[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Of course blowing yourself up in a crowded place is horrific but modern Christianity grew out of acts just as horrific and hateful.[/quote]
For the sake of argument–And? Just wring our hands, hoping Islam comes up with an adequate counter to the aborgation of a more peaceful prophet with that of political/theological conqueror?
[quote]I don’t believe that Wodan did, Julius Caesar wrote about sacrifices to Esus, Taranis Teutates amongst others though it is possible that this was a deliberate misrepresentation. There is certainly evidence of human sacrifice in Britain which predates the Romans.
[/quote]
So, this was good? Everything I’ve read says that northern European paganism involved human sacrifice. Doesn’t this contradict you here:
I haven’t heard the claim that Christians demanded “ritualized human sacrifice” before. That’s a new one. You usually hear the “Thor and Odin” crowd complaining about Christianity being too peaceful, not too warlike.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
You usually hear the “Thor and Odin” crowd complaining about Christianity being too peaceful, not too warlike.
[/quote]
True. The neo-pagan criticism of Christianity that’s popping up in places, which we briefly mentioned in another thread. Christianity being mocked as pacifist and universal. While paganism is heroic/masculine and tribal.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I don’t believe that Wodan did, Julius Caesar wrote about sacrifices to Esus, Taranis Teutates amongst others though it is possible that this was a deliberate misrepresentation. There is certainly evidence of human sacrifice in Britain which predates the Romans.
So, this was good? Everything I’ve read says that northern European paganism involved human sacrifice. Doesn’t this contradict you here:
But Britain and Anglo-Saxons are traditionally Pagan. And the country was doing fine until those damned Christian Immigrants turned up with their disgusting ritualised human sacrifice in support of a Middle Eastern war God.
I haven’t heard the claim that Christians demanded “ritualized human sacrifice” before. That’s a new one. You usually hear the “Thor and Odin” crowd complaining about Christianity being too peaceful, not too warlike.
[/quote]
I think you missed the point of my post. Anyone claiming that Britain is historically Christian is missing a large chunk of Britain’s History. Anyone harping on that Britain should maintain it’s Christian values is also missing out on the fact that a large amount of modern atheist writing is coming out of Britain. I don’t want someone dictating that Christian rules should guide Britain any more than I want Sharia law. Religion is a personal thing and should be kept separate from politics.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
You usually hear the “Thor and Odin” crowd complaining about Christianity being too peaceful, not too warlike.
True. The neo-pagan criticism of Christianity that’s popping up in places, which we briefly mentioned in another thread. Christianity being mocked as pacifist and universal. While paganism is heroic/masculine and tribal.[/quote]
Neo Paganism is normally a pretty bad representation of actual Pagan religions but that is a whole other can of worms.
I don’t criticise Christianity for being too peaceful or too violent. Too hypocritical possibly or too lacking in supporting evidence.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
You usually hear the “Thor and Odin” crowd complaining about Christianity being too peaceful, not too warlike.
True. The neo-pagan criticism of Christianity that’s popping up in places, which we briefly mentioned in another thread. Christianity being mocked as pacifist and universal. While paganism is heroic/masculine and tribal.
Neo Paganism is normally a pretty bad representation of actual Pagan religions but that is a whole other can of worms.
I don’t criticise Christianity for being too peaceful or too violent. Too hypocritical possibly or too lacking in supporting evidence.[/quote]
I guess I’ll bite. So, who CAN discuss the issue of Islamic violence and oppression? Hm? It’s most definitely not our imagination.
Edit: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_chicago_terrorism_charges
The Crusades! Pagans! Don’t talk about this! And, remember…The Crusades! Pagans!
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
You usually hear the “Thor and Odin” crowd complaining about Christianity being too peaceful, not too warlike.
True. The neo-pagan criticism of Christianity that’s popping up in places, which we briefly mentioned in another thread. Christianity being mocked as pacifist and universal. While paganism is heroic/masculine and tribal.
Neo Paganism is normally a pretty bad representation of actual Pagan religions but that is a whole other can of worms.
I don’t criticise Christianity for being too peaceful or too violent. Too hypocritical possibly or too lacking in supporting evidence.
I guess I’ll bite. So, who CAN discuss the issue of Islamic violence and oppression? Hm? It’s most definitely not our imagination.
Edit: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_chicago_terrorism_charges
The Crusades! Pagans! Don’t talk about this! And, remember…The Crusades! Pagans![/quote]
Discuss away. Islamic violence is horrific and an issue that should be discussed. As is the violent tactics being used by certain Christian groups to convert people to Christianity. There are terrorist acts taking place around the world in the name of Christianity does that mean that Britain shouldn’t allow Christians in?
