Were the Crusades simliar to the Muslim holy war?

Im sure all of us have watch some move like Robin Hood Prince of Theives or "Kingdom Of heaven"

Brilliant movies may i add.

In the movies and i'm also sure surrounded by reality in the medieval ages the Church and European Christian kings incited their society to go off and "barney the Turk" and free the holy land to obtain link and redemption etc... blah blah blah

So my question is do you think the Crusades lead by Sir Richard the Lionhearts were in effect a form of a "white man Jyhad"?

I mean in the 20th century and 21st immediately its mainly brown skinned Islamics that are using their religion to spread wars.

So do you conjecture that the Crusades in the medieval times were close to a "White boys Jyhad"? A bunch of blue eyed White Christians sitting in their cold Snowy European Castle all banding together to tutor the dark skinned heathens a lesson or two?

Was it really like that? Or did they hold some honourable intention?
Answers:
The difference is, Jihadists are just out to detroy what already exists, whereas crusaders rightly or wrongly were trying to build what did not however exist.
Yes its the same.They are still fighting for the domain.
If you research the origins of the word "Infidel" it will tell you a lot. During the Crusades, Christians believed anyone who wasn't Christian, be infidels. In contrast, infidels, as the Islam usage, means people who don't believe contained by God. The Koran actually says adjectives Abrahamaic(sp?) religions, including Judaism and Christianity, are divine religions and are not "kafir" or infidels.

The Church ordered the crusaders to rape, pillage, etc. and kill all Muslims That is historical certainty. It is exactly what the Islamic extremists do during Jihad.
Yes, the Crusades were call for by the Pope, so similar in that respect. A jihad can be called by heaps different people in the Islamic world - individual the Pope in theory can beckon for a religious crusade.

The films you talk about are fun to keep under surveillance but historically pretty inaccurate.

The crusades were to purloin back 'chrisitian' lands conqured by the islamics.

Todays Turkey & a bit of the middle east was traditionally the lands of the Byzantines - the Eastern Roman Empire. Source(s): http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=ht… Some what. But keep hold of in mind the crusades were precautionary actions vs Jihads were filthy.

http://nationscrier.com/index.php?option…
I have to wonder what reality you come from. Muslims are not using their religion to spread war. That would be Zionists and Christians who are on a holy war. Who invaded Iraq and Afghanistan? Counties with predominantly Christian and Jewish citizens.

Al-quada does not exist. It is a permanent status to describe separate cells of Islamic extremists who have be effected by American, Israeli and UK influence. It is ludicrous that these cells hold any connection to one another.

As for the crusades. It wasn't a white mans jihad. It be a calling to all Christians that they would be saved regardless of skin colour if they fought and died for Christ. Race never have anything to do with it. Only religion.

We are witness's to the second Crusades, since the creation of Israel. Only the general public is too damn stupid to even realise this. Source(s): report, history Yes Jihad and Crusade are much the same thing.

The purpose of the Crusades be to recapture the Holy Lands.

The Christian Empire of Byzantium (one half of the old Roman Empire) ruled Israel until 638 when the Arab armies conquered it.

400 years subsequent the European Christians recaptured it during the Crusades.

It was a Holy War, but several of the crusaders went either to pillage or for personal glory. Some approaching the holy orders of knights (the Templars, etc) were inspired by religious fanaticism.


Medieval Christianity be a very severe religion. They still burnt witches and heretics at the stake subsidise then.


Related Questions: