Is the reason that Christianity managed to spread so quickly throughout the Roman Empire because of the empire's massive slave population?
Think about it. All of the areas that Abrahamic religions have dominated are all areas that have had extensive slavery - whereas places that have never extensively practiced slavery (China, Japan, India) have also never had any Abrahamic religions set up shop (Except for parts of India because lol Mughal conquests)
Basically what I'm asking here is: Do the Abrahamic religions, Christianity especially, thrive in cultures that have long histories of slavery and if so why?
>>1118023
Islam spread in India in certain communities because the caste system was more lax, as in in the Malipas. I'm not entirely sure about Christianity or Judaism, but Islam spread because of it's radical idea of equality regardless of race, caste, or ethnicity. This was especially seen in Bengal.
>>1118023
Abrahamic religions are much more cult-like and communal than the religions that followed before them.
They appeal to those living unsatisfying and harsh lives on Earth who desire easy salvation in the afterlife. It lacks any sort of deeper thought-process than "Follow these easy steps to get eternal salvation!". No real philosophy, self-determinism, existentialism, etc. is inherent in Christianity.
As far as Religions go it is 100% plebeian-tier.
>>1118321
Yeah, pretty much.
Goddamn death cult.
>>1118023
the slaves were largely unconverted until the 4th century or later. the bulk of christians up until the 4th century lived in urban areas. after Christianity became the state religion most conversion efforts were in rural areas and among the slaves. these efforts at conversion weren't driven by christian charity but by destroying temples, holy sites and idols. we have letters from bishops telling Christian land owners to not allow slaves on their property to engage in pagan rituals and to attempt to convert them.
no. Romans were living a time of spiritual crisis. Christianity was there.
>>1118023
Partially, yes. But it wasn't only because of slaves, but a large number of other oppressed groups throughout the empire.
Outside of some bread doles in the capital, there was hardly anything in the way of social welfare. Christians moved into communities and built orphanages, they gave alms to the poor, they helped widows and so on in a time when most people didn't give a shit about the downtrodden. This not only appealed to the underclasses they were helping, but other people who could see the genuine improvements to their communities.
The empire's on and off persecution of Christians only made it worse for those trying to suppress them. Put yourself in the shoes of some random peasant in Rome and this small group of people moves in. Sure they worship some weird cult, but they seem nice enough and they help everyone around them. Now the empire is marching in and slaughtering them, and they don't even cower or run- they embrace death as martyrs! Clearly this God gives them great moral strength.
Ironically Christianity also became popular amongst women, since the early creed preached a great amount of equality and respect between the sexes compared to the extremely patriarchal Rome.
>>1118321
Mystery Cults were a thing before the Christains came 'round, though
>>1118315
>slam spread in India in certain communities because the caste system was more lax
It spread much more due to the invasion by Mughals and forceful conversion and other coercive actions such as Jizya and Sharia.
India is an interesting case because it is a showcase of Islamic conquest stopping half-way and never finishing the convert-or-die process which engulfed the Middle East and North Africa. The Balkans are the other region. In both cases it was utter chaos the moment the Muslims lost dominance. Traditional Islamism in the vein of Muhammad and the early Caliphates is not very compatible with other philosophies, religions, and ideologies and seems to only thrive in violence.
>>1118340
Most were not defined as 'Mystery Cults' until Christians branded them as Heretics and Pagans then summarily beheaded, burned, and imprisoned them. And if that isn't Cult-like behavior I don't know what is.
>>1118348
The Mughals were generally more lax with Islam (exceptions such as Aurengzeb). Rather when the Mughals first established their empire in 1425, Islam already had a foundation in India. 200 years prior, conquers such as Mohammad of Ghor had established their own Islamic kingdoms. The Mughals themselves took Delhi from the hands of it's Sultan. So yes, Islam spread in India a lot through conquering, but it initially arrived and was established because of a lax caste system in certain areas if the subcontinent.
>>1118340
Most were esoteric, ie people approached them to be inducted. Christianity had people propagating their religion, ie they approaching people to induct them
>>1118023
That might explain why christianity spread to some degree, but the reason why it became predominant is Theodosius outlawing other faiths, the christian autists on here like to pretend that christianity just had a winning message of sorts, but the reality is different. Their religion was imposed by deceit through the subversion of pagan customs and celebrations and through force and slaughter when said deceit failed.
Fuck christendom and it's apologists.
>>1118372
The person we really should blame is King Josiah
>>1118315
>Implying India is a serious threat in Civ
Their faction bonus is basically a direct happiness debuff that scales with population which fucks their shit up completely whenever something goes wrong.
