Tanda2 orang udah kepepet fakta ya begini ini._____

From: Stanley Sethiadi <[email protected]>

To: [email protected]

Sent: Monday, October 3, 2011 5:38 PM

Subject: [proletar] RE: Sebelum perang salib.



  



Ini adalah posting terakhir saya mengenai perang salib. Kalau Anda puas,

baiklah. Kalau Anda tidak puas silahkan selidiki sendiri. Saya tidak akan

melayani lagi posting Johnny Indon. Saya tahu ia bisa berbahasa Inggris,

tetapi baru tingkatan elementer atau maximum intermediate. Ia belum patut

ngajari saya. Bahasa Indonesianya saja bahasa preman Senen. Mana ada dalam

bahasa Indonesia kata elu-gua. Itu bukan bahasa Indonesia yang baik.



Sampai jumpa pula di-thread lain.



Salam. Stanley.



From: Stanley Sethiadi [mailto:[email protected]] 

Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 7:25 PM

To: '[email protected]'

Subject: Sebelum perang salib.



Saya forward seluruh tulisan deh. Lebih dari 3000 orang dibunuh a.l. banyak

orang Kristen.



Salam. Stanley.



http://www.frontline.org.za/images/Frontline%20Banner.gif



http://www.frontline.org.za/images/Dropdownmenus_themission.gif



<http://www.frontline.org.za/INDEX.HTM> back to homepage



<javascript:;> http://www.frontline.org.za/images/org_newcolour.gif



<javascript:;> http://www.frontline.org.za/images/resources.gif



<javascript:;> http://www.frontline.org.za/IMAGES/MISSION_REPORTS.GIF



<http://www.frontline.org.za/related_sites.htm> Links to Related Sites



http://www.frontline.org.za/images/Dropdownmenus_resources1.gif



<http://www.frontline.org.za/articles.htm>

http://www.frontline.org.za/images/BACKBUTTON.GIF



THE CRUSADES AND JIHAD 



Back in 1999 while our mission was being bombed by the National Islamic

Front government in Sudan, fellow missionaries were organising

"Reconciliation Walks" to the Middle East to apologise for "The Crusades".

At the time, as our church services were under aerial and artillery

bombardment by Jihadists, it seemed rather bizarre. Therefore I undertook a

study of the crusades and Jihad. 



Anin Maalouf in "The Crusades through Arab eyes" claims that the Crusaders

conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 was "The starting point of a millennial

hostility between Islam and the West." Islamic scholar John Esposito blames

the Crusades for disrupting "Five centuries of peaceful coexistence elapsed

before political events and an imperial papal power-play led to a centuries

long series of so called Holy Wars that pitted Christendom against Islam and

left an enduring legacy of misunderstanding and distrust." ("Islam: The

Straight Path" OUP). 



What Preceeded The Crusades? 



However the Crusades only started after five centuries of Islamic Jihad had

conquered and annihilated, or forcibly converted, over two thirds of what

had formerly been the Christian world. Shortly after the Islamic conquest of

Jerusalem, in 638, Christian pilgrims were harassed, massacred, and early in

the 8th Century, 60 Christian pilgrims from Amoriem were crucified. 



The Muslim governor of Caesarea seized a group of pilgrims from Iconium and

had them all executed. Muslims extorted ransom money from Pilgrims, and

threatened to ransack the most holy churches in Christendom such as the

Church of the Resurrection - if they didn't pay exorbitant taxes. In the 8th

Century a Muslim ruler banned all displays of the Cross in Jerusalem. He

also increased the penalty tax (Jizya) and forbad Christians to engage in

any religious instruction, even of their own children! In 772, the Calipha

al Mansur ordered the hands of all Christians and Jews in Jerusalem to be

branded. 



In 789, Muslims beheaded a monk in Bethlehem, plundering the monastery and

slaughtering many more Christians. In 923, a new wave of destruction of

churches was launched by the Muslim rulers. In 937, Muslims went on a

rampage in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday plundering and destroying the Church of

Calvary and the Church of the Resurrection. 



In 1004 the Fatimid Calipha Abu Ali al-Mansur al-Hakim unleashed a violent

wave of church burning and destruction, confiscation of Christian property,

and ferocious slaughter of both Christians and Jews. Over the next ten

years, thirty thousand churches were destroyed and vast numbers of Believers

were forcibly converted or killed. 



In 1009, Al-Hakim ordered that the most holy churches in Christendom - the

Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem

- be destroyed. He heaped humiliating and burdensome decrees upon Christians

and Jews forcing Christians to wear heavy crosses around their necks, and

Jews to have blocks of wood in the shape of a calf around their necks.

Ultimately, he ordered Christians and Jews to either accept Islam or flee

his areas of control. 



Christians remained in a precarious position and under threat throughout the

Middle East. When the Seljuk Turks swept into Jerusalem in 1077 they

murdered over three thousand people, including many Christians. It was at

this point that the Christian Emperor of Byzantium, Alexius I, appealed for

help to the Western churches. 



Pope Urban II challenged the knights of Europe at the Council of Clermont in

1095: "The Turks and Arabs have attacked our brethren in the East and have

conquered the territory of Romania (the Greek Empire) as far as the shore of

the Mediterranean and the Hellespont.have occupied more and more of the

lands of those Christians and have overcome them in seven battles. They have

killed and captured many and have destroyed the churches and devastated the

Empire. If you continue to permit them to continue thus for a while with

impunity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On

this account I.persuade all people of whatever rank, foot soldiers and

knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians."



Nowhere was the call for the launch of the Crusades talking about either

conquest or conversion, they were merely to remove the Islamic invaders from

the lands that had previously been Christian, to restore religious freedom

to the Holy Lands. 



Myths And Misconceptions 



The politically correct dogma that the Crusades were unprovoked, imperialist

actions against the peaceful, indigenous Muslim population is simply not

accurate. Such propaganda reflects a hostility for Western civilization, and

often against Christianity itself, rather than any actual historical

research. 



Similarly, the characterization of the Crusaders as greedy for loot, only

out for personal gain, is simply out of touch with reality. Those who

participated in the Crusades saw it as an act of sacrifice rather than of

profit. The Crusades were in fact prohibitivly expensive. Many Crusaders had

to sell their property to raise money for the long journey to the Holy Land

and knew that their chances of returning alive were slight. Most who did

manage to survive and return came back with nothing material to show for

their efforts. 



Similarly the modern PC myth that the Crusaders attempted to forcibly

convert Muslims to Christianity is a politically motivated fantasy. Search

as one might through the writings and records of the Crusaders, one will not

find any mention of Crusaders seeking to convert the Sarracens or the Turks.

The Crusaders saw themselves as Pilgrims seeking to recapture and liberate

Christian lands from vicious invaders. 



Even Maalouf in The Crusades Through Arab Eyes, reports the observations of

Spanish Muslim Ibn Jubayr who traversed the Mediterranean on his way to

Mecca in the early 1180's and found that the Muslims were far better off in

those lands controlled by the Crusaders than they were in Muslim ruled

lands. And that Muslims preferred to live in the Crusader realms as those

lands were more orderly and better managed. 



Ibn Jubayr wrote: "Whose lands were efficiently cultivated. The inhabitants

were all Muslims. They live in comfort with the Franks - may God preserve

them from temptation! Their dwellings belong to them and all their property

is unmolested. All their regions, patrolled by the Crusaders in Syria are

subject to the same system: The land that remains, the villages and farms,

have remained in the hands of the Muslims. Now, doubt invests the hearts of

a great number of these men when they compare their lot to that of their

brothers living in Muslim territories. Indeed, the latter suffer from the

injustices of their co-religionists, whereas the Franks act with equity."



The Crusades have often been portrayed as European Colonialism, but the

Crusader states were not ruled from Western Europe. The governments they

established did not answer to any Western power. Nor did the Crusader rulers

siphon off the wealth of their lands and send it back to Europe. No streams

of settlers came from Europe to settle in these states, which were

established only in order to provide permanent protection for Christians in

the Holy Land. 



The Merciful Saladin 



The presentation of Muslim commanders such as Saladin as merciful and

magnanimous is a myth. When Saladin captured the Crusaders at Hattim on 4

July 1187, he ordered the mass execution of all the Christians: "They should

be beheaded in accordance with Quran 47:4 'When you meet the unbelievers on

the battlefield, strike their necks'" Saladin's secretary Imad reported,

"With him were a whole band of scholars and Sufis and a certain number of

devout men and aesthetics; each begged to be allowed to kill one of them and

drew their swords and rolled back their sleeves. Saladin, his face joyful,

was sitting on his dais; the unbelievers showed black despair." 



In 1148, the Muslim Commander Nur ed-Din ordered the slaughter of every

Christian in Aleppo. 



In 1268, when Mamluk Sultan Baybars seized Antioch, he ensured that all the

men were slaughtered, the women sold into slavery, the crosses in every

church smashed, the Bibles torn and burned, the graves of Christians

desecrated, every monk, priest and deacon was dragged to the altar and had

their throats slit where a mass had previously been celebrated, the Church

of Saint Paul and the Cathedral of Saint Peter were destroyed and the bodies

of the Christians burned. 



