Re: Why did the Romans persecute the Christians?
Codeb...@bigsecret.com
erl...@bredband.net wrote:
> The Roman Empire was religiously tolerant. The state allowed people
> from different parts of the empire to keep their own religions. Often,
> old and new cults from different parts of the empire were merged
> together, that is, there was a lot of _syncretism_ of religions.
>
> But there was one exception from this Roman tolerance against
> religions: Christianity. As I understand it, Christianity was illegal
> in the Roman Empire from its appearance in the 1st century A.D. until
> Emperor Constantine made it legal in the 4th century. There were many
> Christian martyrs that were executed during this period, and there were
> major waves of persecution about 250 A.D. during Emperor Decius and
> about 300 A.D. during Emperor Diocletian.
>
> Why? What was the difference between Christianity and other religions,
> that made the Romans feel it necessary to ban Christianity and to
> persecute and execute Christians?
> After all, most Christians were law abiding citizens that just wanted
> to mind their own business and, to some extent, convert others. Yet, to
> waste so much energy and resources in persecution of Christians, the
> Romans must have considered the Christians as a seriuos threat against
> society. What was that threat they perceived?
>
> One possible answer is that the Christians refused to worship the
> Emperor, a costum that was made mandatory by the state, and that most
> other religions accepted. But this can hardly be all of it, because the
> Jews didn't worship the Emperor either, and the Romans granted them an
> exception from that rule. Why couldn't the Christians get a similar
> exception?
>
> Could it be the apocalyptics of Early Christianity that was the
> problem? The Early Christians believed in a Second Coming of Christ in
> the _near_ future, when major upheavals would occur and the world as
> they knew it would be destroyed. Perhaps the Romans feared that the
> Christians would not just passively wait for this, but also actively
> try to cause these upheavals and destruction? If so, the Romans would
> naturally consider the Christians as very dangerous potential
> troublemakers. And perpaps this fear wasn't entirely unfounded.
> Couldn't there actually have existed fringe Christians that wanted to
> expedite the Second Coming of Christ in this way? If so, the blame cast
> upon the Christians by Emperor Nero for setting fire to Rome in 64 A.D.
> might have appeared as quite justified by the public...
JESUS AND NOT CAESAR WAS THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.
THAT WAS THE ONLY SIN THEY WERE ACCUSED TO HAVE
COMMITTED.
Down with Caesar.
>
> But that's only my own speculations. Does anybode have some more
> definite knowledge about this?
>
> Regards,
>
> Erland Gadde
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian
> THAT WAS THE ONLY SIN THEY WERE ACCUSED TO HAVE
> COMMITTED.
No jebus. Get over it.
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove, and gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer, and fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
Why I am not a christian:
http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus/nojebus
Olrik
Why? At least, Ceasar existed!
>> But that's only my own speculations. Does anybode have some more
>> definite knowledge about this?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Erland Gadde
>
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Geoff
news:1141088118.6...@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
There is remarkably little evidence of any persecution by the Romans. It
probably was another isolated incident(s) that was mythologized.
Panama Floyd
Codeb...@bigsecret.com wrote:
> erl...@bredband.net wrote:
snip
To get to the other side?
-Panama Floyd, Atl.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
EAC Pace Car Driver
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html
M Dunne
mountain man
news:_9QMf.25606$Qs1.6...@wagner.videotron.net...
> Codeb...@bigsecret.com wrote:
>> erl...@bredband.net wrote:
>>> The Roman Empire was religiously tolerant. The state allowed people
>>> from different parts of the empire to keep their own religions. Often,
>>> old and new cults from different parts of the empire were merged
>>> together, that is, there was a lot of _syncretism_ of religions.
There was alot of serious oppression.
"I implore thine aid for freedom,
for victory over enemies infamous
for the wantonness of the wrongs they inflict,
for their perversion of justice,
for their contempt of religion,
for their insatiable greed;
a people that revel in unmanly pleasures,
whose affections are more to be dreaded
and abhorred than their enmity.
Never let a foreigner bear rule over me or these my countrymen;
never let slavery reign in this island.
Be thou forever O goddess of mankind and victory,
sovereign and Queen in Britain "(ibid.).
--- Bunduica/Voadicia/Bonducca/Boudica/Boudicea/Boadicea (60 CE)
--- Dion Cassius, Xiphilinus Except
>>> But there was one exception from this Roman tolerance against
>>> religions: Christianity. As I understand it, Christianity was illegal
>>> in the Roman Empire from its appearance in the 1st century A.D. until
>>> Emperor Constantine made it legal in the 4th century.
It is not impossible (for a theory of history) that
Constantine created christianity (ex nilo) in the period
312 - 325 in order to establish a Roman religion over
which he would have supreme power as emperor.
Correct.
Constantine sponsors Eusebius of Caesarea to write some scripture,
specifically four eye witness legal testaments, and other supporting
scriptures, and a brief history of the ecclesiastical history.
Eusebius does this, and interpolates his required references into
the patristic literature (eg: Josephus, Tacitus, Origen, etc) and in
other separate (fictitious) works.
