Have Christians ever seeked to conquer the World for Christianity ?

[tradeunionsupporter]

The reason I want to know is because the Neocon Right Wingers always tell me that the Islamists desire to conquer the World for Islam but don't all Religions do this ? Why just pick on Islam ? When Christians started the Crusades in the name of Christianity to conquer Palestine. I think Islamist Terrorism is caused by U.S. Foreign Policy rather then their desire for Empire Christians have had Christian Empires.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

[Smyg]

Have Christians ever seeked to conquer the World for Christianity ?

All the time. How do you think they've motivated colonialisation, imperialism, etc.? Naturally, this is a misuse of the religion for profit (compare the Swedish king who "crusaded" in Finland and converted the already converted).

[RGacky3]

see History from about the 3rd/4th century AD up until the early 1900s. So I'd say so.

[Aloysius]

They still do. There are a shit-ton of missionaries traveling the world, converting when and where they can. It seems they'd rather interfere and convert everything than do something that benefits everyone.

[Potato]

All the time. How do you think they've motivated colonialisation, imperialism, etc.? Naturally, this is a misuse of the religion for profit (compare the Swedish king who "crusaded" in Finland and converted the already converted).

Finland was mainly pagan before Swedish conquest and mainly pagan for a good while after the Swedish conquest so they were hardly "already converted". But yeah, I don't think it would've mattered even if they were, the point was to get Finland before Novgorod could.

[RGacky3]

They still do. There are a shit-ton of missionaries traveling the world, converting when and where they can. It seems they'd rather interfere and convert everything than do something that benefits everyone.


I would'nt say that, priests and missionaries were some of the driving forces in Latin American revolutions against imperialism and capitalism, and they are some of the biggest supporters in African autonomy movements and building up communities.

The Zapatistas, I would dare say, would have never succeded had it not been for the priests that supported them, the same goes for the movements in central America, Argentina, the anti-dictatorship activists in chile and so on.

There is a difference between that and say people that hold food charities and only let people that attend the church benefit, or assholes like Pat Robertson.

[tradeunionsupporter]

Christians from Europe the British Empire the Dutch and the Spanish from Spain and other European Nations did conquer in the name of Christianity Religion and Racism right ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christendom

[CommunityBeliever]

Have Christians ever seeked to conquer the World for Christianity ?

Yeah. That summaries modern human history.

[Smyg]

Finland was mainly pagan before Swedish conquest and mainly pagan for a good while after the Swedish conquest so they were hardly "already converted".

Wrong, according to my education at least. Erik "the Saint" forcibly christened people who had already converted, just to rack up heaven points. Not that there weren't pagans, there just happened to be Christians as well.

[Elysian]

Christian missionaries cannot be compared to imperialists, for the latter are only concerned with the accumulation of capital. The former are good people, convinced that their mission is to serve and save the poor and those in spiritual darkness.

[Azraella]

but don't all Religions do this ?

The idea of a one true religion is a recent concept in human history. Before then religion was a ethnic thing part of a culture's worldview. The religions of the Middle East based around a jealous sky god had a very different worldview compared to indigenous religions. For example the Persian and Egyptian pantheons were nominally allied when the Persians conquered the Egyptians. The Aesir and Vanir were part of the same worldview of the northern Europeans though depending on the source they are considered different pantheons(though the modern reconstruction of the religion worships both). The Greek pantheon was connected to the Roman pantheon and was often very inclusive of other pantheons(especially the Egyptian). In fact, paying respect to another culture's gods was a pretty normative thing. (Note: I am not incredibly familiar with Native American paganism)

[Potato]

Wrong, according to my education at least. Erik "the Saint" forcibly christened people who had already converted, just to rack up heaven points. Not that there weren't pagans, there just happened to be Christians as well.

I got to admit my knowledge on this is based pretty much only on high school history but we were mostly told that Christianity was actually pretty much exercised by the elite and the merchants (because being Christian helped with trade when pretty much everyone in the Baltic Sea area had converted already)while the vast majority of peasants remained both Pagan and unwilling to accept the Swedish control.

Though yeah high school history is high school history, if somebody actually knows about this, it's appreciated

[hatzel]

I don't think it would've mattered even if they were, the point was to get Finland before Novgorod could.