When on 29 May 1453, the greatest city in the world of that time,

Constantinople, was conquered by the Jihadists, the Muslims "slew everyone

that they met in the streets, men, women and children without

discrimination. The blood ran in rivers down the steep streets from the

heights of Petra toward the golden horn". The Muslim soldiers even entered

the Hagia Sophia, and slaughtered thousands of Christians worshipping in

what was then the largest church in the world at that time. 



What Did The Crusades Achieve? 



The Crusades bought Europe time. From the first century of Islam Muslim

armies were invading Europe. Spain suffered under Islamic occupation for 8

centuries. In the 14th Century, Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia, Albania

and Croatia fell to Muslim invasions. 



In 1426 the Egyptian Mukluks conquered Cyprus. In 1395 the Muslims conquered

Nicopolis on the Danube River. In 1444 the Muslim armies seized Varna in

Hungary. In 1456 the Turks besieged Belgrade, and even tried to conquer

Rome, but were thrown back. The Muslims first attempted to seize Vienna in

1529. As late as 11 September 1683 Muslim armies besieged Vienna, but were

routed by 30 000 Polish Hussars (cavalrymen) led by Poland's King Jan III

Sobieski. 



Were The Crusades A Failure? 



The constant depiction of the Crusades as a failure is not justified by the

historical record. The Crusades succeeded in seizing the initiative,

throwing the Muslim invaders onto the defensive, for the first time after

five centuries of attack. The Crusaders bought Europe time - centuries in

fact. 



At a critical time, the Crusades united a divided Europe, and threw the

Muslim invaders back, bringing a peace and security to Europe that had not

been known for centuries. As a result of the tremendous sacrifices of the

Crusaders, Christian Europe experienced Spiritual Revival and Biblical

Reformation which inspired a great resurgence of learning, scientific

experimentation, technological advancement, and movements that led to

greater prosperity and freedoms than had ever been known in all of history. 



For a picture of what Europe might be like today had Islam succeeded in

conquering it, one can look at the previously Christian civilisations of

Egypt and what is today called Turkey. The Copts in Egypt now make up just

10% of the total Egyptian population, and are severely oppressed. What is

today called Turkey was once the vibrant Christian Byzantine Empire, the

economic and military superpower of its day. Today the Christian

civilization which had flourished there for a thousand years has all but

been extinguished. The last Christian city in Asia, Smyrna, was massacred by

the Turkish Army in 1922. 



The classic Hollywood version of the Crusades as depicted in the $150

million Kingdom of Heaven epic was produced in consultation with groups such

as the Council on American - Islamic Relations. 



Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith, author of A Short History of The Crusades

described the film as "Rubbish!.it's not historically accurate at all.it

depicts the Muslims as sophisticated and civilized and the Crusaders are all

brutes and barbarians. It has nothing to do with reality."



Without the Crusades it is questionable whether Europe or American would

even exist. 



The Crusades ended over 700 years ago. Islamic Jihad continues to this day. 



The popular misconceptions about the crusades are that these were aggressive

wars of expansion fought by religious fanatics in order to evict Muslims

from their homeland, and force conversions to Christianity. However the

historical record does not support those assertions. 



A Reaction To Jihad 



The crusaders were reacting to over four centuries of relentless Islamic

Jihad, which had wiped out over 50% of all the Christians in the world and

conquered over 60% of all the Christian lands on earth - before the crusades

even began . Many of the towns liberated by the crusaders were still over

90% Christian when the crusaders arrived. The Middle East was the birthplace

of the Christian Church. It was the Christians who had been conquered and

oppressed by the Seljuk Turks. So many of the towns in the Middle East

welcomed the crusaders as liberators. 



Far from the crusaders being the aggressors, it was the Muslim armies which

had spread Islam from Saudi Arabia across the whole of Christian North

Africa into Spain and even France within the first century after the death

of Muhammad. Muslim armies sacked and slaughtered their way across some of

the greatest Christian cities in the world, including Alexandria, Carthage,

Antioch and Constantinople. These Muslim invaders destroyed over 3,200

Christian churches just in the first 100 years of Islam. 



Defensive Wars 



As Professor Thomas Madden in The Real History of the Crusades points out:

"The crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a

direct response to Muslim aggression - an attempt to turn back, or defend

against, Muslim conquests of Christian lands. Christians in the 11th Century

were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them.Islam was

born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Muhammad, the means of

Muslim expansion was always by the sword.Christianity was the dominant

religion of power and wealth.The Christian world therefore was a prime

target for the earliest Caliphas and it would remain so for Muslim leaders

for the next thousand years.The crusades.were but a response to more than

four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured over two

thirds of the Christian world." Without the Crusades it is questionable

whether Europe or America would even exist. 



Thinking The Unthinkable 



As the London Telegraph pointed out: "A more realistic view of history

requires less retrospective fantasy and more brain work. It means forcing

your head around to see what motivated men and women centuries ago. Try to

think the unthinkable - that the Crusaders were right, and that we should be

grateful to them." 



