It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If your slave master wasn't a christian, you wouldn't be a christian.

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2009 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Yep. KRS-ONE used to say this to African Americans on the MIC, and now I'm saying it to all Northern Europeans....

"IF YOUR SLAVE MASTER WASN'T A CHRISTIAN, YOU WOULDN'T BE A CHRISTIAN"

The original Western Religion was that of the Celts. The Celts had a variety of dieties, and had no true Homogeneity of beliefs. The only thing linking them all together were the Druids who were the magistrates, attorneys, apothecaries, spiritualists, and advisers in pre-roman times.

That was until Julius Cesar took umbrage with two things.

1. The Celts were rich as cream.... they had over 400 Gold Mines.

2. The Celts were so perverse they actually let women hold office, and by law were obligated to take care of their young, old, and mentally/physically infirm. You see in Roman times, unwanted children were abandoned and left to die. And the patriarchal nature of Rome found egalitarian societies to be repulsive.

Cesar then conquered the Celts by killing off all of the Druids, and pushing Druidry underground, he removed the names of the Celtic deities and replaced them with Roman gods in a false syncretism. He took over 1 million Celtic Slaves and eventually Roman Christianity spread through the Celtic realms.

All Hail Cesar...

"IF YOUR SLAVE MASTER WASN'T A CHRISTIAN, YOU WOULDN'T BE A CHRISTIAN"

So what of this?

Well for one, Celts had a strong belief in the "Otherworld" An afterlife which had no heaven or hell, it was just the continuation of this life. So much was it like this life, that many debts were scheduled to be paid in the afterlife as opposed to during this one.

Although the Celts had a sense of morality and law, this had to do with this world, and the Gods rarely cared about the affairs of humans. The only sin in the Celtic world was to come to a standstill in life. There was no sexual morality.

Eventually people will wake up to the fact that European Americans suffer the same detachment from their true heritage as African Americans. And Rome still exists today in this attempt to rule nations with an over organized gov and religion.





[edit on 8-5-2009 by HunkaHunka]




posted on May, 8 2009 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Are you serious? Christianity was spreading like a wild fire even before the Roman Empire adopted it. Your reason and Logic is flawed, If what you are saying is correct, then please answer this; Why in Ethiopia have they been Christians longer then Europe?


en.wikipedia.org...
www.cia.gov...



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by poedxsoldiervet
 




How is my logic flawed? It's not logic actually, it's history.

Christianity did not spread into the Celtic regions until after Cesar exterminated the Druids.


Keep in mind that the megalithic culture of the Northern Europe extends to 3200 BC.

Celtic Europe goes back to 1800 BC

The druids themselves go back to at least the 200 years before Christ.

en.wikipedia.org...



The process of Christianisation intensified following the legalization of the religion under Constantine in the 4th century, and its promotion by subsequent Christian emperors.


www.thenagain.info...




[edit on 8-5-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
I've not once attacked any atheist, simply presented ideas. Slavery is a fault of men's decisions to go that route they just used religion to signify it, which is undoubtedly wrong for anyone. Their faulty dogma today would make no sense with any religion. Before anyone says "your God condoned to slavery," I will say that it was men who did it and that's what free will is. They could have not enslaved anyone you know!



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   
While i agree that the fact that Roman empire adopted Christianity served as a catalyst in its spread in Europe, Middle East and Africa, it happened centuries after Julius Caesar.
Also you described Druidism too one-sided. There were Human sacrifices for example. And other unpleasant stuff. All religions/cultures/societies have some moral weakness/strength in comparison to others.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by watchtheashes
 


I think you misread my post. My point is that the Romans where the Slave masters of the Celts and it was the Romans who brought Christianity to the Celts.

i.e. Celts are not Christians... that is their slave masters religion.

I for one reject anything the slave masters of my ancestors brought, such as organized religions and organized governments.




[edit on 8-5-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Not all celts were Roman Slaves. In fact it was not only the roman empires expansion but also the migration of the germanic tribes.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
While i agree that the fact that Roman empire adopted Christianity served as a catalyst in its spread in Europe, Middle East and Africa, it happened centuries after Julius Caesar.
Also you described Druidism too one-sided. There were Human sacrifices for example. And other unpleasant stuff. All religions/cultures/societies have some moral weakness/strength in comparison to others.



However Julius Cesar is the one who conquered the Celts AND exterminated the Druids.

You also have to remember that most everything we know today about the Druids comes from Roman historians. Of course they were made out to be barbarians because everyone who wasn't Roman was seen as perverse.

The Celts had no written history. Druids wrote nothing down, and all tradition was orally passed on.

Here is an excerpt from wikipedia...