Wrong, according to my education at least. Erik "the Saint" forcibly christened people who had already converted, just to rack up heaven points. Not that there weren't pagans, there just happened to be Christians as well.

Wouldn't this mean we have to approach the question somewhat differently: "have Christians ever seeked [sic] to conquer the world for Christianity?" with emphasis added. If Swedish expansion eastwards during in the 11th-13th centuries was motivated by Christianity, and as a conquest 'for Christianity,' why were the Sámit largely left to their paganism until the 17th-19th centuries (when oppression in the north really kicked into gear)? Of course there are geographical and topological concerns at play here; the north was inhospitable and inaccessible, making sea routes considerably more significant. It was not until the 17th-19th centuries that the necessary infrastructure was developed to link the north to the Stockholm-Åbo/Turku core (incidentally I saw the construction of the east coast railway up to Ångermanland just a couple of years ago, back when the only way in was by bus; there were still no trains at this time), bringing about the oppression and Christianisation of the Sámit.

Is this an example? Why were the Sámit not Christianised earlier? Did the Swedish Crown wish to, 'for Christianity,' but found it impossible, given the geographical barriers? I may question this, insofar as Sámit were found as far south as Värmland and Uppland well into the 16th century (some nomadic, coming with the seasons, but many sedentary), and were occasionally found in these areas centuries later. Was the difference in 'approach' to these two groups a territorial concern? This is certainly more likely; as long as Sápmi was a 'backwater,' one the Swedish Crown had no interest in, it seems its people were largely left alone, but for the taxation. The opening of the Nasa silver mine in the first half of the 17th century, with all the oppression and effective slavery of the Sámit that came with it, seemed to change the story quite a bit, and suddenly the Christianisation of the northern peoples became a priority that it hadn't been before. Should this conquest and Christianisation then be seen as 'for Christianity,' or was it for entirely politico-economic reasons?

An interesting comparison would be the Norwegian king, Sigurd the Crusader. Norway, of course, a very different country to Sweden, and the Norwegian-Sámi interactions were different from Swedish-Sámi interactions. Not least because Norway was always based on coastal routes, always had a presence in the far north. Of course there was still persecution and oppression of the Sámit in Norway, and one could argue it ran considerably deeper and had far more destructive effects than it did in Sweden. But still, for some reason, the Norwegians were more concerned with going and Christianising people in Småland, across the Baltic (that is to say in the important trade centres later united in the Hanseatic League, just to get that point across very strongly) and all the way out in the Levant, leaving those on their doorstep to do their own non-Christian thing. This strikes me as a strange thing for a Crusader to do, a missionary, one who is acting 'for Christianity.' And it can't be claimed that it was because of easy or difficulty, because getting to these far-flung places was far more different than getting to the places one went to all the time, namely, Sápmi.

I think it's safe to say these 'heaven points' were never anything to do with heaven, and were more to do with 'hey, other kings, look how awesome I am.' I get the feeling that converting a load of random people the rest of Europe had never even heard of in what was then considered just a frozen wasteland would have got you much kudos from the Byzantine Empire or the French crown or the Teutonic knights. The important players in contemporary Europe, the people you want to be on good terms with. Though, of course, I don't think you get more 'heaven points' for converting an Estonian or a Turk than you do for converting a Sámi. But maybe I'm wrong...

Still, the point is that we have to question whether we're talking about what is done 'for Christianity' and what is done with Christianity as the justification. Kind of like how we perhaps doubt that the French empire was all about the mission civilatrice rather than all that killing and plundering and getting loads of cashmonies. And what of the 'humanitarian interventions' of today? As such the question needs to be more precise. A claimed reason and an actual reason aren't necessarily the same.

[Smyg]

La Sombra, I absolutely adore your post. Someone from Revleft mentioned Sigurðr Jórsalafarir. I almost had a regionalist orgasm. The whole Sámi analysis is awesome as well.

Except for the most fanatic, indeed, most of the expansionism done has been for profit, whether political or economic. Christianity has always provided a very good excuse. As Gandhi said: I like your Christ, I do notlike your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.