Christian Love And Self Sacrifice 



Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith explains that crusading was "an act of love"

for one's neighbour. An act of mercy to right a terrible wrong. As one

church leader wrote to the Knights Templar: "You carry out in deeds the

words of the Gospel, 'greater love than this hath no man, than that he lay

down his life for his friends'." 



Professor Riley-Smith points out that the goals of the crusades were firstly

to rescue the Christians of the East: "Many thousands of Christians are

bound in slavery and imprisoned by the Muslims and tortured with innumerable

torments." And secondly the liberation of Jerusalem and other places made

holy by the life of Christ. 



The Medieval crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims, restoring to the Lord

Jesus Christ His property. "The Crusaders conquest of Jerusalem, therefore,

was not colonialism, but an act of restoration and an open declaration of

one's love of God.It is often assumed that the central goal of the crusades

was forced conversion of the Muslim world. Nothing could be further from the

truth. From the perspective of Medieval Christians, Muslims were the enemies

of Christ and His Church. It was the Crusaders' task to defeat and defend

against them. That was all. Muslims who lived in crusader won territories

were generally allowed to retain their property and livelihood and always

their religion." 



Against All Odds 



When we think about the Middle Ages, we inevitably view Europe in the light

of what it became rather than what it was. The fact is that the superpower

of the Medieval world was Islam, not Christendom. The crusades were a battle

against all odds with impossibly long lines of supply and cripplingly

inadequate logistics. It was a David against Goliath enterprise from the

beginning. The chances of success for the first crusade were highly

improbable. They had no leader, no chain of command, no supply lines and no

detailed strategy. The first crusade consisted simply of thousands of

dedicated warriors marching deep into enemy territory, thousands of

kilometres from home. Many of them died of starvation, disease and wounds.

It was a rough campaign that always was on the brink of disaster . 



"Yet it was miraculously successful. By 1098, the Crusaders had liberated

Nicea and Antioch to Christian rule. And in July 1099 they re-conquered

Jerusalem and began to rebuild a Christian state in Palestine." 



A Judgement Of God 



When Jerusalem fell to Saladin in 1187, Christians across Europe perceived

that God was punishing them for their sins. Numerous lay movements sprang up

throughout Europe dedicated to purifying Christian society so that it may

become worthy of victory in the East. 



Professor Madden, of St. Lewis University and the author of A Concise

History of the Crusades, has observed: "From the safe distance of many

centuries, it is easy enough to scowl in disgust at the crusades. Religion,

after all, is nothing to fight wars over. But we should be mindful that our

Medieval ancestors would have been equally disgusted by our infinitely more

destructive wars fought in the names of political ideologies.Whether we

admire the Crusaders or not, it is a fact that the world we know today would

not exist without their efforts. The ancient faith of Christianity, with its

respect for women and antipathy toward slavery, not only survived but

flourished. Without the crusades, it might have followed Zoroastrianism,

another of Islam's rivals, into extinction." But for the crusades Europe

would have probably fallen to Islam and the USA would never have come into

existence. 



Learn To Discern 



Dr. Ted Baehr of Movieguide warns viewers to be "media wise enough to reject

revisionist history" such as the Kingdom of Heaven. " The problem is that

the future generations could accept this politically correct, anti-Christian

propaganda." 



Hollywood's Crusade Against History 



Ridley Scott's blockbuster epic "Kingdom of Heaven" presents one of the

worst distortions of history seen on any screen in recent years. Focusing on

the fall of Jerusalem, in AD1187, to Saladin's Muslim armies, this

anti-Christian, politically correct revisionism gets everything wrong. 



Who Cares About Geography? 



First of all, Scott's Kingdom of Heaven has its geography very wrong. We

know that the film was shot in Spain and Morocco, and it shows. Most people

should know that Jerusalem is not in the middle of the Sahara Desert! Yet,

in his film Jerusalem's high walls are surrounded by sand dunes, without a

tree, a bush or a blade of grass. The Mount of Olives, the Kidron Valley and

the Valley of Hinnon are nowhere to be seen. Unlike the Crusaders who

liberated Jerusalem in 1099, Saladin's Army has no problem moving his siege

engines and assault towers right up to the walls of Jerusalem, because

Scott's Jerusalem in Kingdom of Heaven is not surrounded by valleys or

ditches. 



This film also boldly asserts that Messina was the seaport to the Holy Land.

As Messina is on the Island of Sicily, one wonders why French crusaders

would, or how they could, depart from there. In fact Genoa, Venice and

Naples were the ports which crusaders set sail from. 



