Christians invading Muslim lands?

Question

A question was asked about how Muslims should feel about their lands being invaded by Christian armies. I can't let that one pass. Don't forget who invaded who: The Roman Empire was Christian after the 4th century, and the people in its former lands were Christian. It was the Muslims who swept through those lands after the 7th century. Muslims swept up from the east through modern day Turkey, and up through the west, through Spain. They would have crushed Christiandom entirely were it not for the pope and the knights he was able to rally to defend Europe, and push them back. Even then, they never got pushed back all they way, which is why Constantinople is now Istanbul. Comments anyone?

Answer 1

You are correct. And if you listen to modern day Islamic preaching, you will hear that Muslims wish to impose Sharia all over Europe and in the United States. They still want to establish a world wide caliphate.

Answer 2

As far as I know that is true
Muhammad himself led raids on many villages and towns (some of which were Christian or Jewish) and slaughtered or forcefully converted the inhabitants. He helped to plan dozens more for other Muslims before he died. History suggest that he was more peaceful early on, when he didn't have sufficient numbers to force his will upon resistant populations. If you pick up a Koran (not one with a modernist, toned-down translation, but a traditional translation that makes a serious attempt to be faithful to the original), especially read the chapter entitled "Repentance". The call for violence against non-believers is blatant and undeniable (and in this chapter, Christians and Jews are clearly lumped in together with pagans). Some revisionists (perhaps well-meaning) have tried to tell the non-Muslim public that "jihad" is has only ever been about the interior struggle for holiness. One wishes it were true, but it appears that "jihad" is and has always been much more than that.
Now, people may point out that Christians have at times resorted to violence wrongly, including the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition. But the comparison is not completely apt. First, Christ Himself never advocated forced conversion and slaughter of unbelievers. Muhammad not only advocated it, but personally cooperated in it. Second, in the case of the Crusades we should be careful not to buy all of the anti-Catholic propaganda being sold.
Muslims first forcefully took over Christian lands and persecuted the Christians living there, and controlled Christian holy sites. It is true that some Crusaders did some despicable things in a spiteful, vengeful way. But the Church herself never condoned, let alone ordered, these excesses. And as for the Inquisition, if it was as bad as some anti-Catholics claim, it is odd that there are records of people requesting transfers of their cases to the Inquisition from the secular Spanish courts. No doubt, some horrid things occurred, but it is more accurately understood as the unfortunate result of the weaknesses and sin of individuals, not the official teaching of the Church.

Answer 3

The book of Genesis documents the two lines of people and clearly tells us that the lines that becomes the Muslims will hate the others. Keep in mind... these things were written thousand of years before Islam was invented in 6th century AD. How could the author of Genesis know that???? Very interesting, huh? HINT: The Bible was written by a God who knows what will happen long before it does happen. The hatred Muslims have for the rest of the world is simply proof of the Bible's authenticity.

Answer 4

The lands that the Christians fought for were first Christian lands of the Early Church.

Muslims are antichrist & they have martyred more Christians probably than any other murders done in the name of a religion.

An example of this type of Islam mentality is looking at talaban & alquida. If you saw the picture of the 1st Christian the talaban just killed. You would see a man of victory in Jesus Christ, full of joy & love. So? What threat is this man to the talaban? What threat is this man to the antichrist? What threat is this man to satan? This man is only a threat to the devil & the devils angels & the devils destructive works.

This man is one who brought the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ to people who needed a Savior. As the S. Korean Christians have a passion for their Savior.

The Muslims will kill for their Allah. But the Christians will bring the Gospel to those in need for their Yeshua, their Savior & God (what doubting Thomas said).

Constantinople is now Istanbul. I need to understand more about that thought.


When Christians invade a land, at least they don't invade & kill unbelievers. They invade a territory with the Saving Power of the Gospel of Christ, to set free people from their sicknesses & their sins. To destroy the works of the devil (spiritual evils) and so people can have life & have life more abundantly.

Answer 5

Hello,

Well you could really play with that scenario. Here is mine;
I am working out here in the field with some Cree people in Alberta. Last night I told them that they should blame the Muslims for their demise by the Europeans. Why? Because if the Muslims had not closed down the spice trade roots to the infidels, save the Venitians, then we would not have built bigger and stronger ships to sail across the Atlantic to find India and the rest of Asia. I meant it more as a revisionist type joke but do you know what? They had a laugh and a half and nodded in agreement.

Cheers,

Michael

Edit The Roman Empire was first started in the early republic and peaked at the time of Marcus Aurelius. Augustus was emperor in its "golden age>" All done by pagans; certainly not Christians.

Cheers,

Michael Kelly

Answer 6

Well, the guy wasn't talking about the Crusades. He was talking about modern western governments invading and occupying Muslim countries within the last 100 years. The problem is that many Muslim nations do not differentiate between civil and religious law - national acts are acts of Islam. So, not understanding the concept of secular government, they assume that any act by a western nation is likewise an act of Christianity. This view is partially fostered by the fact that Christians in Muslim countries traditionally governed themselves by a theocracy.

Answer 7

I see you read History. I feel the Pope or the Byzintines should have done something when Muhammad invaded Mecca on July 16, 622 AD to inforce his religion. The only wrong the city of Mecca did to Muhammad was to refuse to accept his new Islam belief. It is beyond my comprehension as to why the rest of the world stood for this action. If the Christians would have taken Muhammad and his band of assassigns out then Islam would have never grown into the monster it is today.

Answer 8

the thing is, tribe that swept byzantiums through europe were not muslim arabs , they were turks coming through the middle asia.

when turks invaded today's turkey, europe was no longer comfortable. when the ethnic complication ended, then church's despotic behaviour started, there was no single way they could become strong and strike again. until this century. Russia, England, Italy, France planned to invade Turkey, but they couldnt.

why did you have so strong heart feelings?

Answer 9

Just because the Muslims conquered the lands it does not mean that they forced the people to convert because in Islam there is no compulsion of religion. Religious minorities were protected under the Islamic law back then. But when the Christians took over they forced people to convert. The crusades, the inquisition and colonalization were all part of mass Christianization.

Answer 10

When it comes to history, Islam has pathological amnesia.

But remember, these are also people who claim, despite what their own holy book says, that there was never a Jewish nation in what is now Israel.

How sad!