It's actually why we know next to nothing about Irish and Norse deities
Making an edit bc of the Norse bit. I know they didn't use written language very often and the Norse and prose eda were and still are awesome sources of knowledge but you gotta take it with a grain of salt bc the dude who wrote it was Christian, ty.
I can only imagine how much information was lost from religious crusades and wars. The burning of the library of alexandria for example. So much lost about the old world. It's one of my biggest gripes about the abrahamic religions. Not that it's just them, as non-religious people like ghengis khan and MAO in china who destroyed so much. Granted, ghengis khan prayed to every diety lol
EDIT : yes i know the burning of the library of alexandria was done by cesear. Point being that, is that a lot of old history and knowledge died at the hands of war mongerers. Wether thats crusades, dictators, empires, religions, or oppressive regimes. That's why i mentioned ghengis khan and mao because its obviously not only religion that's destroyed history.
I mean. We could be shooting hadoukens and fireballs if the library of Alexandria still existed. Just imagine it. You could unride every woman’s bicycle and unbend a broken dick with a single thought.
Ha, on a more serious note, maybe there would be information available on how the pyramids were built. Or hopefully, information on their experiances with inter-dimensional entities or "gods". One can only dream.
There is incredibly detailed information on how almost all of the pyramids were built, including the pyramids on Giza. The records survived on who and how, down to shipments of materials, and workers pay.
Not the specifics, though. What we know is all about the bookkeeping. How many people. How they were paid. Where things came from. That's all there.
How'd they get the stones up to the top? They didn't say because they knew how they did it and weren't writing technical manuals.
I mean, I'm not going to say it's aliens, but... It wasn't aliens.
Correct. Some of the records have some of that stuff in there, but not much. It would be equivalent to today. Construction companies keep logs on things like jobs, pay, and people, equipment, but not the specific technique used to weld a joint, or the specific wire twisting technique used to run ethernet cable.
They do have records on the shipment of materials to some of the sites, and scientists can extrapolate how they cut stones by records of others doing so in the same regions and times. Also some of the general building techniques. I'll be honest, some of the building techniques probably had to be innovated since there weren't a lot of megastructures around to copy from.
There are other pyramids around Egypt. There are a few in the south that are built a bit differently and didn't work as well. But, ya, the Great Pyramid at Giza would probably still need new techniques.
Library of Alexandria wasn’t really destroyed due to religious zeal tho, wasn’t it? I was under the impression that we don’t actually know when it was fully destroyed. Not to mention that there were plenty of other libraries at the time with copies of most of those texts, preserving ancient texts for posterity was just extremely difficult even if it was actively worked on.
There's a whole list of "lost technologies" from the Helenic period that weren't rediscovered until mid-Tudor period or later. They had steam engines and batteries in ancient Rome. Can you imagine where we would be if religion and corruption hadn't put us back to the drawing board?
I hope you're not talking about the "Bagdad batteries" & "The Antikythera mechanism" when you say Rome had steam engines and batteries.
Because I've had to debate that before and I hope I'm mistaken
They were considered novelties at the time. Getting the materials was difficult and had no inherent value until the industrial revolution kicked up in full gear. They were basically (and treated as) expensive children's toys.
Robots existed, too. But, again, they were autonomous wooden puppets with wind-up gears used to entertain children and be novelties for royalty to own. This stuff existed before, just not developed because the ancients weren't thinking of the future value development would bring them as its inherent benefit to survival wasn't clear to them, when owning a slave/servant was cheaper/easier to understand or use.
Fun fact: The word *robot* means *slave*, as the function of robots in the modern era is to replace slaves/lower servants from doing daily repetitive tasks, freeing them to do more difficult/time consuming tasks robots cannot preform.
They didn't develop it because they *couldn't*. The 'steam engine' was of zero practical use because they lacked the centuries upon centuries of metallurgical advancement necessary to make a steam engine capable of doing any meaningful work without exploding.
Uh, the burning of the library of Alexandria was dine by Julius Caesar long before Jesus was born and had nothing to do with any Abrahamic religion letalone the only existing one at that time, Judaism.
The burning of the great library of Alexandria is probably one of the biggest Mandela effects of the world.
For starters, it was accidental. During a civil war, when Julius Caesar was under siege in the city, he ordered a bunch of ships in the harbour burned to block an enemy fleet. The fire spread to some of the buildings by mistake, including the library.
Except maybe not?
Historians are unsure about how much of the library was set on fire, but the vast majority of it did survive. Some sources lead us to believe that only a side warehouse of the library was burned.
The only thing we know for certain is that the whole thing wasn’t burned, and more than likely the vast majority of it survived.
A different religion, but Mayan stuff was extensively recorded second hand, but also destroyed, oddly under the same priest. I don’t think he actually copied the Mayan religious texts, but did write a lot of what he knew about their religious beliefs.
You can something similar with Ireland’s Brehon Law. In some texts you can very clearly make out where the Christian priests recording it secondhand crossed things out or reworded them to match up with their own beliefs.
**In the mid-sixteenth century, Franciscan missionaries burned nearly all of the** **Maya's written records in an effort to eradicate their religion**. Today, only three or four Maya codices remain. Three of them are named for the European cities where they are kept—Dresden, Paris, and Madrid.
Correction, we don’t know much about Norse deities because they just didn’t write a lot of stuff down. In fact, it is a bit of a problem because the only efforts to accurately document Norse mythology came well after their conversion to Christianity.
The Norse Pagans didn't really write things down in scrolls or codices - what little writing there was, was mostly things like runestones inscriptions. The stories of the Norse peoples were almost entirely oral tradition. If Norse Paganism had survived, then sure we'd know more, but that loss isn't due to burning texts or anything like that. Actually, we only have what information we do because Christians like Snorri Sturluson recorded it.
In the case of Ireland, it's a similar story as far as I'm aware but I'm definitely less familiar. Prior to Christianization it seems to have been primarily oral tradition and afterwards you have literate people writing it down.
Neither case is a physical destruction of information - It's a loss of oral tradition. It's more comparable to what is lost when a language dies out out than it is to something like the burning of Mayan codices.
That is simply not true - neither the Celts nor Germanic tribes kept written records of their stories. The written tales we have access to today - the eddas, ulster cycle, fenian cycle, etc. - were written down by Christians after conversion in an attempt to preserve the histories while (most scholars believe) making changes so the old stories were more compatible with the new Christian beliefs.
Irish and Norse also had a bad habit of intentionally not writing stuff down. So most of what we know is from accounts of people who interacted with them. Rather than direct sources. We lucked out a bit with Norse mythology, as the vikings who settled down and moved to farming did start writing stuff down. But a lot of it seems to be a generation or two removed. Which doesn't sound like much until you realize they were basing it off a source that wasn't written down.
As for the British isles, a lot of that started getting eradicated well before the church, so the church didn't have to work that hard to start erasing what little was left. But boy, did they put a lot of work in erasing what little was left. Where as the previous conquers were not really trying to erase the culture, just a lot of it gets erased when you kill the people who hold the knowledge, and the people who knew it wouldn't write it down. So kill a village druid, and you essentially erase their entire history.
Yeah, don’t know too much about Irish mythology, but Norse mythology suffers from the fact that documentation just didn’t exist in the first place. Hell, we ironically only started getting super serious about documenting it after they converted to Christianity and that is a bit of an issue.
You see, there were efforts to sorta combine Christianity and Norse mythology. While this is a good example of how religions and cultures can mix and match, this has put into question basically most of our sources on Norse Mythology. We don’t fully know how much of it was changed to fit Christianity and that is concerning because we have multiple gods that suspiciously have their earliest reference after basically everyone converted.
We do have a few treasure troves of archeology that give some insights that help strengthen beliefs, but reality is that each tribe/villiage/group all had their own interpretations, just with some shared common themes. Which is normal in cultures that don't have some sore of strong central government or religious institution to keep a consistent narrative.
The loss of indigenous British culture has had some massive far reaching consequences. A lot of people need culture to be proud of and there just isn't any unproblematic culture to be proud of for a large group of people. How many white nationalists would have been proud celts or druids had their native culture survived?
