Post by Omen on Feb 1, 2013 12:38:03 GMT -5
The bloodshed from faith was to be lead by the march of forgiveness for each sin acquired by a knight of the crusade.
Victory was promised by their God and his divinity blessed each of their actions above that of their enemies. This was the perspective of the Christian. The bloodshed from faith that was followed by savagery from those very same knights was taken as their natural instinct to barbarism.
Victory was promised by their God whom chose followers of a perfidious constitution. Achievement went to these individuals but true glory was a prize that they never obtained. This was the perspective of the Muslim.
Both perspectives from the extremist have searched for each other all throughout history identifying one another as their true enemy. During this time in history Christians and Muslim writers recorded their visions through words that conveyed the image of this enemy, but ignorance sat on the forefront of their messages to ensure that its real identity was hidden.
Pope Urban II stunned the people of Western Europe in 1096 with his words of strength concerning the Muslims conquering Jerusalem. He moved Christian followers of various languages, countries, and governments to come together for battle against a common foe. This was one of the most effective military techniques used all throughout history to organize a broken group.
Under this leadership, a divine blessing was given to each warrior that chose to fight for their faith. They were told that those to die for this type of war would be guaranteed placement in heaven and have all of their sins forgiven. From this the first Crusade was launched to recover the Christian Holy Land and Jerusalem.
In the translated letters recovered from those that lived during this age a distinct understanding of the different perspectives shed a contrasting light to the intrinsic aspect of the conflict.
Within the three letters presented in the years 1098, C. 1102, and C.1147 each letter contained the enduring elements of faith, belief, and sacrifice but in a tone based on the year written.
The first letter in 1098 an anonymous soldier recorded a letter to his loved one with a vigorous religious tone that was all but brainwashed and anxious. The shortened length of the writing made sure to emphasize that the most critical information was delivered to its intended reader. The first sentence started with a thank you to God leading to the second sentence which defined their sacrifice for their Lord Jesus:
“…the messenger whom I sent to you left me before Antioch safe and unharmed and, through God’s grace, in greatest prosperity.”
“…endowed with great valor by him, we had been continuously advancing for twenty-three weeks toward the home of our Lord Jesus.”
Each of those sentences justified the final sentence which pertained to the riches that were gained by war.
“You may know for certain, my beloved, that of gold, silver, and many other kinds of riches, I now have twice as much as you…”
The structure of the entire letter followed that of the desires of the Pope that were passed down to the troops. Benediction was given to God for the purpose of the Crusade, sacrifice through bloodshed would be needed for their Lord Jesus, and greed was to be forgiven for the knight that followed this path. The enemy was those that did not hold the Lord and his justifications first and above all.
The second letter by Ekkehard (C. 1102) outlined the depth of belief and the power of influence that it had over others even when they did not believe. In the first sentence he controlled the tone very much like the first letter by passing his aspect through divinity.
“Here I am very anxious to add certain details concerning these military undertakings, which are due to divine rather than human inspiration.”
This allowed those within the Christian army that looked upon the non-believers in their ranks that were there for the promise of riches and/or to escape their homelands for one reason or another to see a holier reason for them to stand beside them while they went to war. The discourse showed many of those that traveled with the pilgrims were induced into the very spirit of the fight. This reiterated the glorified words of the Pope and their religious piety. The enemy was the allied-ignorant that needed to be converted into the holy ways of his God, as this was done the allied-ignorant accepted that any other faith than their own was wrong.
It must be noted that the passion in the final letter by a German Annalist (C. 1147) was recorded almost fifty years after the first one and although the tone was God-fearing, the rebellious nature could not be ignored. It clearly portrayed an almost chaotic feeling of betrayal by those that falsely used religion as a tool. This was far different than the brainwashed words written in the first letter. These words were written in which strife, deception, and treachery was no longer ignored.
Acknowledgement for the contemptuous greedy and the faithless poor mercenary were defined clearly and without hesitation. It ended offering consent to recognize the few directed by true holiness which places them above all others. The enemy was all who betrayed tradition and did not follow its rules. They were disdained and no better than the other enemies that they fought.
