godspell said
What’s interesting to me is that it really was paganism that created and clung to the notion of the earth being the center, and Christianity was (as so often happpened) parroting pagan ideas in defending geocentrism–it was nonetheless Christian scientists and mathematicians who solved the problem.
The question is what else could these scientists that you refer to have been at that precise time in Christian Europe, except Christians?
Kepler was a very devout Lutheran. Like many (natural) philosophers of his era, Kepler had a mystical belief that the circle was the Universe’s perfect shape, and that as a manifestation of Divine order, the planets’ orbits must be circular. For many years, he struggled to make Brahe’s observations of the motions of Mars match up with a circular orbit. But the important thing is that he was both an absolutely rigid empiricist. For example, the earth’s orbit is only 1 part in 6,000 away from being a perfect circle. For that small amount, Kepler was willing to jettison circular motion. Most other natural philosophers would have chalked that up to observational error, but Kepler knew the margin of error of Tycho’s observations. Therefore, Kepler’s Christianity had nothing to do — to the contrary, it delayed the formulation of his planetary laws — with his contribution to science by solving part of the problem of the movement of planets around the sun. Kepler is an example of a (natural) philosopher and a mathematician who gave priority to a methodological proto-naturalism to natural theology.
On the effect that the Christian religion had on the science of Galileo and Newton, almost the same can be said.
Having said that, the historical truth is that modern science was born and began to consolidate in Christian Europe, despite the great advance that Arab-Islamic science had towards the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The the history of that fact is very complex, but the reasons why modern science was born in Europe date back to the Investiture Controversy (1075-1124) and that the early Hellenization of Christian metaphysics allowed natural theology to be born and flourish.
You can’t very well say there was no Hellenistic influence on the Islamic world, given that so much of it was ruled by Greek dynasties for such a long time.
For whatever reason, the Christian world was more open to new ideas, and the Islamic renaissance in science and math didn’t last long enough, though there are many fine Muslim scientists to this day.
I think probably one reason was that Christianity’s origins were so different from Islam’s. Centuries in relatively obscurity, gradually gaining power in the Roman world, taking it over by degrees, and reviving it for a time. Islam was born in a relative backwater in a very short period of time, and seized power with remarkable quickness. Christianity was a gradual revolution, Islam a very sudden one. There were many factors at work, including economic and political factors. If Christianity had remained dominant in what is now called the Islamic world, no guarantee things would have gone a lot better, but I do think there would be more flexibility. Christianity learned very quickly how to borrow and adapt. It had no choice in the matter. But that’s all the past, and who knows what the future holds?
You’re too focused on individual thinkers. It’s a problem, as is your seeming determination to discount any positive role for Christianity in the development of western civilization (who was it preserved the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans? Christian monks, to a great extent.) There is no basis for saying Christianity delayed anything, when the part of the world it remained dominant in advanced so quickly. Unless you’re talking about race, of course. I would hope that is not what you’re talking about.
In China and other parts of South Asia today, many of the most progressive people are Christian converts. The entrepreneurs, the reformers, trying to break out of old patterns. Christianity is growing there. The notion that all it did was hold people back is nonsense. In some cases yes, in many others decidedly not. Max Weber might have a few things to say about that. Whether any of this is what Jesus had in mind is of course beside the point in this context.
Fernando, the formula goes like this –
First the Church condemns it, then they tolerate it, then they take credit for it.
Are you familiar with the development of the science of geology? In the first decades of the 19th century, pre-Darwin of course, such development was held back for decades because the intellectuals of the day couldn’t get past the concept of a literal Flood. All the data had to be focused through this lens. The science of Geology was born only when it became possible to deny that the Flood actually happened along with the intuition that the same physical forces at work today also worked in ancient times.
The early centuries of Islam were culturally and scientifically fruitful because all the benefits of Pagan knowledge and Hellenistic learning moved east after they were suppressed by the Christian Church. Of course a few centuries later Islam had its own suppression when its own brand of know-nothings became ascendant. The problem with Islam is that it purged itself so completely that no Renaissance was possible. We were very lucky in the West. After the rediscovery of Pagan and Hellenistic thought we were able to begin the centuries long task of prying the dead fingers of the priests off the culture. A task which continues today.