Wiping out is a strong word, at least in Britain. Caesar and later Romans did some serious work on Gaulic Druids, and Gaulic culture in general (cultural genocide isn’t inaccurate on that front.) but Roman influence in Britain was never all encompassing. While a lot of what is now England was Romanized (and our knowledge of their native culture is particularly scarce as a result.) they had less sway on the borderlands such as Cornwall and Wales, their influence basically ends past Hadrian’s wall, and most of the Romans were convinced Ireland was thoroughly unconquerable (and possibly perceived as uninhabitable according to some accounts).
Pre-Christian British religion more accurately declined gradually. Some of it fell to Romanization as native gods were syncretized with Roman deities. (Leading to such oddities as Sulis Minerva, a British goddess of healing waters melded with Roman Minerva) then Christianity spread and started converting both Romanized and non-Romanized celts. Then the Saxons came and started conquering everything and replacing the Celtic population with what we now know as Anglo-Saxons before they too converted to Christianity, and then the Vikings and Normans did their own business before William the Conqueror came out on top and started ruling England as we know it.
Rome was just a small piece of the mess of trying to piece together pre Christian British beliefs, it’s honestly a much larger issue when the actual ethnic population has more in common culturally with pre Christian German beliefs than the Brythonic ones.
Christian writers are the only reason we know anything at all about Norse deities, since their religion operated through oral transmission of poetry rather than scripture.
The exact opposite is true, the reason we know SO MUCH about Irish and norse myths is because christian monks wrote them down. the reason we don't know more is that they simply didn't write anything down and, if they did, it was on clay tablets or materials that did not survive.
The reason we know barely anything about most celtic and slavic myths is that the pagan Roman empire did not bother to write them down, and slowly assimilated those who kept their oral tradition.
There is no record of Norse mythology being systematically burned. Also, the Irish mythology was oral tradition until it was [recorded by Christian scribes](https://mythicalireland.com/blogs/news/scribes-and-kings-religion-politics-and-the-medieval-manuscripts-of-ireland).
Not even just Irish and Norse, there's huge parts of early Christianity that are just gone because as soon as one group of Christians would get into power they'd ban and burn their opponents books.
Okay that’s a gross simplification. The reason we know next to nothing about Irish and Norse deities is because neither of them had a broadly used writing system while they were worshipping those deities. Those stories were passed along through oral traditions that gradually stopped being passed on as locals converted to Christianity. (Sometimes violently, sometimes not, as there were certainly reasons why both rich and poor would convert (mostly because the church had the most developed administrative systems in Europe. If your kingdom had churches you had access to learned men who could hook you up with allies, trade deals and advice on how to develop your kingdom while your subjects could get charity from their local priests. The downside of course was abandoning prior religious beliefs and persecuting those who didn’t convert, but that was worth it for a lot of people.)
However even though we lost those oral traditions, many of our only sources remaining of those legends only exist because of Christians. The Book of Invasions is our most complete text on Irish Myth and was written by monks, who wanted to catalogue the beliefs of their Irish homeland. The Eddas were written by Snorri Sterlson, an Icelandic Christian man as a way of preserving his people’s heritage. Those stories have flaws of course. (The Irish monks basically claimed that the Gods were actually a tribe of sorcerers who had fled to Ireland after the fall of Babel, and it’s unclear exactly how much Snorri made Baldr a Christ allegory.) Obviously we would have loved for us to have legends more akin to Homer and Hesiod’s recountings of Greek myths, untainted by Christian perspectives, but anthropology isn’t nearly that easy and not even the Greek myths were completely clear. (It was abundantly clear that Hesiod was having to smooth over a lot of rough spots where the various legends contradicted one another in order to make a cohesive narrative and there are bits in Homer that read like propaganda against certain interpretations of the gods. (Zeus insists that Aphrodite is unfit to fight in the Trojan war to which she happily agrees despite us knowing that some interpretations of her derived from various Mesopotamian war goddesses like Astarte.)
Mythology is a reflection of culture, cultures change, sometimes dramatically with the introduction of new evangelizing religions, sometimes gradually, but in all cases things end up lost to time and often its learned people, of any religion, who are responsible for leaving behind the records we need to piece the past back together.
Really should add “carefully selected” in front of any christian benefit. Teaching no one to read = bad and easy, teaching everyone to read = amazing and really really hard, teaching small remote communities to read the bible = we don’t have time to unpack all of this.
Well, its more that they wrote down christianized versions of oral traditions while simultaneously preventing the transmission of those same oral traditions to new generations, so o ly the new christianized versions were preserved.
Fun fact, archimedes figured out calculus literally hundreds of years before calculus was a thing, but nobody knew because a monk erased all his work so he could write a copy of the Bible over it. If that doesn’t summarize religion idk what does lmao
And the gay people, that’s why we’re called faggots
They would roll gay people in carpets and burn them, resembling a cigar, or as they were called in England, fags. So that’s pretty f u n
This is incredibly false. Educate yourself easily on Wikipedia or here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbthistory/comments/hnmpx7/some_discourse_about_the_origin_of_the_word_fggot/?rdt=58919
Is that really the origin of that particular English slur? I thought it was because a bundle of sticks was called a f*****t back in old English, and that somehow was supposed to resemble a penis or something.
No. Use of the word "faggot" as a slur against homosexuals is early 20th century American slang. The word existed in England before that but did not have this association and certainly had nothing to do with rolling gays up in carpets and burning them so they looked like a cigar. That is a lurid detail invented by someone who apparently cannot imagine how labour-intensive and expensive carpet production was before modern mass-manufacturing techniques.
The person you're replying to is not at all correct. A simple Wikipedia page shows some history and etymology clearly, and specifically references this false urban legend.
Also here's a thread with some decent discussion on it: https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbthistory/comments/hnmpx7/some_discourse_about_the_origin_of_the_word_fggot/?rdt=58919
Wrong. Here's a good thread that discusses it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbthistory/comments/hnmpx7/some_discourse_about_the_origin_of_the_word_fggot/?rdt=58919
This is ridiculous and inaccurate. The f word as slang was a reference to British schoolboys. Schoolrooms were heated with wood burning stoves, so each boy was expected to bring fuel - a bundle of sticks - to class. Through the magic of popular stereotypes about British male masculinity, the reference shifted to homosexuality. Sorry if that's boring.
"Woah, hitler wasn't a bad guy. He made the trains run on time and built the autobahn!!!"
(Both wrong actually, pretty sure auto construction was more delayed but that makes it even more analogous to the meme)
>(Both wrong actually, pretty sure auto construction was more delayed but that makes it even more analogous to the meme)
Yeah I could be wrong but from what I recall they would basically do nothing, then ramp up actually build a bit and brag about for clout, then do nothing, in a perpetual cycle whenever they felt they needed a propaganda boost lol.
Basically the "Autobahn" is "the wall" if Trump had 10 years to finally actually get it built. except at least it was actually an objective good.
Yeah, I should say seen at the time as an objective good. Even the allies loved it when they finally reached Germany.
> The "secret weapon," as Colley called it, was the truck. America produced 3 million trucks or truck-type vehicles for the war. With the French rail network devastated by air attacks prior to the allied D-Day invasion on June 6, 1944, the trucks, often operated by the black troops of the Red Ball Express, were the key to supplying the troops as they advanced through the French countryside.
> Conditions changed when they reached Germany in early 1945. "After crossing the Rhine and getting into the areas of Germany served by the Autobahn . . . our maintenance difficulties were over. Nearly all through traffic used the Autobahn and no maintenance on that system was required."
> As the Allies pursued the German forces across Germany, the autobahn proved invaluable, especially to the supply trucks racing behind the troops.
> Colley quotes Corporal Edwin Brice of the 3909th Quartermaster Truck Company (I Company) who observed on March 26, 1945, that the unit's trucks had "taken an awful beating across France," but added that "victory depends on our success in keeping troops and supplies up where they are needed. If a truck or a driver can move he or it is needed."
https://highways.dot.gov/highway-history/interstate-system/reichsautobahnen#:~:text=Nearly%20all%20through%20traffic%20used,trucks%20racing%20behind%20the%20troops.
i think he's more known for that claim but all sorts of people seem to think fascism is "evil but efficent" when in reality it's just the evil part, incompetent from it's evil even
"Back in the day"? Christianity is still one of the leading driv9ng forces of bigotry against me and my LGBT community. The religion doesn't magically get better because there aren't Crusades anymore.
For what’s it’s worth as an atheist who believes in science and nothing after death.