[Ocean Seal]

Neither Islam nor Christianity seeks to conquer the world for itself. And neither have, throughout history, class interests have ultimately decided the fate of each religion and wars engaged in for "religious" purposes.

[Os Cangaceiros]

IIRC the Anabaptists' goal was ultimately to establish a worldwide Dominionist state.

I don't know if you could really say that colonists wanted to conquer the world "for Christianity". I'd say that they wanted to conquer the world to enrich themselves, and Christianity was just a justification for that goal. Not to mention the fact that many of the settler groups weren't particularly religious...the settlers who occupied the American South and Chesapeake Bay in the early years of colonialism being good examples.

[OHumanista]

Thing is they see the other religion with fundamentalist atitudes and accuse it. Then with the panic created they seek to do the same thing in their countries but using their own religion. Christianity more than any other faith always seeked the extermination of "heresy", and there are those who wish to revive this way of thinking (or lack of thinking). Islamic fundamentalism is a very convenient excuse to defend christian supremacy.

See the Dominionists in the US or the Republican presidential candidates (Perry and Bachmann mainly). Also the US itself has already conceded a LOT of ground to them. If you search it's easy to find groups openly preaching for an american theocracy.

It's the old "MY GOD IS THE ONE TRUE GOD! YOURS IS JUST A DEMON!"

[eyeheartlenin]

IIRC the Anabaptists' goal was ultimately to establish a worldwide Dominionist state....

With all due respect to Explosive, I think the comrade has the Anabaptists confused with some other group, maybe Baptists, who are quite different.

Anabaptists were the first people in Europe to believe that religion should be separated from government power, and therefore, from violence by authorities. IIRC, they were also pacifists, and indeed, their modern descendants, the Amish, Mennonites, etc., maintain that pacifist stance.

The Anabaptists represented a breath of fresh air, in contrast to continual violence motivated by established European Christianities, like Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism in the West, and Protestantism where it became an established/state church.

With their ethics, the Anabaptists IMHO were one of the few bright spots in the history of European Christianity, which, otherwise, has been very close to the state power, and therefore has some blood on its hands.

[Meditation]

deleted post

[Os Cangaceiros]

With all due respect to Explosive, I think the comrade has the Anabaptists confused with some other group, maybe Baptists, who are quite different.

Anabaptists were the first people in Europe to believe that religion should be separated from government power, and therefore, from violence by authorities. IIRC, they were also pacifists, and indeed, their modern descendants, the Amish, Mennonites, etc., maintain that pacifist stance.

The Anabaptists represented a breath of fresh air, in contrast to continual violence motivated by established European Christianities, like Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism in the West, and Protestantism where it became an established/state church.

With their ethics, the Anabaptists IMHO were one of the few bright spots in the history of European Christianity, which, otherwise, has been very close to the state power, and therefore has some blood on its hands.

I remember where I got that impression, it was from this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Münster_Rebellion

[Rooster]

I don't think Christians have tried to conquer the world for Christianity. The Papal state may have used it as a way to increase it's own power and influence, but much of the time it was to gain more lands and to control wealthy trade routes. But it never panned out that way in medieval Europe with each realm vying for power with each other. The age of empire wasn't about spreading Christianity in this sense either, not directly anyway. Lands were claimed for the crown and such. Religion has usually been an extension of state rule, as a way of regulating society.

[eyeheartlenin]

In response to Explosive Situation:

Dude, you were right! The Münster rebellion was an incident in Anabaptist history I did not know about –– live and learn!

Thanks!

[TheGodlessUtopian]

As the others have said yes,Christians have tried to conquer the world many times.

This tradition is kept alive today through militant Christian organizations like Joel's Army (among many others).

[hatzel]

I still feel we need to clarify what it means to 'conquer for Christianity.' Is it a question simply of converting everybody to Christianity (which may or may not occur alongside Christian State expansion; one needn't invade and conquer a territory to 'conquer' its people through conversion), or do we mean a 'genuine' territorial conquest, conducted 'for' Christianity, that is to say to Christianity's advantage, for its sake, in order to benefit it? For the latter needn't necessarily involve conversion of the people(s) to Christianity, as long as the territory is ruled by and/or for Christians/-ity. Knowing what exactly is to be addressed here is vital, and would also shed some light on the other issue at hand; what does the claim that Islamists want to 'conquer the world for Islam' entail in practice? Or, how is this conquest envisaged to realise itself? Conversion, invasion, subjugation...?

