By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
vlad321 said:
Kasz216 said:
vlad321 said:
Maybe I didn't get it across clearly so maybe it's my fault, but the problems I have are with the fact that the crusades would not have happened if there was no religion, the popular support for the crusades would not have been there at all if it wasn't for the leaders telling them about the heretics across the sea. Religion is simply a tool to rule over and manipulate the masses through out history. The easiest way to gain popular support for a war is through the cross, sickle, or star of david. Thankfully things are now changing for the better than they used to be. Coincidentally the world is also more secular now that it has ever been.


Except they would have. 

Instead of the Catholic Church there would of been some other body chosen to unite europe... and the same things would of happened.

Maybe they wouldn't of went for Jerusalem.  Maybe instead they would of went for the Byzantian empire.

Either way, the events would of played out the same.

 

They did go for the Byzantine emipre, the Fourth Crusade. We than had to go and save constantinople, becoming the first army to ever defeat an army of knights on (techinically) an open field, but I digress.

Sorry I editted my comment to further expand on it, hopefully before you saw it. I said that anything that is based on blind faith can and will be used for controlling the masses, religion just happens to be the thing whose basis solely relies on blind faith alone, therefore it's a favorite. Basically, if blind faith didn't exist, religion would not have existed, among other things, and people would not have been as manipulated as they were and (in my opinion) many atrocities, or other effects of manipulation and conditioning. Im retrospect I should have played the blind faith card in the very beginning and saved us several pages worth of words.

Yes, the fourth crusade.  However the fourth crusade isn't even seen as a nonsecular one.

The only crusade that some people tend to see as nonsecular is the first one.

None of them were... and they would of happened anyway.  It's obvious to see if you study the lay of the land and why the church "had control".

People weren't largely spirtually motivated... and you didn't need the will of the people to start a crusade.  Just the will of the nobles.

I would agree that blind faith is bad.  However i would disagree that religion is based on blind faith.

It's a hard thing to explain to someone who finds themself an atheist...

because afterall....

"how would you explain color to someone who is blind."

for a lot of people it isn't blind faith.