>>1118370
>conquers such as Mohammad of Ghor had established their own Islamic kingdoms
They themselves came from land (Afghanistan and Persia) that was conquered and forcefully converted during the Islamic Caliphates. Who then continued the cycle of conquest and forceful conversion.
Islam spreads primarily through the sword. The Quran reinforces this notion as does the concept of 'Jihad' and Muhammad's never ending acts of barbarism. Prior to Abrahamic religions the concept of 'Holy Wars' did not exist. The Greeks, Persians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. never went on rampaging conquests to spread their cult-like religion at the point of a sword.
>>1118385
>checks wikipedia page
Looks like you have a point, so fuck that guy too.
>>1118339
>Ironically Christianity also became popular amongst women, since the early creed preached a great amount of equality and respect between the sexes compared to the extremely patriarchal Rome
So the beginning of the end for Rome? The original SJWs and Feminists that prosper in decadence and peacetime, then collapse society from within. Why is /pol/ always right?
>>1118407
The earliest Caliphs weren't interested in conversion, though. Conversion meant less people paying taxes. The Umyyads were opposed to conversion and made even those who had converted but were not Arabs continue to pay the tax.
>>1118407
The concept of "jihad" is more of an internal struggle to find the truth. The Quran never tells Muslims to go and kill all those that do not convert. From the very beginning, some Sunnis have hijacked the religion to meet their own benefits. Islam was just an excuse to conquer land.
>Do the Abrahamic religions, Christianity especially, thrive in cultures that have long histories of slavery and if so why?
That's probably a big contributing factor, yes.
The reason for this is very simple. Christianity is a religion that sees reality devided between good and evil, and it foresees an apocalyptic event in which good triumphs over evil. Now, this wasn't new, as the movement of Jesus belonged to a strain of charismatic Judaism. Judaism had a long tradition of defending the weak and powerless, but the difference between other Jewish prophets and Jesus was that his movement was open for everyone. Although a lot of this was probably an innovation of Paul, the movement he started would be one of the first apocalyptic forms of charismatic Judaism that was open to all the weak and oppressed, wherever they may be from
Nietzsche already figured this one op. Superiority vs inferiority
>>1118420
Congrats, you figured it out, women's rights led to the fall of Rome you chucklefuck.
>>1118438
Next time just say I don't know
>>1118438
historically Judaism has been open to converts, of course with more rigorous laws that make conversion less appealing though
>>1118445
>everything that doesn't pander to my opinion is wrong
Why do you go back to your monasterial safe space
>>1118456
Ok. Just tell me the right answer so I know
>>1118407
>Islam spreads primarily through the sword
So what about Indonesia and Sub-Saharan Africa?
>>1118426
>The earliest Caliphs weren't interested in conversion, though. Conversion meant less people paying taxes. The Umyyads were opposed to conversion and made even those who had converted but were not Arabs continue to pay the tax.
Jizya wasn't the only method of collecting tax, and the Umyyads had other taxes in place to force non-Arabs to pay. However, it served the secondary purpose of coercing non-muslims to convert.
>>1118435
I know what Jihad is and realistic in both the Quran and in real-practice it was/is a primary rationale to engage in 'Holy War'. It is a form of retroactive determinism, as success is determined by whether "Allah was willing/not willing", thereby diminishing individual judgement and morality as part of the decision-making process. And subsequently explains why Islamic Conquests were so much more frequent, harsher, and more barbaric than their predecessors.
>From the very beginning, some Sunnis have hijacked the religion to meet their own benefits
Muhammad started the trend with his personal acts of barbarism, including mass beheading, rapes, and 'Holy Wars'. These actions are very much sanctioned in the Quran in virtually all forms of Islamic Traditionalist interpretations, which try to adhere to backwards 7th century standards set by Muhammad.
>>1118469
Yea I saw that movie too. Hopefully one day you start thinking for yourself
>>1118474
I'm not the poster you were originally arguing with, just couldn't resist the opportunity. and for the record I read the book (well the whole series) long before I had seen the movie
>>1118474
Lol "I read the book". Do you know this is a book, and a radio show before that?
>>1118506
My uncle has the entire radio show on tape. the stuff is glorious no matter what the medium is
>>1118023
>whereas places that have never extensively practiced slavery (China, Japan, India) have also never had any Abrahamic religions set up shop
China had a massive war killing tens of millions of people started by Christians in 1800s and only reason Christianity isn't a thing in Japan is because it was seen (rightfully so) as 5th column and purged.
