-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christianity & Colonising
- Thread starter Electra
- Start date
Augustus
…
Can a 2000 year old cultural tradition that is probably the most diverse in human history be separated from a few vaguely defined political buzzwords?
I'd say it can.
All culture is destruction/manipulation of that which came before. How much Ethnic Culture has been destroyed and manipulated by Ethnic Culture?
Anyway, unless we are using the archaic definition of ethnic as 'pagan', Christianity is ethnic culture.
February-Saturday
Devil Worshiper
The pure Christianity known to the esotericists is incorruptible. While I have my disagreements with the Golden Dawn, for instance, they also have my respect. If anything, they are a force for reviving and renewing diversity and forming a perennial basis for various cultures to cooperate through.
The vain teachings of modern churches like Catholicism and Orthodoxy, saying nothing of the evangelicals, I cannot be as approving of. Lutherans are another matter, as are the dreaded "Christopagans" that I think many quite wrongfully view with disdain.
Christianity has been around for over a thousand years and likely longer. Its global empire has had to adapt to native cultures almost as much as native cultures were forced to adapt to it. While this arguably had a distorting effect, it also means that Christianity is one of the most diverse religions out there.
I would argue the exact opposite of your position. Rather than saying that Christianity is colonial to its core, I would argue that it's diverse to the point of meaninglessness.
ETA: Of course, I would say something very similar about Satanism, as self-identifying Satanists these days can be anything from Thelemic initiates and eclectic Wiccans to Quimbanderos and outright atheists. "Satanism," too, mostly only has meaning in the dreams of the masses. This is hardly a unique issue with Christianity, but that's why Christians have denominations and Satanists have currents.
The vain teachings of modern churches like Catholicism and Orthodoxy, saying nothing of the evangelicals, I cannot be as approving of. Lutherans are another matter, as are the dreaded "Christopagans" that I think many quite wrongfully view with disdain.
Christianity has been around for over a thousand years and likely longer. Its global empire has had to adapt to native cultures almost as much as native cultures were forced to adapt to it. While this arguably had a distorting effect, it also means that Christianity is one of the most diverse religions out there.
I would argue the exact opposite of your position. Rather than saying that Christianity is colonial to its core, I would argue that it's diverse to the point of meaninglessness.
ETA: Of course, I would say something very similar about Satanism, as self-identifying Satanists these days can be anything from Thelemic initiates and eclectic Wiccans to Quimbanderos and outright atheists. "Satanism," too, mostly only has meaning in the dreams of the masses. This is hardly a unique issue with Christianity, but that's why Christians have denominations and Satanists have currents.
Last edited:
exchemist
Veteran Member
Regarding your first question, yes of course it can. It's a religion, not a geopolitical strategy.
Regarding the second, why do you exclude Christianity from "Ethnic Culture"? It has been the ethnic culture of Europe for most of the last two thousand years.
Yes - in can be an inclusion to any custom and/or tradition.
syo
Well-Known Member
PureX
Veteran Member
People colonize for greed, not for God.
Christianity began as a tiny sect of Judaism that quickly became attractive to marginalized groups: slaves, women, and so forth. Jesus' teachings in the Gospels were a subversive inversion of the social order of the day. Paul went so far as to say that "in Christ there is no male nor female, slave or free, Jew or Greek."
It wasn't until the 4th century that Christianity became a tool for state violence and oppression.
MJFlores
Well-Known Member
You mean Catholicism?
Catholicism is not Christianity.
Even Protestantism is not Christianity.
However in the loose definition of things, they are associated with colonialism.
Christianity and colonialism are often closely associated with each other because Catholicism and Protestantism were the state religions of the European colonial powers and in many ways they acted as the "religious arms" of those powers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris...sm are often,religious arms" of those powers.
Christianity and colonialism - Wikipedia
However, the belief on Christianity isn't enough tool for oppression.
There must be some force of arms behind it - modern arms to overwhelm the natives that they want to destroy.
At the end of the day, it is not the noble quest of the conquistador [colonial imperialist] to propagate "Christianity" but the lure of gold and other wealth.
amorphous_constellation
Well-Known Member
In the book of Romans, paul clearly wishes to erase all the distinctions between cultures, and he constantly stresses dualism, where bodily things (your ethnicity for example) are described as but mere chains on the universal soul. The soul is of course, free of all biological qualities. This is why saying someone is 'Irish' Catholic or 'Polish' Catholic is actually a misnomer, because Paul at least did not care where you were from. The early saints however, did seem to appeal to populaces with pre-existing cultural material, and many of them might have reflected the qualities of pagan gods. Many cogent arguments for this seem to now appear on youtube in recent years, if you are interested about how peoples were converted. Christianity couldn't get initial appeal if it was totally and utterly alien
exchemist
Veteran Member
This has no bearing on the the historical fact that the culture of Europe for almost 2000 years has been Christian. You can almost, and in fact the historian Norman Davies does this, define Europe as Christendom.
amorphous_constellation
Well-Known Member
I think that ultimately, Christianity was the result of making dualism the theological focal point, and I think it would have happened anyway without the religion. It might be that before, peoples were becoming too concerned with bodily life, and could not find any narrative to unite the humanness in us all. The Christian thinkers however, mostly would consider the worldly or bodily life with great revulsion, and quickly seemed to become fixated on all things non-biological. As one might then surmise, dualism might have to be engineered with more balance.
I cannot castigate the religion really, because I view it more like a conversation that needed to be had. I do believe in a universal and transcendent soul space, but something like that is extremely difficult for myriad cultures to connect to each other on
It represented a phase transition, and I think it likely will be re-integrated into distinct and reemerging pantheons
amorphous_constellation
Well-Known Member
will have to check him out
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Traditionally, both Christianity and Islam believed that they were to be transcendent religions, and there's some in both, especially fundamentalists, who still feel that way.
Groups have been conquering other groups as far back as we can go historically. This is true in Europe, Asia, and the Americas.
Some group conquered another group and then, of course, wanted the conquered to adopt the conqueror's religion and customs. And that was because their way was better and that was proven by who conquered whom.
So I don't find any special in Christianity and Islam.
I also don't find that conquering others is a necessary part of both religions.
Some group conquered another group and then, of course, wanted the conquered to adopt the conqueror's religion and customs. And that was because their way was better and that was proven by who conquered whom.
So I don't find any special in Christianity and Islam.
I also don't find that conquering others is a necessary part of both religions.
They really did a number on the Mayans
What do you think Christianity is?
If it is the teachings of Jesus, it can’t be used for colonising or oppression, for example because Jesus says:
But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust.
Mat. 5:44-45
Augustus
…
As the Mayans did a number on weaker neighbours...
firedragon
Veteran Member
Its not Christianity you are referring to. You are referring to Colonisers who used Christianity as a tool. All over the world many have experienced this for centuries. Yet, this has nothing to do with Christianity but its the oppressor and the coloniser.