This is a True Story - Only the Facts Have Been Changed 



Kingdom of Heaven also distorts history beyond all recognition. The

"hundred-year truce" between the Christian and Muslim armies is a figment of

their imagination. The warfare throughout the 12th Century was incessant. 



The depiction of the Knight's Templar as a band of religious fanatics trying

to shatter the truce and provoke war with the Muslims by attacking caravans,

is a total fabrication. No Knight's Templar ever attacked any caravans.

Attacking caravans is what the founder of Islam, Muhammad, engaged in

regularly. As did his handpicked apostles, the Caliphas. The Knights Templar

were formed primarily to protect travellers from the attacks of the Muslim

army. In fact it was the slaughter of Christian pilgrims, by Muslim armies,

in violation of earlier agreements of safe passage, that precipitated the

crusades in the first place. 



The central figure of this film, Sir Balian, is a historical figure, who did

in fact play a critical role in the defence of Jerusalem in 1187, but the

film script distorts his character and role beyond all recognition. First of

all, Balian was not a blacksmith, nor did his wife commit suicide, nor was

he illegitimate, nor raised as a commoner. His father, Balian the Old (not

Godfrey as in the movie), had three sons, all legitimate: Hugh, Baldwin and

Balian. Balian never had to travel to the Holy Land, because he grew up as

part of the nobility there. Balian was married to royalty long before the

events portrayed in the film, and he was not at all romantically involved

with the Princess Sybilla. (Although his brother, Baldwin, had some love

interest in Sybilla). 



In Kingdom of Heaven, Balian is portrayed as questioning whether God exists,

although according to the historical records it is clear that Balian was a

dedicated Christian who took his faith very seriously. Nor did Balian desert

the defence of the Holy Land following the fall of Jerusalem. Far from

returning to France, Balian proceeded to Beirut in Lebanon which he helped

fortify against Muslim invasion. He was present with Richard the Lionhearted

at the signing of the peace with Saladin, which secured safe passage for

Christian pilgrims and recognised crusader control over the 90 mile stretch

of coastline from Tyre to Jaffa. 



According to Kingdom of Heaven, the real hero in the story is the famous

Muslim general, Saladin (1138 - 1193). Although an exceptionally gifted

military strategist and unusually chivalrous, the film has uncritically

accepted, and embellished, the legends about Saladin beyond what the

historical record would support. A Muslim Kurd, from Northern Iraq, Saladin

was raised in a privileged family, and was very ambitious. At age 14 he

joined his uncle's military staff, and at 31 followed him to Egypt where his

uncle was Grand Vizier. When his uncle died two months later, Saladin seized

power, defeated competing Muslim leaders and started a dynasty which

established Egypt as the major Muslim power in the Middle East. 



Far from having war forced upon him, Saladin initiated the conflict by

declaring a Jihad against the Christians. He swept throughout Palestine

capturing more than 50 crusader castles in two years. At the battle of

Hattin on 4 July 1187 Saladin's army defeated the Christians on the shores

of Lake Tiberius (the Sea of Galilee) - although in the film this battle is

depicted as in waterless desert! Far from being the magnanimous victor

depicted in modern legends and this film, Saladin was a ruthless general who

had thousands of Christian prisoners beheaded in cold blood - including

after the battle of Hattin. 



In the film, Saladin is portrayed as being most gracious in allowing the

defenders of Jerusalem safe passage. In fact after the negotiated surrender

of Jerusalem, which the Patriarch of Jerusalem initiated, Saladin demanded

that every man, women and child in Jerusalem pay a ransom for his or her

freedom or face the grim prospect of Islamic slavery. In order to save the

lives and liberty of the poor people who could not afford the heavy ransom

demanded by Saladin, Balian paid out of his own resources the ransom

required for those who could not afford it. 



Twisted Theology 



The theology in Kingdom of Heaven is also all wrong. The film depicts some

monk standing by the roadside repeating: "To kill an infidel is not murder

it is the path to heaven!" As any student of the Bible would be able to tell

you, neither the concept nor those words appear anywhere in the Christian

Bible. However, as any student of the Quran should be able to inform you,

that is exactly what the Islamic doctrine of Jihad teaches. 



At one point early in the film as Muslims bow in prayer towards Mecca,

Balian comments: "You allow them to pray?" A knight sneers and answers : "As

long as they pay their taxes!" In fact the crusaders never required any

extra taxes of Muslims in order to allow them to pray. That is the Islamic

doctrine and practice of Jizya. To this day Muslim governments require Jizya

- tribute taxes - of dhimmi's (Jews and Christians under their Islamic

rule). 



Before the crusaders march out to the disastrous battle of Hattin, the film

has one knight declaring: "The army of Jesus Christ cannot be beaten."

However, there is no such doctrine in the Bible, or in Christian theology.

