recouped their expenses. But money and land were not the reasons that they went on Crusade in the first place. They went to atone for their sins and to win salvation by doing good works in a faraway land.
They underwent such expense and hardship because they believed that by coming to the aid of their Christian brothers and sisters in the East they were storing up treasure where rust and moth cannot corrupt.
They were very mindful of Christ's exhortation that he who will not take up his cross is not worthy of Christ. They also remembered that "Greater love hath no man than this, than to lay down his life for his friends."
i repeat and hold still that they were exemplary christians setting out on a crusade that had the noblest sentiment as its motivation and the understanding of what that meant in order to achive it by those who undertook it, that being hardship and sacrifice as its soul and resolute defence as its backbone. these men volunteered knowing they wanted to do something for God and their fellow men who were living under tyranny- they understood that in the course of that undertaking they may very well lay down their lives for their fellow man- but achieve that which was sacred to them the salvation of their souls...and rightly so....that is what we should all value. They are a credit to christianity and people saying they aren't should be ashamed of themselves.
the crusaders put their money, comfort and lives where their mouths were- i for one see will not condemn them, but praise them every inch as i think God will when they had to account for their lives of self-sacrifice.
what sacrifice are most christians today making especially some on here?
celtcrusader
Post a Comment