[Bronco]

I think if we were to look at Imperialism and the Scramble for Africa, while to a large extent it was primarily motivated by economic and political factors, there certainly was a feeling among a lot of people that Britain was undertaking a Civilising mission to spread Christianity to the heathens in "the Dark Continent" of Africa which inspired a lot of missionary activity in the region, and this is perhaps one case where there were genuine attempts to conquer for Christianity, and not just in the name of it.

[Zostrianos]

I think the missionary efforts come down to a desire to eradicate all other religions, and establish Christianity as the sole religion on earth. Due to the prevalent secularism in western societies, and the fact that a good percentage (if not most) people are atheists, and evangelists (Americans mostly) know that converting atheists is a lost cause, they direct their efforts (and their infinite monetary resources) to third world countries, especially those that have practitioners of non-Abrahamic faiths, and use false charity to fool people into converting, portraying themselves as saviours to the poor and destitute, when in reality their goal is to destroy other cultures and impose their version of Christianity. And by playing the charity card, they often receive generous funding from politicians who think they're funding a good cause. Here's a page that exposes their schemes:
http://www.christianaggression.org/tactics.php

Some of the stuff is pretty sick:

Denial of Treatment – Often Christian hospitals publicize their services as pro-bono and for the needy and general public. However, when poor non-Christians require treatment, they are either force to convert or pay a large fee for the services. The incident below describes one shocking ordeal of how 17 Hindus because they refused to convert: The Serang Christian Eye Hospital was set up in the Gumma block of Gajapati district by the Baptists of Canada to supposedly provide health care to tribals. The hospital is run by the Council of Christian Hospitals, which has its head office in Bangalore. The poorest of the tribals are misled into receiving free treatment at this hospital in exchange for their souls. The victims are operated upon then pressurized to convert to Christianity, or else told that they will have to cough up the payment for the operations.
Dr Sadguna Raju, a Christian convert and ophthalmologist attached to the Serang hospital, operated upon 27 patients on August 30 and 31 of 2000. Out of these at least seventeen of them are now blind in one eye. Dr Raju left Orissa a day after the operations and the tribal Hindus were given no post-operational care at all. Many times the arrangements for these "quickie" operations are makeshift and rampant malpractice increases the chance that patients could be infected in the operation theater itself. In fact at the post-operative stage the Christian doctors had even noticed the deterioration in the condition of some patients but they chose to do nothing about it as the tribals had refused to convert.
Many of the victims had developed pesedomolas, a bacterial infection, following the operation leading to pus formation in the eye. Some of them have had to turn to begging for their livelihood after this devastating trauma.


Manhunts (South America) - Another method, aptly called "manhunt", involves the missionaries going out, sometimes in motorized vehicles, hunting for natives to integrate them into reservations set up for missionary work. The New Tribes Mission (NTM), for instance, went on such a manhunt in Paraguay. Five missionized natives were killed in one such manhunt. Those unconverted natives were taken to the NTM camp in Campo Loro. Within a short while, according to Survival International, all had diedof new diseases they had no immunity to. Stung by criticism, the best reply the NTM 's Director in Paraguay could muster was: "We don't go after people anymore. We just provide transport."
In another such "manhunt" in 1979, also in Paraguay, one of the frightened natives fell down from a tree and broke her leg. (Her right breast had already been shot off by a previous encounter with the missionaries.) She was compelled, with her broken leg, to walk back to the mission camp. She subsequently died.


Fake Medicines – One common tactic employed by Missionaries is to give a sick villager fake medicines which have no medicinal value and ask them to worship in the name of their faith for wellness. After several days, the missionary gives the villager an identical dose of the medicine, but this time it is the real medicine. Then the missionary will instruct the villager to now pray to Jesus. Soon after, due to the medicine and not due to Jesus, the villager will be cured. The uneducated and gullible villager, however, will attribute his cure to Jesus and convert to Christianity.