Christianity spreads across the eastern empire while Constantine
holds Rome (from 312) and attempts to infiltrate the eastern empire
via propaganda. The Arian controversy is the reaction of the common
people against the imposition of a new Constantinian/Eusebian god.
When Constantine finally takes the eastern empire and becomes the
supreme ruler, he then moves against the Arian controversy, and
summons the rulers (none of them christian) to his Council of Nicea.
At this council Constantine formally implements christianity.
Note the exclusions of the Nicean creed, and the 22 sub
creeds in the fine print (See Rufinius).
>>> But that's only my own speculations. Does anybode have some more
>>> definite knowledge about this?
It is not impossible that the supreme Roman emperor created christianity
as a mechanism by which to tax and administer his newly acquired
lands, and did so in the west from 312, and across the entire empire
after the Nicean council of 325.
Further, see the sketch:
http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes
--
Pete Brown
www.mountainman.com.au
Codeb...@bigsecret.com
In Caesrea de Phillipi where the "Gospel" put in Peter's mouth
the famous, "You are Christ, the Son Of the Living God" a temple
where Caesar was worshipped was said to be located.
Is this what you call MYTHOLOGIZED?
Martin Edwards
of going round muttering, "You lot are going to get yours any day now"
or the Latin/Greek/Aramaic equivalent may have had something to do with
it. Also the fact that gangs of thugs singing, "Jesus wants me for a
sunbeam" intimidated some of those who tried to fight the fire.
--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause - Chico Marx
Martin Edwards
to do with it?
Codeb...@bigsecret.com
IL ne faut pas prendre l'effet pour la cause
Codeb...@bigsecret.com
Jesus and not Caesar is the Son Of The Living God.
That was their onnly sin
Geoff
news:1141153772.5...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
[..]
>> >>There is remarkably little evidence of any persecution by the Romans.
>> >>It
>> >>probably was another isolated incident(s) that was mythologized.
>> >
>> > In Caesrea de Phillipi where the "Gospel" put in Peter's mouth
>> > the famous, "You are Christ, the Son Of the Living God" a temple
>> > where Caesar was worshipped was said to be located.
>> > Is this what you call MYTHOLOGIZED?
>> >
>> He is talking about the putative persecution. What does a temple have
>> to do with it?
>
> Jesus and not Caesar is the Son Of The Living God.
> That was their onnly sin.
Some people can write very concisely and get their point across with an
economy of words. You are not one. No one knows what the heck you are
talking about.
Geoff
news:1141153657.6...@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Good one. Now let's have the Latin rendition please.
Harshman
"Geoff" <geb...@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Ze2dncbnEo6...@comcast.com...
> There is remarkably little evidence of any persecution by the Romans. It
> probably was another isolated incident(s) that was mythologized.
According to biblical records (which have a great deal of historical value,
if you aren't freaked out by the fact that they're included in the Christian
bible), most of the persecution of the very early church was religious, not
political. Early Christianity was just a splinter sect of Judaism, after
all, and the Romans didn't seem to care to be involved when they could avoid
it. I'm not sure at exactly what point Rome became concerned with the
rapidly growing number of Christians within the empire.
In regards to the "apocalyptic religion" theory, it's worth noting that a
fair percentage of Christians today still believe that Nero was the
AntiChrist. To them, the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem very much
was the end of the world, as the Jews knew it. And Preterists feel fine.
Thandarr
Had there been a Usenet during the time of the Roman empire, this would
be a good name for a Christian newsgroup. Christians' big crime was
that they were atheists, denying the existence of the real Gods.
As is already documented above,
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/persecutions.html the persecutions
were sporadic and often uninspired, but from a 21st century perspective
even the minimal intermittent persecutions of Christians were
inexcusable. For one thing, they served to popularize Christianity.
Nevertheless, it is not as if being caught at a Christian gathering was
a death sentence. The evidence seems to suggest that forgiveness was
easy for those who would sacrifice to the Gods or the emperor.
http://www.bibletopics.com/BibleStudy/139.htm
http://www.christianchronicler.com/history1/potentates_and_pressures.html
http://www.unrv.com/culture/christian-persecution.php (incidentally,
the bit about Claudius expelling Christians is confusing. Suetonius
writes "Chrestus" who may or may not have been someone preaching
Christianity, but certainly wasn't Jesus because Chrestus was in Rome.
It's also interesting that this post starts out with "JESUS AND NOT
CAESAR WAS THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD" To the Romans it was the exact
opposite. The emperors, in particular Caesar, were deified and Jesus
of Nazareth was an executed criminal.
Some Christians believe that 666, the Mark of the Beast, refers to Nero
Caesar (NRWN KSR in Hebrew letters, I think). If you leave one of the
N's off, it becomes 616, as it is in some texts.
