Was the death of Hellenic and Norse paganism a bad thing? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 17, 2024, 12:24:16 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Religion & Philosophy (Moderator: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.)
  Was the death of Hellenic and Norse paganism a bad thing? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Was the death of Hellenic and Norse paganism a bad thing?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No, its replacement by Christianity was a good thing
 
#3
It was neither a good nor bad thing
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 42

Author Topic: Was the death of Hellenic and Norse paganism a bad thing?  (Read 2347 times)
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,475


« on: October 26, 2019, 11:06:54 PM »

It was both a good thing and a bad thing, depending on which aspect of those religions one is talking about.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,475


« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2019, 06:46:38 PM »

the Abrahamics with their vastly more stratified society

Quote
the falsehoods spread by the Abrahamics.

Right, because Jews and Muslims have every reason in the world to whitewash the Christianization of Europe. Sure, PSOL.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,475


« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2019, 04:28:43 PM »

Not if Midsommarvis anything to go by.

My impression is that Midsommar is a work of fiction.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,475


« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2019, 01:29:55 AM »

And while the modern (petty)bourgeois commentators claim, that the Parabel of the Good Samaritan has to do with our own (social) ethics, ORIGENES and other ChurchFathers wrote, that CHRIST referred - as always - only to HIMself.

This doesn't hold up given the immediate context in Luke. Jesus is directly answering a question about interpersonal ethics, even though He's--yes, as always--answering it in a way that also has a Christological meaning.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderator
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,475


« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2019, 10:14:13 PM »

And while the modern (petty)bourgeois commentators claim, that the Parabel of the Good Samaritan has to do with our own (social) ethics, ORIGENES and other ChurchFathers wrote, that CHRIST referred - as always - only to HIMself.

This doesn't hold up given the immediate context in Luke. Jesus is directly answering a question about interpersonal ethics, even though He's--yes, as always--answering it in a way that also has a Christological meaning.
The ChurchFathers ("my" St.AUGUSTINE in "De quaest. Ev." or "Contra Pel."; ORIGENES in "In Luc. hom." et cet.) and saints (St.THOMAS Aquinas in His "Catena Aurea" aso.) and as a result also i are far away from interpreting Luc.10,33 with a modern moralism!
The key here is 10,27.

I'm sensing a false dichotomy here (although I'd obviously rather attribute it to you or me misunderstanding the Church Fathers than to the Church Fathers misunderstanding Scripture).
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 12 queries.