The Off Topic Topic

[Syt]

http://juvo.se/obrf.jpg

[CountDeMoney]

I'm going to make that my desktop at work.

[Sheilbh]

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.

Sounds good...

We don't have a church tax in this country.  But I think preserving the buildings would be a good idea.

[Admiral Yi]

Because...christians never kill pagans?

A necessary but not sufficient condition to prove your claim.  Either you need to show that Christians always kill all pagans or you need other evidence that the Christian minority in Japan was just itching to genocide everyone else.

[Sheilbh]

A necessary but not sufficient condition to prove your claim.  Either you need to show that Christians always kill all pagans or you need other evidence that the Christian minority in Japan was just itching to genocide everyone else.

Christians in the 17th century always killed anyone.

[Syt]

We don't have a church tax in this country.  But I think preserving the buildings would be a good idea.

Well, a look at church budgets reveals that they're using only a small part of their income for building upkeep. And the state is already supporting historical buildings (including countless churches) from general taxes.

There was an interesting semi-serious countersuggestion: everyone has a percentage of their income that they give to a charity of their choice.

[Neil]

Perhaps if Christianity had prevailed in Japan millions of citizens wouldn't have had to endure the the status of Burakumin.

I don't see why.  It's not like slavery is incompatible with Christianity.

[Razgovory]

The Church's attitude toward slavery is interesting.  Condemning it through out the middle ages, but with the rediscovery of Aristotle endorsing it.

[Valmy]

The Church's attitude toward slavery is interesting.  Condemning it through out the middle ages, but with the rediscovery of Aristotle endorsing it.

When do you date the rediscovery of Aristotle?  I thought he was the Philosopher, the only one, during the Middle Ages.  Obviously Aquinas was heavily into Aristotle and that was centuries before western slavery got going again.

[Razgovory]

The Church's attitude toward slavery is interesting.  Condemning it through out the middle ages, but with the rediscovery of Aristotle endorsing it.

When do you date the rediscovery of Aristotle?  I thought he was the Philosopher, the only one, during the Middle Ages.  Obviously Aquinas was heavily into Aristotle and that was centuries before western slavery got going again.

I'm trying to find where I read that, but I'm having some trouble.  There was some Catholic council on deciding whether slavery was just.  One side argued from the Bible (against), one from Aristotle (for).  The ones arguing on the side of Aristotle won.

[Sheilbh]

Only Connect has an online version!  I've just wasted hours in the company of Victoria Coren failing to complete any walls
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00lskhg/features/quiz

Edit:  Spoke too soon.  I just completed a wall and worked out all connections!

[Razgovory]

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.

No, I'm not being willfully ignorant.  These practices became rare because they were being stamped out.  What are you basing your assumptions on here, Tyr?  What makes you think that Sati was rare or that it would be outlawed with modern times?  What about the Caste systems and the untouchable classes that are found through out Asia?  Hell, some of them still exist to some extent.  Despite efforts to destroy them.  There is nothing inconsistent with modernity and human sacrifice.  And yeah, Christianity was much, much nicer then what preceded it.

[The Brain]

In Sweden we had freedom of religion until Christianity became dominant. It took us 800 years to get it back.

[Valmy]

I'm trying to find where I read that, but I'm having some trouble.  There was some Catholic council on deciding whether slavery was just.  One side argued from the Bible (against), one from Aristotle (for).  The ones arguing on the side of Aristotle won.

The Bible is not against slavery.  I mean it doesn't like slavery of Jews but beyond that it even says it is ok to have foreign slaves which I thought was why the Church decided enslaving Africans and Native Americans was ok.  But I can certainly see Aristotle being used a source as well.  Though I do not know if describing slaves as 'human machines' is really an endorsement

[PDH]

When do you date the rediscovery of Aristotle?  I thought he was the Philosopher, the only one, during the Middle Ages.  Obviously Aquinas was heavily into Aristotle and that was centuries before western slavery got going again.

Aristotle was known, but only in parts and Latin snippets.  The rediscovery of "The Philosopher" comes about with the increased Muslim-Christian contact, first in Sicily, then later Spain.  Scholars like Averroes helped reintroduce the corpus back into Latin Christendom so that later 12th and 13th century scholastics could give him that title.