View previous topic | View next topic

The jewish race isn't responsible for killing Jesus - FACT

Page 6 of 10
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next


The jewish race isn't responsible for killing Jesus.
Thank Jehovah
33%
 33%  [ 2 ]
Thank Buddah
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Thank Allah
16%
 16%  [ 1 ]
Thank Gawd
16%
 16%  [ 1 ]
Thanks Berlusconi
33%
 33%  [ 2 ]
Thanks Nazis
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 6

exnihilo
798000.  Sat Mar 19, 2011 7:41 pm Reply with quote

I says what about rape??? I think I see the root of the problem; what is written us quite divorced from what you read. Try again.

That said, I can assure you quite categorically that I am not mistaken or confused on the nature or facts of the crusades!

 
Ion Zone
798080.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:22 am Reply with quote

Good grief. Ok, charade over. It seems you are utterly incapable of explaining the religious motives behind the first crusade, so I'm going to have to do it.

While the first crusade was initially and overtly a response to a request for help from the Byzantium with regard to an invasion of its holdings in Asia Minor by the Seljuk Turks it quickly became a reason to expand those holdings and the influence of Christianity. Ultimately the First Crusade was about expansionism of all sorts, religious included. However the rally to defend Byzantium is a legitimately non-religious objective. As such, despite the fervor to retake the holy lands in the name of Christ and the nature of the crusade as a 'pilgrimage' (It was not called a crusade until the thirteenth century), the first crusade was as much (or more) about adventure and re-securing lands lost to the Turkish invaders as it was about religion - the main, but not only (The Pope also wanted to reunite a schism in the Church, and there were a few other things), religious reason being that the Muslims occupied the Holy Lands.

I think that's the gist of it. Question is, why couldn't you tell me this?

Quote:
I says what about rape???

You say:
Quote:
If they were not religious how do you explain the pillage and rapine of every non-Christian community they passed through on their glorious way?


And as I said: That is not Christian, this is anti-Christian, you failed to give anything like a proper reason for the conflict, you just got emotional about it.

Quote:
Well - I'd say that we have undeniable proof here that religion causes conflict - at any rate.


I know you are being coy, but argument does not equal violence, and if it did, one of sides here is atheist. As I said, statistically, wars for religious reasons are a tiny minority.


Last edited by Ion Zone on Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:28 am; edited 1 time in total

 
Ion Zone
798085.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:38 am Reply with quote

Exhillo, I was trying to get you to explain the First Crusade and it's religious and non religious motivations in your own words. For one thing it would help me understand a difficult piece of history, instead you responded with a depressingly garbled hand-waving of the entire conflict which explained nothing.

I'd like to point out to those who think I do not look at the evidence that they have very short memories indeed - after a quick check round my reference book I accepted that the Albigensian Crusade had explicitly religious motives.

*Edit*

You deleted your post?


Last edited by Ion Zone on Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:42 am; edited 1 time in total

 
exnihilo
798086.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:38 am Reply with quote

I did not say rape was a Christian act, I said Christians on a Christian mission for a Christian leader indulged in rape, murder and pillage of non-Christians. Do you see how that's different?

I am more than aware of the origins of the Crusades, and regardless of what Alexius wanted when he appealed for help, the Crusade as called by Innocent was a religious mission. There's no two ways about that, and I'm amazed that out of all the crusades the only one you think was religious was the Albigensian. Is this because on WikiPedia after a summary of what the crusades were it then lists explicit additional motivations for each and that one mentions religion?


So, to recap:

1) The desire to make Jerusalem Christian was not religious?

2) The killing of Jews and Orthodox along the way was not religiously motivated?

3) The offer of absolution to those who went was not religious?

4) The fact that the Pope called it and not the kings and princes shows no religious motivation?


You acuse me of not addressing you, but you flat out ignore everything that anyone else says that you don't agree with. As for your 'statistics', they're being used here as they so often are, for support and not illumination. Crusades, partitions, jihads, history is absolutely replete with religiously motivated wars and slaughters. The Bible is too, as I'm sure you're aware.

No doubt you'll maintain that all of that was just a front, an excuse for some other deep-seated human desire to kill one another just because. It seems that you will not hesitate to suggest that all 'good' motivations are religiously inspired and all 'bad' ones are just our base instincts.

 
Ion Zone
798089.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:57 am Reply with quote

Quote:
I did not say rape was a Christian act, I said Christians on a Christian mission for a Christian leader indulged in rape, murder and pillage of non-Christians. Do you see how that's different?