Thandarr
cyclotron
Christian, see The Martyrdom of Polycarp:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/martyrdompolycarp.html
Of interest are the things he is asked to do to save himself: swear by
the fortune of Caesar, revile or deny Christ (or repent of being a
Christian), offer sacrifice to the gods, and to say the words "away
with the atheists". The latter, he did, but while pointing to the
crowd, which did not score him any points of course. The anger of the
crowd was along these lines: "This is the teacher of Asia, the father
of the Christians, and the overthrower of our gods, he who has been
teaching many not to sacrifice, or to worship the gods."
Les Hellawell
wrote:
>
>"Geoff" <geb...@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:Ze2dncbnEo6...@comcast.com...
>> There is remarkably little evidence of any persecution by the Romans. It
>> probably was another isolated incident(s) that was mythologized.
>
>According to biblical records (which have a great deal of historical value,
>if you aren't freaked out by the fact that they're included in the Christian
>bible), most of the persecution of the very early church was religious, not
>political. Early Christianity was just a splinter sect of Judaism, after
>all, and the Romans didn't seem to care to be involved when they could avoid
>it. I'm not sure at exactly what point Rome became concerned with the
>rapidly growing number of Christians within the empire.
Could the difference be that the Roman's were happy to tolerate
different religions in the native lands but they had better not bring
them and promote them in 'our' land and the heart of the Empire where
the gods dwell - Rome!
The jews did not try to convert the Roman's but the Christians did.
>In regards to the "apocalyptic religion" theory, it's worth noting that a
>fair percentage of Christians today still believe that Nero was the
>AntiChrist. To them, the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem very much
>was the end of the world, as the Jews knew it. And Preterists feel fine.
--
Les Hellawell
Greetings from:
YORKSHIRE The White Rose County
Les Hellawell
>It's interesting that this discussion shows up here on "alt.atheism."
>Had there been a Usenet during the time of the Roman empire, this would
>be a good name for a Christian newsgroup. Christians' big crime was
>that they were atheists, denying the existence of the real Gods.
The big crime was they did the Jehova's witness bit and tried to
seel their religion to the Roman's in their own homes under the
vert shadows of their gods.
It was stupid then and it is still stupid now.
Les Hellawell
>It's interesting that this discussion shows up here on "alt.atheism."
>Had there been a Usenet during the time of the Roman empire, this would
>be a good name for a Christian newsgroup. Christians' big crime was
>that they were atheists, denying the existence of the real Gods.
Another point:
The jews were an organised religion with an established priesthood
which the Romans could recognise and control (or try to). The
Christians at the time were more little cells with no clear hierarchy
and something they could not pin down or control. They were to
them just as we see muslim terrorists cells here today I submit.
Secretive, suspicious, plotting, plotting what whereas the Jews were
out in the open.
cyclotron
>seel their religion to the Roman's in their own homes under the
>vert shadows of their gods.
Seems they succeeded.
Les Hellawell
Codeb...@bigsecret.com
As If I ever told you that I was one.
Anyway Jesus and not Caesar was the Son of the Living God
This was the only sin they were accused of committing.
Martin Edwards
Si ça marche comme un canard..............
Martin Edwards
Jesus, he lived in the first century CE.
Tohu...@hotmail.com
Tell this to those who were afraid and thought they were
threatened by that statement. They killed thousand innocents
martyres
Christopher A. Lee
A paranoid fantasy.
Tohu...@hotmail.com
Just tell me why you think I should take your assessment
seriously. Just because you are a God-hater?
Goodness Godless
<Codeb...@bigsecret.com> wrote in message
news:1141088118.6...@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> erl...@bredband.net wrote:
>> The Roman Empire was religiously tolerant. The state allowed people
>> from different parts of the empire to keep their own religions. Often,
>> old and new cults from different parts of the empire were merged
>> together, that is, there was a lot of _syncretism_ of religions.
>>
>> But there was one exception from this Roman tolerance against
>> religions: Christianity.
What a load of self rightous, Jubus Freek, crap. How come you
Wanky Xians have become so fucking arogent!
No wonder you are 8 trillion dollars in the red to the Communist Chinease!
Coward Bush and Clinton dont have the heroisim to drop bombs on
the Chinease!
deowll
"codeb...@bigsecret.com" <Codeb...@bigsecret.com> wrote in message
news:1141232278.0...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
You need to read more than your own lit. Some of the original texts or at
least copies of same are still around and you just told a fib.
Captain America
mountain man
news:1141273197....@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Both Augustus and Julius were dead before converts even came to Rome.
christianity did not breath its first breath
until Constantine took Rome.
--
Pete Brown
www.mountainman.com.au/essenes
Martin Edwards
Martin Edwards
Mike Painter
>>
>>> There is no such thing as the son of a god and, if there was a real
>>> Jesus, he lived in the first century CE.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tell this to those who were afraid and thought they were
>> threatened by that statement. They killed thousand innocents
>> martyres
>>
Oh, sorry they are dead, just like all the people killed by one group of
christians who did not believe what another group believed.
Codeb...@bigsecret.com
This is not making your point that Jesus never existed.
2 groups of Christians are still believres in Christ no matter
what the interpretative doctrinal difference is.
