tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post2134976560238486147..comments2024-03-16T01:00:19.876-05:00Comments on The Mad Monarchist: The Knights TemplarMadMonarchisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08083008336883267870noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-24527397716458461082013-08-13T21:15:31.715-05:002013-08-13T21:15:31.715-05:00I'm not buying it. You pour out vitriol on the...I'm not buying it. You pour out vitriol on the Crusaders and praise the Muslims all around only to then mildly criticize the fact that the world isn't a perfect place. The Muslims were the first to attack and conquer Jerusalem for religious reasons. Jerusalem had been conquered by the Romans before Christianity even existed and the Jews were given special dispensation to practice their religion by the Romans. It became Christian by conversion and remained Christian until the Arabs invaded and took it. If you really meant what you say, *that* would be the crime you should first mention, not the effort by the Christians to take back what had first been taken from them.<br /><br />I could not say it better than G.K. Chesterton:<br />“When people talk as if the Crusades were nothing more than an aggressive raid against Islam, they seem to forget in the strangest way that Islam itself was only an aggressive raid against the old and ordered civilization in these parts. I do not say it in mere hostility to the religion of Mahomet; I am fully conscious of many values and virtues in it; but certainly it was Islam that was the invasion and Christendom that was the thing invaded.”MadMonarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08083008336883267870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-58156512067929573282013-08-13T20:42:18.872-05:002013-08-13T20:42:18.872-05:00I do condemn the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem. I o...I do condemn the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem. I oppose ALL conflict over that city. It shouldn't be Christian, or Jewish, or Muslim, but simply Abrahamic. Also, I don't condemn all war, much less all suffering. I simply oppose violence to this city: its Holy to 3.5 Billion people, give or take. I don't have a problem with the Swedish crusade against the heathens, or the Muslim conquest of Mecca, etc. I simply oppose attempts by anyone to make this city theirs. It doesn't belong to Christians, or Jews, or Muslims: it belongs to all of us. <br />Also, what are "Bull Cookies"? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00664415766811995661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-51169630746251103442013-08-13T20:26:26.914-05:002013-08-13T20:26:26.914-05:00Bull cookies! If you were honest and just hated wa...Bull cookies! If you were honest and just hated war and suffering you would condemn the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem in 634 rather than the Christian campaigns to retake lands that were Christian to begin with -and which became Christian peacefully. There would have been no Crusades if the Arabs had not not invaded and conquered lands that were not their own.MadMonarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08083008336883267870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-39631816852297207002013-08-13T19:52:21.457-05:002013-08-13T19:52:21.457-05:00I'm going to have to strongly disagree with MM...I'm going to have to strongly disagree with MM on this. The Crusades were a disaster. All nine of the crusades were fueled by hatred for Muslims, all 10 of them cost the lives of men that didn't need to die, and let's remember, during the medieval ages, the middle east was prosperous. Baghdad had some of the first public schools in history, the Arabs made great progress in mathematics and medicine, and Jerusalem being owned by only 1 faith makes me choke: its holy to Christians, yes, but also Jews and Muslims. This city should be a place of peace and brotherhood, not war. I know its lofty to think of knights and of conquering crusaders, but let's be realistic: they killed thousands of people. There was nothing glorious about them: Crusaders were filled with a deep hatred, and that fueled their war. I usually agree with MM, to the point that I've even suggested this site to some of my pro-republic friends, but I think he's completely wrong here. The crusaders were not chivalrous, and much less just, and were the opposite of the ideal Christian, and the ideal monarchist. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00664415766811995661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8783969302315257415.post-81855310321017637522013-04-19T19:23:52.308-05:002013-04-19T19:23:52.308-05:00I have a fondness for anything on the Knights Temp...I have a fondness for anything on the Knights Templar, so I thank you for writing about it!<br /><br />carmeljamaicahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10290964278837339589noreply@blogger.com