You made it sound that way. Essentially, you are saying that devout Christians doing evil things equals evil things done in the name of Christianity.

That the Pope launched the call to arms does not make it a religious war - it only implies that it is. The brief summery of reasons I gave above are what make it religious. Likewise the rape, pillaging, and general mayhem along the way (along with the swift devolution of any control the Pope may have had over the next couple of crusades) are simply indicators of how little control there was over the conflict as a whole, doubtless the Pope would not have approved of this mayhem....the mayhem happened simply because there was a naivety about the way the conflict would work - the armies that went to the holy lands had no real central leadership and, increasingly, as the crusades continued, followed their own agendas - such as attacking raping and pillaging anyone they liked.

Your response overlooks the beleaguered Byzantium's call for foreign help and doesn't give the most of the actual motives for the launch of the campaign, only sorry tales of what happened along the way.

Quote:
Crusades, partitions, jihads, history is absolutely replete with religiously motivated wars and slaughters.


There are plenty of these things, it is true, but, in a purely statistical sense, religion itself is not a primary cause for war. (If you want we can pick random pages from my copy of the Encyclopedia of Wars and I'll give you a summery of their objectives (just pick a number between three and 1405).)

 
exnihilo
798091.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:08 am Reply with quote

And I'm out. Your first and last sentences alone are enough. The one so hopelessly contrary to what I was saying, the last so entirely obnoxious that I can't be bothered any more.

I seriously hate whipping my credentials out and slapping them down on the table, but I'm a professional historian, I will not be picking random pages from your single book for Christ's sake!

I have suggested you read more widely and gain a less distorted view of the period, you have decided that breadth of knowledge is no substitute for stolid certainty - that's the definition of ignorance and I haven't the patience.

 
Ion Zone
798095.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:24 am Reply with quote

Quote:
I seriously hate whipping my credentials out and slapping them down on the table, but I'm a professional historian, I will not be picking random pages from your single book for Christ's sake!


Then why have you not tried to, properly, explain the conflict? All you have done, essentially, is say that you know why it happened and give examples of generalized atrocities that happened along the way. If you want me to understand, then please explain it! I'm citing a reputable referencing resource that catalogs a vast number of wars. It does not have a pro-religious agenda (indeed the language of the entry on the first Crusade suggests they also see religion as a primary cause of war). This is not a fringe book, it's used in schools. If it comes down to finding out if religion causes war or not I can think of no better book than a very large and general reference encyclopedia that catalogs a huge cross-section of wars from 2325 B.C to 2003 A.D. and gives the motives and political background for each and every one.

 
Sadurian Mike
798098.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:37 am Reply with quote

So you are using school-level references (I notice it is recommended for US high school and college, so our secondary education level) in a further-education-level argument?

Do you not realise that what is taught at school is necessarily simplistic, and that it is later on that you get taught to research more broadly? The very fact that the book you are so heavily relying on covers such a huge breadth of subject matter, means that it cannot describe the causes of each war to any sort of depth, nor treat the causes with the scholarly investigation required for any proper argument.

Does your "Encyclopedia of Wars" list the wars described in the Old Testament and give alternative reasons for them? Does it say why the Wars of Religion were so-called? Why jihads to drive infidels from Muslim lands were religiously motivated? How the Arab-Israeli conflict would be easier to settle were it not for the religious divide?

More to the point, does it mention that using religion as an excuse for war makes it a cause?


Last edited by Sadurian Mike on Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:44 am; edited 1 time in total

 
exnihilo
798100.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:43 am Reply with quote

Quite so. There's a thing called context, which is not given by books giving a broad overview, still less those dealing with the entire scope of human conflict! The Crusades were called by a religious leader (who viewed himself as the only leader of the only religion) for the religious purpose of taking Jerusalem for Christianity and expelling the infidels. This was their purpose. Their stated purpose. How is that not a religious motivation? There's no way I can make that simpler.

To obfuscate now with thousands of years of conflict is not helpful, but as you have, where do we start? Mike's given several examples, as have I, and there are any number more, so I flat out dispute the notion that they're in the minority - unless you are saying that any war that someone said was religious wasn't because religion is meant to be about good, so anyone doing something bad in its name was dissembling.