Yes, and you can thanks all the devout Irish monks in the Dark Ages, copying the books so they’d be around to be rediscovered. An oversimplification, but not compared to what you guys just typed.
The formula is “Never give Christianity any credit and imply that if it hadn’t happened we’d all have jetpacks now.”
😀
Stephen said
Are you familiar with the development of the science of geology? In the first decades of the 19th century, pre-Darwin of course, such development was held back for decades because the intellectuals of the day couldn’t get past the concept of a literal Flood. All the data had to be focused through this lens. The science of Geology was born only when it became possible to deny that the Flood actually happened along with the intuition that the same physical forces at work today also worked in ancient times.
If the science of geology was so “held back” by Christian dogmatism, how does one explain that every major innovation and discovery in the field dating back to the mid 16th Century was made by a person raised a Christian-dominant country?
Stephen said
The early centuries of Islam were culturally and scientifically fruitful because all the benefits of Pagan knowledge and Hellenistic learning moved east after they were suppressed by the Christian Church. Of course a few centuries later Islam had its own suppression when its own brand of know-nothings became ascendant. The problem with Islam is that it purged itself so completely that no Renaissance was possible. We were very lucky in the West. After the rediscovery of Pagan and Hellenistic thought we were able to begin the centuries long task of prying the dead fingers of the priests off the culture. A task which continues today.
Is this actually historical? In a couple words, “not really.”
There is a kernel of historical fact in the first part of this: the best explanation for what we now refer to as the Golden Age of Islam was likely the influence of pre-Islamic knowledge in regions conquered by Muslim conquest. In particular, the greatest advances were made during the 10th and 11th Centuries in the fields of philosophy and mathematics by people living in Persia, the Iberian Peninsula and the Indian Subcontinent. The foundation of this knowledge was largely Persian/Zoroastrian, Indian/Hindu and, yes, Hellenistic and Latin.
So, it is correct that pagan knowledge was very important to the Golden Age of Islam. Of course, much of this is associated with Islamic conquest.
The end of this era of advancement tracks rather well with the Mongol conquest of Khwarezmia and establishment of the Mongol Ilkhanate — not with “Muslim know-nothings becoming ascendant.”
* * *
As to the loss of knowledge following the fall of the Western Roman Empire . . . blaming this one the “Christian Church” bogeyman has a few problems:
First, regional loss of Roman hegemony had caused similar losses of knowledge and civilization decay in regions that were not Christian: for example, in Britannia and Old Saxony.
Second, in the immediate aftermath of the Fall of Rome, when living Romans and the children of living Romans in Italy (all of whom were Christian) were attempted to reconstitute the Empire, pagans works continued to flourish. The loss of these works most closely tracks with the ultimate death of Roman power in the West from the mid 6th Century onward, rather than the Christianization of the Empire two hundred years earlier.
Third, the eastern part of Christendom (i.e., the Byzantine Empire) didn’t go through a dark age, lending further support to the idea that the loss of knowledge and civilization was connected more to the loss of the polity (the Empire), rather than religious influence.
Fourth, the Dark Ages, whatever they were in the West, were over by the 11th Century, when the first modern universities begin to develop. Note that the universities system developed in the Christian West …. not in China, not on the Indian Subcontinent, and not in Mongolia.
We are now roughly a millennium into a period when the overwhelming vast number of advances in science, philosophy, mathematics and the like were made in Christian-dominated countries. And yet, the “Christian Church” continues to be advanced as some type of evil suppressor of knowledge.
Fernando, Stephen
We have many movements in the past with nice slogans like peace, universalism, free speech, free education, free healthcare, freedom of religion and on her other side with censorship, massive repressions against “internal” enemies. See communism with more than 100 million victims worlwide.
Roman empire was a prison of the nations with Concordia, Clementia, Caritas, Pax Orbis Terrarum on their coins. With citizenship for “friends” and slavery or crucifictions tor the rest. Colosseum and Temple of Peace time opened in Rome at the same time.
Periods of love and peace and persecutions wrapped with different ideas or religions.
Divida et Impera. Never gets old.
vergari said
Is this actually historical? In a couple words, “not really.”