It is, in fact, Islamic dogma that no Muslim army can never be defeated by

an infidel army. This Muhammad asserted on the authority of Allah himself.

(Something which the recent defeats, of the Taliban, in Afghanistan, and

Saddam Hussein's Muslim military superpower of the Middle East, Iraq, by the

Americans has precipitated a serious theological problem for Islamic

scholars). 



Insults to Intelligence 



Quite aside from the factual errors in geography, the attributing of Islamic

doctrine to the Christians, and the blatant distortion of history, the

Kingdom of Heaven is an insult to the intelligence of its viewers in terms

of its preposterous script. 



Here we are expected to believe that: Balian is grieving his wife's death,

yet he does not even attend to her burial; that Balian raised a commoner,

trained only as a blacksmith, from France, could within days of arriving in

Palestine be teaching the local people how to practice agriculture and dig

wells in the desert; and that this blacksmith with no military training

could know more about siege weapons and military strategy that all the

knights and military professionals concentrated in the Holy Land put

together! Just where would a blacksmith have learnt all about siege engines,

trebuchets, cavalry tactics and defensive strategy? 



The fictional, adulterous relationship depicted between Balian and Princess

Sybilla strains all credibility. As does Balian's presumed ethical

objections against executing the venomous and bloodthirsty husband of his

presumed adulterous interest! Apparently justice and the avoiding of a

disastrous war were not as important as his adulterous affections. 



Aside from the terrain around Jerusalem being so conveniently flat for the

invading armies, the depicted firepower and range capabilities of the

catapults and trebuchets are ridiculous. Steel cranes with three-inch

titanium cables would have trouble sustaining the weight and strain with

which these 12th Century wooden and rope trebuchets were meant to have

pulverised the thick walls of Jerusalem! The film makers of Kingdom of

Heaven try to make up for a lack of script and character development by

overdosing on computer generated explosions and fictional firepower

capabilities. (Actually maximum range for a 12th Century catapult would have

been 150 yards with a 300 pound rock). 



And how can any viewer with a grasp of history or military tactics swallow

the kind of tactics and strategy dished up in films like Kingdom of Heaven?

What soldiers throw their shields away just before engaging a massive

assault by the enemy?! Apparently, Orlando Bloom wanted his long flowing

locks to flow in the breeze, but seriously, what knight would throw his

helmet away just before engaging in hand to hand combat?! 



Also, as any student of history and anthropology should be able to tell you,

the crusaders did not burn the bodies of their dead. That was the practice

of the Vikings, the ancient Greeks and the Hindus, but not of the Christians

who buried their dead. 



The ridiculous speech with its feel good "why can't we all just get along"

drivel dished up by Orlando Bloom's Balian on the walls of Jerusalem (while

Saladin's armies politely delay their attack until he has finished) may

sound believable to some 21st Century Humanist, but these were not the

convictions or sentiments of any 12th Century crusader. As for the pathetic

egalitarian gesture of knighting everybody - without any training, testing

or code of conduct - is so unhistorical, and so out of touch with reality,

as to make one wonder what drugs the scriptwriter was on at the time. 



Then there's that shipwreck. To expect us to believe that the hero of the

film could go down with the ship in high seas, and awake the next morning

alive and well, on the shore - with the entire crew and every passenger, and

every horse dead, and neatly deposited on the shore - is ludicrous.

Especially that the only survivors of the shipwreck were the hero, and his

horse! And of course, very conveniently, his father's sword was not the kind

of heavy sword that would sink to the bottom of the ocean, but was also

neatly deposited next to this sole survivor! 



Crusade Against Christianity 



The ridiculous and inane comments attributed to the bishop in the film are

also not only highly unlikely, but jarringly anachronistic. Producer Ridley

Scott, and scriptwriter William Monahan, obviously hate Christianity. But,

just in case any viewers lack the discernment to detect the unveiled

anti-Christian hostility and prejudice, which permeates the entire movie,

Ridley Scott, has gone on record as stating: "Balian is an agnostic, just

like me." Of course there was no such thing as agnosticism in the 12th

Century, especially not amongst crusaders. The word "agnostic" was a 19th

Century invention. 



Just in case anyone misunderstood the motivations behind his movie, Ridley

Scott has been quoted as saying: "If we could just take God out of the

equation, there would be no f. problem!" 



Entertainment or Exploitation? 



Considering how few people today read history books, and how most depend

entirely on these kind of "based on a true story - the names and the places

are true - only the facts have been changed to protect the guilty" films,

for their understanding of the past, this kind of blind prejudice and

obsessive hatred against Christianity on the part of producers and directors

should be frightening. As Karl Marx declared: "The first battlefield is the

rewriting of history." I'm sure that all the enemies of Christianity are

delighted with propaganda pics like Kingdom of Heaven. 