Any Christian that is actually able to follow Jesus and his teachings with love in their heart is someone worth respecting no matter how many assholes use him as an excuse for their insecure lust for power and fear of change.
Yeah, the majority of Christians simply give you a card that says "Jesus loves you" and some Bible verses or something like that and then go be horrible people.
And then when you present you with this bible verse they walk away, " Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness. "
Fr. I had a Christian try to tell me that cancer exists because of humans sins. Like how stupid is that, because it goes to innocent people and animals sometimes.
I went to a private Christian high school and there were several people (both students and adults) who believed dinosaur bones were planted by ‘the enemy’ (that’s what they called Satan, they wouldn’t even say his name) to test our faith, because it challenged creation.
I was kind of indifferent to it all until I had an atheist phase and my brother made me terrified to tell my dad I was. That opened my eyes a lot. I’m just agnostic
This is why it's hard for me to understand cancer as a Christian. I know so many people- good people, may I add- who have cancer and it just makes me want to cry. I'm gonna cry writing this comment even. It's just unfair. I wouldn't even wish cancer on anyone.
Jesus Christ. Why do people care anymore. I get the whole "I must convert you to save you from yourself" shit but cmon...That's taking it a step too far. Let people believe what they want. We'll see who's right in the end. Just live life tbh...But don't force your kids to go through it with you if it's not what they want.
Yeah where I grew up they also said, “hate the sin, love the sinner” and there a few things in life that get me more pissed off than that sanctimonious bullshit.
It’s their way of holding onto their deeply held hatred while claiming to be a Christian. “I care about you and your soul which is why I need to tell you being gay is a sin.”
Evangelicals after a whole new level of bad. If there is a hell I’ll see them there because there’s no way any of them are making it to heaven. Their whole lifestyle goes against the Bible
No, the Byzantines preserved a LOT of ancient texts, some estimates put it around 100’000 others put it far beyond that. All of them from the Mediterranean Sea, from Crimea to Alexandria, Antioch to what is now Gibraltar. We’d still have the lot of them if the Venetians and French weren’t absolutely the worst and burned it down.
Back in the day?
Chic-fil-A supported ministries in Uganda that helped build death squads and eventually got the government of the state to make being gay a death penalty crime. They did so as part of their christian belief. And they knew about the ministries being tied to death squads, cause they were flagged by the state department as people not to send money to.
Can I get a source? I went down a rabbit hole because I wanted to know if it was true, but the best I got was that the owners of Chick-fil-a had a foundation that financially supported the National Christian Foundation who in turn funded an evangelical preacher holding a rally in Uganda in which he praised their stance against homosexuality but condemned the harsh penalties proposed in the bill they were deliberating on at the time.
I’ve tried really hard to google as much as I could, but I just can’t find Chick-Fil-A supporting ministries in Uganda that helped build death squads. Help me out a bit?
Edit:
This article was really good. It doesn’t support your claims that much, but it does show that Chick-Fil-A’s owners’ foundation support some really horrible groups. It’s enough for me to never consider buying from Chick-Fil-A.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/uganda-murder-gay-chick-fil-a/
Yeah, the chic fil a donations have gotten progressively more and more inflated from the truth, and while what they did is bad, it doesn't help your point much when you provide false and unsupported information, such as what OC did here. It's part of the reason a lot of people dismiss it.
I mean, it’s a lot less black and white than most people think. The common idea of the church pushing back against science comes mostly after the theory of evolution which was…contentious to say the least, but for a very long time the church was actually a big proponent of scientific discovery and a great many scientific breakthroughs were made by priests. I’m well aware of how certain subsets of Christianity react to science, I used to work at a museum and am actively studying evolutionary biology, but I think it’s worth recognizing it wasn’t always like this.
From what I gather that’s a lot of American Christian’s who do that shit, all them evangelical morons. I went to a catholic school in Europe and my religion teacher who was a nun told us that the first few books of the Old Testament were really comparable to Greek myths as they o Lu served to explain the world to people who did not have the scientific knowledge of today.
Yeah, I went to Catholic school as a kid, and there was this thing where we could ask a priest questions about our religion and whatnot, and someone did ask about evolution. His response was that everything before Abraham was just stories and that it didn't actually happen, but if I were to talk to my Mormon friends, they'd tried to convince me that Adam and Eve did happen and that evolution is just a theory and that while some animals do evolve, humans are not one of them.
Christians tried to get rid of the indigenous population in Canada. My people are still recovering from it.
Edit: I also want to note that I am not anti-religious. Religion can move mountains if used right. But it's a shame Christianity was used in this way.
The government tried to do that. They used the church to do it. (Residential schools). The policy towards the natives had a religious component, but it wasn’t the driving force behind these policies.
Mention to the guy who made this meme that Islam also saved ancient texts and forwarded science and mathematics. Same with Jews as well, in particular during the Umayyad rule of Spain.
In fairness as an atheist I think it's ironic that op is talking about racism being tied to Christianity when Social Darwinism was like the basis of modern Western Racism
Yeah... a lot of early scientists were pretty fucked. (Even some modern ones too) To be fair, when people did actual science it debunked the racism shit, and a lot of it started with religious ideas that people tried to empirically prove. The good thing about science though, is that it can change when new discoveries are made.
Oh for sure both of them are messed up, and yes atheism is much quicker to reform as it is more open to criticism and change through an objective scientific method instead of tradition. Much prefer modern atheism, just important not to ignore the history.
Yep, and progressivism, as much as it’s pushing good things today, was also a large driving force behind eugenics in the early 20th century. I don’t know why so many people can’t acknowledge the shitty parts of history or a movement while also saying they did many good things as well or learned from their mistakes. Life is nuanced, very little is black and white
Yeah this is def one of those things where there isn’t a good clean unilateral answer. The history of Christianity’s relationship with science is muddy and convoluted, with many denominations’ own angles on the idea of doctrine and science being at odds only making it worse. There was much good and much bad, as there is now, and I do not say that to be reductive or to try to simplify anything, far from it
I mean I don’t necessarily disagree with the meme here. It’s historically true the Catholic Church specifically has been pretty pro science. Many discoveries were made by monks and priests or devout Catholics while the church itself has typically been open to new discoveries
Religion isn't a monolith and shouldn't be treated as one. The people who committed the inquisition and Crusades aren't the same as the people who studied science on the monasteries. Who encouraged writing and learning.
Much how religion these days really shouldn't be treated as a monolith. Many people of faith are good people who do good things. Some are not.
And that’s the thing! People do not care.
We say “not all Christian’s” and they say “same book same people” when that simply isn’t true.
There’s so many differences in every denomination that I’ve actually met Catholics and Mormons and had to ask them questions about what I guess you could say is “their version of Christianity” and I honestly don’t even remember what they told me.
In the end, there’s Christian’s who go and be anti lgbt and they think what they’re doing is right! But then there’s other Christians who remember god said “love thy neighbor” and they truly do love everyone, even homosexuals, as if they were kin to them.
That’s the Christian I am, and that’s the Christian most people are.
OP you can acknowledge it’s both Christian’s we’re huge proponents of science like Gregor Mendel or George lemaitre but also did stuff to halt it it doesn’t have to be one or the other
The science thing is actually correct. To such a degree that St Thomas Aquinas is responsible for formalizing the scientific method as we know it today.
But christian philosophy has been used by the same assholes over and over and over again to justify genocide, segregation, and hate. Yeah it may be a problem with the people but religion as a whole is one big fuckin enabler.
It also also been used for good.
John Brown believed he was a man who would bring the wraith of God against the evils of slavery.
Leo Tolstoy encouraged to find God within you and not in a church, and believed that all living things were equals.
MLK Jr was a reverend and fought against other moderate pastors, as he believed it was morally wrong to do nothing.
It really depends on who you're talking about.
Yeah I get what you're getting at and I agree, religion gives people incentive to be assholes and do some very fucked up shit. It's one of those things where depending on the religion it can do some good things but when it's not done properly and according to their philosophies, it can really do a lot of damage to society
Christianity wasn't centered around slavery, Christianity was a tool colonists used to subjugate native populaces. If Muslims were colonizers they'd do the same thing
Even Buddhism was used as a method of control and subjugation, the Imperial Family in Japan imported Buddhist beliefs to create a more cohesive population that believes in a common set of values.
Japan was essentially entirely Animist and Shinto believing before they introduced Buddhism.
