According to scholars, suffering is an inevitable sad fact in human life. Since Christianity has charged its believers with the obligation of caring for the suffering, care becomes an integral aspect of suffering. Although theologians have not yet explored the mysteries of suffering in human lives, one thing is clear to all the people; care is essential to the suffering. Theologians view care as the frame that supports suffering. While Christians perceive care for the suffering as a God’s delegated responsibility, it is not clear to non-Christians when and who to care for.
From a world’s perspective, people should care for those who experience suffering without their own involvement. Indeed, non-Christians argue that people should not care for those who suffer due to their own carelessness. In this paper, caring comes out as God’s manifestation to his loved ones. Using the biblical and life experiences, the paper will demonstrate how the Christians’ worldview affects this argument. Based on these experiences, the arguments given will reinforce God’s miraculous involvement into the lives of human beings.
God’s manifestation through caring
According to Christian’s worldview, people should care for those who suffer. Who is the suffering? The biblical Job’s story is an example of suffering. According to Job 1.1 “There was a man in the Land of UZ, whose name was Job, and the man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil” (KJV). From this passage, it is apparent that good people suffer. Through suffering, God manifested His power and capability to Job. As presented in the biblical context, Job was under the care of his wife. Given that his wife experienced the suffering he underwent, God’s manifestation went beyond Job. Therefore, by caring for the suffering, God demonstrates to the people that He is the controller of their lives.
As caretakers of the suffering, people experience indirectly what God can do to their lives. Since people might not understand what their future holds, they have to care for the suffering now. Based on the worldview, specific people in the society, such as nurses, should care for the suffering; however, this view is a misconception. As per the Christian’s worldview, God calls all the people to serve the humanity (Shelley & Miller, 1999, p. 56). Through service of care, God manifests His will to the people. In his suffering, Jesus cared for the human soul, which had long suffered. Indeed, Jesus manifested the will of God to the world; that is, salvation. From Job’s story, human beings can achieve fulfillment and true happiness if accorded sufficient care in suffering.
Care provides people with opportunity to express love to the suffering. For instance, during the Haiti’s calamity, nurses and other social workers volunteered to offer shelter and healthcare to the suffering motivated primarily by love. According to first John 4:16, “and when we have known and believed the love given to us, God is love” (NRV). As this text depicts, God is love and through humanity, He expresses this love. It is therefore justifiable that, through the caretakers, God manifests His universal love to a suffering humanity. This perception influences the Christian’s worldview in two ways: First, it influences the Christian’s participation into the mission of God. Through caring for the suffering, Christians become not only part of God’s mission, but also propagators of God’s love to the world (Colson & Pearcy, 1999, p.89).
This perception acts as a motivator to the professional caretakers. Secondly, the argument changes the Christian’s perception over suffering. Caring is an involvement into the mystery of suffering. Therefore, through caring, Christians will be part of the God’ mysteries into the human thriving. In this context, human beings can realize fulfillment and true happiness by performing critical roles in the lives of the suffering. Since love provides satisfaction and strength to the human lives, the social workers in Haiti enjoyed the innermost fulfillment, which defines the true happiness everybody strives to realize.
Through caring, God manifests His physical nature to the world. Although Genesis illustrates the image of God as a loving God, many people perceive it as a historical imagery. The bible articulates that God created ‘man’ in His own likeness and image, an assertion that most scholars struggle to understand (Yancey, 1977, p.32). If human beings represent the image of God, why is it that their acts distantly differ from God’s acts? The two examples of care represented above would informatively disapprove these scholars. In the Job’s story, his wife cared for him throughout his suffering. In Haiti’s calamity, volunteers from all over the world accorded the victims with the relevant support for their survival. In fact, their contribution brought order to the lives of the Haiti people. Where was their God then? These volunteers represented the image of God to the victims. They were indeed a delegation from God. Therefore, by caring for the suffering, caretakers illustrate the image of God, not only in physique but also in actions.
Conclusion
Although Christians view caring as a responsibility from God, they do not clearly comprehend why God calls them to care. Through caretaker’s caring, God manifests, His nature, character, and will to the humanity. It is therefore justifiable that caring is a means for God’s manifestation to the suffering humanity. By performing care-related acts, human beings are not only a delegation from God, but also part of God’s mission of caring for humanity.
References
Colson, C., & Pearcy, N. (1999). How now shall we live? Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.
Shelley, J.A., & Miller, A.B. (1999). Called to care. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press.
Yancey, P. (1977). Where is God when it hurts? Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.
In today’s society, secular and Christian worldviews clash in several ways. Both are different and varied in their composition, expression, and application. The divide between them is so wide that Christian views are disregarded in professional fields such as business and politics (Pearcey, Henley, & Martinez, 2014). Disregard Christian perspectives are evident in several fields, such as journalism and politics. The exclusion of Christian precepts in dealing with secular matters has resulted in outcomes that worsen rather than improve society. Professional pursuits in contemporary society are characterized by a great separation of work and religion because of misguided perceptions about the relationship between the two.
Many people avoid the integration of their careers and spirituality and therefore spend most of their time avoiding worship, evangelization, and other Christian duties. This approach has originated from the propensity to view work and Christian duties as incompatible. However, business activities give Christians an opportunity to carry out their duty of evangelization. As such, Christians should embrace and incorporate biblical perspectives into their work in order to eradicate the divide between their faith and work.
In many instances, I undertake career-related projects that eradicate the need for incorporation of Christian values and precepts. However, the cultural mandate by God to humans to subdue the earth makes work a way of contributing to God’s call (Pearcey at al. 2014). It is important to integrate biblical worldviews into secular endeavors in order to fulfill God’s cultural mandate to humans. In many workplaces, involvement in religious activities is restricted because of the diversity in people’s religious views. Therefore, corporations assume that limiting the number of religious discourses is right for them. They ignore the fact that Christian precepts possess the power to change employees in positive ways through changes in attitudes towards people and work (Fernando, 2002).
The world of politics is characterized by actions and conversations that are evidence of the great divide between politics and Christianity. For example, corruption is one of the major challenges faced in politics because many participants lack core Christian values such as honesty, trust, and justice. On the other hand, this is evident from the separation of state and religion. Many people believe that religion should not be fused with politics because both are different and incompatible entities (Fernando, 2002). This approach has resulted in many problems because the incorporation of Christian perspectives into politics would solve innumerable challenges. A similar problem is observed in the dissemination of information by different media platforms. Many media outlets stretch the truth in order to attain certain desired outcomes. As a result, distorted media reporting and individualized opinions are used to shape public discourses in matters such as education, politics, and science (Pearcey at al. 2014). Incorporating Christian perspectives into media reporting would foster truth and justice and enhance responsibility and accountability.
Many people avoid incorporating Christian worldviews into their lives because of varying interpretations offered with regard to the relationship between religion and secular pursuits. Many people approach worship as a different entity from other aspects of their lives. As a result, many people believe that worship is conducted after work because both are incompatible. However, this approach is wrong and misinformed. Work and worship are compatible because God commanded human beings to subdue the earth and take care of it. Therefore, any type of work or occupation is a response to God’s mandate.
References
Fernando, A. (2002). Spiritual Living in a Secular World. New York: Monarch.
Pearcey, N., Henley, W., & Martinez, R. (2014). Clash of Worldviews: How Shall the Christian Professional then Live? Christian Business Review, 3 (1), 14-19.
Religion could be considered one of the first peoples attempts to cognize the world that surrounds us and give answers to the most important questions related to the nature of life, the origin of the Universe, rules that regulate its existence, etc. It appeared as primitive beliefs of tribes living in different areas. For this reason, ancient cults were not homogeneous in their nature and origin. Moreover, they promoted worshiping to different powers. Thus, in the process of evolution, these beliefs transformed into complex and structured religions with their rituals, ceremonies, and perspectives on the nature of God. However, the above-mentioned convergences preserved and become the main distinguishing criteria that were used to create different confessions and sects. For instance, being one of the most popular religions in the world, Christianity incorporates numerous perspectives on the nature of God and creation, and Gnostic and Christian views are one of them.
Gnostic Views
Gnosticism could be determined as a set of religious ideas and beliefs which state that God is split and the world is created by the emanation of this supreme creature, but not himself (Farrelly 54). Moreover, Gnostics also believes that our world is split too as there are dark and light aspects of our existence. For this reason, the supreme God is not the creator as he is not able to give birth to imperfect things. Gnostics also postulate that humanity is divided. There are doomed and evil people who are opposed to those who possess a divine spark that comes from the supreme God, gnosis, and know the right way to live and the truth.
Niceness Views
These ideas about the creation and the nature of God are often opposed to Nicene ones. People who adhere to this very perspective are sure that there is only one God who is the creator of all things starting from the Universe and ending with every creature living on the planet. Furthermore, according to this very theory, God cares about the world and creates things by the power of his will (Farrelly 78). It also means that all objects are initially good as they are the result of Gods creativity and his intention to care about his children.
