A Chrisitan accpets Islam

[Kirran]

I don't know if it's was , your same opinion in this thread
7.5 Million Americans Lost Their Religion in the Past Two Years

http://www.religiousforums.com/thre...on-in-the-past-two-years.174917/#post-4207625

I don't see how this refutes what I was saying.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

If he had decided before he asked the questions then he converted before the questions, in which case, this was staged.

Yeah i think alot of people do this to get some sort of kick, of getting a huge welcome from thousands of people, be part of a friendly community and get a convicing feeling from doing some sort of ritiual (like baptism) where you leave the old behind.

By fire & sword, why? The Germanic peoples were not converted through debate. Look up the "Northern Crusades". The North European pagans were converted by the tip of a blade, and even then they kept as much of their Heathen traditions as they could. You can see this even today, where the Old Gods are coming back into view.

Hmmm thats interesting. But who would invade germany? i cant remember this from history. the priests and missionaries?

 

[Augustus]

But who would invade germany? i cant remember this from history.
the priests and missionaries?

Charlemagne certainly didn't rely on priests and missionaries...

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

Charlemagne certainly didn't rely on priests and missionaries...

But wasn't he a german convert himself? if so then my original point is true that many converts are persuaded through questions and answers they receive or through emotional connections. And its not true that germany or scandinavia was converted by war

 

[Augustus]

And its not true that germany or scandinavia was converted by war

Germany didn't exist.

Charlemagne was a Frank who created himself an empire by defeating Saxons and the like. He was non too fond of their heathen practices and liked to show this by killing lots of people who disagreed with his religious persuasion.

He spread Christianity by the sword more than the Arabs spread Islam by it.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

Germany didn't exist.

Charlemagne was a Frank who created himself an empire by defeating Saxons and the like. He was non too fond of their heathen practices and liked to show this by killing lots of people who disagreed with his religious persuasion.

He spread Christianity by the sword more than the Arabs spread Islam by it.

franks were germans. back in those days a country was called after the people that inhabited it. and so if germans, franks were a german tribe, inhabited france(frankia) then it was germany. ofcourse it isnt always like this but for the most part they were called by the tribes/clans that inhabited it.

 

[Augustus]

franks were germans. back in those days a country was called after the people that inhabited it. and so if germans, franks were a german tribe, inhabited france(frankia) then it was germany. ofcourse it isnt always like this but for the most part they were called by the tribes/clans that inhabited it.

Yes, but you can't say that because Charly was a Frank, and Franks were Germans, then Germany wasn't invaded. 'Germany' is an anachronism.

The Great Charles invaded territory belonging to those of a different culture, such as the Saxons, and spread Christianity using force.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Alot of the 'refugee' or better known as 'immigrants', here where i live (germany), are muslim but the weird thing about them is: they come from albania, india, pakistan, turkey or saudi arabia. all of these countries have no war or conflict and are basically save.

A lot of these still aren't safe places. Pakistan and India in particular are turbulent nations whose inhabitants might wish to flee for reasons other than outright warfare. Government corruption, poverty, social/religious inequality might be reasons these people have to flee their homes.

 

[Nietzsche]

Hmmm thats interesting. But who would invade germany? i cant remember this from history. the priests and missionaries?

In the early eras, it was the Holy Roman Empire(under Charlemagne). But all manner of Christian missionary made their way to the North, some official others not. It all depended on the time frame. What is important is that resistance to Christianization was extremely fierce.

But wasn't he a german convert himself? if so then my original point is true that many converts are persuaded through questions and answers they receive or through emotional connections. And its not true that germany or scandinavia was converted by war

There was no "Germany" yet. There were the Germanic tribes inhabiting Magna & Inferior Germania(roughly a swathe of territory comprising the modern-day Lowlands, Germany, some of Austria, the Baltic Coast up to Lithuania, ect). And they were converted by the sword. Especially the Saxons, who were converted under threat of death by Charlemange.

In Scandinavia, it took centuries for Christianization to take hold. Christian Kings would be imposed and then cut down by the people, especially those who refused to allow Blots. Some Germanics were undoubtedly converted through conversation and reason, but the over-whelming majority were brought to the Nazarene by the sword.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

Yes, but you can't say that because Charly was a Frank, and Franks were Germans, then Germany wasn't invaded. 'Germany' is an anachronism.

