What if Constantine had turned Hindu ?

TakuanSoho · #61 (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suburbanite

I have nothing inconsistent in my philosophy on life that YOU'VE pointed out to me, thats something you need to get straight. look at you, ranting like this to everyone's attack on religion, you're more interested in minimizing the feelings of isolation and resentment of your fellow agnostics and atheists than in creating solidarity amongst like minded people. Perhaps you feel more comfortable in a room full of theists, but the rest of us don't buddy, and the last thing we need is our own so-called like minded person going out of their way to point out our errors. I didn't state anything you're claiming I said, you've even begun to confuse the agnostics and atheists on the forum. Do we all sound alike to you? In your hatred of us have you come to blur all our aliases into one?

So it was "Smart" as opposed to you, you were siding with him, so you inherit Smart's crap.

If you want to defend them more forcefully, bring it on. Otherwise your "rant" above is about as valid as anything else you have said on this board.

smart makes a comeback · #62 (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakuanSoho

So it was "Smart" as opposed to you, you were siding with him, so you inherit Smart's crap.

If you want to defend them more forcefully, bring it on. Otherwise your "rant" above is about as valid as anything else you have said on this board.

For the sake of accuracy...something you sorely lack..It should be... sided with "her"

TakuanSoho · #63 (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

For the sake of accuracy...something you sorely lack..It should be... sided with "her"

Thank you for the correction. Unlike you, I aim to be accurate rather than "right".

TakuanSoho · #64 (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suburbanite

what a poser, going around attacking atheists and defending theists... i think we know where you stand takuan

To answer this question.

HEY SHIT FOR BRAINS, HOW HAS ANYTHING I SAID ON THIS THREAD DEFENDED THEISTS?

This is why I hate fundie atheists. They have AS much a problem with comprehending something outside of their dogma as the theists do. The only difference is that at least the theists don't pretend to be "rational" about their faith.

wolf_22 · #65 (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 08:28 PM

[quote=smart makes a comeback;415320]I would say, if indeed the chriswtian fath could indeed find a venue to expand from, you are correct. i still think however, it w2ould at best be in the limited state of a faith like Janeism or Zarathustranism is today, little more then a curiosity

It would be facinating to see white. english and romance language speakng people following pOoytheism (although it can be argued that christianity is polythyeism, but that is another discussion)
It is also interesting bto speculate if Islam would have ever manifested itself n ? My guess would be probably not
[quote]

I can't remember if islam was very popualr in this time or not. I think it was.
I did read listen to something that explained why christianity overtook the norse religion so easily (apart from the politics involved)- norse religion called for the end of the world and even the end of the gods (they'd later be rebirthed if memory serves me correctly) while christianity did promise an end of the world but never an end of the afterlife and an even better world will be rebuilt afterward.
many people will not align with a faith that is harmful to them or quite a few don't even like faiths that don't offer a lot of benefit.

its so hard to predict these things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dom1

It was already in Europe and both Asia and Africa had states that already made their empires/nations official religion Christian well before the Romans did.

There was already a strong base in Europe. Just do a minimal amount of research and see for yourself.

What don't you understand about the fact that Christianity was large and growing ever larger even before Constantine? What don't you undrestand that in cities all across the Roman world Christianity was getting stronger?

Maybe you should seek out people as ignorant as you are on this subject, but it may be tough to find.

minorities get stronger because of people in power. it doesn't matter how strong they were- one emperor could have knocked them down. if he wouldn't have supported them they wouldn't have gained so much power nor would they have lost so much competition.

of course religions like Hinduism didn't spread in the west- we already endorsed christianity.

bluedog · #66 (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 08:47 PM

[quote=wolf_22;416347][quote=smart makes a comeback;415320]I would say, if indeed the chriswtian fath could indeed find a venue to expand from, you are correct. i still think however, it w2ould at best be in the limited state of a faith like Janeism or Zarathustranism is today, little more then a curiosity

It would be facinating to see white. english and romance language speakng people following pOoytheism (although it can be argued that christianity is polythyeism, but that is another discussion)
It is also interesting bto speculate if Islam would have ever manifested itself n ? My guess would be probably not

Quote:

I can't remember if islam was very popualr in this time or not. I think it was.
I did read listen to something that explained why christianity overtook the norse religion so easily (apart from the politics involved)- norse religion called for the end of the world and even the end of the gods (they'd later be rebirthed if memory serves me correctly) while christianity did promise an end of the world but never an end of the afterlife and an even better world will be rebuilt afterward.
many people will not align with a faith that is harmful to them or quite a few don't even like faiths that don't offer a lot of benefit.

its so hard to predict these things.

minorities get stronger because of people in power. it doesn't matter how strong they were- one emperor could have knocked them down. if he wouldn't have supported them they wouldn't have gained so much power nor would they have lost so much competition.

of course religions like Hinduism didn't spread in the west- we already endorsed christianity.