Martin Edwards
Ulysses at Langdale Tarn
Erland,
You wonder why the Jews were spared by the
Romans and the Christians were not spared,
even though they had similar beliefs. Before the
revolt and the diaspora, virtual all expat Jews were
merchants and moneylenders. The Romans had
financial obligations involving the Jews, and probably
this is why they were not fed to the lions.
David H
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lee Philips
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Erland,
>
> You wonder why the Jews were spared by the
> Romans and the Christians were not spared,
> even though they had similar beliefs. Before the
> revolt and the diaspora, virtual all expat Jews were
> merchants and moneylenders. The Romans had
> financial obligations involving the Jews, and probably
> this is why they were not fed to the lions.
The Romans were mighty conquerors, but they avoided destroying
cultures whenever possible. Aside from installing their own local
magistrates and tax collectors the Romans left other cultures alone,
including the Jews. The difference with Christians was, Christians
refused to pay their taxes. They also had a habit of martyring
themselves rather than paying lip service to Rome's set of deities.
David H.
Why?
Because christians are assholes.
The Other David H.
#2217
Martin Edwards
he had financial obligations to them.
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
Well, in Rome, even though there were edicts against Christianity,
the charges had to be brought by a private individual, hence the
apparent inconsistency in applying the persecution.
- = -
Vasos-Peter John Panagiotopoulos II, Columbia'81+, Bio$trategist
BachMozart ReaganQuayle EvrytanoKastorian
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Remorse begets zeal] [Windows is for Bimbos]
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
Matt Giwer
If you have a credible source for those reasons you should not be hiding it
from the rest of the world.
But if true, refusing to pay taxes is sufficient cause for "persecution" and
removes them all from the category of martyrs. And one would expect "Render unto
Caesar" to be known to real christians so these people could not be christians.
--
The good news about the Katrina response is thousands of mobile homes were
delivered to Arkansas faster than anyone thought possible.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3580
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
antisemitism http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/ a1
Matt Giwer
> Erland,
>
> You wonder why the Jews were spared by the
> Romans and the Christians were not spared,
> even though they had similar beliefs. Before the
> revolt and the diaspora, virtual all expat Jews were
> merchants and moneylenders. The Romans had
> financial obligations involving the Jews, and probably
> this is why they were not fed to the lions.
From the Protocols of the Elders of Judea no doubt?
Of course you have credible citations to back this up, not.
If you paid attention to sacking Judea twice you would know how Romans dealt
with financial obligations.
--
The holocaust is a very strange kind of history. It is the only kind of
history that will disappear when the witnesses die.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3585
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Old Testament http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/ot.phtml a6
Matt Giwer
> Yet they were massacred in England under Richard I precisely *because*
> he had financial obligations to them.
Those reasons did survive in the record whereas records of massacres did not.
In fact one can read the two provisions of the Magna Carta which name Jews to
see what they were getting away with.
--
Hodie tertio Nonas Martias MMVI est
-- The Ferric Webceasar
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
flying saucers http://www.giwersworld.org/flyingsa.html a2
deowll
"Martin Edwards" <big_m...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:du9rpi$jrf$1...@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> codeb...@bigsecret.com wrote:
>> Mike Painter wrote:
>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>>>There is no such thing as the son of a god and, if there was a real
>>>>>>Jesus, he lived in the first century CE.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tell this to those who were afraid and thought they were
>>>>> threatened by that statement. They killed thousand innocents
>>>>> martyres
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Be happy to if you supply some names and addresses.
>>>Oh, sorry they are dead, just like all the people killed by one group of
>>>christians who did not believe what another group believed.
>>
>>
>> This is not making your point that Jesus never existed.
>>
>> 2 groups of Christians are still believres in Christ no matter
>> what the interpretative doctrinal difference is.
>>
> Check this out:
>
> www.jesusneverexisted.com
Bad URL and it does not matter. If you are a Christian you are a follower of
Christ. If you don't, you need another title.
Martin Edwards
twice. How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
existed at all, died in 33 CE?
cyclotron
>How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
>existed at all, died in 33 CE?
I'll take the bait.
We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers of
other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
happens. He manifests himself to us. This is what it means that he
"makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving out
doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
and do it. That is the Christian life in a nutshell. Where can you go
away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning gaze? He
parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into you.
He knows your heart.
And that is why the Romans persecuted the Christians.
Because they did not understand their confidence and unwavering faith,
which came by the Holy Spirit. It infuriated them. That is also what
they admired and why so many of the persecutors themselves became
believers. Even today, God loves even those who express hatred for him
and his people, and is patient to draw them to himself. Check out the
movie the End of the Spear and see the true story of how a man's
sacrifice of his life to reach a tribe locked in a cycle of vengeance
in the Amazon led to his killer's conversion.
panam...@hotmail.com
cyclotron wrote:
> Martin Edwards asked:
> >How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
> >existed at all, died in 33 CE?
>
> I'll take the bait.
>
> We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
> point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers of
> other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
> happens. He manifests himself to us.
