Richard Dawkins criticised for Twitter comment about Muslims

[garbon]

And yes they did. Going out and converting heathens generally wasn't/isn't an issue.

Judaism isn't either and nor did early Islam put a focus on converting people outside Arabia.

[Razgovory]

Which religion are you talking about?
Ancient societies tended to be religious because they were ignorant and felt it would help them, usually not because God said so. You're wrong if you think paganism and Christianity are the same on an organizational level

And yes they did. Going out and converting heathens generally wasn't/isn't an issue.

I'm thinking of Indo-European Paganism.

You have to realize that there is no difference between "felt it would help them" and "because God said so".  Their entire lives were structured around rituals to appease the gods.  The concept of a personal faith was foreign to them.  If something went bad, it meant the gods were unhappy, and if someone in the community was making the gods unhappy the community would either cast them out, or kill them.  In a very real sense, they were theocracies.

The Romans are an excellent example of a religion that didn't play nice with others.  They pretty much annihilated the religion the Celts, attempted to do so with the Jews, and made worship of the Emperor mandatory.  More commonly recorded is the tendency for one ethnic group to enslave another because of some origin myth.  The Sons of Mars or Odin or whatever the ancestor hero was were given the right to enslave the neighboring inferior peoples.  It was this aspect that attracted many extremists in Germany to the idea of restoring ancient German pagan faiths.

I'm less familiar with say Japan, but I'm to understand that official Shinto had no problem attempting to force conversions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%8Dsen_Jing%C5%AB in addition to it's racist Japanese supremacy concepts.  So while you might find this all lovely and quaint I do not.

[Eddie Teach]

And yes they did. Going out and converting heathens generally wasn't/isn't an issue.

Judaism isn't either and nor did early Islam put a focus on converting people outside Arabia.

You must have an extremely narrow interpretation of the word "early".

[Josquius]

I'm thinking of Indo-European Paganism.

You have to realize that there is no difference between "felt it would help them" and "because God said so".  Their entire lives were structured around rituals to appease the gods.  The concept of a personal faith was foreign to them.  If something went bad, it meant the gods were unhappy, and if someone in the community was making the gods unhappy the community would either cast them out, or kill them.  In a very real sense, they were theocracies.

Exactly. Totally different outlook to Christianity.
In paganism you pray to the gods to help you make your life better/ to stop fucking with your life. In Christianity the reason you live your life is to pray to the gods.
To the old Germanic peoples the gods just were a force they believed existed. They weren't at all central to their everyday lives. Even despite the primitive times they lived in.

The Romans are an excellent example of a religion that didn't play nice with others.  They pretty much annihilated the religion the Celts, attempted to do so with the Jews, and made worship of the Emperor mandatory.  More commonly recorded is the tendency for one ethnic group to enslave another because of some origin myth.  The Sons of Mars or Odin or whatever the ancestor hero was were given the right to enslave the neighboring inferior peoples.  It was this aspect that attracted many extremists in Germany to the idea of restoring ancient German pagan faiths.

The Jews and druids fucked with the Romans politically.
Generally the Romans regarded other people's gods as manifestations of the Roman gods. They didn't wipe out the Celtic faith so much as assimilated it along with the Celtic people. Religion was not a factor in their conquests.

I'm less familiar with say Japan, but I'm to understand that official Shinto had no problem attempting to force conversions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%8Dsen_Jing%C5%AB in addition to it's racist Japanese supremacy concepts.  So while you might find this all lovely and quaint I do not.

Militarist Japan?
Yeah, perfect example of normalcy there...
With imperial Japan religion was used as a partial excuse for a lot. You shouldn't put the horse before the cart though. They quite specifically decided they needed heavy nationalist feeling and exploiting people's beliefs was the way to do this.
In Korea religious conversion wasn't  at all the point of their invasion. It was decided as standard policy in Japan however that the people should revere the emperor. It is quite incomparible to Christians suddenly telling Jews to go to church.
For  a better and more accurate use of Japan as an example- look at the way Buddhism and Shinto exist side by side with no trouble. There are even suggestions that Shinto itself is formed of the merging of two main belief groups.

[Razgovory]

I don't think you understand, the pagan outlook made religion more central to their lives, not less.  Proper veneration of the gods was necessary to their very survival. The idea that you could separate religion from any other human activity was impossible.  For them life was religion.

