Pagan Societies were barbaric because Christian values were not around.

Sep 2015
1,436
England
What do you mean "his point", whose point are you blabbering about because I never mentioned Visigoths, Swabians and Franks. Seems you are misrepresenting me, in yet another gnomic post.
Your insults do you no credit.

Nor refusing to follow the thread of a post (ie. its meaning).

Nor expressing an apparent and latent prejudice. You are correct on only one point: my posts might very well be entirely moral. But they are certainly not lacking in substantive, meaningful content, in any way whatsoever, and anyone reading them will know so, unless they prefer to live the lie so to speak. I don't. So, your only move, if you really really don't like meaningful content, is to reconsider your position or purpose here at Historum.
 
Oct 2018
293
Adelaide south Australia
A bit late to this thread, and I've only read a few pages. Apologies if any or all of my point shave already been discussed.

Christian apologist have been making the same bogus claims since the time Christianity first [officially] began to persecute pagans, under the emperor Theodosius in the fourth century.

The term 'christian' is a pretty vague term, as threat literally dozens of sects , each claiming exclusive truth. Each one saying all the others' are not true Christians" ( no true Scotsman fallacy)

No true Scotsman or appeal to purity is an informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition in an ad hoc fashion to exclude the counterexample.[1][2] Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule ("no true Scotsman would do such a thing"; i.e., those who perform that action are not part of our group and thus criticism of that action is not criticism of the group).[3]

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia

I have been called immoral because I am an atheist and do not happen to share the precise personal superstition of whatever kind of Christian to whom I am speaking.


Let's just look at some facts;

Ancient Egypt had very well defined moral and ethical system, built on the notion of 'M'aat', ( natural order, including justice); this goes back about 5000 years. Can quote some if you like.


India: have a read of say the Bhagavad Gita ('the Song Of God' A sublime work on theatre of suffering. First written down around 8th century ce, from much older oral history.

The Greek schools of Philosophy, from the presocratic and Pythagoras to Plato (ca 470 bce) to Roman moral philosophers, such as Marcus Aurelius. (reigned second century ce; pagan)

Around 600 bce In India; Siddartha Gautama called 'The Buddha'. A moral philosophy superior to Christianity, imo.

Same period; china; Confucius, the great moral philosopher.

Judaism first wrote down the Torah, including 613 commandments (mitzvot) which make up Mosaic law. If you read Hammuarabi's code, some of the rules look very familiar. Probably because much of Judaism is lifted from the Sumerians, including their god. Just for interest, read the story of the flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh, and compare it with the story of Noah in Genesis..

Modern times; Karl Marx,as well as providing a brilliant analysis of nineteenth century Europe, was also amoral philosopher. Read his monograph on "The Factory", which deals with child labor.

I gotta go out. I'll finish with a debate arguing "Is the Catholic Church a force for good?" Steven fry takes the contra view.. I will simply not bother with any sectarian bullshit about what is a true christian.

 
Likes: Zanis
Jul 2017
2,083
Crows nest
Your insults do you no credit.

Nor refusing to follow the thread of a post (ie. its meaning).

Nor expressing an apparent and latent prejudice. You are correct on only one point: my posts might very well be entirely moral. But they are certainly not lacking in substantive, meaningful content, in any way whatsoever, and anyone reading them will know so, unless they prefer to live the lie so to speak. I don't. So, your only move, if you really really don't like meaningful content, is to reconsider your position or purpose here at Historum.
What a load of gnomic claptrap.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2014
3,382
Australia
Just look at the long line of Popes. Do you call all of the Christian bosses persons who were respecting life?
It is hypocritical to claim to respect life while also supporting the capital punishment. This study suggests that, even today, the majority of Protestants and Catholics in the US still support the death penalty.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-2-00006?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

At least the current Pope has stated that the Death Penalty is contrary to Christian values.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2010
14,644
Wessex
This is a pointless line of argument because this was a society in which everything was viewed from a religious perspective and through a religious lens; so one can pick good things and bad things from hundreds of years of history, and say these represent 'Christian values'. One can do the same with 'European culture' or 'European values', the burning of witches, the Gothic cathedrals, the art of the Renaissance, the use of torture in criminal investigation, the Enlightentment - and the Christian! - of the absolute value of every individual human life, they all form part of it.
 
