[Festus]

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba

The problem here is that you could take the Crusades and the blessing of the Spanish and Portugese land grabs later on as proof that Catholicism is not a Religion of peace either. Islam also believes itself to be a Religion of peace and presents itself as such- would a cradle Muslim looking at the history of the supposedly Christian west really come to the conclusion that Catholicism was much more of a religion of peace? We both should know that the answer to that is no.

What would make a Muslim turn towards Christianity would surely be the lack of a proper understanding of original sin in Islam, coming to an intuitive grasping of the need for the Atonement of the Crosss and how law without Grace cannot bring us closer to God, surely?

You should try reading a real history book from time to time instead of getting your "history" from anti-Christian websites.

The Crusades were a defence against Muslim agression and if they hadn't happened you would probably be a Muslim now. I say probably because if you wanted to be a Christian or an atheist they would kill you for apostasy.

[HamletOrHecuba]

Originally Posted by Festus

You should try reading a real history book from time to time instead of getting your "history" from anti-Christian websites.

The Crusades were a defence against Muslim agression and if they hadn't happened you would probably be a Muslim now. I say probably because if you wanted to be a Christian or an atheist they would kill you for apostasy.

Sorry my understanding of the crusades hasnt come from websites. The violence against Eastern Christians were part of the Crusades and what had they got to do Muslim aggression even if your reading of thing is correct.

Your understanding of Islam though seems to have come from websites.

Do you support the right of the state of Israel to exist?

[Fanny Cradock]

Originally Posted by muppeteer

I wouldn't call it a fallacy to say that the majority of people are a particular religion because they were raised in that religion.

Not at all. But it becomes a genetic fallacy if you want to say more than this. For example, "If you were born into a Muslim family in Indonesia you would be Muslim. Therefore Christianity is untrue". Whether this is being implied here is questionable but it certainly occurred to me when I read this thread.

[Festus]

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba

Sorry my understanding of the crusades hasnt come from websites. The violence against Eastern Christians were part of the Crusades and what had they got to do Muslim aggression even if your reading of thing is correct.

Humans are prone to sin and bad things happen and I won't deny it any more than you can deny that the Allies committed war crimes during world war ii, or the Irish Army committed attrocites during the Civil Way.
The point is the purpose of the Crusades was defensive.

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba

Your understanding of Islam though seems to have come from websites.

I'll take it that is your opinion.

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba

Do you support the right of the state of Israel to exist?

In what form?

I have nothing against Judaism however I am not a Zionist or a dispensationalist.

[HamletOrHecuba]

Originally Posted by Festus

Humans are prone to sin and bad things happen and I won't deny it any more than you can deny that the Allies committed war crimes during world war ii, or the Irish Army committed attrocites during the Civil Way.
The point is the purpose of the Crusades was defensive.

I have nothing against Judaism however I am not a Zionist or a dispensationalist.

Okay I will re-phrase it, do you support the state of Israel to exist outside of its 1948 borders? Do you know any Muslims, have you had serious conversations with any?

Peter The Hermit was preaching defensiveness? Are you sure about that?

[Festus]

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba

Okay I will re-phrase it, do you support the state of Israel to exist outside of its 1948 borders? Do you know any Muslims, have you had serious conversations with any?

Regarding Israel I have said what I have said. Regarding Islam I think the evidence from the Islamic states is clear.

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba

Peter The Hermit was preaching defensiveness? Are you sure about that?

Lets stick with Pope Urban II

[HamletOrHecuba]

Originally Posted by Festus

Regarding Israel I have said what I have said. Regarding Islam I think the evidence from the Islamic states is clear.

Lets stick with Pope Urban II

Really? Islamic states do and have varied wildly. Ive been to Saudi Arabia and to Iran and the differences between them are wider than the differences between the USA and Russia.

Did Peter the Hermit not play a huge role in the First Crusade? Was the conquest of Jersusalem and the Holy Land in general not a goal of the Crusaders? Did the Crusades not lead to making firm the division between Eastern and Western Christendom?