There is a kernel of historical fact in the first part of this: the best explanation for what we now refer to as the Golden Age of Islam was likely the influence of pre-Islamic knowledge in regions conquered by Muslim conquest. In particular, the greatest advances were made during the 10th and 11th Centuries in the fields of philosophy and mathematics by people living in Persia, the Iberian Peninsula and the Indian Subcontinent. The foundation of this knowledge was largely Persian/Zoroastrian, Indian/Hindu and, yes, Hellenistic and Latin.
So, it is correct that pagan knowledge was very important to the Golden Age of Islam. Of course, much of this is associated with Islamic conquest.
The end of this era of advancement tracks rather well with the Mongol conquest of Khwarezmia and establishment of the Mongol Ilkhanate — not with “Muslim know-nothings becoming ascendant.”
* * *
As to the loss of knowledge following the fall of the Western Roman Empire . . . blaming this one the “Christian Church” bogeyman has a few problems:
First, regional loss of Roman hegemony had caused similar losses of knowledge and civilization decay in regions that were not Christian: for example, in Britannia and Old Saxony.
Second, in the immediate aftermath of the Fall of Rome, when living Romans and the children of living Romans in Italy (all of whom were Christian) were attempted to reconstitute the Empire, pagans works continued to flourish. The loss of these works most closely tracks with the ultimate death of Roman power in the West from the mid 6th Century onward, rather than the Christianization of the Empire two hundred years earlier.
Third, the eastern part of Christendom (i.e., the Byzantine Empire) didn’t go through a dark age, lending further support to the idea that the loss of knowledge and civilization was connected more to the loss of the polity (the Empire), rather than religious influence.
Fourth, the Dark Ages, whatever they were in the West, were over by the 11th Century, when the first modern universities begin to develop. Note that the universities system developed in the Christian West …. not in China, not on the Indian Subcontinent, and not in Mongolia.
We are now roughly a millennium into a period when the overwhelming vast number of advances in science, philosophy, mathematics and the like were made in Christian-dominated countries. And yet, the “Christian Church” continues to be advanced as some type of evil suppressor of knowledge.
It seems like Christianity was better able to pick up useful ideas from paganism than vice versa. Julian tried, but didn’t do a very good job of it, because he didn’t understand it very well.
The civil society may well be a Christian invention. The one thing the western world did better–and that the eastern world (including Russia, where Christianity was subordinate to the state) kept falling short on. The idea of useful organizations that were independent of the state, had their own identity, their own realm. The state could fall (as all states must), but they would continue, regroup, reorganize, and eventually rebuild.
Western Christianity didn’t always advocate for tolerance, liberty, and pluralism (and certainly not science and capitalism), but it was the soil in which those ideas grew. And I think that’s because it spent several centuries not only independent of the state but treated antagonistically by it, thus necessitating a different relationship with authority, that fostered the less monolithic development of the west.
James S. Valliant & Warren Fahy
In this book, we will reveal how and why the calamitous clash of civilizations between the Romans and the Jews brought into existence a new religion. For the first time, we will present astonishing new evidence proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the Roman government, in direct response to this bitter clash of cultures, created the religion known today as “Christianity.”
Introduction, Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity, p. xiv
We can show this war-torn period of ancient history inspired one side to create a form of religious “psy-ops” in a sophisticated attempt to counter its enemies’ religious fervor, and that ancient project has endured and shaped Western history every since.
p. xv
The authors found the following book valuable: Operation Messiah by Thijs Voskuilen and Rose Mary Sheldon.
An amazon reader 4-star review states:
In a nutshell, their claims are:
— Ancient Roman espionage was very sophisticated; impressive even by modern standards.
— Actions by Paul described in the New Testemant that are otherwise difficult to explain, make perfect sense if he was an excellent Roman spy.
— As a spy, Paul’s purpose was not only to get information about the Christians to the Romans, but also to modify their religion to make it less threatening to Rome.
One of the authors is an expert on espionage history who has published other books on ancient espionage.
The authors go into great detail on Paul’s actions as described in the New Testament, explaining how those actions make more sense if he was a spy.
