White Supremacy and Christianity

[Grandliseur]

Slavery and imperialism go back millennia, and different parts of the world were not 'newly' inferior.

The major difference in later times was the concept of biological race being an issue rather than culture that marked one as superior/inferior.

Look at what the Romans wrote about places like Germania and Britannia, they were often appealed at these course, uncivilised barbarians. Cicero described Brits as being too stupid to be good slaves, and Julius Caesar believed they could not be taught music due to their intellectual deficiencies.

It's not like the world was waiting for evolution to be able to classify the world in terms of civilisation.

Scientific racialist theories certainly had a negative effect on Western society, but you are trying to hard to put the evils of the world on evolution.

I thought I was being fair by showing how this gradual progress (evolution) of society into this kind of thought that is expressed in the German article, even in the book quoted. I put the blame on a Christian perversion that combined with a dehumanization of societies that lived simpler lives than our industrial evolution had driven our societies to.

It seems to me that some who embrace evolution do not want it recognized that their values have nothing to do with morality, but instead circle about survival of the fittest.
It is not as if Darwin's ideas came out of a vacuum. They came out like a chicken comes out of an egg when the time is due. It is not as if atheism is something he (Darwin) invented. The French revolution seems to have been a strong force behind the birth of official atheism as a movement:

Dechristianization of France during the French Revolution - Wikipedia
"
An especially notable event that took place in the course of France’s dechristianization was the Festival of Reason, which was held in Notre Dame Cathedral on 10 November 1793.

The dechristianization campaign can be seen as the logical extension[16] of the materialist philosophies of some leaders of the Enlightenment such as Voltaire, while for others with more prosaic concerns it provided an opportunity to unleash resentments against the Catholic Church (in the spirit of conventional anti-clericalism) and its clergy.[17]
. . ."​

.

It's not like the world was waiting for evolution to be able to classify the world in terms of civilisation..

In this way, I see evolution not as something Darwin invented, but that had its roots among many other sources of power. The French Revolution being one of the birthing places of this kind of life philosophy. Just because a country has an established church with privileges from the crown does not mean that the majority of the population believes its dogma or want to be under its heels.

How do you think the Russian revolution succeeded unless a great many were fed up with the ruling and religious systems? Thus we had a movement that gained ground in France and spread its wings to the world.

So, in fact the world was being set up to embrace evolution, the abolishing of god, so as to reign in our modern era and weaken the churches.
Have you ever seen how a fungus eats up the whole gradually? That is how I see the development of this history and evolution.

 

[Derek500]

...It seems to me that some who embrace evolution do not want it recognized that their values have nothing to do with morality, but instead circle about survival of the fittest...

Actually, I accept evolutionary theory and I also accept that "survival of the fittest" doesn't mean "survival of the meanest" at all.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

With the way things have functioned with the Catholic church even dictating things to rulers, I don't think Christ's teachings change the way our world functions. However, if Christ's teachings had been followed that make people recognize each other with fellow feeling and trying to assist the needy, things would have been better.

Maybe we need a better method of inculcating moral values into our communities. Words in a book promulgated by a religious institution whose agenda is principally to promote itself don't seem to matter.

The good times are coming to a quick end. It seems that we entered a pocket of time from after WWII where the west prospered as you say. Now, democracy, the making things better is nearly over. I see nothing but a serious decline on all fronts in the future. This decline is already in the house, past the doorstep.

This is the pessimism so characteristic of much of Christianity.

For its entire history, Christians have been reciting this message. It's a common message among groups that attempt to control people through fear. I believe that you said that you are an American. If so, you are probably pretty familiar with the conservatives' message about the world going to hell in a hand basket and the enemy being at the door and in our midst. The more fearful they are and the more powerless they feel, the more they are willing to submit to authoritarian figures including gods. Where people are in fact powerless and exposed to imminent threat, there will be the most prayer.

It's a terrible thing to do to people that aren't actually in danger - people like us (I hope) that are actually relatively safe, comfortable, and have our basic needs met. I know that bad luck can strike at any time, but barring some unforeseen catastrophe such as a serious medical problem arising or a murderous home invasion, I expect the rest of my life to be as good as the first 63 years have been, and have good reason to believe as much.

At the moment, we are preparing for war on a global scale. The only question is when will it start! If we have atomic warfare soon, all things nearly shall be destroyed, the stock market, the various systems growing food and carrying it to us.

