One of their stated reasons is because they want US military bases out of Saudi Arabia.

Another is the hatred for the Jews. The Koran teaches them that Jews are only animals and not human--pigs and something else, but I forget the other animal.

If religion had no proof, then there wouldn't be any followers.

That's what religion is about. (Wait until after you die to find out.)

Something that has followers has proofs ?

All things that have followers have proofs ?

Inquisition....WTH? We are talking the crusades here. What's clear is that Islam and Christianity were colliding for political and geographical reasons. You are the one who needs a history lesson.

You're flaunting your ignorance of the Bible and Christianity again.

Unlike when Jesus resurrected other people (e.g. Lazarus), he came in his "resurrected" body, that is, a re-made, so-called "glorified" body. That resurrection is not the same as using the shock paddles to help someone after they die with a heard attack and "bringing them back." No, it's a whole different event. He is called the "first born" of the resurrected for it, too. You didn't understand the categorical difference. Again, you would have to actually learn the Bible to have understood that.

One question, how the fuck do you know?

1. Really? You should check up your definition of proof / evidence, and compare yours to the scientific one.
Literally anything could be a confirmation of truth, if thats what the person wants to see. Do I really need to give you examples of this?
People used to believe that earth is a flat surface, obviously they had some reasoning behind it. So, do you believe them? Do you think their supposed evidence, their proofs are credible? Do you think the earth is flat? After all, they had some factors indicating it to them, lol.

2. Point being? I guess that they have really killed him. Well, that doesnt prove that he actually came back from the dead. Also, the fact that they werent slouches, doesnt really mean much, does it? Do you think in a criminal investigation, the approach is as the one you've presented? "They werent slouches, then there's 0% chance of a fk up".
So that statement doesnt make sense no matter how you look at it (as in, I dont see it as a compelling argument).

3. I've pretty much explained it it *1
Anything can by a piece of evidence for anyone. If it's actually 'legit' evidence, is a completely separate matter.

4. Belief and knowledge are 2 separate things. Lets say someone does something bad. You have your suspicions, based on sth, so you may believe that this person is guilty, but you cant say that you know it. Without hard evidence there can be no talk about knowledge in the strict sense.
Of course if you have a strong belief in sth, then even the smallest thing might turn into hard evidence in your eyes.

5. Wut? It was merely an example of my non-believing attitude. I dont know, but I presume that children are supposed to believe in santa, at least judging it by all these chrissmassy movies etc. I don't know, maybe I wasnt unique, maybe there are no children who believe in him. I know that I didnt.
I have never believed in god either, I just went to church cos that was the thing to do.

6. I didnt contradict myself, at least not in that matter, as I did not present any evidence for their existence, only my take on the subject, using simple logic - if a process has happened once, then it means that it is possible, so taking in consideration the scale of the universe, the posibility turns into a really high propability.

I really do think it better to avoid trying to psychoanalyze people.

No, the person who belongs on my mortal enemies list is most likely, located in Germany.

Something can be real and "supernatural". It's only supernatural because it's A) beyond our understanding or B) 100% pure bullshit. So its better to say such things are highly unlikely.

That was, indeed, the stated reason. However, the Crusades were mainly fought to fill the Papacy's coffers and confer upon it continued secular relevance. Actually, the riches being plundered from the 'holy land' is what made the Knights Templar a thing (since they ran the banking system, if one can call it that, that revolved around the looting). Amusingly, it was the Inquisition that finally put the Knights Templar down after they got too big for their britches. It is all medieval politics, at its base. ;)

"Christianity" was not going for political and geographic gain. FALSE Christians and the POLITICAL PAPACY (which has nothing to do with Christianity, that is, the Bible) were going for earthly gain. What we're saying here is that the Crusades were horrible AND had NOTHING to do with Christianity. The fact that someone pops up and claims to be Christian does not mean that anything he does IS Christian.

BYW, Islam isn't a religion. It's a political ideology under the facade of a religion--a power movement. My source? Middle Easterners who are former muslims, living under death threat for leaving Islam. That's why they call it "Islamofascism." It's not only almost totalitarian, moreso for women, but it's enforced like the Fascists of early 1900's Europe enforced their laws. Islam is not even a faith--it is merely obedience.

No, supernatural is basically anything outside the universe (ghosts, god, jesus resurrecting), there's not one shred of proof or evidence that those things can happen. But once a brain is destroyed, you might as well give up after that. And after 3 days of being dead, that chance is 0.
What makes you a judge of other christians? And islam IS a religion it's basically a modified judaism and christianity.

I don't claim there is a god, yet i don't claim there isn't one either... what am i?