Forum menu
Got to say, now the knee jerk objectors have left it alone, I'm loving this thread. Always been interested in early Christian history and theology, and some great questions and answers in this discussion.
All theological literature will presuppose the existence of God
Oh right, so that brings us back to evidence for Jesus being presupposed to exist doesnt it? Interesting subject, I doubt we would agree on much but a talk over a few pints would be fun I'm sure, its hard to do over the interwebs without offending though.
@saxonrider - When studying Christian religious texts do you cross reference against other older texts from different religions? Look for similar themes and stories etc in order to ascertain which elements predate Christianity? Genuinely interested to find out if this is so something that is undertaken.
Skipping back to smiting
God’s were all about being powerful and smiting enemies if you flattered them enough. But Jesus’s message was
entirely different.
Wasn’t Jesus doing his dads bidding, spreading peace and love? They same God that flooded the world cos he was narked and wrought plague and pestilence on Egypt? Not consistent is he?
When studying Christian religious texts do you cross reference against other older texts from different religions? Look for similar themes and stories etc in order to ascertain which elements predate Christianity?
Not wishing to speak for SaxonRider but this is certainly carried out. Which is why you know about it I expect 🙂 I think it's what comparative religious studies is.
@saxonrider – When studying Christian religious texts do you cross reference against other older texts from different religions? Look for similar themes and stories etc in order to ascertain which elements predate Christianity? Genuinely interested to find out if this is so something that is undertaken.
Absolutely. In terms of ancient Judaism, for example, the Gilgamesh Epic is hugely influential, as are elements of Zoroastrianism. And of course Christian theology itself draws heavily from Stoicism and Neoplatonism.
Ultimately, because faith is not the same as knowledge, it is not necessarily beset by challenges to the knowledge bank that informs it. But to be clear, and as many philosophers contend, although faith is not a knowledge category, that does not make it de facto anti-intellectual.
I do object to religious faith (and the study thereof) being afforded a different status to other forms of belief.
It really does depend on what you mean, and what period you are talking
From post Nicene period mostly, although I will of course bow to your greater knowledge, my understanding is that although it's part of the founding myth of modern Christianity, the persecution under the Romans was (by comparison) much less dramatic, than the various inter orthodox struggles. Many sects including ebionites, gnostism, montanism, etc were variously either rejected or destroyed and by 5th century with have the beginning of the orthodoxy that would become the Church. Coupled with an utter rejection of "classical gods" and many works and art that formed part of that world, the early Christians put to death those that would not come to the faith and destroyed libraries, schools, temples statues and so on.
Thanks to early Christians we now have fewer ancient manuscripts works of art and so on that we would otherwise still have. This isn't the fault of modern Christian worshippers of course, but knowledge of this part of the church's early existence shouldn't be hidden either.
Latin is not relevant today and the word science has a different meaning to the latin word that it is derived from.
Or are you one of those people who think that the only things worth studying are the sciences?
The sciences are one area in particular where Latin is used extensively! Animal and plant taxonomy is always shown in Latin, using a system developed by Charles Linnaeus, because common names can vary widely for the same animal with a wide distribution, one example is the Mountain Lion, or Cougar, Puma, etc.
The word 'cougar' is borrowed from the Portuguese çuçuarana, via French; it was originally derived from the Tupi language. A current form in Brazil is suçuarana.[11] In the 17th century, Georg Marcgrave named it cuguacu ara. Marcgrave's rendering was reproduced in 1648 by his associate Willem Piso. Cuguacu ara was then adopted by John Ray in 1693.[12] In 1774, Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon converted cuguacu ara to cuguar, which was later modified to "cougar" in English.[13][14][15]
Puma is the common name used in Latin America and most parts of Europe. The term puma is also used in the United States.[16][17][18][19] The first use of 'puma' in English dates to 1777, introduced from Spanish, and prior from the Peruvian Quechua language in the 16th century, where it means "powerful".[20]
In the United States and Canada, it also called mountain lion, a name first used in writing in 1858.[21] Other names include panther, painter and catamount. Early Spanish explorers of the Americas called it 'gato monte' meaning cat of the mountain, and 'leon' meaning lion.[4]
The cougar holds the Guinness record for the animal with the greatest number of names, with over 40 in English alone.[22]
Regarding Animism, the Japanese have a form of Animist worship, in fact they happily use two forms of belief, three if you include Christians.
The main two are Shintō and Buddhist - it’s often said that in Japan one is born Shintō and dies Buddhist, both are well integrated into Japanese culture.
Thanks to early Christians we now have fewer ancient manuscripts works of art and so on that we would otherwise still have.
But surely this is just 'people' rather than being specifically early Christians? Unless you are sure that they were MORE warlike and destructive than other religious/ethnic groups?
Nah 'grips, specifically Christians, hence my picture on the previous page, the gouging of crosses and the breaking off of noses on religious statues was entirely a Christian endeavour, and repeated over and over throughout the classical world. The persecution of early Christians was repaid in full and with interest.