Comparison
Comparing these two perspectives, we could state that they are extremely different and suggest diametrically opposed perspectives on the creation of this world. When Gnostics are sure that God, the world, and humanity are split, the Nicene vision suggests the concept of Gods oneness. Furthermore, contrasting these theories, it is crucial to touch upon the nature of objects created by God. Gnostics are sure that there are both good and evil phenomena as the world is the result of Gods emanation activity. At the same time, the Nicene view presupposes that all things are initially good because of the great power of the creator who cares about this world and acts with a purpose to do good to people. These differences precondition the great divergence in the above-mentioned perspectives.
Conclusion
Altogether, we could state that among other ideas about God and creation, Gnosticism and Nicene views should be taken as opposite ones. They proclaim that God is split and should not be confused with the creator and, at the same time, that there is only one supreme creature in the world correspondingly. The differences in these approaches precondition the great divergence in these views and the existence of different perspectives on God.
Work Cited
Farrelly, John. Belief in God in Our Time. Michael Glazier Books, 1992.
Over the course of the evolution of Christian religion, it was supported by a number of Christian leaders, who introduced the basic concepts of Christian faith to all those willing to learn about it and created an image of Christianity. Much to their credit, they did their job incredibly well, seeing how nowadays, Christianity is one of the three largest religions in the world. However, some of the Christian leaders should be given a special credit for their work and persistence in trying to follow the key principles of Christianity and retain Christian values.
Therefore, the impact of religious leaders on the evolution of Christian religion cannot be overestimated. The one who has contributed the most to the given process, however, is yet to be found. Although it cannot be argued that Jesus was the historic personality that actually is the central figure of Christianity, there are a number of people who moved Christianity forward in the darkest of the times, therefore, preventing others to let Christianity dissemble.
The Religious Leader That Made a Difference
When it comes to defining the ultimate Christian leader that the world has ever produced, it is more reasonable to go back in time and search for the man among the people who called themselves the chief disciples of Jesus Christ. While the given issue is truly arguable, seeing how each of Jesus’ disciples had enough faith in Him and had the right to be called the true Christian leader. However, it is remarkable that Peter is the first to figure out who Jesus actually was:
“Blessed are you Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to you that you are Peter [petros], and upon this Rock [petra] I will build my church” (Matt. 16:17–18). (Ehrman 15).
Apart from being, as Ehrman put it, Jesus’ favorite disciple, Peter discovers his healing abilities later on (Gaiser 224), which also makes him all the more significant a persona. Even though, as Ehrman explains, “Peter occasionally reverted to his fickle and unreliable ways” (Ehrman 18), he still was considered Jesus’ chief disciple in the early Christian Church.
Reading between the Lines of Mary Magdalene’s Story
Another possible Christian leader who deserves being mentioned, Mary Magdalene plays a very important role in a number of Biblical events. Her significance can be defined by the fact that she was present at Jesus’ crucifixion and was the first one to find Jesus’ tomb empty. The symbol of repentance, humility and devotion (Gouk and Hills 110), Mary Magdalene played a crucial role in the evolution of Christian religion.
Conclusion: Christianity, Its Leaders and Its Followers
With that being said, it must be admitted that a number of people have contributed to the progress of the Christian religion and its spread all over the world, including the most remote corners of the world.
Despite the fact that, quote honestly, Jesus should be named the man who actually planted the seed of Christianity into once pagan society, the rest of the Christian leaders should also be mentioned for their deeds and sacrifices that they made for the sake of their faith. Hence, while Peter has been named the ultimate Christian leader in the entire history of the humankind, it is still worth keeping in mind that Christianity exists nowadays owing to the efforts of hundreds of outstanding leaders and milliards of believers.
Works Cited
Ehrman, Bart D. Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene, the Followers of Jesus In History and Legend. Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.
Gaiser, Frederick J. Healing in Bible: Theological Insight for Christian Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group. 2010. Print.
Gouk, Penelope M. and Helen Hills. Representing Emotions: New Connections in the Histories of Art, Music and Medicine. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company. 2005. Print.
Religion can be defined as a set of beliefs which are said to be centered on a certain supernatural being about reality and human nature. Religion in this case can be coded by prayer and religious laws which have been established by those people who belief in that religion. Religion today is taking so many aspects hence the existence of so many denominations. The differences in this case have been as a result of the cultural aspects which many people can associate religion with. For example, we have so many religious groups say the Christianity, Buddhism, Islam’s, among other groups. It is through these groups then we can be in a position to try and understand their religious aspects and how they try to relate with the other religious groups. Ecology on the other hand can be defined as human surrounding which involves the human life and its interaction with the environment. The environment in this case can be taken to engross the living organisms and the physical properties which involve the climate, geology plus other biotic factors. So, there is the need to try and understand the relationship between these two things. This is because none can exist without each other. This is because human beings form religion. It is these human beings who are seen to co-exist with the environment but you tend to find that human beings have put themselves in to a crisis with the environment. This is because man has failed to preserve the diversified living organisms which are found in our ecosystem and hence have tried to expose them in to danger. Through the paper, am going to look at the Christianity and Hinduism and how they relate to ecology. (Achtemeier, 2000).
Christianity and religion
More Christian’s belief that, in the beginning, God created Adam and Eva and both were given Dominion over all the plants, animals and everything that was under earth created by God. The Judeo-Christian creation myth in this case makes nature to have a lower status than man. It is due to this fact that man was created to ensure that such things are protected and not destroying them since this is what most Christians tend to belief. They were created as more superior than the rest of Gods creation so that man can take care of these creations but not to destroy them. In its very creation, many Christians belief that the earth was created to serve man and man to serve god. So if earth was created to serve man, then the big reason to try and protect it lies here. This is because the earth is the only depended thing by man. It is on earth and its creations whereby man can get his daily necessities hence the need to try and protect the world with all its many creations since it is our life. (Babie, 1996).
It is due to this fact you find that Christians have rejected the issue of animalism which can be used to expose nature hence stripping it of its inherent value. The earth was created by God hence a place which is so much cared by him though God does not devote Himself in it. This fact led to one Christian to write that Christianity is one of the most anthropocentric religions the world has ever experienced. In his writings, he tried to mean that man shares in most great measure Gods transcendence of nature. This is the reason why we see so many Christians establishing a dualism of nature and man but, it was Gods will that man tries to exploit nature so that they can make their ends meet. Its also a belief that mans spiritual home is in heaven but not on earth. The earth was made as a place whereby man could sustain his live with the authority rested upon him to ensure that he has protected everything which God made. (Adams, 2000).
There is also a problem with most of the Christians on their view on earth. This is because most of the Christians thoughts are that man was not for the earth and his spiritual home is in heaven. He only rose from the earth and hence was created so that he could escape from its imperfection. They also try to argue that they want to be with God and God in this case was removed from the earth and he is staying in heaven. So with this, earth is not our home but just a place to live and mould us so that we can be in a position to go in to heaven. It is with this thought that the earth is seen as one of the essential places in trying to shape our relationship with God. It is through this that we are supposed to respect Gods creations through protecting the environment but not through destroying it simply because it was created by God so that it can be maintained but not destroyed. (Babie, 1996).
One of the catholic scholars in this case John F. Haughty who wrote an essay titled Christianity and ecology. It was in this writing whereby he tried to explain that the universe is the most Gods revelation since the universe in this case is trying to unfold hence can reveal the nature of God through the earth. So in his writing, Haughty tried to say that nature is a Gods promise hence the need for all human beings to be more concerned on nature protection since the earth is this case is seen as the most manifestation of Gods covenant with man. So, this is quite obvious that when we abuse Gods environment, we are definitely getting a curse from God since the environment was made for us hence abusing it means the same as rejecting our God who made us. So it’s very much important to try and understand Gods creation and how he was so much happy with his creation. So when we destroy the environment, we are at the same time destroying Gods creation hence deserving punishment from Him. Christianity then will require an all inclusive Christic pattern, one which does not see the earth as a backdrop of its salvation. Most Christians then argue that people should remove their thoughts that the earth is a temporal place for people to live in. This is because it is through this concept that many people will not be in a position to protect the environment but will destroy it since they will think that everything which is on earth shall be destroyed hence no need to protect the earth with all its creations. (Babie, 1996).
Another Christian Mcfagues said that the world is the most visible sacrament of God. He said that the world and all its creations which were created by God is the physical and bodily presence of the heavenly God. So if we belief that God is all magnificent, then we will also belief that God is all present in all life which he created. So in this case nature falls under this phenomenon since it was also created by God. The biggest question which so many Christians ask themselves is “Would an infinite God create all these things if he did not have any value for them?” This is the major question so many people are still contemplating today on the issue of nature and why it was created. If God did not have any value for them, then He would have only created man alone so that he can sustain himself without the need of nature. Now if we try to analyze all these we will see that nature was very much imperative even at the beginning when God created it, it is through this that we are all called to protect nature since God found it very much significant hence he created nature. (Babie, 1996).