>>1118407
>Buddhists
King Dutthagamani of Sri Lanka would like to have a word with you.
>>1118517
Hong Xiuquan thought he was Jesus' younger brother. Neither the Protestants nor the Catholics would have considered his movement Christian.
>>1118420
Christianity didn't cause Rome to collapse retard.
>>1118635
It wasn't the sole cause no, but internal strife brought about by religious differences and state endorsement of one specific cult over all others was a serious problem in the latter days of the roman empire.
>>1118646
Religious strife was a symptom of underlying causes, the same thing would have happened with the imperial cult, or Sol Invicuts, or Manichaeism.
>>1118650
No it wouldn't have because pre-christian roman religion didn't work that way and even when christianity existed it was only when it became the only allowed religion in the empire under Theodosius that the problem started. I mean, christians had been causing problems to one extent or another from the start really, but it took state sponsorship of that one religion and no other religion in order for the true clusterfuck to occur.
>>1118650
well manichaeism would have probably caused considerable issues given mani's teachings concerning banning reproduction
>>1118688
Yeah, but the real issue with what theodosius did was him endorsing one specific faith and declaring others illegal.
Christianity is supposedly booming everywhere except for America/Europe (et al English speaking countries considered "the West"). However, you're not wrong. It does thrive in enslaved cultures, and that's because enslaved cultures are humbled. It took forever for Buddhism to take off, to the point where that may be why there are such long time-spans for Buddha to reincarnate.
Christianity does not, because its doctrine is always relevant to the poor and oppressed, because they relate to Jesus who was just that. "For the Son of Man did not come down to be served, but to serve. In essence," Jesus was our slave and victimized by us.
But there's also the deepest underpinning tenet that's inseparable from true Christianity (not that mega church bullshit) and defines the religion. And that's charity. The idea of tithing and giving to the poor, in exchange being returned what you gave four-fold; is not a bylaw other religions share. Edgar Allen Poe put it best.
>A strong argument for the religion of Christ is this - that offences against Charity are about the only ones which men on their death-beds can be made - not to understand - but to feel - as crime.
When you're at the end of your rope (of life), you will realize and wish that your only purpose had been able to help more people enjoy theirs.
>>1118023
>spread so quickly
It was still a small minority of c.10% three centuries later and was confined mostly to the urban poor in the eastern cities. It was only after Constantine when it began to get traction and even then it took until Theodosius for it to become the majority.
>>1118420
Fuck off Gibbon, I know that's you.
>>1118023
People who know they are lost look for salvation.
People who know they are slaves look for freedom.
People who know they are dead look for resurrection.
>>1118420
It's not ironic at all, considering how well Christianity treats women. It's also not ironic as women tend to have higher empathy for others, and are therefore more capable of discerning that God is a person, not an idea.
Hence most autists lack empathy and are psychopathic atheists.
You know, most of you people.
>>1118650
Doubt it. The memetic nature of Christianity meant that it must replace all other religion
>>1120357
Nonsense. The bible clearly says that only a few will find the narrow path that leads to Jesus. That path is literally Jesus. And the bible teaches that most people are on the broad road that leads to destruction.
It's catholics who want to rule the world, not Christians. Knowing the difference can save your life.
>>1120210
oh fuck off. autism doesn't cause you to have no empathy, it causes you to be bad at understanding the social behavior of others. autism and psychopathy are two completely different mental illnesses
>>1120372
>#notallchristians
>>1120210
Autists don't have a problem with empathy, they have problem with reading people. Many autists actually react incredibly strongly if they do manage to understand what another person is feeling because they haven't become as jaded to it as other people.
>>1118407
>They themselves came from land (Afghanistan and Persia) that was conquered and forcefully converted during the Islamic Caliphates.
Incorrect. The Islamization of these places took place under native Muslim regimes like the Samanids, not the Caliphates, and were done through the growth of a middle class centered in the towns of Central Asia. The Ghaznavids, Ghorids, Delhi Sultans, and eventually the Mughals all derived from Turkic slaves not from conquered territory but brought in from the steppe further east, converted, and turned into a class of soldiers who generally escaped some political issue in Afghanistan by running away into India as adventurers.
Even at their most brutal, it was actually very difficult to convert Hindus with violence. Rather most converts were those who were raised as slaves or married into the Turkic Muslim elite in the north or were more primitive and less fully Hindu by the time Islamic generals and sufis arrived, such as in the Bengal.