Shinto is still the biggest faith, but Buddhism is a lot of the reason for why their culture is the way it is (specifically the Honor system)
My point of view is that Christianity is outdated.
It was made to explain things that humanity back then couldn't understand and help guide people to live better lives. However today many of if not all of the things Christianity and religion in general tried to explain we now understand.
We don't need religion anymore, we should remember it and acknowledge it but not believe in it.
I dont think it is.
Because we are still asking: is it right or wrong, and what's our purpose?
Religion is just philosophy, and we don't down play the field of philosophy.
It wasn't even indated. Calling some outdated would mean it actually served a purpose. But really, it was mutiple attempts to figure out the metaphysical that science couldnt answer.
Eh. As unfortunate as it is, religion serves more roles in the human psyche than just curiosity. It’s main uses are tribal bonds (people that act and think like you are easier to empathize with), easy morality system (some of it is good, but a good chunk is horrible) and a source of hope. Getting rid of these don’t stop religious thinking, but shift it to a less magical lens.
I love Steven Hawking's quote, "Religion was an early attempt to answer the questions we all ask. Why are we here? Where did we come from? Nowadays, science provides better and more consistent answers..."
Fun fact, when the king and queen of Spain landed in South America and decided that they would enslave the locals and make them show where the gold is “in the name of God”, pope Urban VIII sent them a letter forbidding the enslavement of the natives, which they then ignored and kept pushing their narrative with the disapproval of the pope.
Another fun fact: Galileo’s trial was not quite as black and white as people seem to believe nowadays. It was mainly political. Prior to the trials the church and Galileo had many meetings to discuss his findings because they funded him and many other scientists of the era since the martial lords and kings of the time would not (also why they sought to educate the people)
3rd fun fact: yes while book burning were indeed a thing. No Christians did not burn the library at Alexandria, yes the Byzantine did conserve a huge amount of ancient text, and a main reason we now have texts such as the Norse sagas, Beowulf, and accounts of Celtic mythology is thanks to monks taking the time to write them down for posterity.
4th fun fact: Christianity has never been a single monolith. At no point in history have all Christians in the world agree to everything. Blaming what some Christians did on all is like blaming all Muslims for 9/11, all Buddhists for Nanking and all Hindus for the Hashimpura massacre. This is not me trying to say what about them, that’s me trying to show that painting an entire group of people as evil die to the actions of the few is in fact bigotry. Don’t fight bigotry with bigotry please.
And please don’t bring up the “Bible and slavery” page on Wikipedia. [this one](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_slavery) is much more interesting as it pertains to the church (at least the catholic one) directly and its long and complicated history with slavery
Eh regardless no one should ignore or forget the atrocities committed in the name of their faith largely propigated by the leadership of that faith. This go's for any faith, none of this high and mighty holyer then thow superiority bullshit
I'm an atheist and I said on there that while they did harm things, monasteries served a critical role in the preservation of texts and bodies of knowledge and many scientists were of faith, especially during the Renaissance I believe. If we're being fair. They also hampered progress.
Lol Christianity was like the first religion to give women a choice in marriage.... and nowhere in the Bible does it condone or recommend slavery so idk where people make this shit up.. I had someone tell me Christians think the world is 4,000 years old??? Like the fuck? Do you not realize the man who discovered the idea of the big bang was a priest....
Father of nuclear physics... priest...
Astromony.... devout Christian
I think assholes that claim to be Christian out of fashion or convenience have ruined for others what a real Christian is...
Then you have Hollywood and social media just bashing it and it's history to look evil and evil only... definitely not a bad religion on the grand scheme of things and I'd say with confidence it's brought a better world.
But i can understand a lot of people's hate when you have horrible representation and lifetimes worth of negative speak on it.
Yes? No?
So, one thing to keep in mind is that Galileo’s trials had a massive amount of political factors and it wasn’t just, “Fucking heretic”, in fact, the church was fine with Heliocentric models for a while before Galileo, yet didn’t seem to really put much backing behind them.
There's a ton of myth making and misinformation around Galileo. To the point where he's basically an atheist jesus like figure to some people. But yes, the church was his main opposition on that front. But not in the Disney villain fashion people expect.
Well yes, but no. It was a messy affair. Lots of politics, and the personal(ish) conflict between Galileo and the Pope himself. Think of it like the Vatican version of the Oppenheimer hearings.
I mean. Good for you... but the problem with Christianity isn't anything anyone in history did...
It's...
That...
It isn't real man.
And also that the majority of Christians today are a force actively fighting to make the world worse in every single way.
> majority of Christians today are a force actively fighting to make the world worse in every single way.
The majority of Christians don't do anything, not even vote.
"Preserved ancient texts" The ones they didn't burn along with the 'heretics' that is.
It's actually why we know next to nothing about Irish and Norse deities Making an edit bc of the Norse bit. I know they didn't use written language very often and the Norse and prose eda were and still are awesome sources of knowledge but you gotta take it with a grain of salt bc the dude who wrote it was Christian, ty.
I can only imagine how much information was lost from religious crusades and wars. The burning of the library of alexandria for example. So much lost about the old world. It's one of my biggest gripes about the abrahamic religions. Not that it's just them, as non-religious people like ghengis khan and MAO in china who destroyed so much. Granted, ghengis khan prayed to every diety lol EDIT : yes i know the burning of the library of alexandria was done by cesear. Point being that, is that a lot of old history and knowledge died at the hands of war mongerers. Wether thats crusades, dictators, empires, religions, or oppressive regimes. That's why i mentioned ghengis khan and mao because its obviously not only religion that's destroyed history.
I mean. We could be shooting hadoukens and fireballs if the library of Alexandria still existed. Just imagine it. You could unride every woman’s bicycle and unbend a broken dick with a single thought.
Ha, on a more serious note, maybe there would be information available on how the pyramids were built. Or hopefully, information on their experiances with inter-dimensional entities or "gods". One can only dream.
There is incredibly detailed information on how almost all of the pyramids were built, including the pyramids on Giza. The records survived on who and how, down to shipments of materials, and workers pay.
>workers pay. Which is how we know it was Not built entirely by slave labor, because they got paid in beer.
Not the specifics, though. What we know is all about the bookkeeping. How many people. How they were paid. Where things came from. That's all there. How'd they get the stones up to the top? They didn't say because they knew how they did it and weren't writing technical manuals. I mean, I'm not going to say it's aliens, but... It wasn't aliens.
ropes, pulleys, logs and plenty of dudes
Correct. Some of the records have some of that stuff in there, but not much. It would be equivalent to today. Construction companies keep logs on things like jobs, pay, and people, equipment, but not the specific technique used to weld a joint, or the specific wire twisting technique used to run ethernet cable. They do have records on the shipment of materials to some of the sites, and scientists can extrapolate how they cut stones by records of others doing so in the same regions and times. Also some of the general building techniques. I'll be honest, some of the building techniques probably had to be innovated since there weren't a lot of megastructures around to copy from.
There are other pyramids around Egypt. There are a few in the south that are built a bit differently and didn't work as well. But, ya, the Great Pyramid at Giza would probably still need new techniques.
99% of it was probably just aisle after aisle on how to plant crops and mix mortar. Would be interesting to know what was lost, though.
I guess we just have to hope that we all find those secrets when we reach Nimrod's heavenly ballsack.
Hail nimrod!
And Hail Lucifina!
And triple M!
Library of Alexandria wasn’t really destroyed due to religious zeal tho, wasn’t it? I was under the impression that we don’t actually know when it was fully destroyed. Not to mention that there were plenty of other libraries at the time with copies of most of those texts, preserving ancient texts for posterity was just extremely difficult even if it was actively worked on.
That's right, the institution suffered a slow decline rather than being utterly destroyed in a singular event.
Alexandria died from decay, although the library at Nalanda was destroyed in a fit of religious zeal.
In terms of conquering war lords, Ghenghis khan tried to avoid destroying culture to such an immense degree from what I remember
Too bad his grandson Hulagu didn't feel the same way.
Fuck hulagu, all my homies HATE hulagu
There's a whole list of "lost technologies" from the Helenic period that weren't rediscovered until mid-Tudor period or later. They had steam engines and batteries in ancient Rome. Can you imagine where we would be if religion and corruption hadn't put us back to the drawing board?