The Muslim writings were not structured based on tone or imagery; they were made to transcribe the events of the time.
The evil of the Christians was not described by opinion but validated by their actions. One letter (Beh-El-Din, Official in Jerusalem) depicts the brutal acts of the Franks by following the unscrupulous orders of the king of England. The king deceived the Sultan of the Muslims and slaughtered 3000 of his people after promising them freedom. Because there was no clear reason recorded for the massacre, the feeling left for the reader was that of inhumanity when envisioning the Christians. The enemy implied was the instinctive unholy nature of the Christians to lie and kill with out mercy or guilt.
The second Muslim letter (Usamah Ibn-Munqidh) used the process of ‘guilt by association’ to characterize the barbarity of the Christians.
He attempted to show a fair description of Frank physicians by writing about one that was a failure and one that was a success. His accentuation was on the details of the failing physician by describing his paltry attempts to save his patients which resulted in their deaths. He then provided a brief entry about a successful Frank physician and then transitioned into the lack of understanding in their actions with things such as prayer and how they treated their women. The depraved nature of the Christians flowed through their spirit as blood through the body.
Wickedness in their decisions with women and life was the enemy that Islam suppressed but the ignorance of the Christians was one that the writer had to imply but never say.
The conflict between the Christians and the Muslims of that time appeared to be based on faith and glory. This was only the surface. Both groups from this outlook fought for the same things and bled in the blood of one another as the price.
Reaching down deeper into the voices recorded as text, a different reason surfaced through each of their perspectives. Faith gave way to belief. Belief fractured into ‘way-of-life’…and finally that crumbled into the actual separation that many refused to change. The foundation for each of these writers was laid in culture.
Each culture viewed their own as superior and was willing to fight and die to prove it. Each group conquered, slaughtered, pillaged, raped, and sacrificed during war in the name of their God.
No matter how many names and descriptions were given to the enemies that they fought; no name was as true as the real name of their enemy…ETHNOCENTRISM!
Victory was promised by their God and his divinity blessed each of their actions above that of their enemies. This was the perspective of the Christian. The bloodshed from faith that was followed by savagery from those very same knights was taken as their natural instinct to barbarism.
Victory was promised by their God whom chose followers of a perfidious constitution. Achievement went to these individuals but true glory was a prize that they never obtained. This was the perspective of the Muslim.
Both perspectives from the extremist have searched for each other all throughout history identifying one another as their true enemy. During this time in history Christians and Muslim writers recorded their visions through words that conveyed the image of this enemy, but ignorance sat on the forefront of their messages to ensure that its real identity was hidden.
Pope Urban II stunned the people of Western Europe in 1096 with his words of strength concerning the Muslims conquering Jerusalem. He moved Christian followers of various languages, countries, and governments to come together for battle against a common foe. This was one of the most effective military techniques used all throughout history to organize a broken group.
Under this leadership, a divine blessing was given to each warrior that chose to fight for their faith. They were told that those to die for this type of war would be guaranteed placement in heaven and have all of their sins forgiven. From this the first Crusade was launched to recover the Christian Holy Land and Jerusalem.
In the translated letters recovered from those that lived during this age a distinct understanding of the different perspectives shed a contrasting light to the intrinsic aspect of the conflict.
Within the three letters presented in the years 1098, C. 1102, and C.1147 each letter contained the enduring elements of faith, belief, and sacrifice but in a tone based on the year written.
The first letter in 1098 an anonymous soldier recorded a letter to his loved one with a vigorous religious tone that was all but brainwashed and anxious. The shortened length of the writing made sure to emphasize that the most critical information was delivered to its intended reader. The first sentence started with a thank you to God leading to the second sentence which defined their sacrifice for their Lord Jesus:
“…the messenger whom I sent to you left me before Antioch safe and unharmed and, through God’s grace, in greatest prosperity.”