The Facts of History 



The fact is that the crusades of the Middle Ages were a reaction to

centuries of Islamic Jihad. In the first century of Islam alone Muslim

invaders conquered the whole of the previously Christian North Africa

destroying over 3200 churches - in just 100 years. In the first five

centuries of Islam, Muslim forces killed Christians, kidnapped their

children to raise them as Muslims, or compelled people at the point of the

sword to convert to Islam . Up to 50% of all the Christians in the world

were wiped out during the first three centuries of Islam. The Saracens (as

the Muslim invaders were called) desecrated Christian places of worship and

were severely persecuting Christians. Pilgrims were then prevented from

visiting those places where our Lord was born, was crucified and raised from

the dead. It was only after four centuries of Islamic Jihad that the

crusades were launched as a belated reaction to the blatant Islamic Jihad. 



Logistics and Economics 



As the Christian History Institute has pointed out, the characterising of

crusaders as only in it for the plunder and the loot betrays an ignorance of

both geography and history. The vast majority of the crusaders were

impoverished and financially ruined by the crusades. Crusaders, through

great sacrifice and personal expense, left their homes and families to

travel 3000km across treacherous and inhospitable terrain - and the shortest

crusade lasted 4 years. Considering that only 10% of the crusaders had

horses, and 90% were foot soldiers, the sheer fact of logistics is that the

crusaders could not possibly have carried back enough loot to have made up

for the loss of earnings and high expenses involved with these long

crusades. Many crusaders lost their homes and farms to finance their

involvement in the crusades. 



There's More to Life than Money 



Perhaps self-seeking materialistic agnostics in the 21st Century cannot

understand that some people could be motivated by something other than

personal financial enrichment, but the fact is that many people make

sacrifices for their religious convictions, and in order to help others. In

the case of the crusaders, the historical record makes clear that amongst

the motivations that led tens of thousands of volunteers to reclaim the Holy

Land was a sense of Christian duty to help their fellow Christians in the

East whose lands have been invaded and churches desecrated by Muslim armies,

and a desire to secure access to the Holy Lands for pilgrims. There was also

a desire to fight for the honour of their Lord Jesus Christ, Whose churches

had been destroyed and Whose Deity had been denied by the Mohammadan

aggressors. In other words, to the crusaders this was a defensive war to

reclaim Christian lands from Muslim invaders. 



We may not share their convictions, or agree with their methods, but we

ought to evaluate them in the light of the realities of the 11th and 12th

centuries, and not anachronistically project our standards and politics back

upon them. 



The Missing Jihad 



Scriptwriter William Monahan, and Director Ridley Scott, obviously don't

understand the motivations behind the crusaders, and apparently they do not

understand the Islamic doctrine of Jihad either - which the film makes no

reference to. Considering that Jihad was the central threat that had lead to

the reaction of the crusades, this omission is inexplicable. Kingdom of

Heaven preoccupies itself with fictionalising crusader atrocities, but it

ignores the pattern of the preceeding five centuries of genocide and

aggression by Islamic armies. For those wanting the politically incorrect

rest of the story which Kingdom of Heaven does not even hint of, you would

want to read Slavery, Terrorism

<http://www.frontline.org.za/books_videos/sti.htm>  & Islam - The Historical

Roots & Contemporary Threat. 



Scott's Kingdom of Heaven is politically correct, anti-Christian, pro-Muslim

propaganda. It makes poor entertainment and is a worthless distortion of

reality. 



MOHAMMED VS CHRIST 



In his article "Self Hate, Revisionist History and Christophobia in the

movie Kingdom of Heaven" Dr. Ted Baehr notes some of the differences between

Mohammed and Christ: 



"Mohammed was the prophet of war; Christ is the Prince of Peace (Isaiah

9:6-7). 



Mohammed's disciples killed for the faith; Christ's disciples were killed

for their faith (Acts 12:2; 2 Tim. 4:7). 



Mohammed promoted persecution against the "infidels"; Christ forgave and

converted the chief persecutor (1 Tim. 1:13-15). 



Mohammed was the taker of life; Christ is the giver of life (John 10:27-28).



Mohammed and his fellow warriors murdered thousands; Christ murdered none

but saved many (John 12:48). 



Mohammed 's method was COMPULSION; Christ's aim was CONVERSION (Acts 3:19). 



Mohammed practiced FORCE; Christ preached FAITH (John 6:29, 35). 



Mohammed was a WARRIOR; Christ is a DELIVERER (Col. 1:13; 1 Thess. 1:10). 



Mohammed said to the masses, "Convert or die!"; Christ said, "Believe and

live!" (John 6:47; 11:25-26). 