This is clearly the mindset of secularism. In the fact of grouping people into different boxes. True Christianity does not notice any one group as being superior or inferior to another, as all are presented equal and stemming from one source, God. Thus, true revelation from God, when actually read and comprehended, does not promote racism, bigotry, or social classification.

God declares there is only race of peoples...the human race.

Acts 17:26-28, "And (God) hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds their habitation. That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, through he be not far from everyone of us: For in him live, and move, and have our being......."

Galatians 3:26-29, "For ye are all children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." BD

smart makes a comeback · #67 (**permalink**) 05-13-2008, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakuanSoho

Thank you for the correction. Unlike you, I aim to be accurate rather than "right".

Try for accurate, right AND correct, and lose some of your naivete and fear of history that cuts against your comfort zones, and you will be fine

All bantor aside, you do know SOME history, the problem is, your grasp of history is tainted by 50 year old platitudes and "truisms" that have loing since been withdrawn and recanted by historains and even most theists.

I know it is difficult for a person of faith to accept, but all it is you know of your faith and worship, was "agreed to" at the point of a sword

Quote:

Quote: Wolf22
minorities get stronger because of people in power. it doesn't matter how strong they were- one emperor could have knocked them down. if he wouldn't have supported them they wouldn't have gained so much power nor would they have lost so much competition.

of course religions like Hinduism didn't spread in the west- we already endorsed christianity

Wolf, dont bother trying to reason with and educate Dum1, the lard ass is a complete dunderhead and one of the most ignorant posters on the foum (but I think you know that)
His prospectives are laughable and his sense of history is a joke, as as he has shown scores of time, his mental ability is not unlike a learning disabled house cat. It is the same, no matter which of his alter egos he posts under, in drag or in his "male" (sort of ) mode
I have the fat fuk on ignore, keeps his retarded long winded bullshit off my radar

Dom1 · #68 (**permalink**) 05-14-2008, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakuanSoho

God you are an idiot. I have already said that Christianity was not a "popular movement", but because you can't argue any of my points, you have to ignore what I say and continue to argue what you wished I would say. That generally is a good sign that you have NO understanding of the issues and are merely parroting what you have read elsewhere (my guess is from fiction, or if you have a tad of intelligence, Elaine Pagels).

Nicene was not a revolution in Christian thought, it was the confirmation of a process that had begun over 200 years earlier. Nothing it confirmed in 320 was new, everything it confirmed had been a major if not dominate part of Christianity from the beginning. We know this because we have plenty of pre-Nicene texts that show this. The other sects, Montanism, Ebionism, and Gnosticism were not major movements, they were small movements confined to a writing elite. The only serious challenger to Orthodoxy were the Arians, and even this wasn't much of a challenge in that Arians were primarily based on the fringes of the empire, where as Orthodoxy was strongest in the core urban centers.

I am not arguing that Constantine's conversion wasn't important, it was, but at the same time to say that if he hadn't converted Christianity would have died out is just plain wrong. All major changes are evolutionary in process, and Constantine's conversion was just another step along this evolution (which continued for another 500 years, and indeed is still occurring). If you cared to study this period, you would discover why Christianity won, and what it says about humanity. But you don't care to know, you rather have your simplistic good guys and bad guys, because, it seems, that is all you can handle.

The only thing I really take issue with here is you saying it was not a populat movement. The fact is that Christianity was expanding and that is one of the reasons that Constantine chose Christianity, because of its popularity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

You keep repeating yourself, but bullshit said over and over, is still bullshit.

Yours is regurgitated blither from non secular whackos who can not bare to abandon the idiotic notion that there is a linear legacy from Jesus to his followers to the modern church. The problem is, that is unmitigated nonsense, and frankly, bordering on the retarded

Your depiction of the pre second century "church" as some cohesive entity, is even more laughable, although I see you have beck peddled slightly from your original statements. I understand this, becuse when so soundly proven wrong,. What choice did you have ?

