Anyone who's actually read the four gospels, as opposed to being a contrarian edgelord bigot just because, knows that the Pharisees conspired to have Christ killed for threatening their established order of pretentious hypocrisy, cronyism, and personal gain, hence why they threatened the Roman governor with insurrection if he didn't give in to their demands for crucifixion. Christ had thousands of Jewish followers, many of whom, like Peter, feared persecution by the local governing establishment.
>>14945387
The Papal clergy did the same during the Middle Ages in Europe. They were more interested in power and personal gain than teaching the lessons of Christ, and because the general populace was illiterate, it could easily be coerced into believing whatever the con men feigning righteousness claimed came from God.
That all gradually changed with the Reformation, which encouraged education and reading the Bible and interpreting it for one's self. Notice how traditionally Protestant countries are not only more socially and economically advanced than traditionally Catholic countries, but have also been more historically Jew friendly.
Considering how quickly Islam spread within a matter of decades, as opposed to Christianity which took centuries to become a dominant faith, it's clear that Islam's initial foundation was based on warfare and subjugation through force, hence Christendom's hardened resistance with the Crusades. Today's Islamic terrorists are following what Muhammad's earliest followers would have done: forcibly convert or kill. A Crusade would be an act of self defense and preservation against invasive Islamo-fascism, which is presently resulting in another Holocaust against Jews, Christians, and all non-Muslims who refuse to convert, and yes this includes even Muslims who would denounce such violent terrorist hate.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Public Comments