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Discuss away. Islamic violence is horrific and an issue that should be discussed. As is the violent tactics being used by certain Christian groups to convert people to Christianity. There are terrorist acts taking place around the world in the name of Christianity does that mean that Britain shouldn’t allow Christians in?[/quote]
What was the Wilders thing about?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Discuss away. Islamic violence is horrific and an issue that should be discussed. As is the violent tactics being used by certain Christian groups to convert people to Christianity. There are terrorist acts taking place around the world in the name of Christianity does that mean that Britain shouldn’t allow Christians in?
What was the Wilders thing about?[/quote]
Some stupid laws that infringe freedom of speech. Everyone is scared of Islamic violence due to Muslims being insulted by perceived slights on their religion. I personally think the best way to deal with it is to create so many insulting images of Mohamed that they get used to the idea.
That is what worked with Christianity in the UK (to some extent.) Films like Life of Brian point out how ridiculous it is to be offended by an insult to a supposedly all powerful being.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
I think you missed the point of my post. Anyone claiming that Britain is historically Christian is missing a large chunk of Britain’s History.
[/quote]
Uh, no. Britain has been pagan. Everyone acknowledges that. So has the rest of northern Europe. However, those periods of time were characterized by tribalism, human sacrifice, scientific backwardness, Viking raids, and the like. If you have a pantheon of warlike gods, you get more war.
Christianity hasn’t been all roses either, but it has been better than Islam or living in mud huts.
[quote]
Anyone harping on that Britain should maintain it’s Christian values is also missing out on the fact that a large amount of modern atheist writing is coming out of Britain. I don’t want someone dictating that Christian rules should guide Britain any more than I want Sharia law. Religion is a personal thing and should be kept separate from politics.[/quote]
Yes, Dawkins et al have really moved the ball forward culturally.
[quote]Christianity hasn’t been all roses either, but it has been better than Islam or living in mud huts.
[/quote]
I don’t think Western success can be attributed to Christianity, I think Christianity just happened to be our flavor of Abrahamic religion that luckily got sloughed long ago enough and for long enough to allow for other cultural and scientific values to enter our society and create what it has become.
To be completely honest, the Koran is a more MODERN and clear socio-ethical philosophy than the Bible will ever be (of course unless we put out a Bible 2.0.) It is basically impossible to live personally or societally by what the bible says because it is so eclectic, distorted and lost in translation, perhaps some might call this syncretic to be more favorable.
Islam is a complete system, it’s teachings, laws and judgements are clear for all who wish to embrace it. Unfortunately, while it is a true socio-political-ethical & economic system. It is absolutely outdated and abhorrent, it is too much of a conquest driven for today’s society.
[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Christianity hasn’t been all roses either, but it has been better than Islam or living in mud huts.
I don’t think Western success can be attributed to Christianity, I think Christianity just happened to be our flavor of Abrahamic religion that luckily got sloughed long ago enough and for long enough to allow for other cultural and scientific values to enter our society and create what it has become.
To be completely honest, the Koran is a more MODERN and clear socio-ethical philosophy than the Bible will ever be (of course unless we put out a Bible 2.0.) It is basically impossible to live personally or societally by what the bible says because it is so eclectic, distorted and lost in translation, perhaps some might call this syncretic to be more favorable.
Islam is a complete system, it’s teachings, laws and judgements are clear for all who wish to embrace it. Unfortunately, while it is a true socio-political-ethical & economic system. It is absolutely outdated and aborherrent conquest driven for today’s society.
[/quote]
Well said
Well, it’s a coalition that better be willing to work together in the future. I have a feeling the West is going to need it.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Well, it’s a coalition that better be willing to work together in the future. I have a feeling the West is going to need it.[/quote]
What gives you any indication that they would be willing to “work together?”
More than likely they’d just accept Islam when given the standard three options Muhammad gave to unbelievers.
Atheism is a thing easily taken up and easily laid down.
[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Christianity hasn’t been all roses either, but it has been better than Islam or living in mud huts.
I don’t think Western success can be attributed to Christianity, I think Christianity just happened to be our flavor of Abrahamic religion that luckily got sloughed long ago enough and for long enough to allow for other cultural and scientific values to enter our society and create what it has become.
[/quote]
I think modern science would likely have never emerged in the West without Christianity:
http://www.reasons.org/theology/historical-theology/historic-alliance-christianity-and-science
Today, a supposed rift has been dug between young earth creationists on one hand and naturalists one the other over evolution. Warfield saw no conflict between either:
It is pretty difficult to go to a pre-19th century Western art exhibit and not notice the influence of Christianity. Western literature has likewise been heavily influenced by Christianity.
Moreover, the Roman Catholic church gave socio-political structure to Europe post-Western Roman Empire. The Protestant reformation also had large effects on that structure.
I’m not sure you can prove this. You can buy critical Greek New Testaments that contain all the NT documents dating back to roughly 100 AD and compare them yourself if you’d like. There are textual variants, but not anything of significance.
Arguments of “syncretism” are usually made in a post hoc, ergo propter hoc fashion from what I’ve seen.
On the level of society, it is true that you can’t “live by the Bible.” There are no specific mandates related to society or civil government. Actually, if we’re to believe Romans 7, Christians can’t do it either.
