Untaught History- Christians forced entire nations to convert at the point of a sword

originally posted by: Anaana
I am not sure I would phrase it like that but I do understand what you mean, whether I agree with it to the full extent you take it...I am much less sure about. Everything, or everything as I perceive it?

I meant everything man made was first an abstract thought. About 80% of your day is in this abstract world we live in. You are in the world the whole time you are on your computer as example. But my main point is religion is a byproduct of how we think and whether God is real or not our brains would not comprehend the thought if we didn't have the ability to think in the abstract.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

The thing is that Christs conduct in the Bible is compassionate. He does not kill, nor torture, does not oppress nor does he shun. He breaks bread with those who were cast out, breaks tradition (at least that of his time) repeatedly, rewrites the contract between man and God simply by living and dying the way he did.

These are things which are good. Man however, has sought to twist his words and deeds, and I suspect edit things into his utterances that were never meant to be there, for their own nefarious purpose.

This is why I pay more attention when he tells us to love one another, to treat one another as we would wish to be treated ourselves, not to judge because we are not fit to do so. These are messages which resonate with what I believe to have been his true intent as a man and as an entity, they do not contradict the idea that he was a loving and compassionate man. That is the concept I follow. All else falls away beneath this fundamental approach.

Simply put...yet extremely profound. I agree, wholeheartedly.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

I follow Buddhism 5StarOracle. One of the most profound sayings attributed to Gautama Buddha is to not believe anything even if it came from his mouth. But to search for the truth ourselves.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Raggedyman

Remember people were largely uneducated upto about say 1500 ad, couldn't read, so the clergy told people what to do and think

Then, as ever, there were ways of finding the truth of the matter. For those that couldn't read, not as many as might be thought I'd wager, there were other ways of getting news. Minstrels. Wandering tinkers. ...and others, all carried the news and latest happenings around Europe.

Just out of curiosity, how do you define uneducated? I'm very curious.

The clergy, powers of the church lied to the people and manipulated them

...and? What else is new? You don't think those "uneducated" people weren't aware of this? Really?

I guess I mean uneducated by not having access to the internet...

Peasants couldnt read or write, thats a fact, books were worth large sums of money and had to be hand copied

and No, I dont think they were aware of this, thats my opinion

a reply to: Raggedyman

I guess I mean uneducated by not having access to the internet...

Well then, you'd be right. There were, however, other things that served, if you will, as the internet. Not as instantaneous, obviously, but still got the news out and about... Then, as now, there were people who wanted to know what was going on in the world around them.

Peasants couldnt read or write, thats a fact, books were worth large sums of money and had to be hand copied

Indeed. However, you also had the merchant class who very much could read and write, probably in more than one language. You had the folks who worked for them who could, at the least, read and write their native tongue...that, too, is fact. Yes, books were worth a small fortune, but depending upon the time the printing press soon changed that.

Those merchants brought the world to what were otherwise isolated, at least somewhat, communities. They didn't necessarily need to read and write in order to disseminate information... I'm not going to say that most knew what was happening in the world, or even about the world, but many did.

and No, I dont think they were aware of this, thats my opinion

Only if they chose to be unaware. The information was out there to be had. The local inn. The public house down the road might be playing host to a traveling show, and the members talk about what's happening down the road where they were last week, or last month, or even last year. People talk, people listen. Some even make up their own minds about things...they may not be able to act on it--but they know.

As it is today, so it was yesterday, and so it'll be tomorrow. Only the speed has changed. The accuracy is for us to determine.

...and yes, it is your opinion, and you're welcome to it. Personally, I think you are underestimating our ancestors.

a reply to: seagull

and I think you are underestimating how much power and control the church had on the people, how many lies were told to oppress them.
Consider Luthers peasants revolt, the peasants never knew what was written till they could read what the bible really said.
Then the church put them down with the sword because the peasants wanted a system based on the bibles teachings, the church didnt.

Its nice to think you know history, different if you study it

Personally, I think you are underestimating the corruption of the church and its power

a reply to: Raggedyman

Just as a note...

Conversations generally go better when you're polite. You have absolutely no call to be rude in this discussion. Consider turning it down a notch.

Having said that?

I'll leave you to your "expertise" in all matters concerning the Church, since you seem disinclined to have a conversation and would prefer an echo chamber.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Raggedyman

Just as a note...

Conversations generally go better when you're polite. You have absolutely no call to be rude in this discussion. Consider turning it down a notch.

Having said that?

I'll leave you to your "expertise" in all matters concerning the Church, since you seem disinclined to have a conversation and would prefer an echo chamber.

I am sorry that you seem to think that I am rude
It was never my intention, maybe to many fights on this site has caused me to be less than courteous, maybe something for me to reflect on

Anyway, no doubt this is going to sound unreasonable as well, seems anytime I disagree with someone I am unreasonable

You made many suggestions that I don't see history backing up, many assumptions based on...
what?
Prior to Luther and Worms, the Catholic churc, as well as the Orthodox Church did as they wished, it did change after people started to read the bible for themselves.
Western civilization was created off Luther and his work
Now I am not a big fan of Luther, respect where it is due though

I still can't see the uneducated masses gaining information from those in power, if those in power hid it from them

Maybe a bit like today and all the things we think are being hidden from us, why you and me see ats as a necessity for information in 2017 with the help of the Internet, imagine if you couldn't read

a reply to: CB328

By later times you mean 1967 or what?

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

I call duality insanity for what it is and am not blind to the genocide that follows when the cancer is allowed to spread. Racism, Nationalism, Gender inequality are all manifestation of flawed dualistic ideas creating us vs them stories that can be used for justification of insane behavior.

A few examples:
Indian genocide by the Muslim.
Native American genocide by the Christians.
Enslavement and genocide by the Muslim and Christians in Africa.
Islam Jihad vs Christian Crusade killing each other.
Nazi killing Jews during the 2nd world war.
Wahabbi/Sunni/ISIS/US vs Shia/Russia/Syria in current middle east.

Plenty of religions have been able to limit duality in their teachings. Why are the Abrahamic religions so logically dualistic (us vs them thinking) compared to Buddhism/Taoism/Shinto/Sikhism/Hinduism/Jainism/Confucianism?

There are souls that are Christians, Jews and Muslim that are moral in spite of the duality hiding in the books since they see beyond the books and scripture.

Do not mistake me for an atheist. I know some of the effects of the "hidden normal".

We could talk all day about the history of violence in the name of God and still not arrive at a conclusion who is the worst ever with the exception of Catholicism.

It's quite trendy to bash Islam and ignore the violence Christians cause. Being an American is pretty good odds that you will be or at least identify as Christian if you are religious. Tons of Christians on death row, in the armed forces and doing life sentences so the capacity for violence is universally human.

Not to mention "the machine" for lack of a better term, really wants enough people to believe that Islam is itself violent when it's no different than Christianity in that regard and in most regards, shares traditions with it and Judaism.

I would not want to be the type of person who is such a blank slate and programmable to fall for such obvious trickery, it is all of us humans who are violent, some by proxy others directly but religion is an excuse not a reason, for violence and doesn't encourage it.

Every religion has its false teachers and sub cults with weird beliefs, some benign and very few are violent.

They have the numbers and geographical dispersion to literally terrorise most countries in the world and we actually can't know that every time the news says "Radical Islamic terrorists" committed an act of terror that it was not a covert operation to blame the radicals of choice, so a reason to strike "back" is available.

It's not hard and does happen.

People were paid to dance in the street on film and it was later used by the media to show Muslims dancing for joy after 9/11 in Palestine.

I wonder who by...?(begins with M).

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TerriblePhoenix
a reply to: Raggedyman

The True Church is in Golgotha.

If you think so

I know so because I thought about it and it seems obvious to me Golgotha is not a geographical location as it was mentioned by the Gospels alone until Medieval Jew"sh authors started writing about it.

It's the mind, the place of the skull or "Golgotha" the true Church and Temple and in the brain is the Holy of Holies.

originally posted by: TerriblePhoenix

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TerriblePhoenix
a reply to: Raggedyman

The True Church is in Golgotha.

If you think so

I know so because I thought about it and it seems obvious to me Golgotha is not a geographical location as it was mentioned by the Gospels alone until Medieval Jew"sh authors started writing about it.

It's the mind, the place of the skull or "Golgotha" the true Church and Temple and in the brain is the Holy of Holies.

Except
My mistake I thought You were referring to the church as a building or place.
Christians see it as a gathering of true believers, according to the bible at least, we can hold a church meeting anywhere there is room. A church is a gathering, not an individual

Maybe other religions see it as a building, in their mind, you can as well, no harm

originally posted by: CB328
there is a fair amount of information about how the Christians in Roman and later times forced many tribes and nations to convert to Christianity and killed a lot of people who resisted in the process.

Yes, and the heathens did just the same, vice-versa. Except they have no justification in killing, themselves being devoted followers of false religions.

Kill or be killed.

You nip the pagans in the bud before they sprout into a mighty number and over-run you, your homes, your family, your children and your wives.

Jesus said to love one another. I rest my case.