Last edited:
Sep 2015
1,436
England
This is a pointless line of argument because this was a society in which everything was viewed from a religious perspective and through a religious lens; so one can pick good things and bad things from hundreds of years of history, and say these represent 'Christian values'. One can do the same with 'European culture' or 'European values', the burning of witches, the Gothic cathedrals, the art of the Renaissance, the use of torture in criminal investigation, the Enlightentment - and the Christian! - of the absolute value of every individual human life, they all form part of it.
The point i have been making since whatever page it was, is really fairly plain and simple. It's not anything other than plain words, that make a case. What is the case i have made?
  1. Is it not the case, that we can all agree, that slavery Is barbaric.
  2. And therefore where a civilisation, on this point, does or does not allow slavery, it is either barbaric or not, again on this one point (and therefore thus far, for there will be other points).
  3. The Christian world tended towards abolishing slavery from the c.10th onwards, especially in northern and western Europe, and not so much in Mediterranean Europe, Spain and Portugal in particular, during the middle ages 500-1500.
That was my point. Nothing more. Just history. The more open minded members will have realised & sussed it out as such, without much fuss.

Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom - Wikipedia
(China is clearly an apparent exception)
 
Oct 2018
293
Adelaide south Australia
Not an argument, simply a statement of facts. Their Christian values including roasting the odd person in a bronze cow, cutting off various bits and blinding now and again. Good pagan stuff really - they obviously didn't see Christian values the same as the OP
You forgot burning at the stake :) Fully supported by the Church, for centuries.

Just one small example; Hypatia of Alexandria; 5th century ce. A rare creature in the ancient world; a woman, who was a mathematician , neo Platonic Philosopher, and Pagan .She was murdered by the Christians of Alexandria with the knowledge and support of the Bishop of Alexandria, Cyril. These good Christians then flayed her body and paraded her skin through Alexandria. Also a vivid example of the corruption of the early Church; the Bishop held the power of life and death, something no clergy should never be allowed to hold, imo.

There's a LOT of stuff about her because there is a lot known about her life, teachings and death

There is also a pretty good movie about her; 'AGORA', wit Rachel Weiss as Hypatia.

Make no mistake, the reason people are no longe burned at the stake for heresy is because the churches are no longer permitted to kill people. Think I'm wrong? Listen to a few Televangelists, preachers and predators to the mentally deficient.

@johnincornwall; Christians did (and still do) evil things with the use of some mental sleight of hand; they held to their Christian beliefs, even practising
them between themselves. Pagans were damned, so not really human. Thee psychological explanation for such behaviour is called 'cognitive dissonance', something at which every devout christian I've ever met excels. (apologies to anyone familiar with cognitive dissonance )

I wrote this post because I enjoy hitting my head against a brick wall; it feels great when I, like now. :)
 
Likes: specul8
Oct 2018
293
Adelaide south Australia
"At least the current Pope has stated that the Death Penalty is contrary to Christian values."

Well yes, he has. Francis has made career of making pope-like noises. Doesn't seem to have actually done much.

A great many Catholics have pretty much ignored what quite few popes have said/.written. The earliest I can remember is in the early 1960's when the Pope prohibited Catholic women from using the contraceptive pill. Women simply ignored him.

For all of his alleged liberal ideas, Francis has not addressed issues such as marriage of clergy, women priests, or Capital punishment in nay meaningful way. EG Forbid catholics to have any involvement in Capital punishment, starting with juries, lawyers, judges and politicians.

The Pope is an anachronism, completely redundant .


Did I like any Pope? Well yeah, I was very fond of PopeJohn XX1 ; a rotund little old peasant, meant be simply caretake pope. Instead, he convened the Second Vatican council, in 1959,, which resulted more changes in the Church than for nearly 100 years. I thought he was a good, devout man.