FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-23-2012, 05:10 AM   #61
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
If Christianity is an imperially contrived (not conspired) 4th century phenomenom
How droll.

Quote:
My apology relates to having to bring up issues such as military fascism etc. in a forum where not everyone wants to consider such issues relevant to history of christian origins.
Not everyone is a democrat. Of course, it is relevant. The history of Constantinianism is one of consistent, persistent and pernicious opposition to the purifying following of 'the Galilaean'. It stretches from the farcical theatre of Nicaea, to the forced baptisms of Clovis, to the Roman Inquisition, to the bombing of Guernica under Franco. In the West that opposition was more manifest, more naked, more bloody, than in the East, for economic reasons, but the malign influence of the imperium of Rome lives on even today, and in all parts of the world. It lies just under the surface (though it can be forced to rear its ugly head) in places one might least expect.
sotto voce is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 05:20 AM   #62
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,619
Default

One of the titles of the Roman Emperors was that of pontifex maximus which translates as supreme pontiff, the emperor was in charge of religious affairs and eventually the bishop of Rome inherited the imperial title together with its authority and religious role – the bishop of Rome also inherited the right to wear the purple robe and the imperial pomposity and autocratic governance.
Iskander is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 05:24 AM   #63
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bordeaux France
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post

Not everyone is a democrat. Of course, it is relevant. The history of Constantinianism is one of consistent, persistent and pernicious opposition to the purifying following of 'the Galilaean'. It stretches from the farcical theatre of Nicaea, to the forced baptisms of Clovis, etc..
The baptism of Clovis was not forced. This baptism brought him the help of the catholic fraction of the Gauls against the arian Wisigoths. His wife, Clotild, belonged to the catholic fraction of the royal family of the Burgonds (Bourgogne). There is a joke in french, saying that "Clovis embraced the cult of Clotild". French speakers will easily understand "cul = ass" instead of "cult"... Clovis was a sort of frankish Constantine.
Huon is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 05:31 AM   #64
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post

Not everyone is a democrat. Of course, it is relevant. The history of Constantinianism is one of consistent, persistent and pernicious opposition to the purifying following of 'the Galilaean'. It stretches from the farcical theatre of Nicaea, to the forced baptisms of Clovis, etc..
Quote:
The baptism of Clovis was not forced.
Note the use of the plural.
sotto voce is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 05:51 AM   #65
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Why? Who are you apologising to? What makes you think any apology is owed?How so?
If Christianity is an imperially contrived (not conspired) 4th century phenomenom (as I suspect it may be) then its suppression/destruction of all the other pagan religious cults is not a nice story. It is a story of death and destruction in a barbarous epoch in antiquity, described as "Neronian". I dont particularly like telling dismal stories. My apology relates to having to bring up issues such as military fascism etc. in a forum where not everyone wants to consider such issues relevant to history of christian origins.
Christianity made the former subjects of the Roman Empire an easy target for would be conquerors.


The Emperor Theodosius enacted legislation to impose Christianity in the Roman Empire and to exterminate non-Christians.


The history of early Christianity is a history of cruel repression against whoever disagreed with them. The Christian bloody intolerance also extended to their fellow Christians; the Christians became obsessed with heresy and and hunted down dissenters. Heresy in classical Greece had only meant a school of thought, but early Christians made holding a different opinion a crime against God punishable with eternal hell fire, and also a crime against the ecclesiastical authority punishable with death.


There was no desire in the population to fight for the preservation of Christianity. Even Rome was easily conquered by invaders and Augustine felt obliged to explain that Christian duty lay in the spiritual in his book, the City of God

In Spain in 711 a small Saracen raiding party conquered almost the whole country after winning a small battle against the Christian Visigoth king and the conquerors felt so secure among the Christian former subject of the Visigoths that they proceeded almost immediately to invade France. They were stopped south of Paris by a largely pagan Frankish army.
The Christian Visigoth kingdom in Spain that the Saracens replaced had been a very very bad government.
Iskander is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 06:00 AM   #66
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iskander View Post
The history of early Christianity is a history of cruel repression
Isn't it strange? A week is a long time in politics, but in religion, three hundred years is but a blink of an eyelid.
sotto voce is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 06:12 AM   #67
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iskander View Post
The history of early Christianity is a history of cruel repression
Isn't it strange? A week is a long time in politics, but in religion, three hundred years is but a blink of an eyelid.
I am listening
Iskander is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 06:25 AM   #68
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iskander View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Isn't it strange? A week is a long time in politics, but in religion, three hundred years is but a blink of an eyelid.
I am listening
Good.
sotto voce is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 07:02 AM   #69
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bordeaux France
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post

Not everyone is a democrat. Of course, it is relevant. The history of Constantinianism is one of consistent, persistent and pernicious opposition to the purifying following of 'the Galilaean'. It stretches from the farcical theatre of Nicaea, to the forced baptisms of Clovis, etc..
Quote:
The baptism of Clovis was not forced.
Note the use of the plural.
Ah ?

The history told by Gregory of Tours is certainly embellished, to show clearly that the conversion of Clovis to catholicism gave him the help of the God of the christians. But I never read that Clovis was baptized many times.
Huon is offline  
Old 01-23-2012, 10:52 AM   #70
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sotto voce View Post
Not everyone is a democrat. Of course, it is relevant. The history of Constantinianism is one of consistent, persistent and pernicious opposition to the purifying following of 'the Galilaean'. It stretches from the farcical theatre of Nicaea, to the forced baptisms of Clovis, etc..
Quote:
The baptism of Clovis was not forced.
Note the use of the plural.
Ah ?

The history told by Gregory of Tours is certainly embellished, to show clearly that the conversion of Clovis to catholicism gave him the help of the God of the christians. But I never read that Clovis was baptized many times.
I think you will find that what sotto voce meant by 'the forced baptisms of Clovis' was not 'baptisms which Clovis was forced to accept' but 'baptisms which Clovis forced other people to accept', although I'm guessing here, because sotto voce has not had the courtesy to provide 'uns own explanation.
J-D is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:21 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.