his, brownpill me on the rise of Christianity in the roman empire.
>>384021
Christianity, as with all religions, started in one tiny place, when the rest of the earth was populated by a wildly marvelous diversity of religious beliefs—and yet, curiously enough, the concept of warfare over religious differences was virtually nonexistent. Most people in ancient times believed it was proper to respect the gods of other peoples. This changed on a global scale when Christianity was spread, quite literally, by the sword. Those who attempted to assert their religious differences were harassed, tortured, robbed of their land and belongings, even killed. Before it achieved political power, Christianity was a small sect, a heresy against the Jewish faith, that had to accept equality among all the other religions of the Roman Empire. Yet it was the first religion to openly attack the religions of other people as false (the Jews, at least, were a little more tactful). Needless to say, Christianity only truly flourished when it had the ability to eliminate the competition—when it had the full support of Rome’s Emperors after 313 A.D., and when, in 395 A.D., every religion other than Christianity was actually outlawed. Through force and decree Christianity was immersed in the cultural surroundings of lands near and far, and in an environment where it was widely accepted, if not the only thing accepted, it spread and planted itself among subjugated peoples. As kids grew up taking Christian ideas for granted, they often did not realize that only a few generations ago those ideas were entirely alien.
>>384041
>Christianity, as with all religions, started in one tiny place, when the rest of the earth was populated by a wildly marvelous diversity of religious beliefs—and yet, curiously enough, the concept of warfare over religious differences was virtually nonexistent.
Spotted the retard. One only has to look at Caesar's Gallic wars to know this is shit.
Most people, in the ancient times, drew little distinction between a people and their religion; religion was far more ethnic and "cultural". You made war on them, you made war on their gods. Why do you think the Chinese stamped hard on the indigenous southern peoples religions? Why do you think there was so much religious overwriting in Egypt every time a new cult came to power? Why did you have so many Babylonian kings casting down the temples of their rivals?
Honoring the gods of a defeated enemy was a relatively rare phenomenon.
>>384041
hello Vladimir Lenin
i'm tired of this pic desu
>>384051
Colonization of the world, more often than not by robbery and warfare, spread Christianity into the Americas and other corners of the earth, just as Islam was spread throughout Asia and Africa. It is not a coincidence that the two most widespread religions in the world today are the most warlike and intolerant religions in history. Before the rise of Christianity, religious tolerance, including a large degree of religious freedom, was not only custom but in many ways law under the Roman and Persian empires. They conquered for greed and power, rarely for any declared religious reasons, and actually sought to integrate foreign religions into their civilization, rather than seeking to destroy them. People were generally not killed because they practiced a different religion. Indeed, the Christians were persecuted for denying that the popular gods existed—not for following a different religion. In other words, Christians were persecuted for being intolerant.
Such absolute religious intolerance is an idea that found its earliest expression in the Old Testament, where the Hebrew tribe depicts itself waging a campaign of genocide on the Palestinian peoples to steal their land. They justified this heinous behavior on the grounds that people not chosen by their god were wicked and therefore did not deserve to live or keep their land. In effect, the wholesale slaughter of the Palestinian peoples, eradicating their race with the Jew’s own Final Solution, was the direct result of a policy of religious superiority and divine right. Joshua 6-11 tells the sad tale, and one need only read it and consider the point of view of the Palestinians who were simply defending their wives and children and the homes they had built and the fields they had labored for. The actions of the Hebrews can easily be compared with the American genocide of its native peoples—or even, ironically, the Nazi Holocaust.
>>384109
Damn that's fucking massive
>>384138
>Such absolute religious intolerance is an idea that found its earliest expression in the Old Testament, where the Hebrew tribe depicts itself waging a campaign of genocide on the Palestinian peoples to steal their land. They justified this heinous behavior on the grounds that people not chosen by their god were wicked and therefore did not deserve to live or keep their land. In effect, the wholesale slaughter of the Palestinian peoples, eradicating their race with the Jew’s own Final Solution, was the direct result of a policy of religious superiority and divine right. Joshua 6-11 tells the sad tale, and one need only read it and consider the point of view of the Palestinians who were simply defending their wives and children and the homes they had built and the fields they had labored for.
Hm, this story sounds recent.
>>384138
And Sinoization spread out of the Yellow River valley by robbery and warfare, and to export their ancestor worship. The Bantus expanded all throughout sub-saharan Africa, obliterating predating beliefs as well as their people.
The wide spread of Christainity and Islam today has a lot to do with the relative power of Europe and the Levant, and little to do with the religious ethos themselves. Any people will expand, and as often as not carry their religion with them, stamping out other beliefs, if given the right material conditions to do so.
>was not only custom but in many ways law under the Roman and Persian empires.They conquered for greed and power, rarely for any declared religious reasons, and actually sought to integrate foreign religions into their civilization, rather than seeking to destroy them.
And Rome and Persia were the world? What about Han China? What about the Maurya and Gupta dynasties in India? What about the Egyptians? The Diodochi states? The Incas? Lots and lots of non-Abrahamic empires crushed foreign religions, or at least tried to, it's not a uniquely Abrahamic phenomenon. They weren't interested in living in harmony with subject peoples; they either eliminated and replaced with their own people, or they tried to turn their subject peoples into the host people.
>People were generally not killed because they practiced a different religion. ...In other words, Christians were persecuted for being intolerant.
Actually, if you bothered to look at pretty much any Roman document pertaining to Christian persecution (I would recommend Pliny the Younger's letter to Trajan), the problem was their opposition to the emperor-cult that permeated the Roman sphere.
>Such absolute religious intolerance is an idea that found its earliest expression in the Old Testament,
No, actually the Egyptians beat them to it by millenia. All that replacing foreign deities with their own pantheons.
>>384244
what even is the brown pill? Tell me how whatever it is is shit?