Guilt & Accusations – In 1975, Christian Missionaries were unsuccessful in converting the Panare Native Americans of the Colorado Valley. The missionaries had converted the Bible to their native language, but the peaceful and simple tribe could not understand the concepts of sin, guilt, war and plagues. So instead, the missionaries changed the Bible so that instead of the Romans and others, the Panare were responsible for the death of Jesus. One excerpt read: ”The Panare killed Jesus Christ, because they were wicked. Let's kill Jesus Christ, said the Panare. The Panare seized Jesus Christ. The Panare killed in this way. The laid a cross on the ground. They fastened his hands and his feet against the wooden beams, with nails. They raised him straight up, nailed. The man died like that, nailed. Thus the Panare killed Jesus Christ…
God will burn you all, burn all the animals, burn also the earth, the heavens, absolutely everything. He will burn also the Panare themselves. God will exterminate the Panare by throwing them on the fire. It is a huge fire. I am going to hurl the Panare into the fire, said God.”
And the simplistic Panare tribe immediately claimed they loved Jesus, fearing they would be burnt by God. Missionaries seem to go to any extent to convert others, even if it requires gross deception and misrepresentation of their own holy book, the Bible will for the benefit of “winning souls”.


Miracles – One of the most despicable ways of deception is how Missionaries pray on young rural school children. The school bus will stop suddenly. Young kids are told that they must pray 'Krishna' to try and restart it, but it fails to do so. Then they try 'Rama', then 'Guru Nanak', then 'Allah' etc. Finally, after exhausting the common names in India for spiritual authority, they are asked to say 'Jesus' all together, and at that time the bus suddenly starts. Everyone applauds the demonstration of Jesus' love and power.

Missionaries are a plague on this planet.

[Commissar Rykov]

Conquer the world for Christianity? No typically it has always been like all religions coopted to be used as a rallying cry to go slaughter some other group over yonder. The Crusades were nothing more than an excuse for the Papacy a rather real political entity to flex its might in the Middle East typically for reasons that were beyond questionable. Spanish conquest of Latin America was done in the name of Christianity but yet again it was really just about conquering for the Spanish throne and getting resources such as slaves, gold, and various types of coffee, tobacco, etc. Wars are always about political and economical power of a sorts over a people it just so happens that religion is a great motivating factor. Most monarchs never gave two shits about religion in actuality but if you were to listen to their proclamations you would swear God was suffering from MPD as he told everyone to do all kinds of things in his name.

[Zostrianos]

A lot of people have tried to present simple geopolitical or economical reasons for the Crusades, the conquest of the America's, the 17th century Portuguese missions in India, etc. But the fact remains that imposing Christianity was the main motivating factor for all these (and many others). When you look at the history, the first concern of the conquerors and colonialists was the conversion of the locals to Christianity.

[Commissar Rykov]

A lot of people have tried to present simple geopolitical or economical reasons for the Crusades, the conquest of the America's, the 17th century Portuguese missions in India, etc. But the fact remains that imposing Christianity was the main motivating factor for all these (and many others). When you look at the history, the first concern of the conquerors and colonialists was the conversion of the locals to Christianity.
No the first concern was enslavement they could really care fuck all about your religion. Christianity only began to be taught to slaves around the late 18th Century and that was because they could use scripture to teach them to be good slaves and not rebel. Not that it always did much good. Nat Turner sure taught that lesson to Virginian Plantation Owners.

[Zostrianos]

Maybe in north America with African slaves, but in central and south America, and India (q.v. the Goa Inquisition) conversion and eradication of local customs was a primary concern:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_the_Age_of_Discovery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_Inquisition

[Commissar Rykov]

Maybe in north America with African slaves, but in central and south America, and India (q.v. the Goa Inquisition) conversion and eradication of local customs was a primary concern:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_the_Age_of_Discovery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_Inquisition
Sure it was a concern but not to spread the Word of God it was to subjugate people to the Spanish Throne. Any nation that had the Papacy's tentacles dug into it always had to bring God somewhere into their colonial plans. The Papacy was and still tries to be a political organization. Yet still the primary reason to the conquests of Latin America again had nothing to do with Christianity it had everything to do with Spain wanting Colonial Assets and needing the blessing of the Papacy especially since they were fighting with Portugal over the division of Latin America.