As written in Roman sources, Celtic Druids engaged extensively in human sacrifice.[27] According to Julius Caesar, the slaves and dependants of Gauls of rank would be burnt along with the body of their master as part of his funerary rites.[28] He also describes how they built wicker figures that were filled with living humans and then burned.[29] It is known that druids at least supervised sacrifices of some kind. According to Cassius Dio, Boudica's forces impaled Roman captives during her rebellion against the Roman occupation, to the accompaniment of revellery and sacrifices in the sacred groves of Andate.[30] Some modern-day scholars question the accuracy of these accounts, as they invariably come from hostile (Roman or Greek) sources.[31] Different gods reportedly required different kind of sacrifices. Victims meant for Esus were hung, those meant for Taranis immolated and those for Teutates drowned. Some, like the Lindow Man, may have gone to their deaths willingly.

Archaeological evidence from the British Isles seems to indicate that human sacrifice may have been practiced, over times long pre-dating any contact with Rome. Human remains have been found at the foundations of structures from the Neolithic time to the Roman era, with injuries and in positions that argue for their being foundation sacrifices. Similarly, additional human remains in the tombs of aged men show signs of having been killed to be buried in the grave.


Keep in mind that Celts were not afraid of death. It was assumed they would continue to live on in the "other world". This is why many jumped to their deaths in old age and why many were willing participants in human sacrifice.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Not all celts were Roman Slaves. In fact it was not only the roman empires expansion but also the migration of the germanic tribes.


en.wikipedia.org...


I didn't say all celts were taken as slaves... I said 1 Million were taken as slaves. It was the Romans which systematically dismantled the processes which maintained the Celtic Empire. It was the Romans who wrote the history of the Celts, and the Romans which removed the Celtic Gods from their place in the community, replacing them with Roman deities in a false syncretism.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 



Then how do you explain the fact that Celts and druids survived on the British Isles and even Ireland. Druids and Celts are not extinct or even dead. I know quite a few people who practice druidism.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


I am far from adoring Julius Caesar, trust me. Neither i am a Christian. And of course last thing i would like to do is to tell you what religion (if any at all) you should follow.
But it is one thing to respect your ancestors and dislike their enemies - and totally other to declare modern architecture not acceptable since it was Roman oppressor/slave master who brought it to Northern Europe. It is not serious approach, i hope you agree with me on this.
Religion is not science/technology. But just as it is not fault of Roman arch in some bridge , it is not fault of religion that Romans captured so much in Europe and erased its culture.
As for Druidism - it is surely not as bad as it is presented. But nor it is ideal.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
The only thing linking them all together were the Druids who were the magistrates, attorneys, apothecaries, spiritualists, and advisers in pre-roman times.
what, apart from the languages, art and culture. how about the political systems and the trade. no, your right, it was all the druids.


That was until Julius Cesar took umbrage with two things.


the romans, if i remember correctly from my studies, had their biggest issue with the fact that the celts, believing in a rich and good afterlife for those who die in battle, weren't all that susceptible to the psycological impact a roman legion often had in the classical world. you don't mention this?


Cesar then conquered the Celts by killing off all of the Druids
except in ireland, these irish druids and their legacy are where most of the information related to actual druidism can be gained, unlike the stuff you seem to be drawing from roman writing on the druids.


Although the Celts had a sense of morality and law, this had to do with this world, and the Gods rarely cared about the affairs of humans.

celtic belief seems, to me, to have been more a form of elaborite ancestor worship than having anything to do with god like deities. where they are mentioned it is uasually interfering in human affairs. which gods are you refering to? there were tons of them, maybe i don't know the gods you mean.


The only sin in the Celtic world was to come to a standstill in life. There was no sexual morality.
sin? sin's a very christian term. there's no sin but there is morality and immediate consequence. there was also sexual morality and taboos and all that, it was just different to ours.


Eventually people will wake up to the fact that European Americans suffer the same detachment from their true heritage as African Americans.


you see, the thing is, ireland never really had the romans, yet christianity in ireland was adopted, it flourished. it has always been a big thing and the irish can fairly be said to be roman catholic to a large extent. dosn't that jibe just a little with your theory?

[edit on 8/5/09 by pieman]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

You also have to remember that most everything we know today about the Druids comes from Roman historians. Of course they were made out to be barbarians because everyone who wasn't Roman was seen as perverse.

The Celts had no written history. Druids wrote nothing down, and all tradition was orally passed on.

Here is an excerpt from wikipedia...


And there lies the rub... it's all right saying 'the Celts' believed this, that or the other (as you've done yourself in this thread) when in reality, we have very little to actually go on. Much of what has been written about Celtic belief - particularly in wicca frenzy following Buffy the Vampire Slayer and the Llewellyn Books explosion - is pretty much rubbish and practically all very speculative.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Then how do you explain the fact that Celts and druids survived on the British Isles and even Ireland. Druids and Celts are not extinct or even dead. I know quite a few people who practice druidism.


