Quote from dbphoenix: "Nor did the Muslims start the conflict with the Christians. It was ongoing before either existed. Wanna go again?" I request that Db support this idea. Because I am not quite sure he means. Were the hundreds of years of Muslim imperialism just part of some other movement? If so which ones? Here is a database of over 500 battles. Not including many against Africa and Asia.
You're suggesting there were no conflicts before the 7th century. As I pointed out, over and over again in your own thread, this is/was not the case. Is another thread really necessary? Read your own.
wow... you are even douching up a thread I made for you... with your very own quote. That is why I made a new thread for you... so you could stop douching up mine. I "suggested" no such thing. Why would anyone but a troll's strawman make such statement?
you are lying like pond scum db. We can see once again you have no desire or ability to support your thesis... so you are just going to douche it up.
Raging, angry, religiously motivated, thread starting Jem, finds yet another ridiculous crusade of his own. It's Bill -let's talk jihad- Warner who says Fact: Muslims started the battles against classical civilization..... even when battles against classical civilization began before there were any muslims.Yeah that'll work! Seems all you have to do is turn fact and ancient history on its head to get a PhD these days. Long before anything else, Rome, not muslims, ran its own form of "jihad". Rome destroyed Corinth, taking possession by extreme violence of another and much earlier classical civilization called Greece. Basically, that's how it started. As everyone knows, it went on to spread an Empire from West to East against every man and his dog before Islam, using same and similar methods whenever opposition occurred and even when it didn't. How come Bill the Crusader apologist man didn't map all those battles? Two thousand years later from that start, and nearly a thousand years after the Crusades, troll for christ Jem, gets sucked into an attempt to re-write history and absolve christianity or more to the point Catholicism, for its own atrocities during the Crusades, by saying muslims were doing it first so christians didn't start it. Well they didn't not start it either.
Lol. he did didn't he! Incredible His hiatus via Lent time sure took it's toll. Like a pressure cooker.
Why is it some et atheists like these 2 guys suffer some sort of inferiority sickness? After being caught trolling... they go after the other sides personal religious beliefs. Yes, this thread is about Muslims and Christians but it not about their belief system (other than if it cause the aggression) , your belief systems or mine. It was simply about seeking to learn more from DB about his excuse for the Muslim aggression against Mecca, then the Jews and the Christian lands. These fricken Einsteins don't seem realize I have not denied that DB could be correct. I just want to see the info supporting his claim. Everyone knows about Rome... but how did that motivate muhammeds army. Nice try trolls but one does not rage or get angry... when I produced multiple sources including the video above showing that the Christians did not start the aggression against the Muslims.
You asked for a response. When you get them you start with the insults and rage. You always do. When Rome (which becomes christian) invades, violently overruns and colonizes existing lands that had their own well established highly successful and prosperous cultures for thousands of years previous, that is what...to be all conveniently ignored! Over the hundreds of years of enduring violence which the Roman Empire had started and maintained through its invasion , imposition of a new religion and continued Imperial rule, you want to simplistically believe some 700 years later when Islam gets invented, it's suddenly their aggression that start things? Why is that. Because you sucked up some bs on a catholic website. Not muhammeds army. It was an eventual conquest of the Byzantine(Roman) Empire by Arab armies. Roman Empire now christian, Arab Empire now muslim. The occupation of Mecca was tribal. One Arab religion falling out with the other. Rome first conquered the land. Now another Empire similarly wants it back. Islam, just as Christianity, being the opium of the masses, the predominant superstition of each side. The hollow excuse for one to blame the other over anything and everything.
Who is ignoring it the history? No one. Who is denying history... no one. Why do you keep arguing with such strawman bullshit? Its pointless. What could have caused the Muslim aggression is an interesting subject. I don't mind learning if you wish to actually support your argument. Knowing a bit of history about Jerusalem and Alexander the great and the East West schisms in the Church... I would sincerely like to hear how lefties explain the Muslim aggression in some way or another. Perhaps... you will hit on some real points. I know there were regional conflicts too. I would like to see you weave a tapestry of at times divergent facts... and come up with a beautiful work explaining how the muslim aggression was not really about creating muslims and looting women and cash. Was this not really not just Jihad and Jizya? Why did they March out of Arabia.. let us know. I would like to read your or dbs points... with links that support those points.