And your proof of this is...?
> This is what it means that he
> "makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
> just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving out
> doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
> desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
> and do it.
And recent studies suggest that it may simply be brain activity.
http://www.onset.unsw.edu.au/issue4/neuroreligion/neuroscience%20and%20religion.htm
> That is the Christian life in a nutshell.
Nutshell. Good place for a nut.
> Where can you go
> away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning gaze? He
> parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into you.
> He knows your heart.
Sounds like paranoia to me. No, thanks!
> And that is why the Romans persecuted the Christians.
> Because they did not understand their confidence and unwavering faith,
> which came by the Holy Spirit. It infuriated them.
Infuriated by a group they didn't even know existed before the mid 2nd
century CE?
> That is also what
> they admired and why so many of the persecutors themselves became
> believers.
So, no Roman politics, no panic in a fragmenting empire. I doubt that
reflects modern hypothoses on the matter.
> Even today, God loves even those who express hatred for him
> and his people, and is patient to draw them to himself. Check out the
> movie the End of the Spear and see the true story of how a man's
> sacrifice of his life to reach a tribe locked in a cycle of vengeance
> in the Amazon led to his killer's conversion.
"I saw it in a movie"? That's your answer? Good grief. A christian
needs a computer like a fish needs an electron microscope.
-Panama Floyd, Atl.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
EAC Pace Car Driver
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html
cyclotron
>> Martin Edwards asked:
>> >How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
> >>existed at all, died in 33 CE?
> >I'll take the bait.
>> We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
> >point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers of
> >other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
> >happens. He manifests himself to us.
>And your proof of this is...?
It requires no proof. It is a testimony of my experience. You do not
have to believe if you don't wish to.
> >This is what it means that he
> >"makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
>> >just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving out
>> >doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
> >>desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
> >>and do it.
>And recent studies suggest that it may simply be brain activity.
>http://www.onset.unsw.edu.au/issue4/neuroreligion/neuroscience%20and%...
Most human experience does involve the brain. Just as sensory
perception involves the sensory organs. The fact that the skin
transduces the feeling of heat only fortifies the fact that you might
be touching a hot stove. The fact that you can locate a spot in the
brain that perceives a spiritual experience does not negate the reality
of the experience.
> >That is the Christian life in a nutshell.
>Nutshell. Good place for a nut.
Clever.
> >Where can you go
> >away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning gaze? He
> >parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into you.
> >He knows your heart.
>Sounds like paranoia to me. No, thanks!
Words to a song I wrote. If you'd like to hear it I'll send you a link.
> >And that is why the Romans persecuted the Christians.
> >Because they did not understand their confidence and unwavering faith,
> >which came by the Holy Spirit. It infuriated them.
>Infuriated by a group they didn't even know existed before the mid 2nd
>century CE?
And your proof of this is?
>> That is also what
>> they admired and why so many of the persecutors themselves became
> >believers.
>So, no Roman politics, no panic in a fragmenting empire. I doubt that
>reflects modern hypothoses on the matter.
The so-called modern hypotheses to which you refer are an attemt to
rewrite history out of hatred for the truth. They are not based on
evidence but on denying the existing evidence and then claiming that
lack of evidence is proof. But this is not new. It is the renewal of
what the Romans tried to do in a different way ..."stamp out the hated
Christian faith because it sheds light on our own unrighteousness ".
Perhaps these theories will succeed in part as the Romans did. But in
the end, Christ will prevail.
>> Even today, God loves even those who express hatred for him
> >and his people, and is patient to draw them to himself. Check out the
> >movie the End of the Spear and see the true story of how a man's
> >sacrifice of his life to reach a tribe locked in a cycle of vengeance
> >in the Amazon led to his killer's conversion.
>"I saw it in a movie"? That's your answer?
You misinterpret what I said. I added this as an example of what I said
for interested parties. This is not an answer, but a suggestion to see
an amazing story that, if it does not move you I feel you are made of
stone.
>Good grief. A christian
>needs a computer like a fish needs an electron microscope.
Then perhaps I should turn mine in. But it certainly got a rise out of
you even at your lofty intellectual level.
DanielSan
> Martin Edwards asked:
>
>>How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
>>existed at all, died in 33 CE?
>
>
> I'll take the bait.
>
> We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
> point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers of
> other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
> happens. He manifests himself to us. This is what it means that he
> "makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
> just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving out
> doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
> desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
> and do it. That is the Christian life in a nutshell. Where can you go
> away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning gaze? He
> parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into you.
> He knows your heart.
He sees you when you're sleeping, he knows when you're awake, he knows
if you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness' sake?
I agree that there are those that died many many years ago whom people
look to for guidance. However, there are other people that do not seek
such guidance and it is wrong for those that sought the guidance to
attempt to push it onto those that do not wish it.
>
> And that is why the Romans persecuted the Christians.
> Because they did not understand their confidence and unwavering faith,
> which came by the Holy Spirit. It infuriated them.
