| Welcome to Brackenwood. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Philosophies And Theroies; I seriously need a life | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 26 2005, 08:39 AM (1,126 Views) | |
| Shrike | Nov 19 2005, 02:37 PM Post #76 |
![]()
The Spikeadelic One
|
There were plenty of white people in the Middle East! At least in Judaea, not everyone there is Arab or Iraqi the way we think of the Middle East. You had Phoenicians, Greeks, Hittites from Asia Minor, Canaanites, Romans, all these people were white or close to it. Christianity didn't start in the Renaissance, it started way back in the Roman Empire. Read a history book, dude! If ya want people to consider your opinions, at least have them make sense.
|
![]() |
|
| Sigfried | Nov 20 2005, 02:08 AM Post #77 |
![]()
Objection!!!
|
there we can make a difference between north europeans and mediterraneans, dont you think
at the most, the closest were the Achaioi and correct me if im wrong, but the Hittites and the Canaanites are semites, right?? |
![]() |
|
| Whim | Nov 22 2005, 02:11 PM Post #78 |
|
Poetry Freak
|
... For one thing, Jesus was born a Jew. Christianity began with his apostles in Israel, and then the church branched off in Rome later. Jesus probably got a tan, because he was a carpenter. He worked hard. You're thinking of a classic stereotype that describes what many people think Jesus looks like, not from the actual Bible. The Bible doesn't even give a definite description of his looks...but it does tell us that he was a Jew. Like Shrike said...I can't really contemplate your opinion, because you didn't do any research. Secondly, although I'm guessing you put this as a joke, the guys who "wrote the Bible" weren't Renaissance guys getting high. The New Testament was mostly composed of witness accounts of certain Israelites, namely the apostles, as well as letters from Paul. The rest of the Bible dates wayyy back into ancient times. Christianity is actually based on Judaism, and to understand Christianity, you MUST understand the Jewish faith. Christianity describes the fulfillment of prophetic statements in Judaism, and Jesus himself was very devout to the Jewish faith. The idea that Christianity was formed by a bunch of Catholics over in Rome is shallow. The Catholic church brought Christianity to everyone's attention, but it didn't create it. And Siggy...I don't think the Canaanites are semites. I'm not sure about the Hittites. I'll have to look that up. |
![]() |
|
| Sigfried | Nov 22 2005, 02:16 PM Post #79 |
![]()
Objection!!!
|
well, they are related to the phoenicians, and they were fromk the same region, and they were semites |
![]() |
|
| Shrike | Nov 22 2005, 05:12 PM Post #80 |
![]()
The Spikeadelic One
|
I think Phoenicians are more closely related to Greeks, although I could be wrong. The cultures are definitely different, but the similar style of ships and naval predominance? My impression is that the Mycenaean, Minoan, Cycladic, and maybe Phoenician civilizations were all one kind of loosely related family; they're all located in and around the Aegean. But as I said, I could be totally wrong. |
![]() |
|
| Foster | Nov 23 2005, 02:10 AM Post #81 |
|
Token Canuck
|
I think what Sig meant was that Christianity as we know it today was created by the Romans. And he'd be right. Christianity ceased to be a Hebrew faith when the Romans decided it was theirs. I think Jesus would be pretty pissed off if he saw what people were doing with his teachings a thousand and two thousand years after the fact. He had the best intentions, but others got their hands on his ideas and skewed them to fit their own purposes. Plus, the original New Testament may have been written only about fifty years after Jesus' death, but it has been rewritten several times since. Don't you think some of those Catholic guys would change things as they saw fit? Even unintentionally? No translation can be perfect you know. |
![]() |
|
| Darkside | Nov 23 2005, 05:25 AM Post #82 |
|
Brackenwood Lightweight
|
Exactly. Consider the roman government. They were some harsh bastards, power-crazed and all. They saw Christianity gaining influence, and took advantage of it. They had an infinite amount of oppurtuneties to change the teachings of Christ as they saw fit. Rome was a male-dominated society, which could explain alot as to why there are no women bishops or Popes, as well as other women-less or women-repressed laws, custom, beliefs, etc. And it wasnt just women either. A citizen in Rome had to be white, which would explain why a vast majority sees God as a benevolent, open-armed, white man. When you take a look at it, Rome's control has influenced many aspects of our future. Many of our laws were based on Christianity, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal etc. Even after Rome fell, their ideas held on for thousands of years. When you look at the leaders of Rome, do you honestly think they wouldnt try something like that, even if they didnt know exactly how far it would go? |
![]() |
|
| Shrike | Nov 23 2005, 05:44 AM Post #83 |
![]()
The Spikeadelic One
|