An amazon reader 5-star review states:
This is a good read. From a military perspective this is good for historical gurus, it describes the use of Christian theology which was needed for Rome’s expansion and which was able to overshadow that of competing theologies such as Hellenistic, Jewish, or Judeo-Hellenist philosophy/religion. Here it represents Paul the Apostle as a possible ambassador of Rome and looks at his role in shaping Christianity for Rome and his relationship with Jews. Now, many people will not like this view of Paul, yet historically, it can be considered as rather accurate. THis is why we look at Christ, instead of Serapis, taurology, or Bull worship, which is noted in The Golden Calf, Gilgamesh, Egypt’s Serapis, and which is noted in some Hellenistic Chrestus themes.
An amazon reader 2-star review states:
The book did not have to prove that one of Paul’s careers was espionage; he is in other works originally described as being thus employed before his “conversion” when he worked, as a Jew who was also a Roman Citizen, for the Jewish establishment of the Roman Province of Judea. His role was to investigate and neutralize civic and religious dissenters.
That covert professional modus, as this book intriguingly yet circumstantially indicates, probably continued during his later career as a professional evangelist. One is reminded, not of overt leftist rebels like Che Guevara, but of certain modern TV evangelists deeply involved in the agenda of “rightist” government.
Paul comes across as a very modern media operant. He wrote a wish-fulfilling spin of events which created a popular movement and a lifetime career. Whatever its other qualities, its power to make believers, and overtly or covertly manipulate for the benefit of the State, remains effective despite millennia of change. This book poses a new dimension of how that happened.
Steefen said
James S. Valliant & Warren Fahy
In this book, we will reveal how and why the calamitous clash of civilizations between the Romans and the Jews brought into existence a new religion. For the first time, we will present astonishing new evidence proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the Roman government, in direct response to this bitter clash of cultures, created the religion known today as “Christianity.”Introduction, Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity, p. xiv
We can show this war-torn period of ancient history inspired one side to create a form of religious “psy-ops” in a sophisticated attempt to counter its enemies’ religious fervor, and that ancient project has endured and shaped Western history every since.
p. xv
The authors found the following book valuable: Operation Messiah by Thijs Voskuilen and Rose Mary Sheldon.
An amazon reader 4-star review states:
In a nutshell, their claims are:
— Ancient Roman espionage was very sophisticated; impressive even by modern standards.
— Actions by Paul described in the New Testemant that are otherwise difficult to explain, make perfect sense if he was an excellent Roman spy.
— As a spy, Paul’s purpose was not only to get information about the Christians to the Romans, but also to modify their religion to make it less threatening to Rome.One of the authors is an expert on espionage history who has published other books on ancient espionage.
The authors go into great detail on Paul’s actions as described in the New Testament, explaining how those actions make more sense if he was a spy.
What you write about Paul is likely true for Josephus, yes?
Steefen said
James S. Valliant & Warren Fahy
In this book, we will reveal how and why the calamitous clash of civilizations between the Romans and the Jews brought into existence a new religion. For the first time, we will present astonishing new evidence proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the Roman government, in direct response to this bitter clash of cultures, created the religion known today as “Christianity.”Introduction, Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity, p. xiv
We can show this war-torn period of ancient history inspired one side to create a form of religious “psy-ops” in a sophisticated attempt to counter its enemies’ religious fervor, and that ancient project has endured and shaped Western history every since.
p. xv
The authors found the following book valuable: Operation Messiah by Thijs Voskuilen and Rose Mary Sheldon.
An amazon reader 4-star review states:
In a nutshell, their claims are:
— Ancient Roman espionage was very sophisticated; impressive even by modern standards.
— Actions by Paul described in the New Testemant that are otherwise difficult to explain, make perfect sense if he was an excellent Roman spy.
— As a spy, Paul’s purpose was not only to get information about the Christians to the Romans, but also to modify their religion to make it less threatening to Rome.One of the authors is an expert on espionage history who has published other books on ancient espionage.
The authors go into great detail on Paul’s actions as described in the New Testament, explaining how those actions make more sense if he was a spy.