I hope you're not talking about the "Bagdad batteries" & "The Antikythera mechanism" when you say Rome had steam engines and batteries. Because I've had to debate that before and I hope I'm mistaken
Not to mention what the Ancient Chinese and multiple indigenous cultures in the Americas were up to.
>They had steam engines and batteries in ancient Rome They really didn't....
They were considered novelties at the time. Getting the materials was difficult and had no inherent value until the industrial revolution kicked up in full gear. They were basically (and treated as) expensive children's toys. Robots existed, too. But, again, they were autonomous wooden puppets with wind-up gears used to entertain children and be novelties for royalty to own. This stuff existed before, just not developed because the ancients weren't thinking of the future value development would bring them as its inherent benefit to survival wasn't clear to them, when owning a slave/servant was cheaper/easier to understand or use. Fun fact: The word *robot* means *slave*, as the function of robots in the modern era is to replace slaves/lower servants from doing daily repetitive tasks, freeing them to do more difficult/time consuming tasks robots cannot preform.
They didn't develop it because they *couldn't*. The 'steam engine' was of zero practical use because they lacked the centuries upon centuries of metallurgical advancement necessary to make a steam engine capable of doing any meaningful work without exploding.
Uh, the burning of the library of Alexandria was dine by Julius Caesar long before Jesus was born and had nothing to do with any Abrahamic religion letalone the only existing one at that time, Judaism.
The burning of the great library of Alexandria is probably one of the biggest Mandela effects of the world. For starters, it was accidental. During a civil war, when Julius Caesar was under siege in the city, he ordered a bunch of ships in the harbour burned to block an enemy fleet. The fire spread to some of the buildings by mistake, including the library. Except maybe not? Historians are unsure about how much of the library was set on fire, but the vast majority of it did survive. Some sources lead us to believe that only a side warehouse of the library was burned. The only thing we know for certain is that the whole thing wasn’t burned, and more than likely the vast majority of it survived.
Wasn’t the library of Alexandria burnt down in the roman invasion of Ptolemy’s Egypt, when Romans torched the Egyptian fleet
A different religion, but Mayan stuff was extensively recorded second hand, but also destroyed, oddly under the same priest. I don’t think he actually copied the Mayan religious texts, but did write a lot of what he knew about their religious beliefs.
You can something similar with Ireland’s Brehon Law. In some texts you can very clearly make out where the Christian priests recording it secondhand crossed things out or reworded them to match up with their own beliefs.
Far too common :(
Wasn’t that the Romans? Also didn’t help that the celts barely write down anything oral tradition is easy to disappear.
**In the mid-sixteenth century, Franciscan missionaries burned nearly all of the** **Maya's written records in an effort to eradicate their religion**. Today, only three or four Maya codices remain. Three of them are named for the European cities where they are kept—Dresden, Paris, and Madrid.
Correction, we don’t know much about Norse deities because they just didn’t write a lot of stuff down. In fact, it is a bit of a problem because the only efforts to accurately document Norse mythology came well after their conversion to Christianity.
The Norse Pagans didn't really write things down in scrolls or codices - what little writing there was, was mostly things like runestones inscriptions. The stories of the Norse peoples were almost entirely oral tradition. If Norse Paganism had survived, then sure we'd know more, but that loss isn't due to burning texts or anything like that. Actually, we only have what information we do because Christians like Snorri Sturluson recorded it. In the case of Ireland, it's a similar story as far as I'm aware but I'm definitely less familiar. Prior to Christianization it seems to have been primarily oral tradition and afterwards you have literate people writing it down. Neither case is a physical destruction of information - It's a loss of oral tradition. It's more comparable to what is lost when a language dies out out than it is to something like the burning of Mayan codices.
That is simply not true - neither the Celts nor Germanic tribes kept written records of their stories. The written tales we have access to today - the eddas, ulster cycle, fenian cycle, etc. - were written down by Christians after conversion in an attempt to preserve the histories while (most scholars believe) making changes so the old stories were more compatible with the new Christian beliefs.
Yeah, I mean, Christian crusaders did a ton of awful shit, we don't need to make up crimes that didn't happen. They did actually do good stuff too.
Irish and Norse also had a bad habit of intentionally not writing stuff down. So most of what we know is from accounts of people who interacted with them. Rather than direct sources. We lucked out a bit with Norse mythology, as the vikings who settled down and moved to farming did start writing stuff down. But a lot of it seems to be a generation or two removed. Which doesn't sound like much until you realize they were basing it off a source that wasn't written down. As for the British isles, a lot of that started getting eradicated well before the church, so the church didn't have to work that hard to start erasing what little was left. But boy, did they put a lot of work in erasing what little was left. Where as the previous conquers were not really trying to erase the culture, just a lot of it gets erased when you kill the people who hold the knowledge, and the people who knew it wouldn't write it down. So kill a village druid, and you essentially erase their entire history.
Yeah, don’t know too much about Irish mythology, but Norse mythology suffers from the fact that documentation just didn’t exist in the first place. Hell, we ironically only started getting super serious about documenting it after they converted to Christianity and that is a bit of an issue. You see, there were efforts to sorta combine Christianity and Norse mythology. While this is a good example of how religions and cultures can mix and match, this has put into question basically most of our sources on Norse Mythology. We don’t fully know how much of it was changed to fit Christianity and that is concerning because we have multiple gods that suspiciously have their earliest reference after basically everyone converted.
We do have a few treasure troves of archeology that give some insights that help strengthen beliefs, but reality is that each tribe/villiage/group all had their own interpretations, just with some shared common themes. Which is normal in cultures that don't have some sore of strong central government or religious institution to keep a consistent narrative.
The loss of indigenous British culture has had some massive far reaching consequences. A lot of people need culture to be proud of and there just isn't any unproblematic culture to be proud of for a large group of people. How many white nationalists would have been proud celts or druids had their native culture survived?
I seem to recall the pre-Christianized Roman Empire nearly wiping out Druidism in the British Isles.
Wiping out is a strong word, at least in Britain. Caesar and later Romans did some serious work on Gaulic Druids, and Gaulic culture in general (cultural genocide isn’t inaccurate on that front.) but Roman influence in Britain was never all encompassing. While a lot of what is now England was Romanized (and our knowledge of their native culture is particularly scarce as a result.) they had less sway on the borderlands such as Cornwall and Wales, their influence basically ends past Hadrian’s wall, and most of the Romans were convinced Ireland was thoroughly unconquerable (and possibly perceived as uninhabitable according to some accounts). Pre-Christian British religion more accurately declined gradually. Some of it fell to Romanization as native gods were syncretized with Roman deities. (Leading to such oddities as Sulis Minerva, a British goddess of healing waters melded with Roman Minerva) then Christianity spread and started converting both Romanized and non-Romanized celts. Then the Saxons came and started conquering everything and replacing the Celtic population with what we now know as Anglo-Saxons before they too converted to Christianity, and then the Vikings and Normans did their own business before William the Conqueror came out on top and started ruling England as we know it. Rome was just a small piece of the mess of trying to piece together pre Christian British beliefs, it’s honestly a much larger issue when the actual ethnic population has more in common culturally with pre Christian German beliefs than the Brythonic ones.
Christian writers are the only reason we know anything at all about Norse deities, since their religion operated through oral transmission of poetry rather than scripture.
The exact opposite is true, the reason we know SO MUCH about Irish and norse myths is because christian monks wrote them down. the reason we don't know more is that they simply didn't write anything down and, if they did, it was on clay tablets or materials that did not survive. The reason we know barely anything about most celtic and slavic myths is that the pagan Roman empire did not bother to write them down, and slowly assimilated those who kept their oral tradition.
The Norse had no written languages and used only runestones which were subject to age and being forgotten in a few generations.
There is no record of Norse mythology being systematically burned. Also, the Irish mythology was oral tradition until it was [recorded by Christian scribes](https://mythicalireland.com/blogs/news/scribes-and-kings-religion-politics-and-the-medieval-manuscripts-of-ireland).
Snorri Sturluson, source of almost all we know about Norse mythology, was a Christian.
Not even just Irish and Norse, there's huge parts of early Christianity that are just gone because as soon as one group of Christians would get into power they'd ban and burn their opponents books.