[ClearlyChrist]

The Real Question Is: When Did They Stop?

[Elysian]

Maybe in north America with African slaves, but in central and south America, and India (q.v. the Goa Inquisition) conversion and eradication of local customs was a primary concern:

I am not attacking you, but is it possible that these are exaggerated accounts? I am from india, and my fellow Christians are proud of their heritage and believe Portuguese invasion developed Goa.

[graffic]

Europeans have seeked to conquer the world. Many of whom happened to be Christian however there are many Christians who are pacifist. Christ was a pacifist.

In early Islam, Jews and Christians were treated fairly well however as the religion grew in size and number and rulers became more fanatical, conditions became worse. However, it was nothing compared to the persecution of Jews by Christians in Europe.

Today, there are many muslims who want to conquer the world, however Christians not so, as the new testament does not advocate that as far as I am aware.

[B5C]

There is a growing movement in the United States called Dominionism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism

[Azraella]

There is a growing movement in the United States called Dominionism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism


It's debateable whether most Chrisitans would support such a thing. "Give unto Caesar's what is Caesar's" is a pretty big indication that it is supposed to respect secularism. Though given the Christian right here in the states... ugh.

[IndependentCitizen]

British empire not only tried to enslave the world, but it also forced the religion onto its colonies.

[dodger]

Europeans have seeked to conquer the world. Many of whom happened to be Christian however there are many Christians who are pacifist. Christ was a pacifist.

In early Islam, Jews and Christians were treated fairly well however as the religion grew in size and number and rulers became more fanatical, conditions became worse. However, it was nothing compared to the persecution of Jews by Christians in Europe.

Today, there are many muslims who want to conquer the world, however Christians not so, as the new testament does not advocate that as far as I am aware.

They want war; they want the USA to "obliterate Syria" and they want Israel to "nuke Iran". They believe that these wars will hasten the desired day of the `rapture', the end-times when the tiny minority of true believers will be taken up to heaven and Christ will establish heaven on earth.

Allies for Armageddon: The Rise of Christian Zionism
Victoria Clark (Author)

Iodine tablets and crucifix while we are awaiting the rapture................(I already know where I'm going!)

[TheGodlessUtopian]

There is a growing movement in the United States called Dominionism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism

Not growing,actually shrinking of late and was never truly a strong political force that accomplished much for the leaders of the movement.A horrid,para-fascist movement,but I do not believe it is growing.

[ComradeOm]

A lot of people have tried to present simple geopolitical or economical reasons for the Crusades, the conquest of the America's, the 17th century Portuguese missions in India, etc. But the fact remains that imposing Christianity was the main motivating factor for all these (and many others). When you look at the history, the first concern of the conquerors and colonialists was the conversion of the locals to Christianity.Except that that's not a fact at all. Conversion was not a factor in the Crusades. The primary religious reasons for those campaigns were the reconquest of the Holy Land and, on an individual basis, the benefits of penitential warfare. Converting the local populations did not factor into it. Ditto with the conquest of the Americas - gold was infinitely more important a driver than Christianity

[graffic]

they don't want to establish a Christian caliphate but there are fundamentalist Christians

[Invader Zim]

Christian missionaries cannot be compared to imperialists, for the latter are only concerned with the accumulation of capital. The former are good people, convinced that their mission is to serve and save the poor and those in spiritual darkness.


Not really. Historically missionaries have walked hand in hand with imperialism, calling for spiritual enlightenment of "savages".

[Astarte]

Not sure if anyone raised this yet, but you can't understand missionaries, the crusades, etc without understanding the ultimate apocalyptic theology behind the spreading of Christianity or Islam. At certain times fundamentalist believers in Abrahamic religions believe that by accomplishing certain mundane events, prophetic divine events will occur.

See the prophecy of the rebuilding of the Third Temple in Jerusalem, I believe fundamentalist Jews believe it will only be rebuilt by the Messiah.

On the contrary, some evangelical Christians believe above mentioned builder of the Third Temple would be the "Anti-Christ".