Your statement that "Nothing it confirmed in 320 was new" clearly shows, you have no business even engaging in a conversation on this topic. Such is the idiocy and demonstrative ignorance shown by that stement. It also shows, you clearkly have not only an agenda, but have become well versed in the agendas sound bites. So transparent and predicatable

The FACT is, virtually every modern tenent of Christian tradition was fabricated at that point in history, and no objective historain disputes that (the operative word is objective)

Christianity "won", (to the extent it did) for one reason and one reason only, and that is because a Roman Emperor said it “won”, and it had little to do with the nature of humanity and nothing to do with divine Providence.

If it had existed at all to this point in history at all, it would likely be nothing more then a little known sect of Judaism.

So choose to be educated, or cling to your pez dispenser theology and naive revisionist history...up to you

You keep repeating yourself, but bullshit said over and over, is still bullshit. - fatty

You should pay attention to your own words. You have been historically incorrect an impressive number of times on this thread alone.

You say that Christianity won because the Emporer said it won, but you are wrong. The Emporer chose Christianity (and not until his death bed) because there were already so many Christians and because it would help unify the empire. The fact is that he tolerated all religions and there were no forced conversions - which is yet another fact that you screwed up so badly.

Before you attempt to discuss a topic try learning a little bit about it, eh?

Dom1 · #69 (**permalink**) 05-14-2008, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suburbanite

what a poser, going around attacking atheists and defending theists... i think we know where you stand takuan

What did he say that was wrong? Can you point anything out?

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

In the back of my mind, I KNEW that that those so waek in their "faith", would turn this hypotetical into a paranoid non secular whining fest

This is proof of what I contend, that the dogma of the non secular, particularly non scular RIGHT, is so crippling, that those afflicted can not acceot reality, or function in anything other then pre scripted diatribes by con men and televangelists

Pathetic

The only proof that you have given is proof that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf_22

I can't remember if islam was very popualr in this time or not. I think it was.
I did read listen to something that explained why christianity overtook the norse religion so easily (apart from the politics involved)- norse religion called for the end of the world and even the end of the gods (they'd later be rebirthed if memory serves me correctly) while christianity did promise an end of the world but never an end of the afterlife and an even better world will be rebuilt afterward.
many people will not align with a faith that is harmful to them or quite a few don't even like faiths that don't offer a lot of benefit.

its so hard to predict these things.

minorities get stronger because of people in power. it doesn't matter how strong they were- one emperor could have knocked them down. if he wouldn't have supported them they wouldn't have gained so much power nor would they have lost so much competition.

of course religions like Hinduism didn't spread in the west- we already endorsed christianity.

Can't remember if Islam was strong at the time? Let me give you a hint, Islam did not even come around until Mohammed who lived 300 years AFTER Constantine. So no, it was not popular.

Read a book once in a while, emporers DID try to knock them down. Persecutions of Christians by Diocletian prior to Constantine is just one example. Want a rundown of other persecutions? Want a rundown of laws against Christianity? Do you want me to lead you in the right direction or do you want me to spoon feed you the information?

I understand that you are just wanting to discuss this topic, but before you do I think you should know something about it - unlike fatty.

Christians were growing despite the persecutions, that much is just basic knowledge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

Wolf, dont bother trying to reason with and educate Dum1, the lard ass is a complete dunderhead and one of the most ignorant posters on the foum (but I think you know that)
His prospectives are laughable and his sense of history is a joke, as as he has shown scores of time, his mental ability is not unlike a learning disabled house cat. It is the same, no matter which of his alter egos he posts under, in drag or in his "male" (sort of ) mode
I have the fat fuk on ignore, keeps his retarded long winded bullshit off my radar

Reason with me? Educate me?

Fuck, she said that she heard Islam was strong at the time when in fact it didn't come around for another 300 years! You read that and commented and never said anything about her being impressively wrong about Islam, so I doubt you knew she was wrong. Further proof that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Neither one of you have the first clue what the fuck you are talking about.

As far as "alter egos", I have one screen name while you have over ten . . . . . and you create a new one soon after you get your fat ass handed to you like you are now.

Dom1 · #70 (**permalink**) 05-14-2008, 09:58 AM

One reason people don't know much about history is because they get their information from suspect sources. For example, some read something like the Da Vince Code and think they have learned some history. Others get their information from movies, and they think Gladiator was an accurate depiction of Imperial Rome. Still others are so ignornat of history that someone else can come along and spout off grossly inaccurate "facts" and as long as they sound confident these peopel will believe them . . . . reason being that they simply don't have the capability or desire to actually check the facts out for themselves.

Fatty is a typical American in this regard, she is ignorant of history like so many other Americans.