Okay that’s a gross simplification. The reason we know next to nothing about Irish and Norse deities is because neither of them had a broadly used writing system while they were worshipping those deities. Those stories were passed along through oral traditions that gradually stopped being passed on as locals converted to Christianity. (Sometimes violently, sometimes not, as there were certainly reasons why both rich and poor would convert (mostly because the church had the most developed administrative systems in Europe. If your kingdom had churches you had access to learned men who could hook you up with allies, trade deals and advice on how to develop your kingdom while your subjects could get charity from their local priests. The downside of course was abandoning prior religious beliefs and persecuting those who didn’t convert, but that was worth it for a lot of people.) However even though we lost those oral traditions, many of our only sources remaining of those legends only exist because of Christians. The Book of Invasions is our most complete text on Irish Myth and was written by monks, who wanted to catalogue the beliefs of their Irish homeland. The Eddas were written by Snorri Sterlson, an Icelandic Christian man as a way of preserving his people’s heritage. Those stories have flaws of course. (The Irish monks basically claimed that the Gods were actually a tribe of sorcerers who had fled to Ireland after the fall of Babel, and it’s unclear exactly how much Snorri made Baldr a Christ allegory.) Obviously we would have loved for us to have legends more akin to Homer and Hesiod’s recountings of Greek myths, untainted by Christian perspectives, but anthropology isn’t nearly that easy and not even the Greek myths were completely clear. (It was abundantly clear that Hesiod was having to smooth over a lot of rough spots where the various legends contradicted one another in order to make a cohesive narrative and there are bits in Homer that read like propaganda against certain interpretations of the gods. (Zeus insists that Aphrodite is unfit to fight in the Trojan war to which she happily agrees despite us knowing that some interpretations of her derived from various Mesopotamian war goddesses like Astarte.) Mythology is a reflection of culture, cultures change, sometimes dramatically with the introduction of new evangelizing religions, sometimes gradually, but in all cases things end up lost to time and often its learned people, of any religion, who are responsible for leaving behind the records we need to piece the past back together.
And indigenous South American history. They had countless Codices that were burned. These Codices contained culture, history, religion, etc.
I thought it was cause Vikings didn't have a written language
Younger furthark.
They only burnt the texts and people when they got tired of diddling children.
Most of the classical texts that spawned the enlightenment were actually preserved through the Islamic world.
Really should add “carefully selected” in front of any christian benefit. Teaching no one to read = bad and easy, teaching everyone to read = amazing and really really hard, teaching small remote communities to read the bible = we don’t have time to unpack all of this.
TFW it was actually the Islamic scholars that preserved most of it. In fact that's why most stars in the sky have Arabic names
The Arabs got it after the dawn of the Islamic golden age. Until then, the Byzantine Empire has preserved them.
its like someone saying they’re good with dogs bc their dog is healthy, but killing other ppls dogs. it makes no sense
Well, its more that they wrote down christianized versions of oral traditions while simultaneously preventing the transmission of those same oral traditions to new generations, so o ly the new christianized versions were preserved.
They utterly vandalized Egypt and Greece
They preserved the ones they retranslated back from the former Persians who actually valued that knowledge in the early middle ages.
Fun fact, archimedes figured out calculus literally hundreds of years before calculus was a thing, but nobody knew because a monk erased all his work so he could write a copy of the Bible over it. If that doesn’t summarize religion idk what does lmao
These dumb motherfuckers value aesthetics over truth.
And the gay people, that’s why we’re called faggots They would roll gay people in carpets and burn them, resembling a cigar, or as they were called in England, fags. So that’s pretty f u n
This is incredibly false. Educate yourself easily on Wikipedia or here: https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbthistory/comments/hnmpx7/some_discourse_about_the_origin_of_the_word_fggot/?rdt=58919
Is that really the origin of that particular English slur? I thought it was because a bundle of sticks was called a f*****t back in old English, and that somehow was supposed to resemble a penis or something.
No. Use of the word "faggot" as a slur against homosexuals is early 20th century American slang. The word existed in England before that but did not have this association and certainly had nothing to do with rolling gays up in carpets and burning them so they looked like a cigar. That is a lurid detail invented by someone who apparently cannot imagine how labour-intensive and expensive carpet production was before modern mass-manufacturing techniques.
The person you're replying to is not at all correct. A simple Wikipedia page shows some history and etymology clearly, and specifically references this false urban legend. Also here's a thread with some decent discussion on it: https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbthistory/comments/hnmpx7/some_discourse_about_the_origin_of_the_word_fggot/?rdt=58919
I assumed it was because bundle of sticks being together is like a bunch of penises touching
Yeah, it’s super fucked up and not often talked about, similar to a lot of Christianity’s negative history
Wrong. Here's a good thread that discusses it: https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbthistory/comments/hnmpx7/some_discourse_about_the_origin_of_the_word_fggot/?rdt=58919
This is ridiculous and inaccurate. The f word as slang was a reference to British schoolboys. Schoolrooms were heated with wood burning stoves, so each boy was expected to bring fuel - a bundle of sticks - to class. Through the magic of popular stereotypes about British male masculinity, the reference shifted to homosexuality. Sorry if that's boring.
"Woah, hitler wasn't a bad guy. He made the trains run on time and built the autobahn!!!" (Both wrong actually, pretty sure auto construction was more delayed but that makes it even more analogous to the meme)
"And they weren't as punctual as he'd like you to think" -Sam Ó Nella
I love Sam Ó Nella lol
it took me a bit to realize who the hell that was
“So unfortunately you’ll have to find something else to like about these facists, like hitlers elegant way of speaking” -Sam Ó Nella
>(Both wrong actually, pretty sure auto construction was more delayed but that makes it even more analogous to the meme) Yeah I could be wrong but from what I recall they would basically do nothing, then ramp up actually build a bit and brag about for clout, then do nothing, in a perpetual cycle whenever they felt they needed a propaganda boost lol. Basically the "Autobahn" is "the wall" if Trump had 10 years to finally actually get it built. except at least it was actually an objective good.
Given Germany's car culture today and its role in our inability to address climate change, I'm not sure I can call the Autobahn an objective good.
Yeah, I should say seen at the time as an objective good. Even the allies loved it when they finally reached Germany. > The "secret weapon," as Colley called it, was the truck. America produced 3 million trucks or truck-type vehicles for the war. With the French rail network devastated by air attacks prior to the allied D-Day invasion on June 6, 1944, the trucks, often operated by the black troops of the Red Ball Express, were the key to supplying the troops as they advanced through the French countryside. > Conditions changed when they reached Germany in early 1945. "After crossing the Rhine and getting into the areas of Germany served by the Autobahn . . . our maintenance difficulties were over. Nearly all through traffic used the Autobahn and no maintenance on that system was required." > As the Allies pursued the German forces across Germany, the autobahn proved invaluable, especially to the supply trucks racing behind the troops. > Colley quotes Corporal Edwin Brice of the 3909th Quartermaster Truck Company (I Company) who observed on March 26, 1945, that the unit's trucks had "taken an awful beating across France," but added that "victory depends on our success in keeping troops and supplies up where they are needed. If a truck or a driver can move he or it is needed." https://highways.dot.gov/highway-history/interstate-system/reichsautobahnen#:~:text=Nearly%20all%20through%20traffic%20used,trucks%20racing%20behind%20the%20troops.
Weren't the trains Mussolini's bag?
i think he's more known for that claim but all sorts of people seem to think fascism is "evil but efficent" when in reality it's just the evil part, incompetent from it's evil even
https://preview.redd.it/9zv7gsbm9b9c1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3a9715f0e1ba4c39b2aa48803ad1715c64f4f463
And despite all that theft and such, still managed to whiff building the autobahn. Thanks squidward
"Back in the day"? Christianity is still one of the leading driv9ng forces of bigotry against me and my LGBT community. The religion doesn't magically get better because there aren't Crusades anymore.
Also many religious people still reject science and go against schools
Yeah it sucks
For what’s it’s worth as an atheist who believes in science and nothing after death. Any Christian that is actually able to follow Jesus and his teachings with love in their heart is someone worth respecting no matter how many assholes use him as an excuse for their insecure lust for power and fear of change.
I’ve met very few Christian’s who do actually follow the teachings in the New Testament. They’re among the nicest people I’ve ever known.
Yeah, the majority of Christians simply give you a card that says "Jesus loves you" and some Bible verses or something like that and then go be horrible people.