Plus, it took attention away from them. Christianity has its own
version of that, as in the 10 Commandments: "There shall be no other
gods but Me."
> That is also what
> they admired and why so many of the persecutors themselves became
> believers. Even today, God loves even those who express hatred for him
> and his people, and is patient to draw them to himself. Check out the
> movie the End of the Spear and see the true story of how a man's
> sacrifice of his life to reach a tribe locked in a cycle of vengeance
> in the Amazon led to his killer's conversion.
Well, not to worry, cyclotron. You're about 85% of America and a third
of the entire world. You do not need to feel persecuted anymore.
Indeed, you should now look to those that are currently being persecuted
by the selfsame Christians. People like atheists.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and in every age, the priest *
* has been hostile to liberty. He is always in *
* alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in *
* return for protection to his own." *
* --Jefferson (in a letter to H. Spafford, 1814) *
****************************************************
--
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
Per Rønne
> Could the difference be that the Roman's were happy to tolerate
> different religions in the native lands but they had better not bring
> them and promote them in 'our' land and the heart of the Empire where
> the gods dwell - Rome!
Well, the Egyptians /did/ take the Isis cult to Rome. Nevertheless, this
lead to no persecutions ...
--
Per Erik Rønne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Per Rønne
> The difference with Christians was, Christians refused to pay their taxes.
Source?
Martin Edwards
> Martin Edwards asked:
>
>>How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
>>existed at all, died in 33 CE?
>
>
> I'll take the bait.
>
> We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
> point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers of
> other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
> happens. He manifests himself to us. This is what it means that he
> "makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
> just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving out
> doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
> desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
> and do it. That is the Christian life in a nutshell. Where can you go
> away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning gaze? He
> parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into you.
> He knows your heart.
>
Martin Edwards
..."stamp out the hated
> Christian faith because it sheds light on our own unrighteousness ".
Whom are you quoting here?
panam...@hotmail.com
cyclotron wrote:
> >cyclotron wrote:
> >> Martin Edwards asked:
> >> >How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
> > >>existed at all, died in 33 CE?
>
> > >I'll take the bait.
>
> >> We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
> > >point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers of
> > >other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
> > >happens. He manifests himself to us.
>
> >And your proof of this is...?
> It requires no proof. It is a testimony of my experience. You do not
> have to believe if you don't wish to.
The testimony is the problem. My country's running itself into the
ground because of the influence of people who believe what you believe.
Religion is like venerial disease. I don't hate you because you have
it, but you should seek the cure-and please *do not* spread it to
others!
> > >This is what it means that he
> > >"makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
> >> >just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving out
> >> >doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
> > >>desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
> > >>and do it.
>
> >And recent studies suggest that it may simply be brain activity.
> >http://www.onset.unsw.edu.au/issue4/neuroreligion/neuroscience%20and%...
>
> Most human experience does involve the brain. Just as sensory
> perception involves the sensory organs. The fact that the skin
> transduces the feeling of heat only fortifies the fact that you might
> be touching a hot stove. The fact that you can locate a spot in the
> brain that perceives a spiritual experience does not negate the reality
> of the experience.
But the fact that you can reproduce the experience at will by physical
or chemical contact with the brain should be proof enough that nothing
beyond nature is causing it.
> > >That is the Christian life in a nutshell.
>
> >Nutshell. Good place for a nut.
> Clever.
My apologies. It *was* a cheap shot.
> > >Where can you go
> > >away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning gaze? He
> > >parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into you.
> > >He knows your heart.
>
> >Sounds like paranoia to me. No, thanks!
>
> Words to a song I wrote. If you'd like to hear it I'll send you a link.
>
> > >And that is why the Romans persecuted the Christians.
> > >Because they did not understand their confidence and unwavering faith,
> > >which came by the Holy Spirit. It infuriated them.
>
> >Infuriated by a group they didn't even know existed before the mid 2nd
> >century CE?
> And your proof of this is?
Valerian's proclamation of 257 CE. In previous measures, Jewish
practices were targeted. Early (1st c.) Christians considered
themselves a Jewish sect.
> >> That is also what
> >> they admired and why so many of the persecutors themselves became
> > >believers.
>
> >So, no Roman politics, no panic in a fragmenting empire. I doubt that
> >reflects modern hypothoses on the matter.
> The so-called modern hypotheses to which you refer are an attemt to
> rewrite history out of hatred for the truth. They are not based on
> evidence but on denying the existing evidence and then claiming that
> lack of evidence is proof. But this is not new. It is the renewal of
> what the Romans tried to do in a different way ..."stamp out the hated
> Christian faith because it sheds light on our own unrighteousness ".
> Perhaps these theories will succeed in part as the Romans did. But in
> the end, Christ will prevail.
>
>
> >> Even today, God loves even those who express hatred for him
> > >and his people, and is patient to draw them to himself. Check out the
> > >movie the End of the Spear and see the true story of how a man's
> > >sacrifice of his life to reach a tribe locked in a cycle of vengeance
> > >in the Amazon led to his killer's conversion.