In Islam (I forget which sect - I am going to guess Shia) the rise of the 12th Madhi corresponds to the Last Days.

Essentially though, at the end of Abrahamic Apocalypses everyone is a believer in of YHWH/Allah/Elohim.

So, while the climax of world events for all Abrahamic religions results in a global conversion, I think it is clear to say the likes of the Church, the Spanish in Meso and South America, etc., were mainly running on the profit and power motives rather than the divine one.

[Zostrianos]

I am not attacking you, but is it possible that these are exaggerated accounts? I am from india, and my fellow Christians are proud of their heritage and believe Portuguese invasion developed Goa.

I think it's because they didn't actually live at that time, and probably don't know the full history. I've seen several accounts in the past, and all of them paint a very disturbing picture of Catholicism in Goa at that time. Here's a detailed one I just found:
http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=articles&id=1111142225
Details of the Goa Inquisition
Posted March 18, 2005
Christian historian, Dr. T. R. de Souza




At least from 1540 onwards, and in the island of Goa before that year, all the Hindu idols had been annihilated or had disappeared, all the temples had been destroyed and their sites and building material was in most cases utilized to erect new Christian Churches and chapels. Various viceregal and Church council decrees banished the Hindu priests from the Portuguese territories; the public practices of Hindu rites including marriage rites, were banned; the state took upon itself the task of bringing up Hindu orphan children; the Hindus were denied certain employments, while the Christians were preferred; it was ensured that the Hindus would not harass those who became Christians, and on the contrary, the Hindus were obliged to assemble periodically in Churches to listen to preaching or to the refutation of their religion."

"A particularly grave abuse was practiced in Goa in the form of 'mass baptism' and what went before it. The practice was begun by the Jesuits and was alter initiated by the Franciscans also. The Jesuits staged an annual mass baptism on the Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul (January 25), and in order to secure as many neophytes as possible, a few days before the ceremony the Jesuits would go through the streets of the Hindu quarter in pairs, accompanied by their Negro slaves, whom they would urge to seize the Hindus. When the blacks caught up a fugitive, they would smear his lips with a piece of beef, making him an 'untouchable' among his people. Conversion to Christianity was then his only option."

The Goan inquisition is regarded by all contemporary portrayals as the most violent inquisition ever executed by the Portuguese Catholic Church. It lasted from 1560 to 1812. The inquisition was set as a tribunal, headed by a judge, sent to Goa from Portugal and was assisted by two judicial henchmen. The judge was answerable to no one except to Lisbon and handed down punishments as he saw fit. The Inquisition Laws filled 230 pages and the palace where the Inquisition was conducted was known as the Big House and the Inquisition proceedings were always conducted behind closed shutters and closed doors. The screams of agony of the culprits (men, women, and children) could be heard in the streets, in the stillness of the night, as they were brutally interrogated, flogged, and slowly dismembered in front of their relatives. Eyelids were sliced off and extremities were amputated carefully, a person could remain conscious even though the only thing that remained was his torso and a head.

Diago de Boarda, a priest and his advisor Vicar General, Miguel Vazz had made a 41 point plan for torturing Hindus. Under this plan Viceroy Antano de Noronha issued in 1566, an order applicable to the entire area under Portuguese rule :
"I hereby order that in any area owned by my master, the king, nobody should construct a Hindu temple and such temples already constructed should not be repaired without my permission. If this order is transgressed, such temples shall be, destroyed and the goods in them shall be used to meet expenses of holy deeds, as punishment of such transgression."

In 1567 the campaign of destroying temples in Bardez met with success. At the end of it 300 Hindu temples were destroyed. Enacting laws, prohibition was laid from December 4, 1567 on rituals of Hindu marriages, sacred thread wearing and cremation. All the persons above 15 years of age were compelled to listen to Christian preaching, failing which they were punished.

A religious fatva was issued on the basis of the findings of Goa Inquiry Commission. It stated,"...Hereby we declare the decision that the conventions mentioned in the preamble of the fatva as stated below are permanently declared as useless, and therefore prohibited".