An amazon reader 5-star review states:
This is a good read. From a military perspective this is good for historical gurus, it describes the use of Christian theology which was needed for Rome’s expansion and which was able to overshadow that of competing theologies such as Hellenistic, Jewish, or Judeo-Hellenist philosophy/religion. Here it represents Paul the Apostle as a possible ambassador of Rome and looks at his role in shaping Christianity for Rome and his relationship with Jews. Now, many people will not like this view of Paul, yet historically, it can be considered as rather accurate. THis is why we look at Christ, instead of Serapis, taurology, or Bull worship, which is noted in The Golden Calf, Gilgamesh, Egypt’s Serapis, and which is noted in some Hellenistic Chrestus themes.An amazon reader 2-star review states:
The book did not have to prove that one of Paul’s careers was espionage; he is in other works originally described as being thus employed before his “conversion” when he worked, as a Jew who was also a Roman Citizen, for the Jewish establishment of the Roman Province of Judea. His role was to investigate and neutralize civic and religious dissenters.
That covert professional modus, as this book intriguingly yet circumstantially indicates, probably continued during his later career as a professional evangelist. One is reminded, not of overt leftist rebels like Che Guevara, but of certain modern TV evangelists deeply involved in the agenda of “rightist” government.
Paul comes across as a very modern media operant. He wrote a wish-fulfilling spin of events which created a popular movement and a lifetime career. Whatever its other qualities, its power to make believers, and overtly or covertly manipulate for the benefit of the State, remains effective despite millennia of change. This book poses a new dimension of how that happened.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Steefen said
Steefen said
James S. Valliant & Warren Fahy
In this book, we will reveal how and why the calamitous clash of civilizations between the Romans and the Jews brought into existence a new religion. For the first time, we will present astonishing new evidence proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the Roman government, in direct response to this bitter clash of cultures, created the religion known today as “Christianity.”
Introduction, Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity, p. xiv
We can show this war-torn period of ancient history inspired one side to create a form of religious “psy-ops” in a sophisticated attempt to counter its enemies’ religious fervor, and that ancient project has endured and shaped Western history every since.
p. xv
The authors found the following book valuable: Operation Messiah by Thijs Voskuilen and Rose Mary Sheldon.
An amazon reader 4-star review states:
In a nutshell, their claims are:
— Ancient Roman espionage was very sophisticated; impressive even by modern standards.
— Actions by Paul described in the New Testemant that are otherwise difficult to explain, make perfect sense if he was an excellent Roman spy.
— As a spy, Paul’s purpose was not only to get information about the Christians to the Romans, but also to modify their religion to make it less threatening to Rome.
One of the authors is an expert on espionage history who has published other books on ancient espionage.
The authors go into great detail on Paul’s actions as described in the New Testament, explaining how those actions make more sense if he was a spy.What you write about Paul is likely true for Josephus, yes?
You forgot to re-login as Jarek before posting this.
Steefen,
“the ancient historians Tacitus and Suetonius, pagan Romans of the 2nd Century, sometimes called rebellious 1st Century messianic Jews “Christians” or followers of “Chrestus.” Paul himself refers to a very similar group of Jews as “apostles” of Christ. These historically troublesome Jews, like Paul’s adversaries, fundamentally differ from the followers of the New Testament who are today identified as Christians. Any “Christians” causing trouble in Rome or elsewhere at those early dates must have advocated the strictly observant form of messianic Judaism that sparked their rebellion against Rome and their conflict with Paul in the New Testament. These militants were still awaiting the arrival of their messiah, albeit in the form of a warrior who would deliver them from foreign bondage. And of course they expected a thoroughly human messiah, as predicted in ancient Hebrew scripture—and certainly not a sacrificial divine human who modeled obedience to Rome. Their “Christianity,” therefore, despite its other similarities, included none of these things now considered essential to “Christianity” as we know it today. Among pagan observers at the time, like Tacitus, merely professing a belief in the imminent arrival of the prophesied Jewish messiah may have been sufficient to earn the name “Christian”—and even somehow associated with Jesus. Even in the New Testament, the strict Torah practitioners who follow James and Peter and defy Paul are considered “apostles of Christ,” although exactly what that meant to them is unclear. It seems only later, after the near annihilation of the Jewish rebels by the Romans, that the name “Christian” would become exclusively