And they sure as hell destroyed the Celtic religions, and religion was always a major factor for Roman behavior be it war or peace. The Romans suppressed the Druids long after they had conquered what's now France, Northern Italy etc.

I used Japan as an example of a Pagan religion in the far East "not playing nice" with other religions.  I imagine I can find quite a few more.

[Malthus]

You are very wrong. In the old days people recognized each other gods and acknowledged the supremacy of such gods in their local territories.

This was often because the various religions simply thought the other society's gods were just local names for the same gods.

"Oh, you have a mother-goddess figure too? Well, ours is named Isis."

Note that this practice didn't totally stop with Christianity ... local saints etc. often have surprisingly similar characteristics to pre-Christian local gods.

[Josquius]

I don't think you understand, the pagan outlook made religion more central to their lives, not less.  Proper veneration of the gods was necessary to their very survival. The idea that you could separate religion from any other human activity was impossible.  For them life was religion.

And they sure as hell destroyed the Celtic religions, and religion was always a major factor for Roman behavior be it war or peace. The Romans suppressed the Druids long after they had conquered what's now France, Northern Italy etc.

I used Japan as an example of a Pagan religion in the far East "not playing nice" with other religions.  I imagine I can find quite a few more.

In most paganism the gods were just part of the world you had to deal with, not something to be actively worshipped for the sake  of worship ala Christianity.
It's the big reason Christianity was so successful, it was far more of an actual religion than the loose cultural worship that went before.

As I said the druids were a political threat to Rome. The Romans couldn't give a toss about their religion . And no. I suspect you're building a stupid argument base  on generals looking  to omens and that sort of thing here. That Gods were part of war, that omens even said it as a good time  for war, is a very different thing to Christians an  Muslims going  to war FOR religion.

Except Shinto did get along with other religions. It was for irreligious reasons that Japan had a spell of dickery.

[crazy canuck]

Raz,

The Roman suppression of the Druids and the Jews are remarkable because they are isolated incidents.  Generally the Romans didnt care what Gods the population worshipped, unless those religious beliefs interfered with the civil administration of the territory.  Then the Romans took steps to remove the trouble makers.

[Valmy]

And they sure as hell destroyed the Celtic religions, and religion was always a major factor for Roman behavior be it war or peace. The Romans suppressed the Druids long after they had conquered what's now France, Northern Italy etc.

Well yes and no.  Yes they thought the Druids were black magic wizards or something because of their human sacrifice traditions so they were outlawed.  But Celtic religions (along with their Gods and weird superstitions) continued without any persecution.

[Valmy]

The Jews and druids fucked with the Romans politically.
Generally the Romans regarded other people's gods as manifestations of the Roman gods. They didn't wipe out the Celtic faith so much as assimilated it along with the Celtic people. Religion was not a factor in their conquests.

Yeah.  The only religion the Romans ever really tried to destroy was Christianity.

[Maximus]

Well yes and no.  Yes they thought the Druids were black magic wizards or something because of their human sacrifice traditions so they were outlawed.  But Celtic religions (along with their Gods and weird superstitions) continued without any persecution.

My (admittedly imperfect) understanding was that the druids were more than just a priestly caste. They served a political leadership role somehow alongside the nobility and this made them a threat to Roman interests.

[crazy canuck]

The Jews and druids fucked with the Romans politically.
Generally the Romans regarded other people's gods as manifestations of the Roman gods. They didn't wipe out the Celtic faith so much as assimilated it along with the Celtic people. Religion was not a factor in their conquests.

Yeah.  The only religion the Romans ever really tried to destroy was Christianity.

No.  Although when Chriistianity became the State Religion of Rome the Romans did try to destroy all vestiges of Paganism.

[Valmy]

No.  Although when Chriistianity became the State Religion of Rome the Romans did try to destroy all vestiges of Paganism.

Sorry I meant pagan Rome.

[crazy canuck]

No.  Although when Chriistianity became the State Religion of Rome the Romans did try to destroy all vestiges of Paganism.

Sorry I meant pagan Rome.

I know, and you are wrong.  While it is true that there were some periods of intolerance, it is wildly inaccurate to suggest that Pagan Rome tried to destroy Christianity.

[Valmy]

I know, and you are wrong.  While it is true that there were some periods of intolerance, it is wildly inaccurate to suggest that Pagan Rome tried to destroy Christianity.

Wildly inaccurate?  If you say so.  But the main point is there is no other similar thing to the Great Persecution, or the persecution of Decius, for other non-Christian religions.