Agreed.
Well…
In a muslim country, you just dont know who is going to get their head cut off…do you?
[quote]I think modern science would likely have never emerged in the West without Christianity:
http://www.reasons.org/...ity-and-science
Today, a supposed rift has been dug between young earth creationists on one hand and naturalists one the other over evolution. Warfield saw no conflict between either:
It is pretty difficult to go to a pre-19th century Western art exhibit and not notice the influence of Christianity. Western literature has likewise been heavily influenced by Christianity.
Moreover, the Roman Catholic church gave socio-political structure to Europe post-Western Roman Empire. The Protestant reformation also had large effects on that structure. [/quote]
You see, I don’t see this as religious. Jesus The Compassionate, is not unique to Christianity so that really can’t be said to be a unique influence on our culture in relation to others. While Jesus, may have had a great influence on the humanist influence on our society, often expressed through art, I don’t think once again that is something that is once again unique to Christanity or something that does not occur without it. In fact, I think the removal of the Greco-Roman ideal, especially in the West, by Christian forces, was an absolute decay of humanism because it devalued the human form and replaced our cultural maxim with some unattaniable deity on a pedestal.
Also, the Roman Catholic Church (I was born Catholc & Orthodox BTW) cannot really be seen as some sort of uniquely Christian organizational structure, as it basically was the Roman Empire, a sort of extension of a neo-Roman Empire in itself. As well as in regions not-directly under its control, a sort ‘NGO,’ dictating it’s Neo-Roman policies. These policies are often cultural maxims & memes that predate Christianity and in fact were restored despite it.
I can’t really speak on Protestant Reformation, as I don’t much about Protestantism, but have never held them in some a high regard. I hold devout Protestants in about the same regard as I hold practicing Muslims.
As for the conflict in between Creationists, & Evolutionists, I don’t understand the dispute either, and this seems to be something unique to [‘Anglo-Saxon/Anglo-German,’] culture and their cronies, possibly deriving from a lack of exposure to mysticism or just plain lack of cognitive ability.
This dispute doesn’t really exist at all in Latin culture, both stories really aren’t seen to be in conflict with eachother. They can even be bridged, by assuming that the Bible is both allegorical and based in remote facts as well as ancient long exaggerated histories. Assuming this, the story of Adam & Eve can be seen as the first two proto-humans, be they some early hominid or whatever, who chose to leave the jungle through their abstract thought and cognitive abilities, which also forever tainted them. This corresponds directly with evolution, and this is how I’ve always been taught to see it from the religious people within my life.
This statement needs some sort of substantiation. I’ll agree that Islam has a Jesus, but not The Jesus as the Bible defines him.
This is usually where I hear “post hoc, ergo propter hoc” evidence that Jesus was some syncretistic concoction of Greco-Jewish origin.
No one is saying that he was the only influence, but you can’t argue that the same cultural achievements that happened in the West wouldn’t have happened without him. How did Handel and Bach write a good chunk of their stuff without Jesus the Messiah as their muse?
Much in the way of “greco-roman ideal” is actually found in the New Testament. Read Paul. The NT does, however, give its own authoritative view of greco-roman ideals. It refutes some of them.
The human form is never devalued in the NT. Christians are redeemed both body and soul through Christ, who added a human nature. At the resurrection, everyone will be re-united with their earthly bodies. Those who believe will have glorified earthly bodies. Those that don’t will suffer in both body and soul for eternity.
The NT does not, however, deify man.
NEvertheless, the Roman Catholic church was the “Christian” church at the time. There were certain things noticeably lacking in the Roman Catholic conception of the Roman empire that were present in the old Roman Empire itself, such as emperor worship and feeding Christians to the lions. Christianity changed the Roman Empire, like it or not.
You can’t have an opinion one way or another on something about which you are ignorant, right?
I guess not. I edited that actually I guess while you were replying to be:
I see for the most parts Muslims and Protestants to be people who find religion and the religious themselves to be overly important in the modern world setting. I don’t understand why they care so much, or rather, care that WE SHOULD CARE so much. Pretty much all the religious nuts in the West are some loony Muslims about “NUKE US & NUKE UK,” or perhaps being more moderate and just honor killing their daughter cuz she kissed JT poster. Either that, or some wacked out Protestants strumming some fag guitar with a facefull of tears whining away some one-sided argument about neo-liberal issues that offend him. All the while, some Hindus, go and study hard science and engineering, and create something 5 days a week, and then spend some of their free time praying to some laughable 8 armed elephant man with a bindi floating on a magic carpet…and seem to be able to cope without having some sort of mind-blowing conflict between those two ideas, that he can’t just keep to himself.
I think you’re confusing evangelicals with Protestants. They claim to be Protestant. We claim they’re not. “We” only amounts to about 100,000 people in North America these days. I agree with you, though. The faggotry of evangelicalism is one of the reasons I left it - a big reason.