@TheChief
1. Clearly you dont know enough, so you dont have the right to judge 'them'. Like I wrote before, those that raided were few in number, but very successful. To say 'them' is to pair up peaceful farmers with a few bandits, and then judge them att by the actions of the bandits. That would be like if I judged every settler in USA for what happend during occasions like Wounded Knee. I dont do that, becourse I know better.
2. Proof that the religion is dead, or that christianity killed it? Or that much knowlage have been lost? You will find proof in any academic litterature on the subject. The book I recomended to you is one of them, and Price is a very respected archeologist who even studied the subject here in Sweden. On sight, not from a distance. There is plenty of proof, but you best look for yourself and compare what the scientific litterature is saying to my words. Otherwise you will not get the full picture. Sure, it can be quite challenging language at times for a seventeen year old, but that is still the easiest way to do it.
"Every religion on the face of the Earth wants everyone to follow it and every religion on the face of the Earth has missionaries".
That is incorrect. Only very few religions are of missionary nature. You have christianity, islam, buddhism, and a number of small sects and cults who do that. Also, the way buddhism does it generaly differ from that of christianity and islam. Judaism dosent drive mission. Nor do hinduism, sikhism, zoroastrism, daoism, conficianism, shintoism, etc. That is becourse most religions dont have the idea in them that their religion is the only right path for everyone. Usuly it is a seen as the right path for the group wich it is practiced in. They may include others as well, but only if the new initiates truly and wholeheartedly wants to. Zoroastrism is particularly interesting in this matter, as one of their guru-saints gave his life in order to protect the right for a diffrent religous group to practice their faith. There are even quite many religions in wich the worshipers dont recognize it as such. They just see it as a few of the things that make out life, and that is that. They practice religion, the way we see it, but to them a call to a divine being or a sacrefice of food to a spirit is no different from baking bread or sharpening the tip of a spear. Its just things that needs to be done for different reasons, and there are different consequenses if it is not done properly.
"That sense of shame is called civilization and conscience".
We all have a sense of shame conected to our councience. That is somthing natural. However, what christianity did to my people was not just that. Ever heard of the so called 'original sin'? That is just one example of how the church have manipulated the emotions of people in order to win power over them. A shame for just being born.
"Again, it's not the human part of us, it;s the animal part of us".
Humans are a type of animals. We are different from ost animals, but animals all the same, and both new and old traits are parts of us for a reason. We are the sum of our parts, and there is no point in neglecting some of those parts just becourse they are older.
"I didn't mention Hitler in that last one, and I brought him up to point out no matter what a good a person may do, that is outshone by the evils they commit more often than not. What happened centuries ago hasn't got damn thing to do with me or any other living Christian".
Now you are starting to get it, but I dont understand why you think I was refering to you. Concerning modern christians, there are some that have an interpretation of the religion wich I find to be good and worthy, while other ones are worthy only of blame. And then there are those that are mostly harmless, but wich still cant shake off the shadow of the more negative parts of its past.
Also, note that the reference to Hitler was as a person, and yes, what a person do for good and bad must be measured in order to decide if he/she is a good or bad person, but that is on a individual level. On a sociologigal level, however, it is not that simple. You cant judge a whole people as good or bad, but you can note positive and (not or) negative traits that can be found within its culture.
29
@TheChief
1. Clearly you dont know enough, so you dont have the right to judge 'them'. Like I wrote before, those that raided were few in number, but very successful. To say 'them' is to pair up peaceful farmers with a few bandits, and then judge them att by the actions of the bandits. That would be like if I judged every settler in USA for what happend during occasions like Wounded Knee. I dont do that, becourse I know better.
2. Proof that the religion is dead, or that christianity killed it? Or that much knowlage have been lost? You will find proof in any academic litterature on the subject. The book I recomended to you is one of them, and Price is a very respected archeologist who even studied the subject here in Sweden. On sight, not from a distance. There is plenty of proof, but you best look for yourself and compare what the scientific litterature is saying to my words. Otherwise you will not get the full picture. Sure, it can be quite challenging language at times for a seventeen year old, but that is still the easiest way to do it.
"Every religion on the face of the Earth wants everyone to follow it and every religion on the face of the Earth has missionaries".
That is incorrect. Only very few religions are of missionary nature. You have christianity, islam, buddhism, and a number of small sects and cults who do that. Also, the way buddhism does it generaly differ from that of christianity and islam. Judaism dosent drive mission. Nor do hinduism, sikhism, zoroastrism, daoism, conficianism, shintoism, etc. That is becourse most religions dont have the idea in them that their religion is the only right path for everyone. Usuly it is a seen as the right path for the group wich it is practiced in. They may include others as well, but only if the new initiates truly and wholeheartedly wants to. Zoroastrism is particularly interesting in this matter, as one of their guru-saints gave his life in order to protect the right for a diffrent religous group to practice their faith. There are even quite many religions in wich the worshipers dont recognize it as such. They just see it as a few of the things that make out life, and that is that. They practice religion, the way we see it, but to them a call to a divine being or a sacrefice of food to a spirit is no different from baking bread or sharpening the tip of a spear. Its just things that needs to be done for different reasons, and there are different consequenses if it is not done properly.
"That sense of shame is called civilization and conscience".
We all have a sense of shame conected to our councience. That is somthing natural. However, what christianity did to my people was not just that. Ever heard of the so called 'original sin'? That is just one example of how the church have manipulated the emotions of people in order to win power over them. A shame for just being born.
"Again, it's not the human part of us, it;s the animal part of us".
Humans are a type of animals. We are different from ost animals, but animals all the same, and both new and old traits are parts of us for a reason. We are the sum of our parts, and there is no point in neglecting some of those parts just becourse they are older.
"I didn't mention Hitler in that last one, and I brought him up to point out no matter what a good a person may do, that is outshone by the evils they commit more often than not. What happened centuries ago hasn't got damn thing to do with me or any other living Christian".
Now you are starting to get it, but I dont understand why you think I was refering to you. Concerning modern christians, there are some that have an interpretation of the religion wich I find to be good and worthy, while other ones are worthy only of blame. And then there are those that are mostly harmless, but wich still cant shake off the shadow of the more negative parts of its past.
Also, note that the reference to Hitler was as a person, and yes, what a person do for good and bad must be measured in order to decide if he/she is a good or bad person, but that is on a individual level. On a sociologigal level, however, it is not that simple. You cant judge a whole people as good or bad, but you can note positive and (not or) negative traits that can be found within its culture.