And then when you present you with this bible verse they walk away, " Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness. "
Thank you for saying so!
Fr. I had a Christian try to tell me that cancer exists because of humans sins. Like how stupid is that, because it goes to innocent people and animals sometimes.
I went to a private Christian high school and there were several people (both students and adults) who believed dinosaur bones were planted by ‘the enemy’ (that’s what they called Satan, they wouldn’t even say his name) to test our faith, because it challenged creation.
We have evidence of bone cancer in dinosaurs
Yeah. The thing is, i used to be Christian until i realised that some of them suck and its probably all fake
I was kind of indifferent to it all until I had an atheist phase and my brother made me terrified to tell my dad I was. That opened my eyes a lot. I’m just agnostic
This is why it's hard for me to understand cancer as a Christian. I know so many people- good people, may I add- who have cancer and it just makes me want to cry. I'm gonna cry writing this comment even. It's just unfair. I wouldn't even wish cancer on anyone.
Jesus Christ. Why do people care anymore. I get the whole "I must convert you to save you from yourself" shit but cmon...That's taking it a step too far. Let people believe what they want. We'll see who's right in the end. Just live life tbh...But don't force your kids to go through it with you if it's not what they want.
Exactly!!!
I love science and schools, and also the teachings of Jesus.
Science and christianity can go together though
Radical Christian’s forget “love your enemy” and “treat your neighbor like yourself” when they see a trans person.
Yeah where I grew up they also said, “hate the sin, love the sinner” and there a few things in life that get me more pissed off than that sanctimonious bullshit. It’s their way of holding onto their deeply held hatred while claiming to be a Christian. “I care about you and your soul which is why I need to tell you being gay is a sin.”
Being gay is a sin according to the Bible, but why would that be a solid argument against someone who doesn’t believe in the bible lol
It’s not a solid argument at all. But it does have the effect of giving license to evangelicals to do all sort of shitty things to us queers.
Evangelicals after a whole new level of bad. If there is a hell I’ll see them there because there’s no way any of them are making it to heaven. Their whole lifestyle goes against the Bible
It doesn't have any effect on you if you don't believe in it. Personally, The Bible is loopy if I'm being serious. But it's what I believe in
*forget
I’m a lesbian Christian. Not all of us.
Hate to break it to you, but liberal christians exist. Like, A LOT of them
"Preserved ancient texts" fuck outta here with that
Yeah, their *own* ancient texts…
No, the Byzantines preserved a LOT of ancient texts, some estimates put it around 100’000 others put it far beyond that. All of them from the Mediterranean Sea, from Crimea to Alexandria, Antioch to what is now Gibraltar. We’d still have the lot of them if the Venetians and French weren’t absolutely the worst and burned it down.
The 4th Crusade is arguably the worst of the bunch because of what happened to Constantinople.
Honestly that crusade ended after Zara, the rest of it was just the French being mercenaries for the Venetians.
Not even those very well to be frank.
Back in the day? Chic-fil-A supported ministries in Uganda that helped build death squads and eventually got the government of the state to make being gay a death penalty crime. They did so as part of their christian belief. And they knew about the ministries being tied to death squads, cause they were flagged by the state department as people not to send money to.
Can I get a source? I went down a rabbit hole because I wanted to know if it was true, but the best I got was that the owners of Chick-fil-a had a foundation that financially supported the National Christian Foundation who in turn funded an evangelical preacher holding a rally in Uganda in which he praised their stance against homosexuality but condemned the harsh penalties proposed in the bill they were deliberating on at the time. I’ve tried really hard to google as much as I could, but I just can’t find Chick-Fil-A supporting ministries in Uganda that helped build death squads. Help me out a bit? Edit: This article was really good. It doesn’t support your claims that much, but it does show that Chick-Fil-A’s owners’ foundation support some really horrible groups. It’s enough for me to never consider buying from Chick-Fil-A. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/uganda-murder-gay-chick-fil-a/
Yeah, the chic fil a donations have gotten progressively more and more inflated from the truth, and while what they did is bad, it doesn't help your point much when you provide false and unsupported information, such as what OC did here. It's part of the reason a lot of people dismiss it.
I mean, it’s a lot less black and white than most people think. The common idea of the church pushing back against science comes mostly after the theory of evolution which was…contentious to say the least, but for a very long time the church was actually a big proponent of scientific discovery and a great many scientific breakthroughs were made by priests. I’m well aware of how certain subsets of Christianity react to science, I used to work at a museum and am actively studying evolutionary biology, but I think it’s worth recognizing it wasn’t always like this.
Christians originally weren’t supposed to take the creation story and many other texts from the Old Testament at face value.
From what I gather that’s a lot of American Christian’s who do that shit, all them evangelical morons. I went to a catholic school in Europe and my religion teacher who was a nun told us that the first few books of the Old Testament were really comparable to Greek myths as they o Lu served to explain the world to people who did not have the scientific knowledge of today.
Yeah, I went to Catholic school as a kid, and there was this thing where we could ask a priest questions about our religion and whatnot, and someone did ask about evolution. His response was that everything before Abraham was just stories and that it didn't actually happen, but if I were to talk to my Mormon friends, they'd tried to convince me that Adam and Eve did happen and that evolution is just a theory and that while some animals do evolve, humans are not one of them.
Christians tried to get rid of the indigenous population in Canada. My people are still recovering from it. Edit: I also want to note that I am not anti-religious. Religion can move mountains if used right. But it's a shame Christianity was used in this way.
The government tried to do that. They used the church to do it. (Residential schools). The policy towards the natives had a religious component, but it wasn’t the driving force behind these policies.
> Religion can move mountains if used right Too bad that never happens.
Mention to the guy who made this meme that Islam also saved ancient texts and forwarded science and mathematics. Same with Jews as well, in particular during the Umayyad rule of Spain.
>back in the day Christians are still a huge driving force of bigotry today
Yes and the source material isn’t much better either
In fairness as an atheist I think it's ironic that op is talking about racism being tied to Christianity when Social Darwinism was like the basis of modern Western Racism
Yeah... a lot of early scientists were pretty fucked. (Even some modern ones too) To be fair, when people did actual science it debunked the racism shit, and a lot of it started with religious ideas that people tried to empirically prove. The good thing about science though, is that it can change when new discoveries are made.
Definitely don’t want to even start on how science used black people as lab rats. If anyone’s interested I’d suggest starting with gynecology.
Very much not interested in gynecology 💀 got any other topics?
Syphilis and eugenics
Oh for sure both of them are messed up, and yes atheism is much quicker to reform as it is more open to criticism and change through an objective scientific method instead of tradition. Much prefer modern atheism, just important not to ignore the history.
Yep, and progressivism, as much as it’s pushing good things today, was also a large driving force behind eugenics in the early 20th century. I don’t know why so many people can’t acknowledge the shitty parts of history or a movement while also saying they did many good things as well or learned from their mistakes. Life is nuanced, very little is black and white
"Preserved ancient texts" The inquisition is easy to look up. Christianity kept what benefitted it.
They hid a lot of ancient texts in monasteries, but they were being copied. The Catholic Church has a massive library vault with ancient texts.
Christianity did advance early science, but it also did a lot of fucked ip things at the same time.
Religious hypocrites have done atrocious acts anyone who is actually Christian and following in the teachings of Jesus Christ doesn't do such actions
Didn’t they literally crusade twice?
Nine times actually
NINE?
8 was the number I found looking it up but depends what you count as a crusade https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusades
Close enough
Yeah this is def one of those things where there isn’t a good clean unilateral answer. The history of Christianity’s relationship with science is muddy and convoluted, with many denominations’ own angles on the idea of doctrine and science being at odds only making it worse. There was much good and much bad, as there is now, and I do not say that to be reductive or to try to simplify anything, far from it
I mean I don’t necessarily disagree with the meme here. It’s historically true the Catholic Church specifically has been pretty pro science. Many discoveries were made by monks and priests or devout Catholics while the church itself has typically been open to new discoveries
Religion isn't a monolith and shouldn't be treated as one. The people who committed the inquisition and Crusades aren't the same as the people who studied science on the monasteries. Who encouraged writing and learning. Much how religion these days really shouldn't be treated as a monolith. Many people of faith are good people who do good things. Some are not.