Most of the Christian doctrines have a philosophical change in the consciousness which to has put within its many churches over the protection of the environment. The church has been in a position to recognize the importance of the natural setting plus the biological limits of earth with its many respects to sustain human life. For example, it is known that most of the American churches have lobbied on the issue of climate change. So in this case the world council of churches has taken the initiative to educate people on the role of environment and on how we can protect the environment. This is because if we don’t protect nature, then nature will destroy us. This is because these are two things which are said to be interrelated and nothing can exist without each others. So the world council of churches in this case has a climate change program and it is in this climate program that they have been involved in protecting our environment. (Babie, 1996).
You find that in the past 25 years, there has been a theological philosophy by all the church people allover the world in trying to understand the relationship between environment and the spiritual importance and this can be referenced when the theologians were startled when the Judeo-Christian theology with the concept of humanity been on earth to dominate it can be seen as having a big part in crisis with the environment. It is due to this fact you find that most churches allover the world both rich and poor have been involved in ensuring that they have protected the environment. Most of these people are seen to deal with the effect of the industrial society on the quality of water and air. (Achtemeierss, 2000).
So many churches today have been occupied in activities that help to protect our environment. An example to elucidate this is that most of the Christians have formed so many programs and a good example is the community service day. It is in this day that you find that most of these Christians go in so many places making that the environment is so clean. For example, they might go helping those people who are in need, planting trees since as we all know, trees are so much important since its through these trees that many people can be in a situation to get safety from. These trees also act as resting places for so many living organisms hence when we destroy them, we are at the same time destroying the lives of these animals. So it is during the community service day that many Christians take this day as a day to try and safeguard the environment through planting these trees and also enlightening people on the role of environment to us. (Achtemeier, 2000).
Hinduism and ecology
Hindu is responding to the ecological crisis but still from a different perspective from the Christians view point. Hinduism is one of the religious groups which think that it had not been given authority over nature. This is wholly different from the Christians belief on nature whereby they belief God created man and then he was given authority over nature. For Hindu, these people belief that they have no such authority over nature hence no-dualistic nature between man and nature. They call their creator Brahman but Christians call their creator God. So they belief that this Brahman is the known proficient cause of nature. He is the one who created nature and all the creations which is in the earth and no any known authority which is has been given to man over the rest of the Brahmans creations. Unlike the Judeo-Christianity who had been given authority over nature, Hindu tends to belief that they have a more elevated responsibility which they had been given by Brahman over his creation and the greatest part of this particular responsibility to them is the doctrine of Ahimsa that is the issue of non-violence between nature and man. They argue that those people who try to kill animals have an immense punishment which is waiting for then and they should go to torment. This is because they have no authority which is given to them over the creations hence they should not be involved in any killing of animals whosoever since they have no such authority. These animals should be protected but not killing them This is because if we kill these animals, it is one of the ways of destroying the environment so any acts which might lead to killing of these animals is seen as completely unclean and those people who kill these animals are cursed by Brahman who is their creator who created all these animals. Those people who kill these animals are supposed to go to hell for a number of days which are said to be equal to the number of hairs in the body of that animal which was killed. But because these hairs are uncountable, it is the same as saying this person is supposed to go to hell for ever. (Albanese, 2004).
Hindu tends to belief that the most central part of the religious doctrine is that their supreme being incarnates in to so many species. In human life cycle, he undergoes a number of lifestyles that is death, and rebirth which in this case it incarnates to form other human beings. What they belief is the complete detachment from the material world hence so many people have tried to argue that such a belief then is taken to mean that they have rejected from the worth of nature to man. This is because man was created together with nature and the creator saw all these as pretty important to them. So if they try to detach themselves from the material world, then they don’t value nature and don’t even protect it. We protect nature by first trying to appreciate it since it forms part of us.
One of the Hindus treatments of the world can be seen by Rig Veda in trying to care for life and nature. He said that trees and plants can be seen as most containing the remedial properties of man. Most of these trees need to be protected simply because it’s through them then that man can find his cure in them. So with this they say that each tree has a divinity (deity) and it is in these trees where they do their daily worship. So most Hindu worship these trees simply because it’s only in them where they can find their treatment. It’s through the worship of these trees then that they are claiming to be protecting nature so much because they fortune trees and plants so much. It’s in these trees whereby they can do their offering and ceremonies in trying to tribute them. So with Hindu, the issue of tree planting can be seen as a religious activity to them. So, they do plant trees as a way of trying to protect nature and all what is found in nature since it’s in nature especially in the trees where they can find their healing. An example to explain Hindu ecological movement and preservation of nature can be seen in the Chipko movement which was held in March 1973, and it was held in India. It was during this fastidious movement whine all Hindu were seen to have formed a human nature and it is in this particular chain where they hugged trees which marked to be cut down for the development of the equipment factory. This movement has grown so much in Hindu and hence they have used this particular movement in trying to show the ecological movement for them. (Albanese, 2004).
Conclusion
Ecology and religion has led to a growing concern by so many people. This is because of the ecological crisis which is going on the role of nature and in trying to protect nature. The world we are living in today has become one of the places where a zone of land is found with so many wildlife, plants plus other living organisms which are said to be deemed under this world. This is one of the known processes in history which has taken such a long time to achieve. So we are supposed to look at our religious beliefs, our spiritual identities so that we can be in a position to try and redefine our purpose as human beings on nature. This is because nature is carrying everything including man and non can do without each other. Nature is something which has been used by man in so many things. It is in nature whereby we can find human endurance. Nature and religion is then so much related since if we don’t protect nature, then man will also be destroyed too. Most of the religious groups have tried to argue on their many reasons of how they comprehend nature, their role to man hence the need to protect it.
Reference
Achtemeier, H. (2000): Nature, God and Pulpit. Mich: Eerdmans.
Adams, C. (2000): Ecofeminism and the sacred. New York: Continuum.
Albanese, C. (2004): Nature religion in Hinduism: from the Algonkian Indians to the new age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Attfield, R. (2001): Christian’s attitude to nature. Journal of history of ideas. Vol. 2(1).
Babie, P. (1996): The environment and Christianity. Pacifica Vol. 8(1).
After yet again another humbling experience with Jesus Christ, a disciple’s desperate desire to be accepted and acknowledged as a worthy follower of the Messiah was manifested through this poignant question: “What must we do to do the works of God?” Jesus answered: “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” Thus, the mission of the Church in contemporary times is the same as the mission of the Church in the 1 century A.D. Nevertheless, Global North Christians must work hand-in-hand with Global South Christians if they want to share the gospel and expand the Kingdom of God in territories whose inhabitants share the same social and economic circumstances as Global South Christians.
Global South Christians vs Global North Christians
Before going any further it is important to clarify the meaning of Global South Christians. According to recent literature, the emergence of Global South Christians is traceable to the impact of missionary activity in favor of countries outside the United States and Europe. Expansion of Christianity was significant in the aftermath of the Second World War, and significant strides were made after a significant number of nations were liberated from colonial powers.
At the turn of the 21st century, observers pointed out that Christianity was decreasing in the West but increasing in countries like Latin America, Africa, and Asia. Scholars coined the term Global South Christians in contrast to the believers living in North America and Europe. As a result, Christendom in the 21st century is simplified by the demarcation lines that separate the Global South believers from the Global North believers.
It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss in detail why Global South Christians are going to eclipse Global North Christians in numbers in the year 2025. However, the main focus of this paper is to figure out why Global South Christians are effective in reaching out to the local residents of Latin America, Africa, and Asia.
It is also imperative to point out that when tasked to determine the mind-boggling success of Christianity outside the U.S. and Europe, church growth was always attributed to the zeal of the Christians in this part of the world. In addition, the population growth in these territories is also seen as a critical factor at play and explains the dizzying success rate of the said churches. Be that as it may, the proponent of this study will attempt to point out that aside from the spiritual revival and population growth in these territories, another important factor to consider is the impact of the theology adopted by Global South Christians.
It is easy to understand why Global North Christians were not impressed by the church growth potential of the messages that get delivered to the congregation. Westerners made commentaries regarding the messages that seems to them as “simplistically charismatic, visionary, and apocalyptic. Many are uncomfortable with the idea that present-day Christians are still into faith healing, exorcism, and dream visions.
For many in the West, this type of Christianity was a throwback to the old day when believers had to travel on foot if they desired to visit remote and difficult-to-access territories. However, Global North Christians learned too late that spectacular church growth experienced by churches in the Global South was also the direct result of how the stories, concepts, and ideas espoused in the Bible resonated with the hearts and minds of the people living in the continents of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
As a result, new converts and those that are continuing the process of learning more about the Christian worldview experienced a great deal of encouragement and guidance when they discovered that they could relate to the characters and the setting of the stories in the Old Testament and the wisdom-filled teachings found in the New Testament. According to one commentary: “Cultures that readily identify with biblical worldviews find it easier to read the Bible not just as historical fact but also as relevant instruction for daily conduct.” In other words, there is a big difference in the way Global South Christians appreciate the authority of the Bible to speak into their personal circumstances.
For example, it is easy for them to accept teachings regarding the power of prayer and the impact of faith in their lives, if the illustrations used in the Bible mirrored the circumstances that they experience in their daily routine.
Insights gleaned from the review of related literature underscore four main characteristics shared by Global South Christians, and these are listed as follows:
Intense social stratification;
Omnipresence of poverty;
The transience of life; and
Philosophical detachment.
People groups living in the Global South continually experience “intense social stratification” based on race, religion, and other factors. The caste system in India is a good place to start.
However, there are other examples, such as human trafficking in East Asia and child labor in Latin America. People groups confronted with this issue can find comfort in the fact that God’s people experienced the same fate. For example, the Israelites had an intimate understanding of what it meant to be under slavery. They did it twice in Egypt, and then when the cream of the crop of the Hebrew race was carted away to foreign lands as exiles in order to serve foreign kings.
It is interesting to note that Global North Christians are far removed from this kind of sentiment. The forefathers of African Americans were once slaves, and the ancestors of Caucasian Americans were once upon a time under the hegemony of the British Empire. However, these things occurred a long time ago, and present-day American citizens had no inkling as to the meaning of working as slaves or working under extreme conditions even without the assurance of getting paid.
In the case of the “omnipresence of poverty,” the struggle to acquire the basic necessities of life is a recurrent theme in both Old and New Testament scriptures. For example, famines that struck Canaan created forced people to do strange things in order to survive. In the New Testament, the thousands of people following Jesus came from some of the poorest sectors of society so that they endured listening to the preachings on an empty stomach.
However, there was a time when the physical toll was too much, Jesus knew that without a bit to eat these people will collapse on their way home. Jesus demonstrated his concern for the crowd, an attitude that was not expected from an influential political or religious leader. Thus, the decision to find ways to feed the people resonated with the poor Christians living in the territories under the Global South.
It is not possible to compare the lifestyle and earning capability of Global South and Global North Christians. The disparity between the two groups is impossible to harmonize. Most Americans had no idea what it feels to live in a house with a dirt floor and no running water.
When it comes to the concept called “the transience of life” Americans and Europeans with ever-improving life expectancy rates, the problem has never been about premature deaths, because the urgent challenge is all about creating an acceptable retirement package. Men, women, and children are dropping like flies in sub-Saharan Africa due to untreatable and treatable diseases. It is rare to find a case of polio or malaria in some of the upper echelons of Western society. However, death from a rabid dog or death from malnutrition is a common occurrence in Africa and Asia.
Global North Christians will also find it extremely difficult to understand and appreciate the concept called “philosophical detachment.” There is nothing wrong when Christians in North America and Europe decide to camp out of an Apple Store or toy store in order to be the first group of consumers able to get hold of a prized commodity. It is hard for someone immersed in a “consumer” driven culture to let go of entitlements and desires.
Theoretically, Global North Christians have the capability to understand the Epistle of James when he talked about the need to endure when going through a difficult trial. However, there are only a few personal experiences regarding severe testings of faith, that it is difficult for them to fully appreciate the core message of the said epistle.
Biblical Wisdom Literature
Global South Christians draw inspiration from biblical wisdom literature like the Epistle of James, the Book of Proverbs, and the Book of Ecclesiastes. The type of wisdom generated from these sources is the type that enables them to survive grave difficulties and to mitigate the impact of trials and tribulations. Consider for example the passage found in the Epistle of James reads: “Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.”
In this verse, Christians find strength to fight back. However, in the Book of Proverbs one can find the following verses: “When you lie down, you will not be afraid; when you lie down, your sleep will be sweet. Have no fear of sudden disaster.” This passage provides encouragement for Global South Christians living in areas affected by a pandemic. In the Book of Ecclesiastes, the reader is encouraged to see life from a different perspective. For those who are overly ambitious and work tirelessly and endlessly during the summer months must be ready to share what they own.
It is good to know that an in-depth look at biblical wisdom literature enables us to understand where Global South Christians draw their strength and quiet fortitude. Nevertheless, it is of practical importance to point out that the wisdom literature they completed, are not only good source of wisdom. The same group of biblical wisdom literature are available for use as a mechanism for building bridges. Nonetheless, the same source that were highlighted also serves a different purpose, and that is to serve as a bridge connecting Global South Christians to members of the same community.
Conclusion
It is not a good idea to send Global North Christians to do the work that only Global South Christians can accomplish. Global North Christians always have a great deal of difficulty handling the challenges faced in the Old and New Testaments. In other words, send only the Global South Christians to reach out to those who are in great need. Furthermore, it must be made clear that the said group of Christians have access to wisdom literature that are not only for the edification of believers. The said wisdom literature contain statements and ideas that are not offensive to non-believers. Thus, they can use the same to build bridges to other faiths in the places where they live.
Since September 11, 2000 there are only a few people in the civilized world who are ignorant of the power of religion to destroy and divide (Jelen & Wilcox, 2002). Even before 9/11 many are aware of the Holocaust, the destruction of six million Jews based on the idea that they are different. After World War II news headlines were on fire once again because of the intense hatred of the Palestinian Arabs against the Jews. If one will take a closer look at all these issues it is undeniable that religion plays a key role in these conflicts.
Thus, there is a clamor for unity and tolerance. Many are saying that if Jews, Muslims, and Christians can look beyond their minor differences then they will discover that they share so much in common and can use it as a starting point to talk peace rather than war. Unfortunately adherents of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam will tend to disagree. Nevertheless, there is a way for them to appreciate their shared heritage.
This discussion must begin with a little historical background. It has to be made clear that Judaism came first, followed by Christianity, and then Islam. Judaism was officially established when Moses rescued Israelites from Egypt, and brought them to the wilderness to introduce them to God and his laws. This happened hundreds of years before the coming of Jesus Christ. Islam on the other hand was established by the prophet Mohammed six hundred years after Jesus Christ started preaching in Judea.
Bone of Contention
Jews can afford to look down at everyone with contempt because of two reasons. First, they are oldest among the three. Second and most important reason is the fact that Christianity and Islam will never deny that they sprang from this root. Jesus came from the stock of David, from the tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes under Israel. Mohammed will be the first to point out that they came from Abraham, from Ishmael to be exact but it does not matter because Israel too considers Abraham as their father.
The Jews can therefore say that they are the foundation stone for Christianity and Islam and an open minded Christian and Muslim should never be able to refute this claim.
However, a careful study of Christianity will reveal that Jesus Christ and his apostles were all Jews and they have elevated Judaism to a level that makes it accessible to the whole world. Jews can gloat and say that they are the chosen people but this is not a wise decision to make because they will be threatened on all side and in fact since two thousand years ago, since the Jewish Diaspora, the Holocaust, the war in Palestine and numerous terror attacks on the nation of Israel, many are trying to eliminate them from the face of the earth.
It would be wise for them to consider what Christianity is saying about Judaism. According to Jesus Christ there is a much better way. The Jews were the first “fundamentalists” and they were fanatical in their assertion that there is only one God and that sin can be dealt with by using a ritual centered on the Temple and animal sacrifices. Aside from that sin must be abhorred and this is done by following strict rules such as circumcision, strict dietary laws, hygiene and even rules on farming. All of these can be seen in the Book of Leviticus.
Jesus said that God is good and God is love. As a result he had devised a way for people not to go into all these complicated and messy process for the attainment of atonement. In other words there is no need to slave through the rituals and the fanaticism over the Temple and Jerusalem itself. God has made a sacrifice, the death of Jesus on the cross is the payment for all sins and all humanity needs to do is to believe that indeed God as made a way.
The concept of morality is still present and again there is some sort of brilliance in the way it was laid out by Jesus Christ when he said that the commandments – which is the Mosaic Law from Judaism – can be summed up into two major commands: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:37-40). The Prophet Mohammed if he is alive today will agree with Jesus, this is in accordance to what Muslim historians said surrounding the creation of Islam.
When Mohammed was about 40 years old he was seeking God and in one of his meditations, in 610 A.D. during the month of Ramadan he had an encounter with an angel named Gabriel the same angel that visited Abraham and the Mary the mother of Christ (Maqsood, 1995). In the very beginning he aligned himself with the Jews and the Christians.
Mohammed staggered home not sure of if what he has heard and experienced was from God. But his wife had a cousin named Waraqa ibn Nufal who just recently became a Christian and he produced a copy of the Gospels translated in Arabic and he assured Mohammed that he had a genuine encounter with God (Maqsood, 1995). This explains the similarity of the Q’uran and the Bible.
If not for radicalism and fundamentalism it is easier to bring together all the members of these three religions and consider the fact that they share so much common ground that there is no point for all the hate, war and explosions. Before the religious conflict spread throughout the world and zealots began killing in God’s name, the beginnings of these three religions can be considered as humble and without a trace of any desire to dominate the world.
Aside from looking at the religious doctrines from the Christian point of view another way to increase unity and respect among adherents is for the Jews to admit that in hundreds of years of the Jewish Diaspora when they were scattered all over the planet they were unable to perform what the Book of Leviticus asked them to perform.
After the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem they were unable to go there to celebrate their religious feasts and in spite of that they still came out strong as a people. Thus, they can live without a strict adherence to the rules and regulations of their religion. It is therefore possible for them to lower their guard a little bit and acknowledge that their God is also the God of all humanity.
Finally, the Muslims must not take pride in the fact that Mohammed was the last prophet. They must emphasize the fact that God has chosen Mohammed to reiterate what the prophets of the Bible had been saying all along. Pride is the main issue here. If the Jews, Christians, and Muslims will continue to thrive in their religious pride then they will become elitists when in fact there is nothing in their faith that says they are the only one. It is this level of open-mindedness that can save the world.
The shared heritage between these three religions is so obvious that one has to wonder why fanatics had succeeded in creating divisions and conflict among the believers. Instead of conflict there should be harmony because of the realization that indeed there is one source and one God. He is at the center of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
Conclusion
There is so much common ground between all three religions. Peace and unity can be achieved if one can see it from this perspective: Judaism was the trailblazer introducing important concepts such monotheism and the fallacy of worshipping idols and gods in mortal flesh, and then Jesus comes along to provide a better explanation of God’s love for the human race and then Mohammed came in hundreds of years later to remind the world of the good news that God is good and we must obey his commands because it is for our good. It can be argued that the contrasts in their sacred histories are overrated and it is the work of fanatics who obviously does not know the heart of their message which is love and not war.
References
Aldridge, A. (2007). Religion in the Contemporary World: A Sociological Introduction. MA: Polity Press.
Everyone has a worldview, whether it is realized or not, and it is the way someone perceives the world around him or her. A person’s perspective determines the ultimate beliefs about his or her own existence. Although many viewpoints may seem opposite and contradicting, having respect and understanding of other worldviews is essential in the nursing profession. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast Christian Theism (CT), with the Eastern Pantheistic (EP) worldview, by overviewing the foundational aspects that each stance addresses and analyzing the similarities and differences of the two religions.
Christian Theism
One of the most followed world religions is Christianity in its many forms. While CT is varied, all denominations agree on the fact of God’s existence, characterizing him as an “omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent” being (Anderson, Clark, & Naugle, 2017, p. 23). Believers view the world as God’s work, with heaven and hell existing beyond the cosmos as an afterlife and an external reality. This and any knowledge is a matter of faith and belief, which God places within those who adhere to his teachings, characterized by the Bible and Scripture (Sire, 2015). Therefore, humanity’s most significant problem is deviating from God in favor of other, potentially hedonistic worldviews, which is a problem that appropriate religious education can resolve (Samples, 2017). Thus, it is essential to recognize the word of God as deciding what is true and false and creating the prerequisites for the development of certain events within the CT worldview.
My belief regarding my origins is rooted in being created by God’s will, similar to every other believer. As such, my identity is the result of both a profound belief in Christianity’s assertions and the knowledge of its truth, which decides my worldview directly. I exist in this world currently, and I will proceed into the afterlife upon death. A CT worldview supports the notion that my morals stem from God and, thus, I should live a life that does not infringe on others, focusing instead on being a virtuous person and believer (Samples, 2017). Furthermore, I place value in leading a principled life, recognizing the importance of the physical body in the act of trans physical glorification, wherein I will survive my body’s death and reunite with it after redemption (Anderson et al., 2017). This future means that the meaning of humanity is in upholding a life that is both spiritual and rewarding.
Eastern Pantheism: Contrasting Beliefs
While not drastically differing, EP has a worldview that ascribes value to other things and promotes a different view of creation. In Buddhism and Hinduism, the higher power is “indistinguishable from the natural world” (Lataster, 2015, p. 68). The current world is part of a cycle of deterioration, death, and resurrection, wherein the afterlife is a return to the state of living, with no objective external reality, which contrasts Christianity’s notion of heaven (Lataster & Bilimoria, 2018). Differing from CT’s all-permeating belief system, studying the world, rather than relying on gods’ teachings, grants knowledge (Lataster, 2015). Thus, the most significant problem of humanity is suffering, which can be resolved by following lessons that help detach from the world and reach a freeing degree of spiritual and physical wealth (Anderson et al., 2017). The movement of history is therefore rooted in creating circumstances that may free those, who adhere to an EP worldview.
Individuals who adhere to such a worldview differ from Christians, as they feel that a higher being did not create them in his image but instead allowed humanity to devolve from itself. Thus, their identity relies on being part of that, which is sacred, as “the world either is or is a part of the deity” (Lataster & Bilimoria, 2018, p. 49). People with an EP worldview exist in this world’s location and will continue to be rooted in it permanently. Furthermore, while Christians speak of heaven and hell, EP teaches of a cycle of rebirth, where the soul reforms and once again aspires to perfection, which is its destiny. Therefore, life should focus on morals that elevate a person spiritually above others, and great worth is ascribed to achieving a balance between people and the world around them, as both are intrinsically linked.
Conclusion
The differences between the two worldviews prevail over their similarities, as they maintain different stances on humankind’s creation, their goals, and the existence of God. Furthermore, suffering, which is central to CT’s atonement for original sin, should be avoided and even overcome in EP to achieve enlightenment. Therefore, while it may be argued that both EP and CT put value in following specific religious teachings, their methods of acquiring salvation vary drastically, respectively relying on true faith and scientific exploration.
References
Anderson, T. J., Clark, W. M., & Naugle, D. K. (2017). An introduction to a Christian worldview: Pursuing God’s perspective in a pluralistic world. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
The war between Christians and Muslims was then focused on the holy land, which included Jerusalem and the Middle East. Initially, these lands were controlled by the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope. However, Islam began to spread to other parts of the world, including Europe. In its earliest days, the Islamic faith spread quickly because of its peaceful nature, as not warriors but “the preacher and the trader… carried their faith into every quarter of the globe”.1 Aziz stresses that the methods of preaching mentioned in Quran are peaceful, since it is stated that “obey God and obey the Messenger; but if you turn away, the duty of Our Messenger is only to deliver the message clearly”.2
As Fantus observes, Muslims did not try to kill or harm people of other religion until Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah took power and not only killed Christians but also burnt down churches.3 Walker notes that during his reign (996-1021), this ruler introduced new and often conflicting policies, and had inconsistent attitudes towards other religions, such as Christianity and Judaism.4 Some researchers suggest that the reasons behind Al-Hakim’s cruelty was his desire to bring order to his kingdom and ensure righteous way of life of his people.5 Ferguson and Binks claim that the adoption of the “convert or die” philosophy is not confined to religious beliefs, but is a product of people’s personal traits, experiences, as well as their community.6 The adoption of this approach or radicalization based on religious motifs is based on micro-, meso- and macro-level factors.
At this point, Rome and Pope Urban II felt the need to protect Christendom and sought the help of their faithful in declaring war on Muslims. This essay looks into the purpose of the crusades from a Christian viewpoint, including their aftermath and relevance for the Medieval society. The discussions presented in the essay demonstrate the fact that faithful Christians believed that their spiritual wellbeing was negatively affected and corrupted by the growth of Islam. Thus, they had to do everything they could to stop the growth of this competing religion.
Early Doctrinal Developments in the Ancient Church
Before the crusades, there were significant early doctrinal developments in the ancient church. Arguably, it is these developments that eventually led to the First Crusade, which will enhance understanding of the purpose and intent of the crusades. Fantus notes that leaders in the Christian church, especially the Roman Catholic Church through Pope Urban II believed that their faith was in danger due to encroachment from Islam and other religions between the eleventh and the eighteenth centuries.7 Not only was the church fighting for its rights based on the conversion of people into Islam, but it was also trying to remain relevant among communities.
For instance, the radical conversion under the rule of Al-Hakim was regarded as inappropriate since Christians had to convert to Muslims, flee, or be killed.8 People who lived in Egypt in the tenth and eleventh centuries practices different religions, including Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. Although these three religions had not witness considerable oppression previously, Al-Hakim started attacking non-Muslim Egyptians forcing them to conversion.9 Marco Nievergelt argues that between 7 AD and 70 AD, the church lost several members due to a sought of liberation.10 This, coupled with the fact that some members were subscribing to a new faith, made it prudent for the church to initiate self-preservation techniques.11
The growth of Islam brought in two main factors that enhanced the need and desire for the crusades. The first, as Rodney Stark mentions was both a political and social factor. Since 7 AD when Islam was conceived, the religious leaders who subscribed to this faith sought not only to expand their population but also to acquire land.12. Stark notes that Muslims had acquired territories in the Middle East and in North Africa before 70 AD.13 However, they began gaining interest in the gaining interest in areas of the Eastern Roman Empire. Thus, many of the believers in the region were Christians.
During Pope Urban II’s speech on the need for the crusades, he argued that one of the purposes or intents of the activities was to free Christians in the Eastern part of the empire from the suffering they were enduring because of the invasion of Muslims. The Pope was concerned that even though majority of the Christians had not converted to Islam, they would be spiritually affected by the Muslims.14 This influence was mainly associated with Christians’ becoming less focused on their worship and their giving to god and to the Church. Urban II believed that the potential impact of the growing role of Islam was considerable because people could start comparing practices and beliefs or accept the fact that other religions could exist. Such bold ideas could lead to a substantial decrease in the size of Christian congregation.
There were also some political issues that led to the crusades. Going back to the Pope’s argument that Islam would corrupt Christians spiritually, many of the people who supported the crusades did so due to fear of being punished by God. In his speech, Urban II refers to the possible divine punishment of those who disobey God’s laws and let Muslims commit their crimes against Christ:
For if through your carelessness or negligence a wolf carries away one of your sheep, you will surely lose the reward laid up for you with God. And after you have been bitterly scourged with remorse for your faults, you will be fiercely overwhelmed in hell, the abode of death.15
In a way, the Pope draw a parallel between those who commit crimes by practicing another religion and those who do nothing to fight this kind of wrong. Clearly, such speeches made people fearful of possible punishment in their afterlife and considered joining the troops that went to fight against infidels. Clearly, economic gains were another reason for following the call of duty and attacking Muslims.
Political goodwill enhanced this fear as politicians did not put in place any measures to curb the growth of Islam in the traditional Christian territories. Fantus explains that religious leaders had more political power than politicians in the early developments of the ancient church.16 This premise can be used to explain why the crusades were initially not influenced by political leaders but rather religious ones. Islamic factions also had internal political squabbles and this affected their ability to invade other regions. For example, Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah was known to kill Christians and torch down churches in regions he controlled, such as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. However, other Muslim leaders did not torture Christians and even allowed them to practice their religion with minimal interruption.
Such differences in ideologies in the leaders of Islam led to the loss of Jerusalem as a Muslim state in 969 AD.17 One of the reasons for internal opposition among Muslims was religion-based because Shia and Sunni Muslims had certain differences in their core beliefs. Some Shia leaders, including, Al-Hakim, cold not address Sunni Muslims even for the sake of defending Jerusalem. The representatives of these two Camps saw each other as heretics who were not much different from such infidels as Christians or Jews. Christians tried to rebel, but their efforts were not successful until the first crusades when massive military groups were sent to Jerusalem. The Pope then urged Christians to participate in the crusade after the break of Jerusalem from Islamic rule and the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.18
The Church also debated the role of warfare in Christianity, particularly because many Christian doctrines preached peace and not war. Additionally, one of the commandments urged people not to kill, as it is a sin. To change the mindset of people, the clergy argued that the crusades were acceptable because individuals would be fighting for their God.19 One of the ideologists of the “just war” was Augustine who identified the term and explained the reasons behind the necessity (as compared to the possibility) of crusades and killing people for the sake of certain religious beliefs. Augustine found it acceptable and even critical to state just wars or “avenge injuries, if some nation or state against whom one is waging war has neglected to punish a wrong committed by its citizens, or to return something that was wrongfully taken”.20 Augustine’s doctrine implied that justice could be achieve if all the wrongdoing was punished accordingly. In simple terms, such sins as murder and robbery were justified by the need to help God restore justice and maintain the order in the world.
After several deliberations, it was agreed that the Truce of God be observed and no warfare would take place on Sundays and other identified holy days.21 This measure was established first in 1027 during the Synod of Elne where any violence was suspended until the end of festivals. Later, similar steps were undertaken by the church, and sometimes meetings involved secular leaders. For example, the emperor Henry IV was present at the synod that took place in Mainz in 1082. The church had to involve the political lords and the knights who had also been fighting over land and resources in order to properly organize and manage the war.
Therefore, the third purpose of the crusades was penitential warfare, which also sought to bring together the knights, the political lords and the church. Penitential warfare became an important element in the opposition between the West (Christians) and the East (Muslims) during the middle Ages. Penitential warfare could be referred to as any activity associated with the participation in a crusade or a just war. Knights, political lords, and the church all pursued their own interests that were related to economic gains. Some invested money to support the troops, while some provided their men and armament, and went to the distant land to fight for Christ. Although the three groups were talking about penance, they concentrated on potential gains, such as property of the Muslims (or other people) who lived in Jerusalem or other places controlled by Muslims.
Fantus argues that the rallying call of the crusades after Pope Urban II’s speech was “God wills it” to show the spiritual obligation the crusades had on Christians.22 At that time, they truly believed that their spiritual wellness was being corrupted by Muslims and God had willed it that they declare war against all Muslims. The growth of Islam also affected Christians spiritually as they believed that it was their duty to stop any “evil” from spreading. This pushed the agenda and the passion for the Christian faithful to support the crusades.
Warfare and Reasons Behind Crusades
The first crusade occurred between in 1096, and it was led by four army commanders in an attempt to save Christians who were being tortured in Byzantium.23 This first crusade recorded various social and economic impacts. First, socially, it allowed different groups of Christians who believed that it was their duty to kill Muslims or face eternal damnation to join in the war. Fantus explains that several separate groups were formed by different pastors and churches with the most common being led by a preacher referred to as Peter the Hermit.24 These groups could not be easily controlled and they ended up massacring women and children in Islamic villages and Jewish communities.
The economy of these regions was negatively affected due to the warfare. Towns and cities were often devastated due to destruction and the lack of resources. Destroyed communities were abandoned, people did not work in the fields as they had nothing to sow and traders had nothing to trade.25 Moreover, diseases also resulted in additional economic burden. Also, the Roman Catholic Church, the knights and the political lords contributed large investments in sustaining the war and this affected the general economy. The majority of European countries that took part in crusades had to face certain economic challenges as they invested heavily in warfare, but economic gains were insignificant or even non-existent.26 The armies needed food, weapons, and other resources that were extracted from their communities. Moreover, many young men went to fight in the Middle East instead of working in fields and producing goods. Nevertheless, some countries had considerable gains, such as Italy, that was trading with both Muslims and Christians.
The issue of the Christian’s concern on how their faith was spiritually affected by the growth of Islam was also clearly demonstrated during the first crusade. Gerard Delanty explains that Tancred, who was the nephew of one of the four appointed commanders leading the war, had proclaimed that women and children would not be harmed during the war.27 This proclamation was crucial for those who did not fully accept the idea of the “just war” as they knew that innocent people would not be harmed. The commander made the promise that was consistent with the doctrine of Augustine that people doing wrongs should be punished, so Christians were more willing to take part in crusades. Additionally, through other political agreements, villages and towns were not to be destroyed as this would, as mentioned, negatively affect the economy of the area.
The second most significant crusade was the third crusade which occurred between 1189 and 1192. This was an important crusade as the city of Jerusalem had been recaptured by Muslims and Christians were killed in similar manner as Muslims were during the first crusade.28 The third crusade acted as a reaction to the fall of Jerusalem and was called for by Pope Gregory VIII. The whole of Europe supported this crusade: the Pope asked for help from King Philip II of France, King Frederick Barbarossa of Germany, and King Richard I of England, all of whom accepted the call and pledged both armies and finances to support the third crusade. The fact that Jerusalem had fallen due to internal wrangles between Christians also motivated the crusaders to work effectively together as they blamed themselves for the city’s loss. Unlike the previous two crusades, the political wing was heavily involved in the third crusade and political alliances were established. The leaders would often travel to the different cities to encourage the crusaders as they checked on the progress of the war.
The involvement of the political elites opened the door for other lords to join the fight in the best way they could. By the time the eighth was being conducted in 1270, it was mainly run by the political elite. Delanty explains that King Louis IX of France began the eighth crusade with the help of Prince Edward of England.29 Whereas the last crusades were mainly driven by the political elite, the Church still had an important role to play in ensuring that the crusaders were motivated to end the war. Delanty explains that because the crusades began as a religious fight, there was no way of changing it into a political one despite the fact that it was being led by politicians.30
Additionally, the crusaders believed that God anointed their political rulers. Therefore, their involvement in the crusades was a welcomed idea as it also meant that God, by extension, approved of the crusaders’ actions against Muslims. Nievergelt argues that the united Christian front and the failing Muslim front ensured that the battle for the Holy Land was won by Christians.31 Muslims were fighting amongst themselves (Shia and Sunni factions) and this greatly affected their ability to continue with the war. Additionally, lack of resources led to the fall of many of the Islamic states that had already been established. Many factors led to the decay of communities and even states, including environmental issues (such as drought) and political. Wars led to the decrease in population so fewer laborers were available and could produce goods. Trade was also declining due to wars as merchants were afraid of being robbed or killed and they looked for new routes. Therefore, many Muslims lost their lives, including those that were not directly involved in the wars.
Stagnation in the Middle Ages
There are several things that came about during the later years of stagnation in the Middle Ages. These include the fact that more political allies were involved in the cause. It is important to note that after the eighth crusade, there were a lot of activities that happened in the holy land that have been referred to as the “stagnation years.”32 One main activity during the stagnation years was the rebuilding of the Holy Land. Montgomery notes that the Holy Land had been negatively affected by the war with both infrastructure and human life lost.33 The efforts to restore the Holy Land fell mainly on the political elite, although the church declared that it equally invested.34 Although the Church provided some resources, but they still originated from the elites’ donations, so, in a sense, secular groups bore the heaviest economic burden where rebuilding the Holy Land.
Interestingly, a few Muslims remained in some of the areas due to treaties and truces that had been discussed. One of such agreements was the treaty of 1272 that implied a 10-year truce between crusaders and Egypt. According to this truce all religious groups could live in Jerusalem, but certain restrictions regarding fortification and armament were introduced.35 However, Jerusalem, which was important for both Christians and Jews was, remained an area of contention. Whereas Christians and Jews had been fighting over this area long before the wars, the situation that had been advanced by the crusades led to the long Palestinian-Israel war that continues to this day. The history of the area made the two groups hostile to each other as too many people were killed and tortured during the crusade on both sides.
Equally important to point out is that the stagnation years encouraged the break between religion and political leadership. This argument is based on the fact that many kings, albeit still being tied to the Church, looked for other alliances and ways of achieving their goals without involving the Church. One of the reasons for this was the fact that the last crusades were highly political, especially the last two crusades, where kings supplied most of the forces and finances to regain control of the Holy Land.
Notably, the conquests to take back and protect the Holy Land ensured that crusaders had lands they could conquer and explore. Fantus explains that the idea that crusaders would get as much land as they wanted after the conquest was used to motivate them even further.36 This premise ties closely with the legal issues that faithful in England had been fighting. Fantus explains that the English law allowed only firstborn sons to inherit their father’s lands.37 The younger sons were motivated to participate in crusades to earn some money to start a prosperous life when they are back home.
Also, during the stagnation years, a new regime referred to as the Mamluks was formed.38 The group was mainly made up of former slaves of the Muslim empires that had been destroyed by the crusaders. Indeed, it is arguable that the group sought freedom from both their masters and the new Christian faithfuls that had taken charge of their villages and homes. A majority of the crusaders, at first, did not see these slaves as a threat despite the fact that they practiced Islam. Indeed, several were killed during the war but those that remained were largely ignored. After the formation of the group and their activities in Palestine that halted the crusaders’ ability to invade the country, they were attacked and stopped in the ninth crusade. It is important to note that there are critics who do not consider the attack on the Mamluks as a crusade. This is because it was smaller in size and less significant in the history of Christianity.
Aftermath of the Crusades
There were several implications of the crusades in the years that followed. This section analyzes the political, social and theological implications of the crusades.
Political Implications
One of the biggest political implications of the crusades was that they enhanced the power of the political leaders and significantly lowered that of the Roman Catholic Church. Whereas it is true that the crusades began as a purely religious venture, other factors that contributed to the later crusades moved the agenda from a religious one to a political one. Stark explains that the first crusade sought to help Christians who were being tortured in Islamic states, bring together Christian factions that were fighting each other, and free Jerusalem from Islamic rule.39 However, by the fifth crusade, it was evident that the war could also help countries trade more effectively by opening up new routes of trade especially to the Middle East and Africa. This made the crusades a significant political tool for many of the kings who were involved.
Additionally, Stark explains that since a significant percentage of the finances that were used during the crusades were collected from kingdoms, and kings had to raise taxes of the noble families in order to allow the crusades to continue.40 This power also ensured that nobles who refused to pay their taxes were branded traitors of the Church. It is arguable that there are some leaders who took advantage of the situation to extend their reach, especially in Rome. Their power over the crusades also made them more powerful in Rome as the Church needed their resources and their support to motivate the crusaders. It is arguable that this power continued to grow as the crusades continued.
Social Implications
One of the most significant social impacts of the crusades was the large population movement from England to other parts of the world. Many young men joined the crusades to conquering new lands and settle there. Scaruffi notes that it is not only the young poor families that sought to make their lives better.41 The fact that the kings had become more powerful than ever due to their control of the crusades also encouraged some nobles to relocate to other areas that had been conquered. Scaruffi explains that due to the increased taxation by many of the Christian kings, a good number of nobles were forced to sell off their property or be jailed due to failure to pay taxes.42 Also, failure to pay taxes meant that they were religiously unfaithful. Joining the crusades, albeit not at the forefront, ensured that these nobles had a chance to relocate and gain new lands.
Falk goes further to explain that whereas no one had denied poor people the freedom to relocate before the war, the costly nature of the relocating made them stay and live in squalor.43 This changed during the crusades as they would be transported to the new lands without paying anything. Thus, the majority who joined the cause and survived the wars would choose to stay in East. This demonstrates that those joining the fight were motivated by a combination of both social and political issues, often much more than religious reasons.
Theological Implications
Indeed, the most significant debate regarding the crusades is whether or not they were part of a “holy war.” Delanty supports this premise arguing that both Muslims and Christians valued the Holy Land due to its tie to both religions44. Jerusalem was critical to Christians as it was the land where Jesus was crucified according to the Christian tradition. On the other hand, places such as current-day Mecca were important to Muslims as it held a significant role in the religion.45 Therefore, the war was not simply for purposes of stopping the recruitment of members of both religions but also a preservation of the two faiths. Significantly, the initial rallying call for Christians was “God wills it” to prove that the war had been ordained by God.
The crusades were a holy war as they purposed to save tortured both Christians and Muslims. Additionally, Christian churches were burnt down by Muslims who had invaded their territories. From the beginning, the war was clearly defined as a religious one. This changed only in the last crusades, as explained above. The same can be said for Muslims who were looking to also protect the Holy Land through their own customs. To them, the land had been invaded by heathens, and they wanted to do anything to secure it and guide the people back to Allah. Kaplan introduces the controversial debate of who was more hostile between the Christians and the Muslims during the war.46 Indeed, Kaplan points out that even though Muslims did torture Christians in some areas, a majority of them did not force either Jews or Christians to convert. This was unlike the Christians who killed every Muslim they met without even the chance to convert.
Relevance of the Crusades
There are two main factors when talking about the relevance of the crusades. The first is that the “winners” of the war were seen as a superior religion compared to the rest. Kaplan explains that Jerusalem was in the middle of the war due to its significance to three religions – Christianity, Jewism and Islam.47 For Christians, Jesus was crucified and resurrected in Jerusalem. On the other hand, for Jews, it was where the original temple of God was built by King Solomon while for Muslims, it was where Muhammed ascended to heaven.48 The fact that Christians won and ended the war automatically gave them an upper hand in terms of faith. It is arguable that this is one of the reasons why a large percentage of the world’s population is Christian compared to the other religions.
From a religious standpoint, it is also arguable that the war was relevant to determine the status of the different religions in terms of the strength of their gods. This comes from the fact that all the religions involved in the war believed that the God they worshiped had ordained their actions. For Christians, this was Jehovah while for Muslims it was Allah.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the crusades formed a crucial part of the history of Christians, Muslims and even Europe as a political block. There are three main purposes of the crusades as stipulated by history. These three purposes were projected by Pope Urban II who championed for the start of the crusades. One of the reasons is the need to fight for Jerusalem. Both Muslims and Christians had deep attachments to Jerusalem as it was believed to have been the place where Muhammed ascended to heaven and where Jesus was crucified. The second purpose of the crusades was the freeing of Christian faithful in the East who were being tortured by Muslims. Thirdly, Pope Urban II argued that the crusades would bring harmony amongst some factions that were significant to the medieval church.
These reasons were based on the faith and beliefs of Christians. They agreed to the war rallying call “God wills it” to attract individuals to join the crusades. Additionally, kingdoms in Europe gave both financial and other human resources to support the church in order to stop Muslims from expanding to their lands. It is important to note that after the first few crusades, the activities became politically driven as opposed to the religious reasons at the beginning, asmore political leaders got involved in the war. One of the reasons for this is that the war created a viable opportunity for trade by opening up new trade routes especially to the Middle East. Indeed, debates on the topic can take either a political, social or combined or holy war approach. Regardless of the school of thought, it is evident that the crusades were a very significant part of the history of world religions.
Bibliography
Allen, Susan Jane. An Introduction to the Crusades. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2017.
Aziz, Zahid. Islam, Peace and Tolerance. Wembley: A.a.i.i.l. (u.k.), 2017.
Delanty, Gerard. Christianity in the Making of Europe. In: Formations of European Modernity. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019.
Falk, Avner. Franks and Saracens: Reality and Fantasy in the Crusades. London: Routledge, 2018.
Fantus, James Michael. “The Last Word: Why the Timing of the World’s Religious Writings Matters.” Open Journal of Philosophy, no. 9 (2019): 252-264.
Ferguson, Neil, and Eve Binks. “Understanding Radicalization and Engagement In Terrorism Through Religious Conversion Motifs”. Journal of Strategic Security 8, no. 1-2 (2015): 16-26.
Kaplan, Jeffrey. “Nothing Is True, Everything Is Permitted: Premodern Religious Terrorism.” Terrorism and Political Violence 31, no. 5 (2019): 1070-1095.
Montgomery Guyton, ed. “An Examination of Religious History: 33-1500 A.D.” 26th Annual NWFSBS Lectureship, Cantonment, FL, 2018.
Nievergelt, Marco. “The Sege of Melayne and the Siege of Jerusalem: National Identity, Beleaguered Christendom, and Holy War during the Great Papal Schism.” The Chaucer Review 49, no. 4 (2015): 402-426.
Pryor, H. John, ed. Logistics of Warfare in the Age of the Crusades. New York: Routledge, 2016.
Scaruffi, Piero. What the Muslims knew. PDF. Self-Published, 2018.
Stark, Rodney. “The Case for the Crusades.” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 20, no. 2, (2016): 9-28.
Syse, Henrik. “Augustine and Just War: Between Virtue and Duties,” in Ethics, Nationalism, and Just War: Medieval and Contemporary Perspectives, ed. Henrik Syse, Gregory M Reichberg (Washington: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012), 38.
Tyerman, Christopher. The Debate on the Crusades. London: Manchester University Press, 2015.
Walker, Paul E. “Al-Ḥākim And The Dhimmīs”. Medieval Encounters 21, no. 4-5 (2015): 345-363.
Michael James Fantus, “The Last Word: Why the Timing of the World’s Religious Writings Matters,” Open Journal of Philosophy, no. 9 (2019): 253.
Paul E. Walker, “Al-Ḥākim and the Dhimmīs,” Medieval Encounters 21, no. 4-5 (2015): 345.
Walker, “Al-Ḥākim and the Dhimmīs,” 350.
Neil Ferguson and Eve Binks, “Understanding Radicalization and Engagement in Terrorism Through Religious Conversion Motifs,” Journal of Strategic Security 8, no. 1-2 (2015): 18.
Fantus, “The Last Word”, 253.
Walker, “Al-Ḥākim and the Dhimmīs,” 345.
Ibid.
Marco Nievergelt, “The Sege of Melayne and the Siege of Jerusalem: National Identity, Beleaguered Christendom, and Holy War during the Great Papal Schism,” The Chaucer Review 49, no. 4 (2015): 402.
Guyton Montgomery, ed., “An Examination of Religious History: 33-1500 A.D,” (26th Annual NWFSBS Lectureship, Cantonment, FL, February 18-22, 2018), 21.
Rodney Stark, “The Case for the Crusades.” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 20, no. 2, (2016): 10.
Stark, “The Case for the Crusades,” 11.
Christopher Tyerman, The Debate on the Crusades (London: Manchester University Press, 2015), 17.
Fulcher of Chartres, “Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095,” Fordham University, Web.
Fantus, “The Last Word,” 253.
Tyerman, The Debate on the Crusades, 17.
Nievergelt, “The Sege of Melayne and the Siege of Jerusalem,” 403.
John H. Pryor, ed., Logistics of Warfare in the Age of the Crusades (New York: Routledge, 2016), 21.
Henrik Syse, “Augustine and Just War: Between Virtue and Duties,” in Ethics, Nationalism, and Just War: Medieval and Contemporary Perspectives, ed. Henrik Syse, Gregory M Reichberg (Washington: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012), 38.
Pryor, ed., Logistics of Warfare in the Age of the Crusades (New York: Routledge, 2016) 22.
Fantus, “The Last Word”, 254.
Nievergelt, “The Sege of Melayne and the Siege of Jerusalem,” 416.
Fantus, “The Last Word”, 253.
Susan Jane Allen, An Introduction to the Crusades, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2017), 14.
Ibid.
Gerard Delanty, Christianity in the Making of Europe. In: Formations of European Modernity, (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019), 12.
Nievergelt, “The Sege of Melayne and the Siege of Jerusalem,” 405.
Delanty, Christianity in the Making of Europe, 18.
Delanty, Christianity in the Making of Europe, 18.
Nievergelt, “The Sege of Melayne and the Siege of Jerusalem,” 425.
Montgomery, ed., “An Examination of Religious History,” 21.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Allen, An Introduction to the Crusades, 52.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Fantus, “The Last Word”, 254.
Stark, “The Case for the Crusades,” 18.
Stark, “The Case for the Crusades,” 22.
Piero Scaruffi, What the Muslims knew, (PDF. Self-Published, 2018), 9.
Scaruffi, What the Muslims knew, 10.
Falk, Franks and Saracens: Reality and Fantasy in the Crusades, 37.
Delanty, Christianity in the Making of Europe, 21.
Delanty, Christianity in the Making of Europe, 22.
Jeffrey Kaplan, “Nothing Is True, Everything Is Permitted: Premodern Religious Terrorism,” Terrorism and Political Violence 31, no. 5 (2019): 1070.
Kaplan, “Nothing Is True, Everything Is Permitted,” 1085.
Kaplan, “Nothing Is True, Everything Is Permitted,” 1086.
Christianity can be considered a continuation of Judaism because the foundational belief systems are the same. Both religions believe in the same God and follow essentially the same books of the Old Testament. Jesus and all his prophets considered themselves Jews and had been raised within the Jewish community. In addition to his lineage, there are a number of ways that Jesus is said to have fulfilled the Jewish prophecy for a Messiah who would lead his people to spiritual righteousness. Although he is the son of God, Jesus is said to have been descended from David, thus fulfilling part of the prophecy, through his mother. Many of the actions of his life are traced back to Old Testament prophecies such as in John 6: 4, 11-14 in which Jesus performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves on the eve of Passover. This miracle was foretold in 2 Kings 4: 43 and symbolizes his purpose for existing.
However, Christianity also represents a definitive break from Judaism in that its lessons are sometimes contradictory to established Jewish law. This began with a number of incidents in which Jesus had disagreements with the Jewish leaders. For example, in Matthew 21: 12-13, Jesus is said to have entered the temple and driven out all of the people there who were engaged in commerce of any kind. Although this was apparently considered appropriate use under the eyes of the Jewish leaders, Jesus is seen to enter and ‘purify’ the temple, again claiming it as a house of prayer and worship. This practice was perhaps not as bad as it might seem because these commercial stalls were established in order to provide believers with the essential materials they needed to make the required sacrifices or offerings as payment for their requests. Under Christianity, these sacrifices were no longer necessary because Jesus himself became the sacrifice for all. Through many of his teachings, Jesus is said to be correcting or contradicting the Old Testament and the degree to which others took his words literally or spiritually had a significant impact on how the religion based on Jesus’ teachings differed from the teachings of the Jewish leaders.
Even though all Christianity is based upon the same book, the faith has divided into a number of different denominations mostly because no one has ever fully agreed upon the interpretations of the text or the meanings of the miracles. This relates back to the earliest days of Christianity when the faith hadn’t yet fully separated from the Jewish faith. As is demonstrated in discussions about Christianity’s break from Judaism, the break wasn’t smooth, even, brought about at a specific single moment in time or as the result of a single event. As the church developed, there were a lot of factors that affected its direction. Each individual responsible for interpreting the messages of the Bible approached it from their own unique perspective. Jesus instructed largely in parables, which leaves a great deal of room for individual interpretation in the same way that short stories can be analyzed as having a number of different themes. In addition, the areas of the Bible concentrated on and the emphasis given to them can shift the understanding of the parishioners in hearing while the number of interpreters also increases the number of interpretations possible. The Bible became more widely available to a greater number of individuals as more people received an education, the Bible was translated into more common and contemporary languages and more Bibles were available because of the printing press. This only gave rise to more interpretations as corruption within the established churches was discovered and as worldly leaders and others bent religious doctrine to their own, usually secular, interests.