All the News that Fits Our Squint

The Cross and the Crusades

(from Feb 6, 2015)

At the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday President Obama added a few more bars to his Collapse Christianity Concerto.  In the wake of continuing global terrorism he made this statement.  “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place – remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”  Beside the fact that the Crusades were not in ‘some other place’ but in exactly the same place where terrorism is most prevalent today there are a few things his statement tells us.

1.  He needs to recognize that the Crusades were not fought in the name of Christ but in the name of the Catholic Church. It was mostly loyal Catholic peasants who gathered to fight in the First Crusade. They were armed with this promise from Pope Urban II, “All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the [Muslims], shall have immediate [forgiveness] of sins.”  (http://mrkash.com/activities/crusades.html) (Not quite the same as 70 brown-eyed virgins but still an exciting motivation for a poor man who could not pay to have his sins reduced.)  That is not a promise that the founder of Christianity would make.  Jesus ‘crusade’ was peaceful.  He gave Himself up as the sacrifice and payment for sin.  No human deed could ever earn His forgiveness. Subsequent Crusades were fueled by the zeal of Catholics “to recover the Holy Land . . . from the ‘infidel’ Muslims; to go in pilgrimage to the holy places of Palestine.”  (http://www.toughquestionsanswered.org/2010/02/02/a-very-brief-overview-of-the-crusades/#sthash.TH0oL9Wq.dpuf)

2.  He needs to know that no amount of needless violence is ever approved by Christ.  Acts of violence ‘in the name of Christ’ are a sham, a classic case of taking the Lord’s name in vain.  It was the Lord’s brother who said, “the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.” James 1:20.  Trying to compare Islamic terrorism to other religions that used violence is a weak and shallow attempt to justify Islamic terrorism.

3. He needs to admit that Islam is a religion of violence. In his Prayer Breakfast talk he said “From a school in Pakistan to the streets of Paris we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith – their faith – profess to stand up for Islam but in fact are betraying it.”  Really?  Violence betrays Islam? Mohammed started his crusade with violence; it expands through violence; it only succeeds with the threat of violence.  There are more than 100 verses in the Quran condoning war against nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. For example (2:191-193) – “And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing…but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful.   And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone.” (3:151) – “Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority.” This is directly applied to biblical Christians who believe in the Triunity of God.

Here is the good news- the Cross of Christ stands tall and offers peace to all who make their pilgrimage there.  Terrorism will not go away by ignoring it exists; it cannot be domesticated by comparison.  Terrorism can only be stopped by the Gospel.