gee

Julian;

"Wasn't forcing suspected christians to show worship of the Emperor one of the methods that Pliny used to expose them? My memory is a bit hazy here but it would seem to me that it is okay to obey the laws but not okay to worship the emperor in any way."

This was a horrible position that some Christians were put into. If I was faced with this quandry I probably would have worshipped Pliny publically to save my family and then kept my Christianity secret. This horrible situation is difficult to deal with and I see no alternative that is really pleasant.


Dharma;

"What hypocrisy!"

Those poor people who faced these difficulties were many things, but "hypocrisy" is not something I'd think of. What was Pliny? Chopped liver? Given the responsiblity to lead his people - he's putting them to death for what they believe. I'd say "hypocrite" would be the nicest term to call him.

gee

freigeister

Yeah, and notice who keeps the coin.

Dharma

Running the state and a multicultural state at that, is an enormous responsibility. You have to deal with the defeated and they will rebel and the state will be forced to use force if that rebellion threatened to undermine the state, that is a given.

Christians have a right to believe anything they wish, they threatened to undermine Rome, and the Roman Emperors did what they thought was right by suppressing them -- where was the hypocrisy of Rome?

But I am not wrong in pointing out the erroneous theological assertions of Christians who can read the Bible passage stating "we are ALL sons of God" and then turning and saying "well, Jesus is the ONLY son of God". They also asserted that Roman Gods are false or calling Caesar "God" is patently heathen, but calling the King of Israel Ben Elohim (son of Gods) is not.

Clivedurdle

Do we have a timeline, or has anyone discussed the evolution of relationships between this new religion and one of the most successful empires there has been on this planet?

Is Render unto Caesar a deliberate wording put into the mythical Jesus' mouth to help for example with issues arising from Pliny? Does Peter's vision allow sacrificing to Caesar? Is reading into this a dichotomy between God and Caesar a later evolution?

Propaganda about martyrs sets up an argument that might not have been there. Other examples are of of Jesus eating with sinners and breaking the sabbath. Is sacrificing to Caesar a worse sin than breaking the sabbath or saying I am the son of God?

We have an example of someone breaking the main rules of Judaism, including death on a cross. Why do modern apologists pick on one of those rules - sacrificing to Caesar - when it is a political oath of allegiance? Feels like it might partly be a Roman conspiracy to weaken Judaism and a phrase that originally was intended to allow sacrificing to Caesar has been turned through 180 degrees!!

Julian

They weren't put to death for their beliefs, except indirectly. The problem was that they were considered a club or organization, which was against the law at the time. Also, not worshipping the emperor was bad as well. So they were prosecuted as criminals, which they were having broken the laws, and not for their faith, although their faith obviously put them in that position.

I agree with you, family should be more important. It makes you wonder about someone who could give up their family for an abstract god concept.

Julian

gee

Dharma;

"Running the state and a multicultural state at that, is an enormous responsibility. You have to deal with the defeated and they will rebel and the state will be forced to use force if that rebellion threatened to undermine the state, that is a given.

Christians have a right to believe anything they wish, they threatened to undermine Rome, and the Roman Emperors did what they thought was right by suppressing them -- where was the hypocrisy of Rome?"

You know you're right. That poor Pliny. He needed to kill those people...... (ha ha )


Julian;

"It makes you wonder about someone who could give up their family for an abstract god concept."

Me too.

gee

Dharma

so tell me, did the Christians prove themselves to be any better than the Romans at handling rebellion? Christians complaining about Romans is like the "pot calling the kettle black".

Dharma

well if Christians can worship "the king of the Jews" i.e. the supposed king of Israel (rejected by Jews), what kept them from worshipping Caesar, the King of Rome? Why is this such an affront?

Julian

The bible is pretty clear (well, relatively clear) on the fact that there is only one god (and his son and that ghost dude) and that is the only one who should be worshipped.

Julian

Dharma

No, the Bible not once talks about any clear concept of a universal One God. It talks about selecting and worshipping ONE DIETY (Yahweh) out of many, it NEVER denies the existence of other Gods. As for the New Testament, Christians also are unclear on what they are worshipping. Are they worshipping Jesus, the Father or the Holy Spirit? Jesus says two contradictory things :
1)'I and the father are one' AND 'the Father is greater than I'.

2)Then it goes on to say, "Jesus sat on the right hand of God'
3)Jesus says "We are all sons of God", then why is he the only one worshipped by Christians?

these are not exact quotes, but pretty close.