[Festus]

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba

Did Peter the Hermit not play a huge role in the First Crusade? Was the conquest of Jersusalem and the Holy Land in general not a goal of the Crusaders? Did the Crusades not lead to making firm the division between Eastern and Western Christendom?

He was not the Pope.

[Farcheal]

How do you explain the crusades against Byzantium? and the establishment of the latin empire? I suppose the reconquest of iberia was defensive. This tripe is ridiculous.

Also, a person growing up in a religion is conditioned to accept it above othets, as a cultural thing among other reasons. And the current religioms are nothing like "Jesus" or Yeshua's original intended personal God and no real huge overbody

[Manach]

My understanding from the Crusades is academic, and those were in the most part in defence from outside aggression - although no side was blameless in that era.

[Festus]

Originally Posted by Farcheal

How do you explain the crusades against Byzantium?

The Byzantine Emperor asked the Pope for help with some bothersome neighbours.

Originally Posted by Farcheal

Also, a person growing up in a religion is conditioned to accept it above othets, as a cultural thing among other reasons. And the current religioms are nothing like "Jesus" or Yeshua's original intended personal God and no real huge overbody

We are humans not animals and we are educated not conditioned.

and tripe is pretty good with onions but you do have to cook it slowly for a long time.

[tommy2bad]

We are humans not animals and we are educated not conditioned.

Didnt go to the Christian Brothers then?

[Farcheal]

Your seriously just trolling now. Mixing Catholic Pseudo history with your own opinions doesn't make it true. The Byzantines did not ask to be invaded. We are animals. Sentient animals who can apparently think for themselves.

[HamletOrHecuba]

Originally Posted by Festus

The Byzantine Emperor asked the Pope for help with some bothersome neighbours.
.

He did indeed, the only problem was that the help was much worse than what it was supposed to stop.

[muppeteer]

Originally Posted by philologos

Pew Forum 2009 - http://www.pewforum.org/Faith-in-Flux.aspx


Most Christians that I have met, have had a stage in their lives when they have started to make sense of their own beliefs for themselves, irrespective of what mum and dad might think. For me, I wasn't too sure of it all. I decided to read the Bible cover to cover as a teenager and I started to see that it was true concerning the human condition and our relationship with God. It opened my eyes in fact, as there was whole swathes of content in there that I had never heard before in my life. It made me rethink what perception I had of what this life thing was about.

The idea of children having brains that superglue ideas about God to their brains is simply demonstrably false. Even the UK chart shows that. Ultimately, people must realise what makes sense for themselves whether they like it or not, or whether their parents like it or not. That's simply life.

Again, there are millions of people becoming Christians in the world who aren't from a Christian background. Indeed, most growth is happening in areas of the world where Christianity hasn't been heard of. Christianity in the 21st century is fundamentally different to any other century in so far as nobody can no longer say that it is mostly confined to traditionally Christian countries. There are more Christians outside of the Western world than are inside it.

I would expect most Christian conversions today to be in non Christian countries due to simple saturation of the market in the west. The US and UK data shows this well as here people mostly change within Christianity and very little to Christianity.

People will of course make their own determination as to what religion they want to follow. I would think the options they consider seriously though are mainly driven by what they are exposed to. Access to information about other religions may be freely available but accessing praticing members is much less so, as such there is far less exposure to the very different/minority religions. Obiously people will be mostly exposed to the religion of their parents and their community. I would guess that raising a child to believe that the doctrines of a religion are true would more likely produce a child that would not want to go against those doctrines. If it didn't then the religious wouldn't even bother with children would they. It isn't super glue, but it does stick sometimes, and from the data is seems to stick more often than not(and when not it doesn't stray too far from the Christianity nest).

As to the OPs question I would doubt if a Christian in the UK was instead brought up a muslim they would still find the Christian message convincing and convert, simply from the rarity of this happening in real life. Maybe a Catholic converting to CofE or similar seems more cerdible.