The Great Charles invaded territory belonging to those of a different culture, such as the Saxons, and spread Christianity using force.

absolutely im familiar that there were slaugthers of saxons because they didnt convert to christianity. but for the most part people were converted because christianity seemed to be a better religion. since prior to the military action i remember there were missionaries who were sucessful in saxony and middle germany. there was one missionary who fell a tree dedicated to odin or thor and he gained followers for doing this even though the missionary was killed later by pagans.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

A lot of these still aren't safe places. Pakistan and India in particular are turbulent nations whose inhabitants might wish to flee for reasons other than outright warfare. Government corruption, poverty, social/religious inequality might be reasons these people have to flee their homes.

i cant remember any of the people i have met to have fled their country for reason of government corruption or injustice. most of them got here because they want to live in a western country and get education+lots of money.

In the early eras, it was the Holy Roman Empire(under Charlemagne). But all manner of Christian missionary made their way to the North, some official others not. It all depended on the time frame. What is important is that resistance to Christianization was extremely fierce.


There was no "Germany" yet. There were the Germanic tribes inhabiting Magna & Inferior Germania(roughly a swathe of territory comprising the modern-day Lowlands, Germany, some of Austria, the Baltic Coast up to Lithuania, ect). And they were converted by the sword. Especially the Saxons, who were converted under threat of death by Charlemange.

In Scandinavia, it took centuries for Christianization to take hold. Christian Kings would be imposed and then cut down by the people, especially those who refused to allow Blots. Some Germanics were undoubtedly converted through conversation and reason, but the over-whelming majority were brought to the Nazarene by the sword.

Charlemange was a frank, franks (inhabitants of frankia(france)) are a german tribe. Yeah in scandinavia there was also bloodshed but i dont remember it to be really significant. for the most part people who rose to power became christian prior to it and used their power to support the church the best they could and encourage christinization of the population. no bloodshed.

 

[YmirGF]

He spread Christianity by the sword more than the Arabs spread Islam by it.

If I may, that is not a very legitimate point. You might say that Charlemagne spread Christianity by the sword more than some Arab generals spread Islam by the sword though.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

i cant remember any of the people i have met to have fled their country for reason of government corruption or injustice. most of them got here because they want to live in a western country and get education+lots of money.

There you go - the other reasons I mentioned from their own lips. Poverty and social inequality which meant they couldn't get an adequate education.

Charlemange was a frank, franks (inhabitants of frankia(france)) are a german tribe. Yeah in scandinavia there was also bloodshed but i dont remember it to be really significant. for the most part people who rose to power became christian prior to it and used their power to support the church the best they could and encourage christinization of the population. no bloodshed.

Do you believe there was bloodshed in the Christianisation of Scandinavia or don't you?

It's important to remember that the Church would want to revise history and play down the notion that Christianising a people was violent and oppressive. It'd reflect badly on their public relations. Olaf Tryggvason was a Norwegian king who forced Christianity on his people. One man who was converted by Tryggvason was Sigmundur Brestisson who attempted to force Christianity on his fellow islanders by breaking into their chieftain's room in the middle of the night and offering him a choice between Christianity or death. The chieftain relented but attacked Brestisson later on in revenge for his cowardice and forced him to flee.

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

There you go - the other reasons I mentioned from their own lips. Poverty and social inequality which meant they couldn't get an adequate education.




Do you believe there was bloodshed in the Christianisation of Scandinavia or don't you?

It's important to remember that the Church would want to revise history and play down the notion that Christianising a people was violent and oppressive. It'd reflect badly on their public relations. Olaf Tryggvason was a Norwegian king who forced Christianity on his people. One man who was converted by Tryggvason was Sigmundur Brestisson who attempted to force Christianity on his fellow islanders by offering their chieftain a choice between Christianity or death. The chieftain relented but attacked Brestisson later on in revenge for his cowardice and forced him to flee.