They might think they practice druidism, but they'll have very, very little in the way of proof to demonstrate they practice a druidry that has anything in common with 2000 years ago. All the main Druid organisations admit that there's no real unbroken line between then and now and that much of what's assumed has its roots in the 18th C. &c. Anybody who suggests differently is suffering from the same mental malady as those who claim to have a super-secret passed-on spellbook and a family tradition dating back hundred of years.

As for Celts not being extinct, this makes as much sense as 'the iPod people' or' the people who drove 1960s cars and danced to 1960s music' not being extinct. 'Celtic' is more about language and technology culture than it is about genes - except of course to those who've watched Braveheart and the like too many times.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


It seems I did misread your post. Sorry about that man. I think Romans simply realized something after a big earthquake and the sky was black for six hours... That doesn't require any Celtics.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by watchtheashes]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

My point is that the Romans where the Slave masters of the Celts and it was the Romans who brought Christianity to the Celts.


I agree with you that the Romans brought Christianity to the Celts and can probably agree that the Romans were slave masters to the Celts (because I don't want to do the research for myself).

However, this statement


I for one reject anything the slave masters of my ancestors brought, such as organized religions and organized governments.


is utterly illogical and lazy. Why would you just up and reject anything because of something that happened a thousand years ago? It's one thing to say that you reject organized religions and organized governments because of certain specific aspects that you disagree with. It quite another to broadly proclaim that, because the Romans brought it over, you're rejecting it. This is lazy thinking.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
As for Celts not being extinct, this makes as much sense as 'the iPod people' or' the people who drove 1960s cars and danced to 1960s music' not being extinct. 'Celtic' is more about language and technology culture than it is about genes - except of course to those who've watched Braveheart and the like too many times.


this is where things get confusing, always. "celtic" as we understand the term is singly artistic, this is how the nineteenth century historians qualified the peoples of europe.

the scottish and irish languages are both similar but welsh is totally different, yet all three are "celtic". even english is a "celtic language" with a whole heap of latinisation, and language at the time was so regional it soon becomes irrelevant.

the technology changed over time and geography but the people were still called celts.

it just gets down to art eventually.

ultimately, it's how you define yourself if you're going to go down the road of modern peoples because there is always the argument that this stuff was all ruling elites anyway and the normal people didn't ever vary widely genetically immediately before and after one of these cultural waves.

[edit on 8/5/09 by pieman]



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


I am far from adoring Julius Caesar, trust me. Neither i am a Christian. And of course last thing i would like to do is to tell you what religion (if any at all) you should follow.
But it is one thing to respect your ancestors and dislike their enemies - and totally other to declare modern architecture not acceptable since it was Roman oppressor/slave master who brought it to Northern Europe. It is not serious approach, i hope you agree with me on this.


The only thing I take issue with is the assumption that this is how it should be. That it is somehow a divine decree with no other alternatives.

I would like to enlighten people who find their authority in a false religion, that it is not their religion. Even the version of Christianity which was spread through Celtic lands is not the original version of Christianity.

I take umbrage not with Christians or Christianity, but assumption that Romanism is a legitimate form of religion or government for my peoples.

I do not believe we are all created equal, we are all diverse and different. And that difference is a genetic one which predisposes us to live in different ways.




Religion is not science/technology. But just as it is not fault of Roman arch in some bridge , it is not fault of religion that Romans captured so much in Europe and erased its culture.
As for Druidism - it is surely not as bad as it is presented. But nor it is ideal.



I believe that religions originate as a phenotypical manifestation of genetics. Although Druidism is not ideal for those who are not descended from them. For those of us who are, it is much more ideal than what has been given to us by invaders.

I appreciate your debate on this topic btw.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

My point is that the Romans where the Slave masters of the Celts and it was the Romans who brought Christianity to the Celts.


I agree with you that the Romans brought Christianity to the Celts and can probably agree that the Romans were slave masters to the Celts (because I don't want to do the research for myself).

However, this statement


I for one reject anything the slave masters of my ancestors brought, such as organized religions and organized governments.


is utterly illogical and lazy. Why would you just up and reject anything because of something that happened a thousand years ago? It's one thing to say that you reject organized religions and organized governments because of certain specific aspects that you disagree with. It quite another to broadly proclaim that, because the Romans brought it over, you're rejecting it. This is lazy thinking.


You are right. I should clarify why *I* reject what the slave masters of *My Ancestors* gave them.

I simply don't identify with anything Roman. They were anti-intellectuals seeing the Greeks as barbarians because of their penchant for thinking. They saw any egalitarian culture as perverse. They often abandoned their children they didn't want in trash heaps... legally.

There are many things I detest about Roman culture.

I'm sorry I should have clarified that more.

However, I do believe it is moronic for a slave to adopt their slave masters beliefs. Regardless of what those are. If you are enslaving me, then your religious beliefs do not serve me in the least.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Since when did Americans become slaves again? The 19th Century is dead and gone buddy, I think you are stretching it here.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join