Christian Jihad: Two Former Muslims Look at the Crusades and Killing in the Name of Christ

I really enjoyed the work although I did disagree with some of the propositions. I thought the authors did a very good job of making their point that Christianity has much forgiveness to seek. I think as far as that goes, tis true. But, I think many of the assertions are a bit of a stretch, for example the assertion that Pope Urban's call was a call for unprovoked aggression. Even the quotes the authors' use indicates that the Pope was trying to take the Holy Land BACK. Also, while I think the argument can be made that there were definite political advantages in Europe that The Crusades provided. However, I think it is a far harder argument to make that The Crusades were launched solely or even primarily for domestic political reasons. I think the authors fall a little short in both cases. Also, I think the author's condemnation of Richard the Lion hearted is weak. While there is reason for modern Christiandom to not be proud of his treatment of the conquered, it must also be dealt within the time and the culture. According to the authors'; own account RTLH accepted the surrender of the city based upon conditions that the inhabitants knew they could not fulfill. RTLH by the standards of the day, merely lived up to his promise. From his point of view it may very well be that even though the locals dealt with him dishonestly and still kept the true Cross of Christ hidden he, in his generosity did not harm the women and children. In our time by our standards that would be absurd but in the day killing the men of a town or village that did not meet your demands is not all that uncommon. Even with the faults that this work has it is an excellent read. I think for the most part the authors' try and succeed in showing the warts of Chistiandom in a respectful manner. The work has the feel of being an internal and kind criticism. Which comes as no surprise since that was the expressed intent of the authors.

Another unveiling of the brutal savagery called Islam. Since its inception Islam has used the most vicious and insideous tactics in its goal of subjecting the non-muslim world to its yoke. The word Islam means submission , but that is another way of saying slavery. Mohamed considered himself the slave of Allah and he himself owned and traded slaves and he wanted the whole world to be enslaved to his ideology. This well written book is highly recommended for any one who wants to debunk the historical myths propagated by Islamic apologists.

After reading all of the muslims VERY NEGATIVE anti-Christian and anti-Republican, anti-Conservative, rantings and criticisms about this book, I figured I HAVE TO LOVE IT!!!! Man, this is the best money I've spent on a book in a long time!!! It really opens the door of reality really wide...and no wonder Jane Fonda and Barbara Striesland, Allan Combs, Alan Alda, Phil Donahue, Hilary Clinton and all of the other Ultra Left LIBERALS hate it....It contains some LOGIC in it!!! I guess I'll just keep buying these books the liberals and muslims hate so much so I can really get at the TRUTH....NOTHING LIBERALS HATE MORE THAN THE TRUTH!!!!

Yes, people who don't want to hear the other side of the coin, from radical Islamicists to people pretending they know so much about the Crusades, but really don't, will not like this book. But I found it an intelligently written book that covers how the Crusades are looked at by former Muslims. If you want a fair & good treatment of the subject, this is the book for you. If you want to hear how all Christians are guilty for the Crusades and should grovel in shame, skip it. It truly is an interesting book, thus the reviews that hate it so much. Sometimes, the truth hurts. Caner does a very good job. Well written, factual & a good read.

What a rich, intelligent, and inspiring book this is! Only a former Muslim converted to Christ could teach with such wisdom and compassion. The author is a sensitive soul who writes with conviction and strength.