Use of “crusaders” is based a particular view of history anyway, not a particular view of the Bible or of the Christian faith or of Islam. Even most of the strongly pro-Christian historians of that period I’ve read grant that lots of things went on during the crusades that weren’t right. It’s a good move.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Having spent 17 days in Israel, I witnessed first-hand how much our Israeli tour guides loathed the Crusaders. They took tourist groups like mine to several historical Crusader sites, but they made no secret of their contempt for the Crusaders. Worse yet, they equated “Crusader” with “Christian” even today.
I see that two Roman Catholic Schools are (Belmont and Holy Cross) are keeping it. It’s their history anyway. With the demise of “Fighting Lutherans” is “Fighting Baptists” up for consideration?
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
Use of “crusaders” is based a particular view of history anyway, not a particular view of the Bible or of the Christian faith or of Islam. Even most of the strongly pro-Christian historians of that period I’ve read grant that lots of things went on during the crusades that weren’t right. It’s a good move.
It is not just history, but also current events. Many jihadists are called crusaders. Rebels are called crusaders. Given the current climate of the world, I can see, from a global perspective, how this can be viewed negatively.
I like the suggestion of the Maranatha Cupcakes - good idea, at least for their football team. :-)!
Man, that’s harsh. As a former Crusader offensive lineman, it pains me to admit that their recent football record might suggest that nickname. I am trying to do my part, though. I just started preseason training for the 2014 Alumni Game, my one-game season. I am partial to the MBU Leviathans or the Behemoths. Of course, the women’s teams would be called the Lady Behemoths…not so flattering.
“Wake Forest Demon Deacons: Before 1923, Wake Forest was known as the Fighting Baptists. That changed after a victory over Duke in 1923, when a newspaper reporter coined the term “Demon Deacons” to refer to Wake Forest’s devilish play and fighting spirit.”
Enjoying the laughs from this thread. The pics of Billy Sunday are a hoot! Especially next to “The Reformers”. Were theatrics kind of his shtick? or was he serious with those moves..? Perhaps a bit of both :)
Save in defense of one’s person and of the innocent. They most definitely should not use it to promote or defend the faith. Anabaptists even held that it should not be used to promote or defend the state, and I have not been able to find evidence in the Bible where they are wrong (though I should point out that I approach the scriptures from an NCT view, not CT or dispensationalism). So even though in more recent times, “crusade” has other meanings (i.e. evangelistic revivals) I have no problem with a Christian school that wishes not to have a moniker that associates it with militarism, especially of the sort of the Crusades. While the Muslims most definitely posed a real threat to Europe (indeed and very nearly conquered it) and the military actions of Charles Martel, El Cid and others to defeat and drive back that threat was certainly legitimate (Anabaptist objections notwithstanding), for the most part the Crusades were simply papists and Muslims contending over their own vain superstitions concerning Jerusalem and Israel. Why any Protestant evangelical or fundamentalist would want to associate themselves with that sort of anti-Christian nonsense by taking up its name is beyond my ability to comprehend. My chief regret is that the urgent need to distance themselves from the papal superstition that the name represents was not the stated reason for dropping it.
Discussion
NewNot a grad, but
I’m ambivalent. It certainly could be seen as noble and chivalrous. In the article, the Muslims are no their side. Should I worry about that?
NewIf fails to communicate or communicates negatively ...
If fails to communicate or communicates negatively, best to change. (See “fundamentalism” (2))
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement
NewHistory
Use of “crusaders” is based a particular view of history anyway, not a particular view of the Bible or of the Christian faith or of Islam. Even most of the strongly pro-Christian historians of that period I’ve read grant that lots of things went on during the crusades that weren’t right. It’s a good move.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
NewI prefer mascot names that convey the future prospects of a team
I prefer mascot names that convey the future prospects of a team
Like “Cupcakes”
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement
New"Crusaders" is a stumbling block to more than Muslims...
Having spent 17 days in Israel, I witnessed first-hand how much our Israeli tour guides loathed the Crusaders. They took tourist groups like mine to several historical Crusader sites, but they made no secret of their contempt for the Crusaders. Worse yet, they equated “Crusader” with “Christian” even today.
NewThe Roman Catholics Can Have It
I see that two Roman Catholic Schools are (Belmont and Holy Cross) are keeping it. It’s their history anyway. With the demise of “Fighting Lutherans” is “Fighting Baptists” up for consideration?
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
NewAaron Blumer wrote:
It is not just history, but also current events. Many jihadists are called crusaders. Rebels are called crusaders. Given the current climate of the world, I can see, from a global perspective, how this can be viewed negatively.
NewGood Move!
Not that it really matters to me, but I think this is a good move.
I like the suggestion of the Maranatha Cupcakes - good idea, at least for their football team. :-)!
Newis "Fighting Baptists" up for
No one wants to be redundant do they?
NewThe "Sunday's"
The “Sunday’s” … with assorted images
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement
NewOr ... "The Reformers"
From The Reformation Wall
Their motto could be: “Post tenebras lux” / a hopeful thought if this ever happens.
Playing basketball or volleyball in garb this long could be a recipe for disaster!
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement
Newouch!
I am partial to the MBU Leviathans or the Behemoths. Of course, the women’s teams would be called the Lady Behemoths…not so flattering.
NewMaranatha Demon Deacons
Saw this on Yahoo Sports:
“Wake Forest Demon Deacons: Before 1923, Wake Forest was known as the Fighting Baptists. That changed after a victory over Duke in 1923, when a newspaper reporter coined the term “Demon Deacons” to refer to Wake Forest’s devilish play and fighting spirit.”
NewToo funny..
Enjoying the laughs from this thread. The pics of Billy Sunday are a hoot! Especially next to “The Reformers”. Were theatrics kind of his shtick? or was he serious with those moves..? Perhaps a bit of both :)
NewAdversus Augustine, Christians Should Not Use The Sword
Save in defense of one’s person and of the innocent. They most definitely should not use it to promote or defend the faith. Anabaptists even held that it should not be used to promote or defend the state, and I have not been able to find evidence in the Bible where they are wrong (though I should point out that I approach the scriptures from an NCT view, not CT or dispensationalism). So even though in more recent times, “crusade” has other meanings (i.e. evangelistic revivals) I have no problem with a Christian school that wishes not to have a moniker that associates it with militarism, especially of the sort of the Crusades. While the Muslims most definitely posed a real threat to Europe (indeed and very nearly conquered it) and the military actions of Charles Martel, El Cid and others to defeat and drive back that threat was certainly legitimate (Anabaptist objections notwithstanding), for the most part the Crusades were simply papists and Muslims contending over their own vain superstitions concerning Jerusalem and Israel. Why any Protestant evangelical or fundamentalist would want to associate themselves with that sort of anti-Christian nonsense by taking up its name is beyond my ability to comprehend. My chief regret is that the urgent need to distance themselves from the papal superstition that the name represents was not the stated reason for dropping it.
Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura http://healtheland.wordpress.com