At the moment, I'm waiting for a Thomas' English muffin to finish toasting. After that and a shower, the wife and I will be walking to the local grocery store. Then, I will take her and our dogs to a friend's home for a doggie play day in the later morning. Next, it's off to the bridge club in the afternoon, then dinner out for four tonight before coming back home for some wine and Netflix.

This is what life actually is, and need not be lived under the cloud of perpetual doom. Sure, we could be killed or paralyzed today, but is that how we should live out the day? We all face these risks, but they needn't define our psychological state.

 

[Augustus]

It seems to me that some who embrace evolution do not want it recognized that their values have nothing to do with morality, but instead circle about survival of the fittest.

Morality is not per se a concern of evolution, although morality is something that could relate to evolutionary psychology. Our cognition to some degree contains features designed to enable us to form coalitions, morality is in some way related to this.

Although our propensity towards violence is also an aspect of our evolved cognition.

"Evolutionary logic" can be used to support a variety of perspectives on morality, although it is fair to note that it has, along with other scientific racialist theories, been used to support highly immoral behaviours.

The French revolution seems to have been a strong force behind the birth of official atheism as a movement:
Dechristianization of France during the French Revolution - Wikipedia
"
An especially notable event that took place in the course of France’s dechristianization was the Festival of Reason, which was held in Notre Dame Cathedral on 10 November 1793.

The dechristianization campaign can be seen as the logical extension[16] of the materialist philosophies of some leaders of the Enlightenment such as Voltaire, while for others with more prosaic concerns it provided an opportunity to unleash resentments against the Catholic Church (in the spirit of conventional anti-clericalism) and its clergy.[17]
. . .".

The French Revolution contained both atheist (Hebert, Momoro, etc.) and deist factions (Robespierre). It is also fair to note that this was the genesis of certain Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment utopian ideologies (later Marxism also) that saw religious morality as a form of false consciousness that limited human society and was to be eradicated, violently if necessary.

A consequence of the rejection of religious morality as valid led to a 'blank slate' type approach where humanity could be shaped into a perfected 'new animal'. As well as the Enlightenment utopianism, there was also the utopianism of Naziism that grew out of the Romantic tradition but also rejected the existing morality and sought to make man anew.

Ironically, despite their general hostility towards Christianity, the Humanists who offered an alternative atheistic moral code really retained many ideas form the liberal Christian tradition and adapted them for a secular context combined with Greek rationalist philosophies.

So, in fact the world was being set up to embrace evolution, the abolishing of god, so as to reign in our modern era and weaken the churches.

I still don't see the centrality of evolution in any of this though. Darwin's theories were integrated in many concepts of natural theology, and the decline of Christianity was more to do with social and cultural changes, urbanisation, etc. rather than a scientific refutation of the foundations of belief.

 

[Grandliseur]

whose agenda is principally to promote itself don't seem to matter.

Correct.

This is what life actually is, and need not be lived under the cloud of perpetual doom. Sure, we could be killed or paralyzed today, but is that how we should live out the day? We all face these risks, but they needn't define our psychological state.

Happy for you. My situation is being in Catholic hell with brimstone (I am not Catholic). My wife has been in the hospital for more than a year now. It is nice to hear that some have a nice life. Hope you appreciate it while it lasts.

My nationality I will not mention tonight. My primary languages are: English (US type), French, Danish, German, Japanese, Norwegian - reading mostly, and a little bit of Swedish reading. Ordered according to my competency in these languages, more or less. I speak commonly spoken Japanese, but neither write nor read it to any level of a native speaker. Some of the languages have not been used seriously for decades, but I still have fun listening to music in them at times. Reading Danish makes my head hurt, and my reading speed is fairly poor.

 

[metis]

My situation is being in Catholic hell with brimstone (I am not Catholic). My wife has been in the hospital for more than a year now. It is nice to hear that some have a nice life.

I'm very sorry to read this, so my prayers will be with her and your family.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Without resorting to tautological reasoning, it's pretty hard to specifically credit humanists for any of these things. Influence, sure, but simply one of many and often not the biggest.

Religion played a far bigger role in education and literacy, from universities to schooling. Scientific progress too, until relatively recently at least.

Welfare state was all sorts from conservatives, liberals, socialists, fascists. Democracy another hodge podge of diverse influences that evolved gradually over the centuries. Workers rights likewise with significant religious motivations in 19th C industrialists, Quakers especially.

The "Humanists to the rescue" narrative doesn't really hold up to much scrutiny.

You've made these claims to me in the past, but never supported them. Humanists get the credit for placing man in the role that gods formerly played, and skepticism, reason and empiricism in place of faith.