associated with the peace-loving adherents of the New Testament. Indeed, by the middle of the 2nd Century the Romans had ruthlessly exterminated or driven out of the Empire all of the militant variety of messianic Jews. The only forms of Judaism to survive the two Jewish wars against Rome and their aftermath within the Empire were the rabbinic Jews, who de-emphasized the idea of “messiah” for the sake of their own survival, and the cheek-turning, peace-loving Pauline believers of the “New Testament,” who inherited the title of Christians from that point forward. Any Zealot groups that survived at all after the bloody wars with Rome were driven underground or outside the eastern fringes of the Empire, some known as “Ebionites,” and some forever scornful of their fellow Jews and carrying forward many traits in common with a religion that later emerged in the same geographic region centuries later—Islam. Given the events unfolding today, it is perhaps more important than ever to realize that it was the Roman wars with Jewish fanatics that begat what we know as Christianity and shaped the relatively apolitical form of modern Judaism that enabled it to survive. Indeed, all three monotheisms today echo this same ancient and largely forgotten conflict that cracked the foundations of the Western World.” (from “Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity” by James S. Valliant, C. W. Fahy)
Jarek said
Steefen,“the ancient historians Tacitus and Suetonius, pagan Romans of the 2nd Century, sometimes called rebellious 1st Century messianic Jews “Christians” or followers of “Chrestus.” Paul himself refers to a very similar group of Jews as “apostles” of Christ. These historically troublesome Jews, like Paul’s adversaries, fundamentally differ from the followers of the New Testament who are today identified as Christians. Any “Christians” causing trouble in Rome or elsewhere at those early dates must have advocated the strictly observant form of messianic Judaism that sparked their rebellion against Rome and their conflict with Paul in the New Testament. These militants were still awaiting the arrival of their messiah, albeit in the form of a warrior who would deliver them from foreign bondage. And of course they expected a thoroughly human messiah, as predicted in ancient Hebrew scripture—and certainly not a sacrificial divine human who modeled obedience to Rome. Their “Christianity,” therefore, despite its other similarities, included none of these things now considered essential to “Christianity” as we know it today. Among pagan observers at the time, like Tacitus, merely professing a belief in the imminent arrival of the prophesied Jewish messiah may have been sufficient to earn the name “Christian”—and even somehow associated with Jesus. Even in the New Testament, the strict Torah practitioners who follow James and Peter and defy Paul are considered “apostles of Christ,” although exactly what that meant to them is unclear. It seems only later, after the near annihilation of the Jewish rebels by the Romans, that the name “Christian” would become exclusively associated with the peace-loving adherents of the New Testament. Indeed, by the middle of the 2nd Century the Romans had ruthlessly exterminated or driven out of the Empire all of the militant variety of messianic Jews. The only forms of Judaism to survive the two Jewish wars against Rome and their aftermath within the Empire were the rabbinic Jews, who de-emphasized the idea of “messiah” for the sake of their own survival, and the cheek-turning, peace-loving Pauline believers of the “New Testament,” who inherited the title of Christians from that point forward. Any Zealot groups that survived at all after the bloody wars with Rome were driven underground or outside the eastern fringes of the Empire, some known as “Ebionites,” and some forever scornful of their fellow Jews and carrying forward many traits in common with a religion that later emerged in the same geographic region centuries later—Islam. Given the events unfolding today, it is perhaps more important than ever to realize that it was the Roman wars with Jewish fanatics that begat what we know as Christianity and shaped the relatively apolitical form of modern Judaism that enabled it to survive. Indeed, all three monotheisms today echo this same ancient and largely forgotten conflict that cracked the foundations of the Western World.” (from “Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity” by James S. Valliant, C. W. Fahy)
Well I think the general thesis is mistaken but the question as to whether the Romans made any distinction between Christians and other apocalyptic Jewish groups is an interesting one. The Romans weren’t noted for their subtlety and tended to land on dissent (real or perceived) with both feet. And of course after Jesus’ death simply the fact that the Christian founder had been executed as a political criminal would have soured Roman attitudes towards the movement.
vergari said
You forgot to re-login as Jarek before posting this.
Steefen and Jarek are NOT the same person; why are you so slow-witted to not get this?
Second,
“What you write about Paul is likely true for Josephus, yes?”
was directed to the amazon reviewer, a reply I left at the review, I shared here.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert