At risk of derailing the thread here, I’d say there are no examples you can bring of a politically created/patronized religion displacing native beliefs, assuming the mentality of the public didn’t favor that religion. For instance, Anglicanism may have suited the British state well, but it wasn’t arbitrarily forced onto a resistant Catholic population.
“Convert or die” was a very popular proposition for many centuries.
Take, I don’t know, former Yugoslavia. The Bosnians are mostly Muslim, the Serbs are Christian Orthodox, and the Croats are Roman Catholic. You think that’s because they all had different mentalities?
Ugh… I’m talking about whoever created Islam or Christianity in the first place, and Lumifer’s response didn’t seem to acknowledge that. I am indeed aware that Islam predates the Ottoman dynasty.
“During the Saxon Wars, Charlemagne, King of the Franks, forcibly Roman Catholicized the Saxons from their native Germanic paganism by way of warfare, and law upon conquest. Examples are the Massacre of Verden in 782, when Charlemagne reportedly had 4,500 captive Saxons massacred upon rebelling against conversion, and the Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae, a law imposed on conquered Saxons in 785 that prescribed death to those who refused to convert to Christianity.”
Ah, I mean a religion that was created or originally propagated through patronization. Every religion has been patronized for political purposes at some point. Christianity is a pretty good example of a religion that was not useful to the authorities during its early years.
You’re not giving the full quote, and even if he had said that, it wouldn’t remotely meet any burden of proof for showing Christianity was probably created for political purposes. The behavior of the Roman authorities towards Christianity seems to offer more evidence against that, as well as the embarrassment for having their Messiah be crucified by a Roman governor.
At risk of derailing the thread here, I’d say there are no examples you can bring of a politically created/patronized religion displacing native beliefs, assuming the mentality of the public didn’t favor that religion. For instance, Anglicanism may have suited the British state well, but it wasn’t arbitrarily forced onto a resistant Catholic population.
“Convert or die” was a very popular proposition for many centuries.
Take, I don’t know, former Yugoslavia. The Bosnians are mostly Muslim, the Serbs are Christian Orthodox, and the Croats are Roman Catholic. You think that’s because they all had different mentalities?
Did the Ottoman Sultans invent Islam?
Given that you know the expression “Ottoman sultans”, what do you think?
No. The Ottoman Empire started in 1299. Islam, and various very powerful caliphates, had existed for centuries before that.
Ugh… I’m talking about whoever created Islam or Christianity in the first place, and Lumifer’s response didn’t seem to acknowledge that. I am indeed aware that Islam predates the Ottoman dynasty.
From Wikipedia:
“During the Saxon Wars, Charlemagne, King of the Franks, forcibly Roman Catholicized the Saxons from their native Germanic paganism by way of warfare, and law upon conquest. Examples are the Massacre of Verden in 782, when Charlemagne reportedly had 4,500 captive Saxons massacred upon rebelling against conversion, and the Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae, a law imposed on conquered Saxons in 785 that prescribed death to those who refused to convert to Christianity.”
Ah, I mean a religion that was created or originally propagated through patronization. Every religion has been patronized for political purposes at some point. Christianity is a pretty good example of a religion that was not useful to the authorities during its early years.
Matthew 22:21 Jesus said “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”.
You’re not giving the full quote, and even if he had said that, it wouldn’t remotely meet any burden of proof for showing Christianity was probably created for political purposes. The behavior of the Roman authorities towards Christianity seems to offer more evidence against that, as well as the embarrassment for having their Messiah be crucified by a Roman governor.