Prohibitions Regarding Marriages

-The instruments for Hindu songs shall not be played.
-While giving dowry the relatives of the bride and groom must not be invited.
-At the time of marriage, betel leaf packages (pan) must not be distributed either publicly or in private to the persons present.
-Flowers, or fried puris, betel nuts and leaves must not be sent to the heads of the houses of the bride or groom.
-Gotraj ceremony of family God must not be performed.
-On the day prior to a wedding, rice must not be husked, spices must not be pounded, grains must not be ground and other recipes for marriage feast must not be cooked.
-Pandals and festoons must not be used.
-Pithi should not be applied.
-The bride must not be accorded ceremonial welcome. The bride and groom must not -be made to sit under pandal to convey blessings and best wishes to them.

Prohibitions Regarding Fasts, Post-death Rituals

-The poor must not be fed or ceremonial meals must not be served for the peace of the souls of the dead.
-There should be no fasting on ekadashi day.
-Fasting can be done according to the Christian principles.
-No rituals should be performed on the twelfth day after death, on moonless and full moon dates.
-No fasting should be done during lunar eclipse.

Conventions

-Hindu men should not wear dhoti either in public or in their houses. Women should not wear cholis .
-They should not plant Tulsi in their houses, compounds, gardens or any other place.

-Following the law of 1567, orphans were kidnapped for converting them to Christianity.

On September 22, 1570 an order was issued that :
-The Hindus embracing Christianity will be exempted from land taxes for a period of 15 years.
-Nobody shall bear Hindu names or surnames.

In 1583 Hindu temples at Esolna and Kankolim were destroyed through army action.
"The fathers of the Church forbade the Hindus under terrible penalties the use of their own sacred books, and prevented them from all exercise of their religion. They destroyed their temples, and so harassed and interfered with the people that they abandoned the city in large numbers, refusing to remain any longer in a place where they had no liberty, and were liable to imprisonment, torture and death if they worshipped after their own fashion the gods of their fathers." wrote Sasetti, who was in India from 1578 to 1588.
An order was issued in June 1684 eliminating Konkani language and making it compulsory to speak Portuguese language. The law provided for dealing toughly with anyone using the local language. Following that law all the symbols of non-Christian sects were destroyed and the books written in local languages were burnt.

The Archbishop living on the banks of the Ethora had said during one of his lecture series, "The post of Inquiry Commission in Goa is regarded as holy." The women who opposed the assistants of the commission were put behind the bars and were used by them to satisfy their animal instincts. Then they were burnt alive as opponents of the established tenets of the Catholic church.
The victims of such inhuman laws of the Inquiry Commission included a French traveller named Delone. He was an eye witness to the atrocities, cruelty and reign of terror unleashed by priests. He published a book in 1687 describing the lot of helpless victims. While he was in jail he had heard the cries of tortured people beaten with instruments having sharp teeth. All these details are noted in Delone's book.

So harsh and notorious was the inquisition in Goa, that word of its brutality and horrors reached Lisbon but nothing was done to stop this notoriety and escalating barbarity and it continued for two hundred more years. No body knows the exact number of Goans subjected to these diabolical tortures, but perhaps it runs into hundreds of thousands, may be even more. The abominations of inquisitions continued until a brief respite was given in 1774 but four years later, the inquisition was introduced again and it continued un-interruptedly until 1812. At that point in time, in the year of 1812, the British put pressure on the Portuguese to put an end to the terror of Inquisition and the presence of British troops in Goa enforced the British desire. Also the Portuguese power at this time was declining and they could not fight the British. The palace of the Grand Inquisitor, the Big House, was demolished and no trace of it remains today, which might remind someone of inquisitions and the
horrors inside this Big House that their great saint Francis Xavier had commenced.

Dr. Trasta Breganka Kunha, a Catholic citizen of Goa writes, "Inspite of all the mutilations and concealment of history, it remains an undoubted fact that religious conversion of Goans is due to methods of force adopted by the Portuguese to establish their rule. As a result of this violence the character of our people was destroyed. The propagation of Christian sect in Goa came about not by religious preaching but through the methods of violence and pressure. If any evidence is needed for this fact, we can obtain it through law books, orders and reports of the local rulers of that time and also from the most dependable documents of the Christian sect