Roman citizens didn't have to be white, if you were a non-white slave and were freed, and you somehow had children, they would be Roman citizens. It didn't happen often, true, but it was certainly possible. |
![]() |
|
| Whim | Nov 23 2005, 06:36 AM Post #84 |
|
Poetry Freak
|
The "popular version," yes. As a Christian, I could never be content with simply stopping the timeline with the Romans, as many people in today's society do, because Christianity goes way deeper than that once you actually look into things. If you know a lot about the Jewish faith, the New Testament looks completely different from the modern view. The Bible isn't for wimps once you begin to understand it. The New Testament and the Old Testament are very closely linked. ----- I looked up the Hittite thing, cuz I was curious. I found out that basically the Hittites were a separate people from the Semites, but later on the Semites began to mingle with the Hittites. Here's something from one source: "The Hittites are mentioned in the Old Testament, but they were by then a nation in rapid decline. Abraham bought a field and cave from Ephron the Hittite. This settlement grew and became the important town of Hebron. The Hittites were in rapid decline in the 12th century BCE, about the same time the Israelites were first moving into Palestine. The indigent Hittites resisted their coming, but at the same time we find there was much mingling of the Semites and Hittites. Scholars believe the ancient Hebrews acquired their aquiline nose from the Hittites, and this feature is then to be considered "Aryan."" ...Just in case anyone was wondering. I dunno, I wonder about these things I guess. I'm not trying to prove any sort of a point by putting up random information...I'm just acting nerdy! Yay!
|
![]() |
|
| Foster | Nov 23 2005, 09:16 AM Post #85 |
|
Token Canuck
|
Yes, anyone from any race could become a citizen of Rome, even before Christianity. If a slave was freed, and they could get the money, they could earn their citizenship, just like today. One of the good things that Rome gave modern society. However, when Christianity was Romanized, it caused the Dark Ages, and they dodn't call it that because it was dark. It was a bad time to be anything but an upper class Christian man. Things didn't get any better until the Renaissance, and even then it was hundreds of years before things got to be good. |
![]() |
|
| Whim | Nov 23 2005, 09:18 AM Post #86 |
|
Poetry Freak
|
Yeah...to think of the terrible things people do when tempted with power...it makes me sick. Manipulation is the worst.
|
![]() |
|
| Sigfried | Nov 23 2005, 10:11 AM Post #87 |
![]()
Objection!!!
|
sure, the original christianity its a jewish sect, after it was romanized as part of the imperial cult, the phylosophical content of it went in decline for a use with political force and yes, after the Antonian Constitutio or Caracalla Edict anyone within the empire could be a citizen anyway, mediterranean, helenic, latin and semitic history isnt my strong side, talk about a little far north and im in my ground
|
![]() |
|
| rdempstar | Nov 23 2005, 10:28 AM Post #88 |
|
1/3 of the junior theology majors
|
Saddly enough Whim, its just a fact of life. Humans were never meant to have power it does things to you. |
![]() |
|
| Shrike | Nov 23 2005, 10:42 AM Post #89 |
![]()
The Spikeadelic One
|
We had a substitute today who said: "There's four basic ways to control people: punish them, reward them, addict them, or bureacratize them." I thought that was kinda interesting. The Caracalla Edict made everyone in the empire a Roman citizen, true, but all that meant was that you could run for public office and fell under the protection of Roman law. But way before that, back in the Republic, if you were the property of a citizen and were freed, your children would become ingenui or free-born citizens. Otherwise you were just a provincial. Why was the Social War fought in the first place? Because the rest of the Italian peninsula were subjects, but only the people living in the actual city were Roman citizens. Acting nerdy is FUN!
|
![]() |
|
| Sigfried | Nov 23 2005, 10:47 AM Post #90 |
![]()
Objection!!!
|
but what about the sons of a previous slave woman?? my roman teacher thought me that the sons follows the condition of the woman, so if they were born slaves, they remain slaves, no matter if the mother was free |
![]() |
|
| Shrike | Nov 23 2005, 12:07 PM Post #91 |
![]()
The Spikeadelic One
|
Well, since the woman is already a freedwoman then her children are automatically ingenui. If she were a slave, I think it would be up to her master whether her children were slaves or free. |
![]() |
|
| Darkside | Nov 23 2005, 12:12 PM Post #92 |
|
Brackenwood Lightweight
|
The fact that one was a citizen doesnt necessarily mean they held the same social status...af Caesar rome pretty much becam a dictatorship. Well, since the woman is already a freedwoman then her children are automatically ingenui. If she were a slave, I think it would be up to her master whether her children were slaves or free. I think they are born slaves, like it was here in the US. Not sure, but like around 90% certainty |
![]() |
|
| Sigfried | Nov 23 2005, 12:19 PM Post #93 |
![]()
Objection!!!
|
but they were considered Res Mancipi, so they were part of the patrimony, right?? |
![]() |
|
| Foster | Nov 23 2005, 12:43 PM Post #94 |
|
Token Canuck
|
Stupid Romans and their slaves. They gave the world democracy and bureaucracy, and for that they should all be damned. I mean, it's all fine and good when you're searching for a file in alphabetical order, but just try applying for a passport. :rolleyes: |
![]() |
|
| Xellous Pendragon | Nov 23 2005, 09:24 PM Post #95 |
|
Brackenwood Lightweight
|
Okay... My own personal opinion on the whole religion thing: Believe what you want, leave me alone to my own thoughts for you will not recruit me into something I have no desire to be apart of. Though, if you're nice enough, I have no problem looking into it, as I love history and religions have an amazing part of that. At the same time I think we are fools to believe into things that can be considered 'all mighty'. Why can we not just believe in ourselves to become all that we can be? Why must we have someone to rule over us? I do not live on this planet to serve, nor to please. I live now because I so desire to live, because I wish to experience life for what it is and not because some 'God' told me to do it. I am the one who walks my own path and turns the wheel to my own personal fate. It is I who decides where to turn at the crossroads or to stray from my path. And now, for some happy silly religious goodness: [Conversation with a kid in my sophmore Algebra class ( about 3 years ago)between "Kid" and I. Note: I was considered 'gothic' in school, which many idoits who have to use stereotypes often misconstrude a fashion statement sent by the media from a word that describes a dark view in the artistic realm and kids who mix the media's version with a friggen religion....eh...sorry, ranting. No offense.] [Kid] "Do you believe in the Bible?" Xellous Pendragon "Why?" [Kid] "Just wondering." Xellous Pendragon "Why must I believe what is on paper?" [Kid] "I don't know. I do." Xellous Pendragon "Believe in Jesus?" [Kid] "Yes, because he's in the bible." Xellous Pendragon "Believe in Dinosaurs, then?" [Kid] "No." Xellous Pendragon "But there is proof they existed." [Kid] "But they aren't in the bible." Xellous Pendragon "What about him?" [Points to a poster to my right of Einstien (My teacher liked him.)] [Kid] "Nope." Xellous Pendragon "Do you even know who that is? [Kid] "Yes, That's Einstien. But he isn't in the bible, so I don't believe he existed." Xellous Pendragon ".....What about you, and me? I sit before you, yet I am nto in the bible." [Kid] "I know I believe I exist, but not you." Xellous Pendragon "But you're not in the bible." [Kid] "So?" Xellous Pendragon [Proceeds to laugh until sent to the hallway to calm down.] And just a fun quote from my old roomate [Do not ask me on this, I am just quoting from a previous discussion with him, so I will not be able to explain his views]: "The Bible was just a bunch of letters and folklore bound together by a pieceof string and left behind. Someone found it, thought it was amusing, and made it into a cult, which grew into Christianity today." |
![]() |
|
| Whim | Nov 24 2005, 04:30 AM Post #96 |
|
Poetry Freak
|
ROCK ON!!!
Wow...I mean, I'm a Christian, but...eheh, why on earth would anyone think that way?
I totally respect your view. From my personal experience, figuring out what God is all about (I could never be a part of a "blind faith," I look into my religion with great detail) has actually made me more free as a person. Being completely and utterly on my own, without rules or guidelines, doesn't make me free, but makes me a slave of my own instinctual desires. I'm not saying that's your case, of course, I'm merely speaking from my own experience. It's as if a child at the age of five told his parents that he didn't need them, because he was his own person. Now, he would be right; he is his own person. But would it be better for him to leave his parents and try to make decisions based on his own limited reasoning? No, because the parents understand things about himself that he cannot yet see. Or take a better example by C.S. Lewis: Morality, constructed by God, is a guideline on how the human machine is to be properly run. If you were an employee at a factory using a complex machine, how many times would the manager have to correct your use of it? Quite a bit, because although you think you know exactly how to run the machine by putting certain gears and levers in the places they look as if they ought to be in, in truth your method will only wear the machine down and render it improper for use, because it is not the correct way. The correct use of the machine may seem more puzzling to you...not of your own instinct or opinion...but in the long run, you will learn that these methods will actually help the machine to reach its full potential and to last longer. It's the same with life; often, we do what we feel is right, but how often do our instinctual feelings improve us in the long run...the big picture? Let's face it; humans screw up a lot. They don't even know the full extent of their own personality, much less how to properly manage the human race. We have plenty of war and corruption to prove that. I think humans are VERY capable of making their own decisions in life; in fact, God WANTS us to make our own decisions, just as a parent WANTS his child to be independent. But like a parent, God also knows aspects of our natures and personalities that we cannot fully comprehend or foretell on our own. Enter morality! Anyway, I find that one thing has proven true in my life; if I don't rely on myself, I won't be a stable, secure person. BUT, if I rely only on myself, I will instinctually cause myself more trouble later on. Because if there's one thing I've discovered after all these years, it's that I DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING. BIG TIME. If your method works for you, that's fine. I'm not trying to preach to you on how to live your life; I'm just explaining how God helps me live my life, to give another perspective on the issue. [/rant] |
![]() |
|
| Darkside | Nov 24 2005, 04:42 AM Post #97 |
|
Brackenwood Lightweight
|
The thing about relgion is that it can be interperetted as one sees fit, whether good, bad, or ugly. Despite whatever a holy book teaches someone, you're right. One shoildn;t blindly rely on a enigmatic entity for all their life, expecting his or her faith to provide for them. Self independance is the path we should all choose, and make our own decisions, much like, as you said, a parent wants its child to do. That's like, one of the smartest things anyone's ever said on this thread. Props to you, Whim.
btw, is that from "Mere Christianity"? one of my friends asked that i read it after i went to the school's Christian Club and disagreed with all of their "proof" that God exists. I was only trying to make them think...i wish they wouldnt try and convert me... |
![]() |
|
| Foster | Nov 24 2005, 04:57 AM Post #98 |
|
Token Canuck
|
I suppose it's good to have a guideline, but I prefer to depend on my own judgement. It's served me well so far. I realise I don't know everything, or even something, but I figure I can make descisions on my own, without being influenced by any book. My beef with the Bible and any other 'holy' literature is not what is written in them, but that they are written at all. In my opinion, religion should be verbal so that it can change with the people who have made it. When you write something down, it becomes rigid and unchangeable, and can only be changed by those who know how, and for the greater portion of human history, it was the few. Literacy has not always been something that everyone could do. Only those with alot of power, be it political or spiritual, were literate, and you know what they say about power. Those that had power wanted to keep it, so they could change this book to elevate themselves without anyone being the wiser. |
![]() |
|
| Sigfried | Nov 24 2005, 11:07 AM Post #99 |
![]()
Objection!!!
|
meh, as my ancestors used to say: "Stick with your gods, and i will stick to mine" |
![]() |
|
| Whim | Nov 24 2005, 11:46 AM Post #100 |
|
Poetry Freak
|
Thanks. It's so nice to hear someone say that! Most people shut out my opinions right away just because I'm a Christian.
Yup, it is. That's too bad about your friends though...I really disagree with Christians who automatically try to convert someone like they're some kind of number on a scoreboard. You might like the book "Mere Christianity" though, even if you disagree with the views in it, because C.S. Lewis is just such a literary genius. Plus, he tells you right away that the book isn't about converting people or preaching to them...it's a book that philosophizes, and basically tells people what Christianity is from Lewis's perspective. The first five-or-so chapters don't even mention Christianity, actually, they dwell on the meaning of life and the existence of right and wrong and cool stuff like that. It's really interesting.
I agree with you on part of that...it's awful how people manipulate the Bible and other holy scriptures. But although verbal tradition works great in some settings, think from the perspective of someone who wants to manipulate the system. Nowadays, gossip spreads like wildfire, and it would be so easy to manipulate others if nothing in a religion was written down. All I would have to do is tell a few lies, and bam! With a written version, of course, you can do the same thing...but there's an opportunity for someone to look at the Bible and use it against a manipulator...to interpret it differently. I love the idea of verbal tradition, though...a lot of religious literature was actually started through verbal tradition.
Heheh, well I'm not here to convert anyone! I promise I won't go all psycho-if-you-don't-believe-my-way-you-go-to-hell on you if you promise to post something in the poetry topic. Kidding! |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Anything Stories · Next Topic » |




If ya want people to consider your opinions, at least have them make sense.




Wow...I mean, I'm a Christian, but...eheh, why on earth would anyone think that way?
5:13 AM Jul 12