“…endowed with great valor by him, we had been continuously advancing for twenty-three weeks toward the home of our Lord Jesus.”
Each of those sentences justified the final sentence which pertained to the riches that were gained by war.
“You may know for certain, my beloved, that of gold, silver, and many other kinds of riches, I now have twice as much as you…”
The structure of the entire letter followed that of the desires of the Pope that were passed down to the troops. Benediction was given to God for the purpose of the Crusade, sacrifice through bloodshed would be needed for their Lord Jesus, and greed was to be forgiven for the knight that followed this path. The enemy was those that did not hold the Lord and his justifications first and above all.
The second letter by Ekkehard (C. 1102) outlined the depth of belief and the power of influence that it had over others even when they did not believe. In the first sentence he controlled the tone very much like the first letter by passing his aspect through divinity.
“Here I am very anxious to add certain details concerning these military undertakings, which are due to divine rather than human inspiration.”
This allowed those within the Christian army that looked upon the non-believers in their ranks that were there for the promise of riches and/or to escape their homelands for one reason or another to see a holier reason for them to stand beside them while they went to war. The discourse showed many of those that traveled with the pilgrims were induced into the very spirit of the fight. This reiterated the glorified words of the Pope and their religious piety. The enemy was the allied-ignorant that needed to be converted into the holy ways of his God, as this was done the allied-ignorant accepted that any other faith than their own was wrong.
It must be noted that the passion in the final letter by a German Annalist (C. 1147) was recorded almost fifty years after the first one and although the tone was God-fearing, the rebellious nature could not be ignored. It clearly portrayed an almost chaotic feeling of betrayal by those that falsely used religion as a tool. This was far different than the brainwashed words written in the first letter. These words were written in which strife, deception, and treachery was no longer ignored.
Acknowledgement for the contemptuous greedy and the faithless poor mercenary were defined clearly and without hesitation. It ended offering consent to recognize the few directed by true holiness which places them above all others. The enemy was all who betrayed tradition and did not follow its rules. They were disdained and no better than the other enemies that they fought.
The Muslim writings were not structured based on tone or imagery; they were made to transcribe the events of the time.
The evil of the Christians was not described by opinion but validated by their actions. One letter (Beh-El-Din, Official in Jerusalem) depicts the brutal acts of the Franks by following the unscrupulous orders of the king of England. The king deceived the Sultan of the Muslims and slaughtered 3000 of his people after promising them freedom. Because there was no clear reason recorded for the massacre, the feeling left for the reader was that of inhumanity when envisioning the Christians. The enemy implied was the instinctive unholy nature of the Christians to lie and kill with out mercy or guilt.
The second Muslim letter (Usamah Ibn-Munqidh) used the process of ‘guilt by association’ to characterize the barbarity of the Christians.
He attempted to show a fair description of Frank physicians by writing about one that was a failure and one that was a success. His accentuation was on the details of the failing physician by describing his paltry attempts to save his patients which resulted in their deaths. He then provided a brief entry about a successful Frank physician and then transitioned into the lack of understanding in their actions with things such as prayer and how they treated their women. The depraved nature of the Christians flowed through their spirit as blood through the body.
Wickedness in their decisions with women and life was the enemy that Islam suppressed but the ignorance of the Christians was one that the writer had to imply but never say.
The conflict between the Christians and the Muslims of that time appeared to be based on faith and glory. This was only the surface. Both groups from this outlook fought for the same things and bled in the blood of one another as the price.
Reaching down deeper into the voices recorded as text, a different reason surfaced through each of their perspectives. Faith gave way to belief. Belief fractured into ‘way-of-life’…and finally that crumbled into the actual separation that many refused to change. The foundation for each of these writers was laid in culture.
Each culture viewed their own as superior and was willing to fight and die to prove it. Each group conquered, slaughtered, pillaged, raped, and sacrificed during war in the name of their God.
No matter how many names and descriptions were given to the enemies that they fought; no name was as true as the real name of their enemy…ETHNOCENTRISM!