Wasn’t Jesus doing his dads bidding, spreading peace and love? They same God that flooded the world cos he was narked and wrought plague and pestilence on Egypt? Not consistent is he?
This is something that interests me because it appears something of a paradox. However from what I've read I think the issue is that the Bible itself is simply a collection of books with different human authors, which were not originally written to be part of a holy canon. So each book represents the author's understanding of God and reflects the issues facing the author at the time.
The Jewish tradition is one of study and reflection, so the books are compiled for that purpose not as a single coherent instruction manual.
the gouging of crosses and the breaking off of noses on religious statues was entirely a Christian endeavour
Alright but you're saying no other cultural group vandalised the icons and art of any other throughout world history except for Christians?
I think the problem here is that once Christianity became widely established as a state religion then by default it includes nearly everyone, so any atrocities or abuses that the power of the day wished to commit can be labelled as 'Christian' if you want to. People are always going to fight about something. Islam has had the same sectarian in-fighting.
A quick scan of this wiki page regarding Hinduism suggests it's fairly universal. Some shocking stuff on there.
but you’re saying no other cultural group vandalised the icons
No, I'm not, and haven't said that. I'm being very specific about the early Christian sects and their treatment of those they deemed heretical. Other religions have obviously done these sorts of things as well.
It looks like you're singling out early Christianity as being particularly violent and intolerant as a group - but to me it just looks like the same old shit from humanity in general.
But you are right to point out that Christians have not historically been above this kind of thing just like everyone else. This is something that I think some Christians don't acknowledge, because it's their team - just like some Americans don't acknowledge their country's genocide or some British don't acknowledge the horrors perpetrated by the empire.
Animal and plant taxonomy is always shown in Latin
Only if you are an elitist ****er!!
Only if you are an elitist ****!!
That’s a bit harsh. When scientist from different countries use Latin they can be sure they are talking about precisely the same thing, rather than a local word which might mean something different: think suspenders and pants in the US and UK.
Or scarlet pimpernel and Anagallis arvensis
AIUI Druids were the ruling class which is why they had to go. Romans didn’t need all their subjects to believe in their religion, AFAIK.
I believe there were spiritual/ temporal parallel power structures. For example the most well known leader Boudicca was never referred to as a druid
Boudicca was simply an incidental leader though after her husband was killed rather than part of the extant power structure - as I understand it anyway.
But anyway - I don't think many people know much about Druids - more's the pity.
Boudicca was simply an incidental leader though after her husband was killed rather than part of the extant power structure – as I understand it anyway.
"Boudicca was the wife of the Iceni King Prasutagus who ruled his lands as an independent ally of Rome "
https://www.ancient.eu/article/97/boudicca-queen-of-the-iceni-scourge-of-rome/
Hardly incidental, definitely part of the extant power structure
As for druids there are no written records apart from what the Romans and Greeks left us, everything else is made up or extrapolated, even the Roman and Greek texts have to be viewed with caution
As for druids there are no written records apart from what the Romans and Greeks left us, everything else is made up or extrapolated, even the Roman and Greek texts have to be viewed with caution
That's a pity because if there were other sources then there would be a clearer picture of the druids culture.
Similarly in one of the strongest SE Asia empire (Majapahit) most of the historical records actually come from China (Song Dynasty and Admiral Cheng Ho etc), Rome (Marco Polo) and Middle East (Iran). When crossed reference their descriptions were very similar in time and account. Luckily one of the old language (written like Arabic but Not Arabic - I need to research a bit more on this) is still around and the govts is trying to revive it as it is a language that is so capable of describing meanings (not sure what the actual term in English). For example, an item can be describe so precisely in at least 10 ways etc, but because the old language looks so much like Arabic there are many objections from other communities in fear of cultural "decimation".
Right but we don't know what the relationship between Druids and Kings might have been. It's possible that Druids were really in charge, compare with mediaeval European Kings and the Pope.
Right but we don’t know what the relationship between Druids and Kings might have been. It’s possible that Druids were really in charge, compare with mediaeval European Kings and the Pope.
I wouldn't say there were in charged but rather more like the advisor (perhaps at a later stage if they were still around) to the Kings/Queen/leaders etc. Remember druids were considered the most knowledgeable people in those days. Most cultures have their elder(s) or clan leader(s) (later become King etc) as the "ruling" elites. I was watching the coronation of Kings in SE Asia and I can still see those in charged of the ceremony were the local "druid" like people.
Possibly now a good timely reminder that documented history was written by the victorious. As we all know, there are many sides to a story.
Top thread btw, such a joy to not have the shouty ‘knee jerk objectors’.
As you were... 😁
Or scarlet pimpernel and Anagallis arvensis
QED 🙂
Possibly now a good timely reminder that documented history was written by the victorious. As we all know, there are many sides to a story.
Yes, hence it is also a good time to see history from their the other sides (those that were not that victorious) to understand the overall perspectives. The history of the SE Asian empire collapsed is rather "predictable" based on the historical records from those who traded or ventured there. They depicted arrogance and poor governance from the ruling class.