>
> >"I saw it in a movie"? That's your answer?
>
> You misinterpret what I said. I added this as an example of what I said
> for interested parties. This is not an answer, but a suggestion to see
> an amazing story that, if it does not move you I feel you are made of
> stone.
As an example of the `feel it in my heart' kind of thing you mentioned
earlier?
> >Good grief. A christian
> >needs a computer like a fish needs an electron microscope.
> Then perhaps I should turn mine in. But it certainly got a rise out of
> you even at your lofty intellectual level.
I'm just tired of listening to that nonsense, regardless of the level
of intelligence of the person holding the belief.
-Panama Floyd, Atl.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
EAC Department of Telepropaganda
cyclotron
No one, you can remove the quotes. Nice catch.
Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
>Martin Edwards asked:
>>How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
>>existed at all, died in 33 CE?
>
>I'll take the bait.
>
>We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
>point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers ofr
>other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
>happens. He manifests himself to us. This is what it means that he
>"makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
>just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving out
>doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
>desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
>and do it. That is the Christian life in a nutshell. Where can you go
>away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning gaze? He
>parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into you.
>He knows your heart.
Can't you jerks say anything without preaching?
>And that is why the Romans persecuted the Christians.
Nope. That is the Christian martyr complex speaking.
>Because they did not understand their confidence and unwavering faith,
>which came by the Holy Spirit. It infuriated them. That is also what
Complete and utter bullshit.
>they admired and why so many of the persecutors themselves became
>believers. Even today, God loves even those who express hatred for him
Liar.
>and his people, and is patient to draw them to himself. Check out the
>movie the End of the Spear and see the true story of how a man's
>sacrifice of his life to reach a tribe locked in a cycle of vengeance
>in the Amazon led to his killer's conversion.
Standard in-your-face Christian stupidity, nastiness and slander.
cyclotron
>> >cyclotron wrote:
>> >> Martin Edwards asked:
>> >> >How can someone alive today be a follower of someone who, if he
>> > >>existed at all, died in 33 CE?
>> > >I'll take the bait.
>> >> We come to Jesus by faith, believing in his resurrection. Up to that
>> > >point we can only follow what we have read and heard, like followers >of
>> > >other religions. But at the point of true conversion something else
>> > >happens. He manifests himself to us.
>> >And your proof of this is...?
>> It requires no proof. It is a testimony of my experience. You do not
>> have to believe if you don't wish to.
>The testimony is the problem. My country's running itself into the
>ground because of the influence of people who believe what you believe.
>Religion is like venerial disease. I don't hate you because you have
>it, but you should seek the cure-and please *do not* spread it to
>others!
Sounds like you may have been have been hurt by religious people.
Please know that God is not the author of that. But also you could be
"under conviction" as they say. At any rate your contempt for
Christians is noted..
>- Hide quoted text -
-> Show quoted text -
>> > >This is what it means that he
>> > >"makes his abode" with us, or "dwells in us". The Holy Spirit is not
>> >> >just a concept, but a very real person that we experience, driving >out
>> >> >doubts and foolish notions and transforming our very nature and
>> > >>desires. If we continue to abide in him, we will understand his will
>> > >>and do it.
>> >And recent studies suggest that it may simply be brain activity.
>> >>http://www.onset.unsw.edu.au/issue4/neuroreligion/neuroscience%20and%...
>> Most human experience does involve the brain. Just as sensory
>> perception involves the sensory organs. The fact that the skin
>> transduces the feeling of heat only fortifies the fact that you might
>> be touching a hot stove. The fact that you can locate a spot in the
>> brain that perceives a spiritual experience does not negate the reality
> of the experience.
>But the fact that you can reproduce the experience at will by physical
>or chemical contact with the brain should be proof enough that nothing
>beyond nature is causing it.
You are assuming it is unnatural to experience God. But that is not
true. It is what we were made for. Thus it is not so surprising that
our brains have a mechanism for it, just as for all human experience.
The fact that we feel the presence of God points to the fact that he is
real, just as felling heat points to the fact that we are touching a
hot stove. Your assumption that this mechanism is only due to a
chemical an illusion is not supported by any scientific evidence.
Senses are given to us to interact with our environment. God is much
more than that. As the scripture says, "in him we live and move and
have our being". So if we are just beginning to understand a way in
which we experience him while yet in our bodies, that is truly amazing.
However, we do not live as Christians by feelings alone but also by
faith.
> > >>That is the Christian life in a nutshell.
> >>Nutshell. Good place for a nut.
> >Clever.
>>My apologies. It *was* a cheap shot.
No problem. I've done the same to others. We all get ruffled a bit in
these forums.
>- Hide quoted text -
>- Show quoted text -
>> > >Where can you go
>> > >away from his Spirit? Where can you go to escape his burning >gaze? He
>> > >parts the curtain. He knows your every thought. He sees right into >you.
>> > >He knows your heart.
>> >Sounds like paranoia to me. No, thanks!
>> Words to a song I wrote. If you'd like to hear it I'll send you a link.