There was bloodshed but not to such an extent as to consider it signifcant. There was a book which i have come in contact with which told of a viking age story of a pagan who gets convinced that christianity is true because the pagan god Frey demanded human sacrafices every spring and in christianity there was no human sacrifices after Jesus there is not even animal sacrifice. the book is based on folktales, i cant remember what it is called but it was quite old. something with "frey and his wife" or something called like "snaketongue..." or whatever. I think this resembles the majority of christianization of pagans more than the theory through opression and bloodshed.

 

[Augustus]

If I may, that is not a very legitimate point. You might say that Charlemagne spread Christianity by the sword more than some Arab generals spread Islam by the sword though.

Got any specifics to show any Arabs who spread Islam more forcibly?

 

[Godobeyer]

I don't see how this refutes what I was saying.

I mean you did not deny in that thread that Christians convert to athiesm .

you said here :

Most Christians are not becoming atheists. .

 

[Godobeyer]

Huh? I don't understand what you mean.

ok i will explain :

you said that you don't care about atheism is growning in West by saying : "Who cares that atheism is growing in the West?"

but you cared about Christianity growning in Africa and Asia by saying : " The center of Christianity will just shift to Africa and Asia"

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

ok i will explain :

you said that you don't care about atheism is growning in West by saying : "Who cares that atheism is growing in the West?"

but you cared about Christianity growning in Africa and Asia by saying : " The center of Christianity will just shift to Africa and Asia"

I was just saying that it doesn't really matter if atheism grows in the West. It doesn't mean that Christianity is going to die out, just that the global center of Christianity is changing.

Truthfully, the West is on the verge of collapse. Western Europe is in turmoil and American culture is falling apart. Culture and society is decaying and becoming more and more disgusting. The economy is in the crapper and the gap between the rich and the poor is only getting wider and wider. So an increase in atheism isn't surprising, since the culture encourages hedonism, selfishness and individualism. A lot of people aren't very educated about religion. Plus, the public face of religion in America is mostly a joke. You have morons like Pat Robertson, Joel Osteen and a number of others that make a mockery out of religion, promote hatred and use it as a tool to get rich.

But true Christianity will persevere on as it has always done. Besides, if we really are getting close to the Eschaton (end of time), all this has been prophesied. There is nothing to fear, as always. God is with us.

 

[Godobeyer]

I was just saying that it doesn't really matter if atheism grows in the West. It doesn't mean that Christianity is going to die out, just that the global center of Christianity is changing.

Truthfully, the West is on the verge of collapse. Western Europe is in turmoil and American culture is falling apart. Culture and society is decaying and becoming more and more disgusting. The economy is in the crapper and the gap between the rich and the poor is only getting wider and wider. So an increase in atheism isn't surprising, since the culture encourages hedonism, selfishness and individualism. A lot of people aren't very educated about religion. Plus, the public face of religion in America is mostly a joke. You have morons like Pat Robertson, Joel Osteen and a number of others that make a mockery out of religion, promote hatred and use it as a tool to get rich.

But true Christianity will persevere on as it has always done. Besides, if we really are getting close to the Eschaton (end of time), all this has been prophesied. There is nothing to fear, as always. God is with us.

how it's not matter that Christians convert to athiest !!

in USA they said 7.5 million americans lost their religions just in two years !!! , so maybe next 100 years no one in USA will be Christian !!

in issue of Muslims it's does not matter rich or poor , Most of Muslims are poor but they don't lost their religion, inspite that we suffering from terrorists .

If we suppose that terrorists are Christains , so most of Christians in West, will for SURE convert to other religion , that's weak and uncertain in faith .

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

how it's not matter that Christians convert to athiest !!

in USA they said 7.5 million americans lost their religions just in two years !!! , so maybe next 100 years no one in USA will be Christian !!

in issue of Muslims it's does not matter rich or poor , Most of Muslims are poor but they don't lost their religion, inspite that we suffering from terrorists .

If we suppose that terrorists are Christains , so most of Christians in West, will for SURE convert to other religion , that's weak and uncertain in faith .

I'm not sure how you expect me to respond. I don't have any control over anyone else's religious views. If Christianity becomes a minority in America, oh, well. What am I supposed to do about it? I'm not going to be alive in 100 years, anyway.