Mohammed was swift to shed blood (Rom. 3:15-17); Christ shed His own blood

for the salvation of many (Eph. 1:7). 



Mohammed preached "Death to the infidels!"; Christ prayed "Father, forgive

them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34). 



Mohammed declared a holy war (Jihad) against infidels; Christ achieved a

holy victory on Calvary's cross (Col. 2:14-15) and His followers share in

that victory (John 16:33). 



Mohammed constrained people by conquest; Christ constrained people by love

(2 Cor. 5:14). 



Modern terrorists derive their inspiration from Mohammed and carry out their

despicable atrocities in the name of his god; Christians derive their

inspiration from the One who said, "Blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew

5:9). 



Modern day disciples of Mohammed respond to the terrorist attacks by

cheering in the streets; modern day disciples of Christ are deeply grieved

at past atrocities carried out by those who were "Christians" in name only

(the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, etc.). 



Many Muslims are peaceful and peace-loving because they do not strictly

follow the teachings of their founder; many Christians are peaceful and

peace-loving because they do strictly follow the teachings of their Founder

(Rom. 12:17-21). 



Mohammed called upon his servants to fight; Jesus said, "My kingdom is not

of this world; if My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants

fight . . . but now is My kingdom not from here" (John 18:36) 



Mohammed ordered death to the Jews (see A.Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad,

Oxford University Press [1975], p. 369); Christ ordered that the Gospel be

preached "to the Jew first" (Rom. 1:16). 



The Koran says, "Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them" (Qu'ran

9.5); Christ said, "Preach the Gospel to every creature" (Mark 16:15). 



Mohammed's mission was to conquer the world for Allah; Christ's mission was

to conquer sin's penalty and power by substitutionary atonement (2 Cor.

5:21; 1 Pet. 3:18). 



Mohammed claimed that there was but one God, Allah; Christ claimed that He

was God (John 10:30-31; John 8:58-59; John 5:18; John 14:9). 



Mohammed's Tomb: OCCUPIED! Christ's tomb: EMPTY! " 



JIHAD VS THE GOSPEL 



The word "crusade" does not appear in the Bible, nor is it commanded in

Christianity. However, Jihad is the sixth pillar of Islam and the second

greatest command of Muhammad. It is not only commended, but commanded in the

Quran. 



The crusades ended many centuries ago. However Islamic Jihad is carried out

to this day. Millions of Christians have been slaughtered throughout the

centuries by Islamic militants - such as the 1.5 million Armenians murdered

in Turkey in 1915. Christians have continued to be slaughtered by Islamic

militants in Indonesia, the Philippines, Sudan and Nigeria to the present

day. 



Therefore, before Christians fall over themselves to apologise for the

crusades, which ended over 700 years ago, it would be wise to first learn

from reliable sources what the crusades were all about, and study the

Islamic teachings and track record of Jihad over the last 14 centuries .

<http://www.frontline.org.za/books_videos/sti.htm> "Slavery, Terrorism and

Islam - The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat" would provide a good

introduction. Those who do not know their past have no future. 



Dr. Peter Hammond

http://www.frontline.org.za/images/CDs/Crusades%20&%20Jihad.gif

Frontline Fellowship

P.O. Box 74 

Newlands 

7725 

Cape Town 

South Africa 



E-Mail: [email protected]

Website: www.frontline.org.za <http://www.frontline.org.za/> 



The above text is most of what was presented by Peter Hammond at the

Universities in Minnasota. The CD's on his presentation and the open

discussion times with the students is available from:



Frontline Fellowship USA

P.O. Box 728 

Manitou Springs 

CO 80829 

Tel: 719-685-2899 

Fax: 719-685-9330 

email: [email protected]

Web: www.frontlinefellowship.net 



See also related articles: 

<http://www.frontline.org.za/news/Muslim_Evangelism_in_Minnesota.htm>

Muslim Evangelism in Minnesota 

The End <http://www.frontline.org.za/news/end_of_islam.htm>  of Islam

Slavery

<http://www.frontline.org.za/news/slaverytoday_battleoverhistory.htm>  Today

and the Battle over History 

Slavery

<http://www.christianaction.org.za/articles_ca/2004-4-TheScourgeofSlavery.ht

m>  - The Rest of the Story 



http://www.frontline.org.za/images/Dropdownmenus_sites.gif



http://www.frontline.org.za/images/Dropdownmenus_mission.gif



All rights reserved | Contact the webmaster <mailto:[email protected]>

for comments and questions about the site

http://www.frontline.org.za/IMAGES/FOOTER%20IMAGE.GIF



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





    
     

    
    


 



  










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe   :  [email protected]
Unsubscribe :  [email protected]
List owner  :  [email protected]
Homepage    :  http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Kirim email ke