You regarded humanism as a branch of Christianity, or its child, indebted to Christianity for its roots and origin.

I see humanism as a reaction to and repudiation of all theism. You've never offered a reason to think otherwise.

I'm not looking to repeat that discussion. If you want to make a case this time, please do so, but I don't intend to address mere disagreement in the form of unsupported contradictory beliefs.

 

[TheBannerofHomuraAkemi]

Israel sent Jesus to his death--God cut them off of being his chosen-Matthew 23:37-39)--he left the door open to them( vs 39) they have outright refused for over 1950 years.

Are you saying that gives them the right to hate jews? I mean were all responsible for the death of Jesus since we have all sinned.

 

[kjw47]

Are you saying that gives them the right to hate jews? I mean were all responsible for the death of Jesus since we have all sinned.

Jesus taught to love all our brothers and sisters. Some are just mislead--Their eternal life houses are on fire--does one just walk by or knock? I am knocking.

 

[Grandliseur]

Darwin's theories were integrated in many concepts of natural theology, and the decline of Christianity was more to do with social and cultural changes, urbanisation, etc. rather than a scientific refutation of the foundations of belief.

I liked your entire post. It seems you know your history better than I. Still, I have long seen the larger picture you describe in this quote.

As to the above quote that I included here, that is more or less what I have been stating all along. I never claimed that a 'scientific refutation' occurred. I specifically thought it a curious abomination of some where they clung to some religious values in public, and perhaps at home, while now adopting the viewpoint of being 'evolutionary inferior.' The rejection of Christian dogma could not be done in one scoop in most cases; too much was at stake publicly and perhaps personally when considering the effects of those around the ones who might have become too extreme early on.

Haven't enough been said on this topic!

 

[Grandliseur]

I'm very sorry to read this, so my prayers will be with her and your family.

Thank you for your thoughts and prayers.

With age, many of us come to the point where things begin to dissolve. Hope you are doing OK still and enjoy life and the company of your wife.

 

[Child Empress]

This is an interesting and informative article on the KKK origins (this explains how they were not originally Christian): The Satanic Origins of the Ku Klux Klan

Many of the white supremacist Christians believe that Jesus was a Galilean white person, not a racial or religious Jew. I've heard many of these people delude themselves into thinking that the ancient Israelites or Hebrews or whatever were not Jews - or even that the ancient Israeli tribes back then were white. I usually send those types of people this-

Jesus Christ wore tassels on his clothes (Luke 8:44; Matthew 14:36) to serve as a reminder of the Commandments (Numbers 15:37-39). He did Passover (John 2:13), went up to Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 16:16) for the sake of this Jewish feast day that is Passover. He observed Succoth – feast of tabernacles (John 7:2, 10) went to Jerusalem (John 7:14) as required in the Torah. He also observed Hanukkah, the festival of lights (John 10:22) and probably Rosh Hashanah, the feast of trumpets (John 5:1), going up to Jerusalem.
Jesus identified himself as a Jew (John 4:22) and as King of the Jews (Mark 15:2).

 

[Augustus]

I'm not looking to repeat that discussion. If you want to make a case this time, please do so, but I don't intend to address mere disagreement in the form of unsupported contradictory beliefs.

It was more about the specific points you made regarding claiming numerous projects as being specifically 'humanist', rather than claiming them for any other tradition.

Education: Universities were clearly a religious creation with active support from the Papacy. Religiously funded schools were the most common kind until large scale government funding. Even you must accept this part at least. What was the major humanist contribution?

Welfare state: Unless you consider people like Bismark pragmatically responding to the threat of socialism to be a humanist project, why should humanists be considered integral?

Workers rights: look at Quaker industrialists like Joseph Rowntree and the Cadbury family, as well as Marxists and numerous others. Which humanists drove progress?

Scientific progress: historians have observed that Christian churches were for a crucial millennium leading patrons of natural philosophy and science, in that they supported theorizing, experimentation, observation, exploration, documentation, and publication.... one cannot recount the history of modern science without acknowledging the crucial importance of Christianity. Noah J Efron - in Galileo goes to jail - Myth 9: Christianity gave birth to modern science

It's not like scientific progress only occurred when humanists appeared on the scene. How many of the pre-20th C drivers of science were humanists?

Humanists certainly shared many of the same aims, and may have made some contributions, but to claim these projects as 'humanist' driven is just ideological wishful thinking. They all had diverse influences, and humanism was not dominant in any of them.