The Off Topic Topic

[Josquius]

  You are so full of shit.  Nice cop-out on your ignorance, though.

Because...christians never kill pagans?

[Neil]

You do realize that that "turning back" involved mass killings of the Japanese Christians and other persecutions that lasted for some time, right?

Its not like the Christians wouldn't have done the same were they the ones given the chance.

  You are so full of shit.  Nice cop-out on your ignorance, though.

Yeah, because 17th century Christians would never hurt anyone in one of their occasional omnicidal rampages.

[Sheilbh]

Wasn't witch burning a super rare thing even in protestant Europe?
I'm sure I remember QI mentioning it was a freakishly small number in Britain at least.

For catholic vs protestant witch hunting- maybe another reason could be the protestant encouragement of bible study?
The catholic church discouraged witch burning, saying it was stupid superstition. The bible though with its don't suffer a witch to live told the protestants different.

A few thousand in Britain.  But that could be understated.

Generally, from what I understand, they were more likely to happen when societies were collapsing and the trials and executions were very localised.  One village could be going through a witch frenzy while another wouldn't execute anyone and would dismiss allegations.  But I think they were, to an extent, a way for those societies to explain sudden shocks by reference to an external threat - very much like the Inquisition did on a larger scale. 

For those reasons I think there's some doubt about the estimates.  We know that a lot of the worst in Germany happened during the Thirty Years War - it's probable that a lot of the worst in the British Isles happened during the Civil Wars.  That makes it more difficult to simply trust the records or to easily estimate from them.  Overall British Isles, Scandinavia, Germany and North America are estimate to have killed somewhere between 35-70 000 for witchcraft.

Spanish Inquisition - because there were more options than death as a punishment, which wasn't always the case for witches - is estimated to have executed 5 000 or so. Obviously that ignores the religious cleansing and forced conversions.  I think the Roman Inquisition was actually bloodier than the Spanish, in spite of their reputation.  But again there's that important contrast that the witch trials are local and, possibly, a symptom of general social decay and chaos.  The Inquisition is an ordered and restrained savagery.

Though I'm sure there's lots more going on with it all.

[Ideologue]

In fact traditional Japanese culture is very very community focused. Almost socialist in nature.
Its just with modern times, the decay in traditional values, blah blah that that kind of thing has arose in Japan as in the west.

All traditional cultures were community focused, because once upon a time it took a community to survive.

Ironically, it still does, in fact more than ever, but the community is not just impersonal, but practically invisible.  And thus, Republicans.

[Neil]

In fact traditional Japanese culture is very very community focused. Almost socialist in nature.
Its just with modern times, the decay in traditional values, blah blah that that kind of thing has arose in Japan as in the west.

All traditional cultures were community focused, because once upon a time it took a community to survive.

Ironically, it still does, in fact more than ever, but the community is not just impersonal, but practically invisible.  And thus, Republicans.

I think of it as more of a society than a community.

[Razgovory]

Wasn't witch burning a super rare thing even in protestant Europe?
I'm sure I remember QI mentioning it was a freakishly small number in Britain at least.

Human sacrifice was already well on the way out when Christianity came along, it went with civilization.

It was not nearly as high as once claimed, but Britain was probably higher then say France, and France was a much bigger country.  And no, the Romans were gleefully murdering thousands in the arenas well after the Christians showed up.  And we are pretty sure that that the Germanic peoples were sacrificing human beings for quite a while.  People sometimes still find these "bog bodies".  The Vikings seemed to engage in human sacrifice up until they were Christianize.  There is no correlation between lack of human sacrifice and civilization.

[Razgovory]

  You are so full of shit.  Nice cop-out on your ignorance, though.

Because...christians never kill pagans?

They always kill pagans.  Which is why the British depopulated the whole of India during their stay in India.

[Josquius]

.

They always kill pagans.  Which is why the British depopulated the whole of India during their stay in India.

What a stupid comparison.
You know fine well that is a completely and utterly incomparable situation.

It was not nearly as high as once claimed, but Britain was probably higher then say France, and France was a much bigger country.  And no, the Romans were gleefully murdering thousands in the arenas well after the Christians showed up.  And we are pretty sure that that the Germanic peoples were sacrificing human beings for quite a while.  People sometimes still find these "bog bodies".  The Vikings seemed to engage in human sacrifice up until they were Christianize.  There is no correlation between lack of human sacrifice and civilization.

Wrong.
By the end of the first millennium human sacrifice had became a super rare thing, and even there most references to it come from christian priests who of course have a vested interest in demonising the vikings and exaggerating as much as possible.
I see no reason whatsoever to  believe that people would continue doing this thing that they knew to be abhorant and wrong and suitable only for the most dire situations even after they knew it was bollocks.

[jimmy olsen]

[Syt]

Jeez, Tim, homoerotic SM necophilia?

[Ideologue]

Jeez, Tim, homoerotic SM necophilia?

Tim's gone native.  He doesn't even understand it's racist, let alone disturbing on any other level.  Call him: Kim Ortiz.

[Syt]

Meanwhile in Austria.

The head of the Agricultural Lobby has come out and complained about so many people leaving the church. He suggested that everyone not being official member of a religion should instead pay a "cultural tax" that's used for the upkeep of historical buildings . . . by which he means catholic churches.

The conservatives at first said, "Interesting idea," but when everyone else started laughing (and besdes, tax money is already going into the upkeep of historical church buildings), they backpeddalled quicker than a tricicle that has a bus rushing at it.

[Razgovory]

Wrong.
By the end of the first millennium human sacrifice had became a super rare thing, and even there most references to it come from christian priests who of course have a vested interest in demonising the vikings and exaggerating as much as possible.
I see no reason whatsoever to  believe that people would continue doing this thing that they knew to be abhorant and wrong and suitable only for the most dire situations even after they knew it was bollocks.

And gee, I wonder why?  Could it be that pagan sacrifice diminished because there weren't many pagan cultures left in Europe?  You have no reason to believe it would have continued?  What do you base that on?  Lets take an example from Christianity didn't stamp out the beautiful native religions.  How about India?  A good example I think since their pagan beliefs have some of the same roots as European pagan roots.  And yeah, they practiced human sacrifice in several forms there for a long time.  In particular the immolation of widows, Sati.  Something the British put and end to for the most part

"Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs."

-Charles James Napier on hearing complaints from Hindu priests that the British had banned Sati

Real paganism, not the wish-washy neo-paganism wasn't that nice.  Perhaps if Christianity had prevailed in Japan millions of citizens wouldn't have had to endure the the status of Burakumin.

[Ideologue]

Oh, Euros, Euros.

[Josquius]

And gee, I wonder why?  Could it be that pagan sacrifice diminished because there weren't many pagan cultures left in Europe? 

Yet again you're being willfully ignorant. I clearly meant amongst the pagan people, not as an overall number.

You have no reason to believe it would have continued?  What do you base that on?  Lets take an example from Christianity didn't stamp out the beautiful native religions.  How about India?  A good example I think since their pagan beliefs have some of the same roots as European pagan roots.  And yeah, they practiced human sacrifice in several forms there for a long time.  In particular the immolation of widows, Sati.  Something the British put and end to for the most part

"Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs."

-Charles James Napier on hearing complaints from Hindu priests that the British had banned Sati

Real paganism, not the wish-washy neo-paganism wasn't that nice.  Perhaps if Christianity had prevailed in Japan millions of citizens wouldn't have had to endure the the status of Burakumin.

I never said paganism was nice.
Christianity however wasn't.

Sati, yep, it sucked. It was however rare, especially as anything that could be called human sacrifice. Even without the British it would have eventually been outlawed with the coming of modern times.