Last edited by exnihilo on Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:52 am; edited 2 times in total

 
'yorz
798101.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:44 am Reply with quote

Quote:
If it comes down to finding out if religion causes war or not I can think of no better book than a very large and general reference encyclopedia that catalogs a huge cross-section of wars from 2325 B.C to 2003 A.D. and gives the motives and political background for each and every one


I was determined to stay out of this unholy mess, but that is the most preposterous statement I've seen in a long while.
You pick just one book that confirms your already made opinion and that's it? Read somebody's opposing reasoning, and compare.
Bugger - I shouldn't do this. Pearls and swines spring to mind.

 
Ion Zone
798105.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:55 am Reply with quote

Quote:
So you are using school-level references in a further-education-level argument


That it has been picked up on for use in schools is irrelevant. It's an encyclopedia, schools often have very large and comprehensive encyclopedia sets. This catalog of wars is, as far as I am able to tell, the only published one of its kind, which, in itself, suggests that historical books making the case for religion causing war probably focus on religious wars exclusively without trying to ascertain their exact frequency.
Quote:
More to the point, does it mention that using religion as an excuse for war makes it a cause?

It's an encyclopedia, it provides a good analysis of why the wars actually happened, as well as the reasons given by the leaders as to why they happened (which is not the same thing at all).
Quote:
why the Wars of Religion

Without wanting to go into each thing separately, these are still a very small percentage of the total. In return I ask, what about the 93.02% of wars in my encyclopedia NOT fought in the name of religion? Surely if religion is a major cause of war we would expect to see more, but we don't.

I am using this large encyclopedia because it is a catalog, it shows a very wide sample of major conflicts. A book seeking to show, or ascertain, a link between religion and war would, almost certainly, focus on almost nothing except those few wars that are religious in nature.


Last edited by Ion Zone on Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:02 am; edited 1 time in total

 
Sadurian Mike
798108.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:02 am Reply with quote

Ion Zone wrote:
That it has been picked up on for use in schools is irrelevant.

No, it is not. It shows the level of education and information that it is suited for. Just as an ABC book is best suited for primary education and an in-depth scholarly assessment is better for post-graduate work. One thing you learn to do when doing serious research is to assess your sources.

Ion Zone wrote:
It's an encyclopedia, it provides a good analysis of why the wars actually happened, as well as the reasons given by the leaders as to why they happened (which is not the same thing at all)

That doesn't answer the question really, does it?

Ion Zone wrote:
Without wanting to go into each thing separately, these are still a very small percentage of the total. In return I ask, what about the 93.02% of wars in my encyclopedia NOT fought in the name of religion?

Does anyone suggest that all wars are about religion? No.

You stated that you have proved on this forum that religion was not the cause of "a lot of wars". I'm still awaiting the proof.

Your exact post was;
Ion Zone wrote:
Before I proved otherwise on here it was taken as fact that religion caused 'a lot' of war.

 
Ion Zone
798110.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:05 am Reply with quote

Quote:
You stated that you have proved that wars are not about religion. I'm still awaiting the proof.


No, I have stated that it is not a primary cause, these are two different things. My proof is that the statement that religion is a significant cause of human war is demonstrably false.

Quote:
and an in-depth scholarly assessment is better for post-graduate work.


This is the only encyclopedia of its kind. If a broad overview (and they are generally fairly detailed) is not enough to show a religious motive, then what is? It manages quite well in the cases that are religious.


Last edited by Ion Zone on Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:10 am; edited 1 time in total

 
exnihilo
798112.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:09 am Reply with quote

It is, perhaps, also worth noting that Axelrod is not an historian. This is not to say that what he says is wrong, but it is to say that his work is not especially rigorous nor aimed at an academic market. I'd point you to Alan (?) Horowitz's work at Harvard, but it's not available online except as abstracts. The percentage you keep quoting as proven fact is one man's opinion, and one which is not picked up by pretty much anyone else. I don't want to seem to be shifting the discussion, but you simply cannot make assertion into fact by repetition.

 
Ion Zone
798116.  Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:15 am Reply with quote

The name on the cover is not the only one associated with this work:

kaye talley, American Library Association. wrote:
The authors, history professors who worked on this encyclopedia for 10 years, have produced a very readable and apparently well-researched book that both scholars and history buffs will enjoy. As with other Facts On File reference books, this set is easy to use and well designed. This would be an excellent purchase for high-school, college, and public libraries.


(It is recommended for colleges as well.)

 

Page 6 of 10
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group