Plus, I learned this several times over throughout history class. I didn't learn bad things about other religions until college. To me, that's the bigger conspiracy.

a reply to: JustTheFacts

In 2014 in central Africa thousands of muslims had to flee because of Christian militias were going around killing them . So this hasn't left SOME religions it's always been there your focus has been drawn to muslims because of media focus , and where is the next destination for the USA and NATO to destabilise and put puppets in place . You guessed it the Middle East where they have a large proportion of muslims

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: seagull

One of the first Crusades was called against the Muslims in the Holy Land running around practicing convert, submit or die back then, and unlike the white-washed version of the practice we are told about today, it was every bit as brutal as the Crusades.

There's a real reason why there are so few minority religious in the Middle Eastern countries and it isn't because Islam is so great.

Funny how you are now doing exactly what you spoke out against in your earlier post in this thread. You said that people are bringing up the history of Christianity, to somehow justify what Muslim extremists have done in recent times, which nobody has even argued for. Now here you are trying to justify the violent history of Christianity by referring to Islam and to secular violence like Stalin. That's pure hypocrisy, I'm sorry, and it's also a red herring used to steer the conversation away from Christianity's violent roots.

Every time people bring up the simple facts, you guys go into ultra defensive mode and rather than acknowledge the violent history and likelihood that Christianity is just another false religion, you attack another religion. 2 wrongs don't make a right. Arguing against the violent history by bringing up violence from other cultures doesn't make your religion's history fine.

Many folks mentioned that we have been taught this history, but not everybody has. Schools might briefly mention some of this but they never give the details of how horrible it actually was. They give details of the holocaust and every little thing about it, but with the crusades, they are selectively taught in many schools, especially religious ones. I grew up in the 80s and went to Catholic school until 8th grade and then went to public school for 8th grade and high school. Not once, did they ever teach about Christians torturing non believers or cutting of the limbs of natives and leaving them to die in agony, or anything about the brutality of the crusades or slavery as it was condoned by god. They mention the crusades and the dates they happened, but they spare the gory details. So they do teach it, but they purposely leave out TONS of information.

a reply to: DarkWriter
However, I'm willing to bet they didn't teach you anything (or much) about what's mentioned in the 3 videos I posted, or the article I linked. Not even in theology class (or a badly twisted version of it or leaving out inconvenient facts).

Here's some more about the Protestant leader Martin Luther (someone with a lot of influence on how many people think up till this day), stuff you won't often hear when his name comes up in history class, theology, religious discussions, lectures and speeches, or in Church (especially a Lutheran Church which is quite popular in Germany):

Certainly, the handiest trick of the propagandist is the use of outright lies. Consider, for example, the lies that Martin Luther wrote in 1543 about the Jews in Europe: “They have poisoned wells, made assassinations, kidnaped children . . . They are venomous, bitter, vindictive, tricky serpents, assassins, and children of the devil who sting and work harm.” His exhortation to so-called Christians? “Set fire to their synagogues or schools . . . Their houses [should] also be razed and destroyed.”

Source: The Manipulation of Information: Awake!—2000

More examples of stuff you won't hear much about from the usual sources people choose for their information (see the text under my name) regarding history and reality (especially those realities pertaining to God and who's really pulling the strings in various powerful or spiritually influential organizations, social, political, philosophical and religious movements and those promoting a more individualistic approach appropiately described as "Ietsism" in the Netherlands, literally "Something-ism"). Just take your pick:

The Apostolic Fathers—Truly Apostolic?
The Church Fathers—Advocates of Bible Truth?
The Changing Face of “Christianity”—Acceptable to God?
The Apologists—Christian Defenders or Would-Be Philosophers?
The Paradox of Tertullian
Michael Servetus—A Solitary Quest for the Truth: Awake!—2006

Some historians claim that Servetus was the only religious dissenter who was both burned in effigy by the Catholics and burned alive by the Protestants.

500 Years of Calvinism—What Has It Achieved?
Three 16th-Century Truth Seekers—What Did They Find?
One Myth Leads to Another
The Challenge of Knowing God by Name
Tatian—Apologist or Heretic?
Why You Can Trust the Biblical Gospels
The Gospels—History or Myth?
Should You Believe in the Trinity? Awake!—2013

a reply to: Raggedyman

I am sorry that you seem to think that I am rude

But you are rude.

It was never my intention,

I protest. Yes, it was your intention. And you've mastered the art, for sure.

maybe to many fights on this site has caused me to be less than courteous,

Hmmmm

maybe something for me to reflect on

Ya think???

Anyway, no doubt this is going to sound unreasonable as well, seems anytime I disagree with someone I am unreasonable

Yep! YOU ARE! Totally unreasonable....accusing people of being atheists, inventing reasons to insult everyone who isn't your "preferred flavor" of Christian......


I'm happy to see some self-reflection and soul-searching going on here with you!!

originally posted by: rukia


Jesus said to love one another. I rest my case.

He said kill or be killed.