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: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-07-2006, 09:44 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi151 View Post
What a bunch of absolute nonsense.

The Roman world was largely secular prior to about the 3rd century CE, when the Roman Empire began getting into problems, and the power of the State as well as the Priesthood began asserting themselves more.
In many respects, the Roman Empire was a model of secular society not equalled until the Enlightment. In many ways it was not. The republic gave way to Caesarism and the rule of law in governance was undermined by a succession of tyrants well before 3rd century CE.

Quote:
When the Christians took over in the 4th and 5th centuries they certianly extended the power of religion in public policy to a degree never before seen in the Roman world.
I guess that's another version of Gibbon's argument that Rome was destroyed by Christianity from within, in turning a secular and practical minded outgoing Rome, into an inward looking, soul-searching, superstitious Imperial Cripple.
Will Durant I think had a good answer to the charge, arguing that when Rome embraced Christianity, the empire was in already in deep decline brought about by the corruption of its civil edifice, fractured consensus, and a declining moral standards.

Thinking along Durant's lines I would venture that Christianity was to Rome, what Political Correctness is to the West today - goodness to an ailing spirit, but terribly misplaced as medicine.

Quote:
This business of Christians being "secular reformers" who "opposed superstition" is the biggest bunch of hogwash.

And, I should add, the main things that the Christians opposed were not "pagan beliefs", afterall they integrated many of them, the main thing that they railed against was Epicureanism, Atomism, and Stoicism, all of the secular materialist worldviews.
I think it's a little more complicated. I agree that Rome in decline would not be a good place to test Christianity's tolerance of the secular realm.
But while the Church replaced old forms of superstition by new ones, on the whole, over the long haul, not competing directly with secular powers (excepting a few popes), it generally left significant secular space, having a theology which sharply separated the values of this world from those of the next one. In this it sharply contrasts with Islam which knows no such dividing line.

Jiri
Solo is offline  
Old 09-07-2006, 09:52 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by post tenebras lux View Post
Sounds more like a much later post hoc rationalisation of some silly magical thinking: that words have power, and that knowing the true name of god would give power. Hence the commandment not to take his name in vain, etc.
I don't understand why you characterize the above as "much later" when it appears to be thoroughly grounded in the Hebrew Bible? I assume that is where Christians obtained it.
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 09-07-2006, 10:02 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Republic and Canton of Geneva
Posts: 5,756
Default

As if the final version of the hebrew bible is as old as the story of Moses and his burning bush.

Why did only the High Priest know the full name of YHWH (which is why no jew now knows it)?
post tenebras lux is offline  
Old 09-07-2006, 10:42 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by post tenebras lux View Post
As if the final version of the hebrew bible is as old as the story of Moses and his burning bush.

Why did only the High Priest know the full name of YHWH (which is why no jew now knows it)?
The point is that "Jahve" is a word that literally means "Beingness", and it existed as such within the Bible long before it would have been needed as any kind of "post hoc rationalization of magical belief". The case is, in fact, the reverse: the clear insight provided by the word for "Beingness" was gradually eroded to the point where it was understood as referring to an anthropomorphic god. This distortion grew to such an extent that it became a deadly sin to pronounce the word at all.
No Robots is offline  
Old 09-08-2006, 09:15 AM   #15
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 462
Default

The original question was "does the bible promote secularism". The reply is a somewhat tentative "maybe".

Clearly, Christianity does not promote secularism. And in particular, the RCC does not promote secularism. It promotes all sorts of mysticism. The RCC, being a political entity first and a religious movement second, is at least partly responsible for the dark ages and setting back human development in most of Europe by about 1000 years. But that was not the question.

Notably, the rise of protestantism (with its emphasis on the bible) signalled a flowering of rationalism which set in motion rapid development of science and industry. Corroborating, if circumstantial, evidence.

History is never simple. We now have certain sects worshipping the bible itself. Will they ever learn?

David.
davidbach is offline  
Old 09-08-2006, 09:22 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 927
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidb View Post
The original question was "does the bible promote secularism". The reply is a somewhat tentative "maybe".

Clearly, Christianity does not promote secularism. And in particular, the RCC does not promote secularism. It promotes all sorts of mysticism. The RCC, being a political entity first and a religious movement second, is at least partly responsible for the dark ages and setting back human development in most of Europe by about 1000 years. But that was not the question.

Notably, the rise of protestantism (with its emphasis on the bible) signalled a flowering of rationalism which set in motion rapid development of science and industry. Corroborating, if circumstantial, evidence.

History is never simple. We now have certain sects worshipping the bible itself. Will they ever learn?

David.
Did protestantism really? From what I understand the first attempt to secularise were made by the dutch during the dutch revolt in the oath of abjuration. The dutch revolt however was started for trade taxation issues, not religious ones. Well it was a religious issue for the spanish but not the dutch, who wanted to do business with mohammedans and protestants alike but couldn' t.

And if I am correct other seculariser (the french and american revolutionists were deists at best not protestants...)
demoninho is offline  
Old 09-09-2006, 11:58 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 927
Default

Maybe I didnt put this thread in the right subforum... I am interested really which good things christianity brought to Western Europe, I can not think of anything, which wasnt an obvious truth already.

My idea is that christianity gave Europe: poor womens rights, homophobia, anti-semitism, unquestionable myths and divine rule...
demoninho is offline  
Old 09-09-2006, 12:02 PM   #18
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 330
Default

To answer the original question.... No.
ceres is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:31 PM.

Top

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