ApostateAbe

Well, OK, to be clear, we are in agreement that every state gets "involved with" the religion of their people. And we disagree over the point that states adapt to the religion? Would you like me to cite an example of state actors adapting to the popular religion?

sotto voce

Yes please; though I'm not sure what state actors are.

ApostateAbe

State actors are people in positions of political power over nations, such as kings, emperors, lords, presidents, prime ministers, governors, judges, members of parliament, generals, and so on. An example of a state actor adapting to the popular religion is Barack Obama identifying as a Christian and regularly ending his speeches with, "God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America."

ApostateAbe

I am thinking maybe the best analogy that Atwill would have is Henry VIII's founding of the Church of England. Did Atwill make a point of that?

sotto voce

That's ok, then.

So Obama is acting, as on a stage? Did Obama not claim to be a Christian before he became presidential candidate?

(One must not suppose for a millisecond that the USA is Christian, btw. Though it is certainly very religious.)

anethema

the state actors for communism were the Romanovs. the state actors for fascism was the RCC right wing. this is getting a little political, not that it hassnt always been back to the 1st cen. my second statement is beyond dispute to any serious historian of the rise of fascism. the first is merely an opinion. i must again say i come from an RCC background, but am not currently an apologist or a hater, but an antitheist at heart.

ApostateAbe

OK, sure, maybe Barack Obama's identity as a Christian has no connection to the fact that a Christian identity is necessary to have any political weight. And, maybe he ends his speeches with "God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America," just because he really means it? But, here is the choice as it relates to this matter: do you think it is more likely that Barack Obama would change his outward religious face to fit the political environment, or that he would engineer a new religion and popularize it? Would he change the religion of the people to suit his own power ambitions?

ApostateAbe

OK,sure, well, obviously, the Romanovs were not the engineers of communism.

Clivedurdle

All states need to exercise power. They have always used a variety of methods, raw use of force, bribery and persuasion for example. Tom Holland in Persian Fire describes how Darius deliberately used the idea of the one true god.

I wonder if xianity is best understood as a Greek religion, an evolution of the Platonic ideas of a super god, that used the existing models of Judaism and Zarathustra, that were very well known in the Greek world from before the times of Marathon and Alexander.

The Romans going imperial following the crossing of the Rubicon would have understood the importance of religion, and imperial cults really did not have the firepower of Ahura Mazda or Yahweh. Herod's Temple was the largest on the planet.

The Romans also had very serious long term problems around Jerusalem and I see no reason why various themes and ideas should not marinade together, with some deliberate help from people who were already highly skilled in the dark arts of propaganda and persuasion.

Did the Romans develop their own religious nuclear weapon, a true god?

sotto voce

When did Obama claim to be Christian? If he made this claim much earlier, especially before he went into politics, it can hardly be said that he has adapted to popular religion. It's not necessarily anything to do with the state, because it could be entirely personal; akin to a politician going to sports events because it makes him or her seem closer to the people.

In the USA, that is. But again, that is not official, state policy. Religious reading and prayer recitation in public schools would be state policy.

But this is not example of a state actor; it may be a personal pose, yes!

I don't think that states adapt to popular religion. It's not in their nature. Not before we get real democracy, anyway. Rather, states adapt popular religions, to make them suit whatever the power base that supports the state requires. From Romulus until the fall of Rome, Roman governments, in all phases, did so on behalf of patricians; the Elizabethan Establishment did so on behalf of the new capitalists; the German state still does on behalf of old ones, rather oddly, in view of recent German history. Every state in which there is significant consciousness of Christianity (as distinct from actual Christianity) attempts to re-model Christianity in its own authoritarian image.