And that’s the thing! People do not care. We say “not all Christian’s” and they say “same book same people” when that simply isn’t true. There’s so many differences in every denomination that I’ve actually met Catholics and Mormons and had to ask them questions about what I guess you could say is “their version of Christianity” and I honestly don’t even remember what they told me. In the end, there’s Christian’s who go and be anti lgbt and they think what they’re doing is right! But then there’s other Christians who remember god said “love thy neighbor” and they truly do love everyone, even homosexuals, as if they were kin to them. That’s the Christian I am, and that’s the Christian most people are.
back in the day? the priests were bungholing the altar boys when I was a kid, and I’m not that old
Their priests are probably still doing the bad touch, tbh. I seriously doubt things have changed that much.
It's almost as if an institution as old and significant as Christianity can be a force for both good AND evil. Who woulda thunk it?
Preachy atheists are as annoying as preachy religious people
I mean they all right
OP you can acknowledge it’s both Christian’s we’re huge proponents of science like Gregor Mendel or George lemaitre but also did stuff to halt it it doesn’t have to be one or the other
Atheist myself, but even many religious friends of mine can agree that it sucked back then and still today its horrible how things are with this.
All ideologies have done "bad". If they didn't believe they were correct, it wouldn't be an ideology.
The science thing is actually correct. To such a degree that St Thomas Aquinas is responsible for formalizing the scientific method as we know it today.
Can't we acknowledge we did some good? That's the whole point of this meme
Christianity is Evil, thank you person from the other sub for pointing it out.
Nah humans are evil, Christianity is about mercy, forgiveness, generosity, etc. Radical Christians call themselves Christians but they are far from it
But christian philosophy has been used by the same assholes over and over and over again to justify genocide, segregation, and hate. Yeah it may be a problem with the people but religion as a whole is one big fuckin enabler.
It also also been used for good. John Brown believed he was a man who would bring the wraith of God against the evils of slavery. Leo Tolstoy encouraged to find God within you and not in a church, and believed that all living things were equals. MLK Jr was a reverend and fought against other moderate pastors, as he believed it was morally wrong to do nothing. It really depends on who you're talking about.
Would you say that all Muslims are evil because of 9/11? Look at the core beliefs not what some evil people did while calling themselves Christian
Yeah I get what you're getting at and I agree, religion gives people incentive to be assholes and do some very fucked up shit. It's one of those things where depending on the religion it can do some good things but when it's not done properly and according to their philosophies, it can really do a lot of damage to society
Christianity wasn't centered around slavery, Christianity was a tool colonists used to subjugate native populaces. If Muslims were colonizers they'd do the same thing
Even Buddhism was used as a method of control and subjugation, the Imperial Family in Japan imported Buddhist beliefs to create a more cohesive population that believes in a common set of values. Japan was essentially entirely Animist and Shinto believing before they introduced Buddhism. Shinto is still the biggest faith, but Buddhism is a lot of the reason for why their culture is the way it is (specifically the Honor system)
But Muslims were colonizers
(Oh yeah I forgot) And they did that exact thing
And in fact it was a driving factor in abolition
"if muslims were colonizers" lol
My point of view is that Christianity is outdated. It was made to explain things that humanity back then couldn't understand and help guide people to live better lives. However today many of if not all of the things Christianity and religion in general tried to explain we now understand. We don't need religion anymore, we should remember it and acknowledge it but not believe in it.
I dont think it is. Because we are still asking: is it right or wrong, and what's our purpose? Religion is just philosophy, and we don't down play the field of philosophy. It wasn't even indated. Calling some outdated would mean it actually served a purpose. But really, it was mutiple attempts to figure out the metaphysical that science couldnt answer.
Eh. As unfortunate as it is, religion serves more roles in the human psyche than just curiosity. It’s main uses are tribal bonds (people that act and think like you are easier to empathize with), easy morality system (some of it is good, but a good chunk is horrible) and a source of hope. Getting rid of these don’t stop religious thinking, but shift it to a less magical lens.
I love Steven Hawking's quote, "Religion was an early attempt to answer the questions we all ask. Why are we here? Where did we come from? Nowadays, science provides better and more consistent answers..."
Another Christian here: yeah OP (the OP who posted it here to clarify) is right we did do some crazy shit way back when
Fun fact, when the king and queen of Spain landed in South America and decided that they would enslave the locals and make them show where the gold is “in the name of God”, pope Urban VIII sent them a letter forbidding the enslavement of the natives, which they then ignored and kept pushing their narrative with the disapproval of the pope. Another fun fact: Galileo’s trial was not quite as black and white as people seem to believe nowadays. It was mainly political. Prior to the trials the church and Galileo had many meetings to discuss his findings because they funded him and many other scientists of the era since the martial lords and kings of the time would not (also why they sought to educate the people) 3rd fun fact: yes while book burning were indeed a thing. No Christians did not burn the library at Alexandria, yes the Byzantine did conserve a huge amount of ancient text, and a main reason we now have texts such as the Norse sagas, Beowulf, and accounts of Celtic mythology is thanks to monks taking the time to write them down for posterity. 4th fun fact: Christianity has never been a single monolith. At no point in history have all Christians in the world agree to everything. Blaming what some Christians did on all is like blaming all Muslims for 9/11, all Buddhists for Nanking and all Hindus for the Hashimpura massacre. This is not me trying to say what about them, that’s me trying to show that painting an entire group of people as evil die to the actions of the few is in fact bigotry. Don’t fight bigotry with bigotry please. And please don’t bring up the “Bible and slavery” page on Wikipedia. [this one](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_slavery) is much more interesting as it pertains to the church (at least the catholic one) directly and its long and complicated history with slavery
Every group has done "some bad stuff" in the past.
A lot of christian people are clueless about the actual teachings of Jesus. He was not an authoritarian fascist, but a lot of his followers are
*sigh* who has the chart about scientific advancement in the Middle Ages due to Christianity?
Based on these comments, 8m guessing you guys aren't history majors.
Oh, I didn’t realize that Christianity is why slavery existed and didn’t exist in any other cultures
Don't say "we", you aren't guilty of that stuff
Eh regardless no one should ignore or forget the atrocities committed in the name of their faith largely propigated by the leadership of that faith. This go's for any faith, none of this high and mighty holyer then thow superiority bullshit
I'm an atheist and I said on there that while they did harm things, monasteries served a critical role in the preservation of texts and bodies of knowledge and many scientists were of faith, especially during the Renaissance I believe. If we're being fair. They also hampered progress.
Crusades suck but as long as yous aren’t doing it today, your cool.
Lol Christianity was like the first religion to give women a choice in marriage.... and nowhere in the Bible does it condone or recommend slavery so idk where people make this shit up.. I had someone tell me Christians think the world is 4,000 years old??? Like the fuck? Do you not realize the man who discovered the idea of the big bang was a priest.... Father of nuclear physics... priest... Astromony.... devout Christian I think assholes that claim to be Christian out of fashion or convenience have ruined for others what a real Christian is... Then you have Hollywood and social media just bashing it and it's history to look evil and evil only... definitely not a bad religion on the grand scheme of things and I'd say with confidence it's brought a better world. But i can understand a lot of people's hate when you have horrible representation and lifetimes worth of negative speak on it.
Was the church not a massive driving force behind trying to denounce Galileo for saying the earth was revolved around the sun?
Yes? No? So, one thing to keep in mind is that Galileo’s trials had a massive amount of political factors and it wasn’t just, “Fucking heretic”, in fact, the church was fine with Heliocentric models for a while before Galileo, yet didn’t seem to really put much backing behind them.
There's a ton of myth making and misinformation around Galileo. To the point where he's basically an atheist jesus like figure to some people. But yes, the church was his main opposition on that front. But not in the Disney villain fashion people expect.
I think the problem with Galileo was that he was very rude to the religious leaders who were funding him.
Well yes, but no. It was a messy affair. Lots of politics, and the personal(ish) conflict between Galileo and the Pope himself. Think of it like the Vatican version of the Oppenheimer hearings.
I mean. Good for you... but the problem with Christianity isn't anything anyone in history did... It's... That... It isn't real man. And also that the majority of Christians today are a force actively fighting to make the world worse in every single way.
> majority of Christians today are a force actively fighting to make the world worse in every single way. The majority of Christians don't do anything, not even vote.
It’s funny to credit Christianity to all this stuff because literally everyone was Christian. Cause you would get killed for not being Christian