>> > >And that is why the Romans persecuted the Christians.
>> > >Because they did not understand their confidence and unwavering >faith,
>> > >which came by the Holy Spirit. It infuriated them.
>> >Infuriated by a group they didn't even know existed before the mid 2nd
>> >century CE?
>> And your proof of this is?
>Valerian's proclamation of 257 CE. In previous measures, Jewish
>practices were targeted. Early (1st c.) Christians considered
>themselves a Jewish sect.
I missed the date you assigned to your statement above. Yes the second
century is about right for the Romans to begin to persecute Christians
on a large scale. However, we also know that everywhere the apostles
went, they found both converts and opposition. The apostles experienced
persecution early on. Christianity spread out of Jerusalem due to
persecution. And as Paul predicted early on, "all that will live
uprightly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution".
>- Hide quoted text -
>- Show quoted text -
Perhaps. But more correctly as an example of the power of the Holy
Spirit working.
>> >Good grief. A christian
>> >needs a computer like a fish needs an electron microscope.
>> Then perhaps I should turn mine in. But it certainly got a rise out of
>> you even at your lofty intellectual level.
>I'm just tired of listening to that nonsense, regardless of the level
>of intelligence of the person holding the belief.
Intelligence is great but as Paul said, "Knowledge puffs up, but love
builds up." The problem today is that most people are tuned in with
their minds but not with their hearts. People have forgotten they are
complex beings with not just a mind but a soul and a spirit.
Martin Edwards
Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
>>The testimony is the problem. My country's running itself into the
>>ground because of the influence of people who believe what you believe.
>>Religion is like venerial disease. I don't hate you because you have
>>it, but you should seek the cure-and please *do not* spread it to
>>others!
>
>Sounds like you may have been have been hurt by religious people.
Sounds like you are amateur-psychologising your own stupid lie.
>Please know that God is not the author of that. But also you could be
Figments of your deluded imagination (because that's all it is until
you demonstrateits real world existence) aren't the author of
anything, moron.
>"under conviction" as they say. At any rate your contempt for
>Christians is noted..
>
Only your kind of Christian, lying moron.
cyclotron
You're an incurable romantic Martin. ;)
cyclotron
>>Christians is noted.
> Only your kind of Christian, lying moron.
I'm glad to know there are some Christians you feel good about
Christopher.
panam...@hotmail.com
cyclotron wrote:
> >cyclotron wrote:
> >> >cyclotron wrote:
> >> >> Martin Edwards asked:
snip
> >> >And your proof of this is...?
> >> It requires no proof. It is a testimony of my experience. You do not
> >> have to believe if you don't wish to.
>
> >The testimony is the problem. My country's running itself into the
> >ground because of the influence of people who believe what you believe.
> >Religion is like venerial disease. I don't hate you because you have
> >it, but you should seek the cure-and please *do not* spread it to
> >others!
>
> Sounds like you may have been have been hurt by religious people.
Please know in your future conversations with atheists that the
misconception that atheists become so because something unpleasent
happened to them is untrue. This misconception has become something
much like an insult (similar to "Black people can't swim" or "all
Asians own restraunts").
> Please know that God is not the author of that. But also you could be
> "under conviction" as they say. At any rate your contempt for
> Christians is noted..
My contempt is not for the individual christian. It is for *any*
superstition. Ignorance is the enemy of mankind, whether it's
Christian, Muslim, or hippie crystal-rubbing new age plant worship.
>
> >But the fact that you can reproduce the experience at will by physical
> >or chemical contact with the brain should be proof enough that nothing
> >beyond nature is causing it.
>
> You are assuming it is unnatural to experience God.
You are assuming there are gods. I think I'll have to let this thread
go, as I saw in the rest of your post much in the way of apologetics
for the Christian myth. And I just don't care to talk about that.
snip
cyclotron
> >>ground because of the influence of people who believe what >>>you believe.
> >>Religion is like venerial disease. I don't hate you because you have
> >>it, but you should seek the cure-and please *do not* spread >it to
> >others!
> Sounds like you may have been have been hurt by religious people.
>Please know in your future conversations with atheists that the
>misconception that atheists become so because something >unpleasent
>happened to them is untrue. This misconception has become >something
>much like an insult (similar to "Black people can't swim" or "all
>Asians own restraunts").
I don't have that particular misconception. But when they use the
method of abuse and name calling, I suspect that kind of hostility has
a different source than mere intellectual point of view. I could be
wrong.
prab...@shamrocksgf.com
They can have that hostility because of how religious people act first but
yet be atheists for totally intellectual reasons. For example, I don't have
a belief in any god simply because I see no evidence for any god and realize
how flawed all the arguments for any god are. nothing emotional there at
all. How-ever, I may feel very emotional towards idiots that insult my
intelligence or that come around lying about why I'm an atheist even when
corrected or try and tell me that I'm immoral because I'm an atheist, etc.
--
Mike
-------------------------------
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop
thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do
we," George W. "Shrub" Bush Aug 5, 2004