And then there was one / Historian examines the bloody clash between paganism and monotheism

SFChronicle ^ | 3/21/04 | Don Lattin

[tpaine]

My duties as a religion writer forced me to watch Mel Gibson's Jesus movie, "The Passion of the Christ," two times in three days, an assignment that also interrupted my reading of "God Against the Gods: The History of the War Between Monotheism and Polytheism."

[tpaine]

"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

Lattin is about to be crucified himself, -- for writing a religious editorial disguised as a book review..

[Just mythoughts]

These people comparing mere mortal humans to Only Begotton Son of God, who NEVER sinned, keep missing the boat.

[ClearCase_guy]

My duties as a religion writer forced me to watch Mel Gibson's Jesus movie

He sure sounds unbiased against Christianity!

[Ken522]

Paganism, with its worship of a variety of gods and goddesses, tends by its very nature to be more tolerant of other faiths than monotheistic religion.

So the Romans, being pagans, were more tolerant of other faiths? Anyone who has seen "The Passion of The Christ" which shows the scourging of Jesus Christ can see that the Romans were anything but tolerant of other faiths.

[AntiGuv]

Hmm.. This sounds almost identical to a Greek book titled Demolish Them.

[marktwain]

Anyone who has seen "The Passion of The Christ" which shows the scourging of Jesus Christ can see that the Romans were anything but tolerant of other faiths.

I believe that you are wrong. The Roman execution of Jesus was, in their eyes, a political, not a religious act.

Remember that Christianity did not even exist at that point. If anyone was being intolerant, it was the monotheistic Jewish leaders, because Christ was a threat to their positions.

[AntiGuv]

Well, except that Demolish Them (as the timeline makes clear) takes an apparently much more hostile perspective to the advent of Christianity.

[liberallarry]

So the Romans, being pagans, were more tolerant of other faiths? Anyone who has seen "The Passion of The Christ" which shows the scourging of Jesus Christ can see that the Romans were anything but tolerant of other faiths.

Wrong. The Romans singled out the Jews for special punishment because the latter were notoriously intolerant.

[DallasMike]

I have to agree with the writer. Medieval Christianity has little to be proud of. There are exceptions, of course, but the whole Holy Roman Empire thing was a very bad idea. Further, the early Protestants, like Calvin, weren't much better.

[tpaine]

But of course, some who assume their beliefs to be infallible, could be said to reject the concept of a boat for all hands..

[liberallarry]

Also you confuse cruelty with tolerance. The entire ancient world habitually inflicted punishments that we find barbaric and inhuman.

[tpaine]

I'd say the guy is just a bit of a pagan.. Maybe even a savage..

-- If you get what I mean & I bet you do..

[farmfriend]

.

[tpaine]

Check your back.. There's a circular argument coming up behind you.

[tpaine]

If I agree, I too may be crucified, right here on FR..

[x]

IIRC, there's been some disagreement about who killed Hypatia and why. It may not have been a straightforward "hate crime" because of her not being a Christian, but a personal vendetta.

The thing about living in what is in many ways a libertarian age (at least in terms of ideas) is that libertarian rebelliousness against state authority comes to be applied to cultural and religious ideas as well. The One God, the ultimate authority, also comes under fire.

Some people are convinced that they can ride the libertarian spirit back to an earlier vision of the Bible and Constitution and then keep it locked up in the garage. But it doesn't work that way. Ideas and movements can be more like subways or trams that keep going long past your stop. Fall asleep and who knows where you'll end up.

I'm not saying libertarianism is wrong, or that liberty isn't a worthwhile goal (or even that paganism doesn't have its good points), but a lot of people who pride themselves on their radicalism and principled unwilling to compromise, don't see where such qualities can lead, or how much their own assumptions have been shaped by the principles they attack. Shake the foundations enough, and it's surprising what will fall down. Dostoevsky is particularly good on how political radicalism leads to the denial of God.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[tpaine]

IIRC, there's been some disagreement about who killed Hypatia and why. It may not have been a straightforward "hate crime" because of her not being a Christian, but a personal vendetta.
The thing about living in what is in many ways a libertarian age (at least in terms of ideas) is that libertarian rebelliousness against state authority comes to be applied to cultural and religious ideas as well.

Exactly, -- because the majority always tend to try to use state authority to apply their cultural/religious views on society. This violates our most basic constitutional principles.

The One God, the ultimate authority, also comes under fire.
Some people are convinced that they can ride the libertarian spirit back to an earlier vision of the Bible and Constitution and then keep it locked up in the garage. But it doesn't work that way.

If it doesn't 'work that way' our rule of law is being ignored.. What then?

Ideas and movements can be more like subways or trams that keep going long past your stop. Fall asleep and who knows where you'll end up.
I'm not saying libertarianism is wrong, or that liberty isn't a worthwhile goal (or even that paganism doesn't have its good points), but a lot of people who pride themselves on their radicalism and principled unwilling to compromise, don't see where such qualities can lead, or how much their own assumptions have been shaped by the principles they attack.

Aren't you assuming that those who want our constitution obeyed are somehow attacking the principles of culture/religion? This is not so..

Shake the foundations enough, and it's surprising what will fall down. Dostoevsky is particularly good on how political radicalism leads to the denial of God.

Excess zealotry also leads to political radicalism..
Live & let live is the constitutional American way..

[Just mythoughts]

But of course, some who assume their beliefs to be infallible, could be said to reject the concept of a boat for all hands..

As it is Written not all have eyes to see and ears to hear.
"The concept of a boat for all hands" would be dead in the water.

[tpaine]

mythoughts wrote:

As it is Written not all have eyes to see and ears to hear.

"The concept of a boat for all hands" would be dead in the water.


______________________________________


Yea verily. -- Those of little faith must condemn the beliefs of others to puff up their own ego..