Poor magic American performance at the olympics has the US media coping like no tomorrow

submitted by casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]NeoRail 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

1) christianism was at the core of feudal hierarchy, with the divine right of the kings and the chain of beeing

Far from an exclusively Christian idea, this was in fact a pagan concept which the Christians strongly opposed for centuries. Pagan leaders had always ruled with divine right and in many cases were considered gods themselves. Two very basic examples would be the Roman and Japanese empires. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, the resulting political disintegration and decentralisation also greatly marginalised the Roman Pontiff, so most Christian kings retained both their profane and sacral leadership, as they had during paganism. The Popes were opposed to this, not in favour of it, which is one of the reasons for the strife between clergy and aristocracy, as well as the major conflicts between the Papacy and the Holy Roman Empire.

2) Christianity self-identified himself with the god-driven conqueror.

No idea what this is supposed to mean.

On the other hand, there's no religion on the earth that says "the strongest has all rights, the weak must be slave" because is severely disfunctional once you get over the initial conquering phase and you need to establish an actual society.

That's not the point. Every system has to achieve some sort of harmony. The primary values are what's important. In Christianity, this value is mercy. It is a salvation cult. Everyone is fundamentally broken, hopeless, insufficient and incapable of achieving salvation on their own. Even referring to the ultimate goal as "salvation", in contrast to enlightenment, for example, already hints as to the character of the religion. From the Christian perspective, every man - regardless of his personal qualities - is weak and helpless, entirely dependent on mercy and salvation. Does this reflect an aristocratic wolrdview, in your opinion? If not, what worldview does it reflect? It's a downward looking religion. Everyone needs to be saved, but no one can be saved by his own efforts. The responsibility of saving human souls is laid on god, the responsibility of saving humans is laid on the aristocracy. What does this mean for the aristocracy? It means that its justification becomes entirely external and "humanitarian". The higher depends on the lower for its meaning, rather than vice versa. Hence "slave morality".

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]NeoRail 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    I know Nietzsche. The point is that he was wrong in identifying salve morality with Christianity, and he did this because beeing gay he had resentment towards his gay hating culture.

    Cope.

    2) Christianity self-identified himself with the god-driven conqueror. -> this means that Christianity identified itself as a conquering force led and legitimized by God

    What does this mean? Who is this god-driven conqueror? Are you sure you are not instead referring to the lamb of god, which was slaughtered upon the cross in order to redeem humanity?

    Christianity is a soteriological religion, exactly like mithraism and any other Sun cult.

    Utter nonsense. I don't even know where to start with this. This comparison between Christianity and solar cults is ridiculous and I wish I knew where you people get these ideas from. As to Mithraism, assuming that you are referring to the Mythraic Mysteries, you couldn't be more wrong. Those were esoteric. Christianity is a popular mass religion of completley exoteric character. It's the exact opposite of any mystery religion.

    this can be said about any religion in the world, to various degrees. Gods are stronger than mortals. They rule the afterlife.

    Many religions are not even concerned about the "afterlife" in the basic way that we are used to imagine it in the West. Buddhism, Taoism and Hinduism offer a reflection of that. Ancient Western paganism also offered other possibilities. The aforementioned esoteric mystery cults were one alternative. The hero cults are also direct evidence that ancient Western pagans believed humans could stand side by side with the gods - Hercules overcomes death through his own efforts and earns himself a place at Mount Olympus as a deity, for example. Germanic pagans also believed that the warriors who ascend to Valhalla would join the Aesir as brothers in arms during the final days. Moreover, you are missing the point. The focus is what is important. Christianity is a saviour religion - the Christian god is focused on salvation and saving others who need and want to be saved. Everything - the entire Christian cosmology and the purpose of everything - is salvation. The ancient pagan gods have very different concerns. They may respond to certain rituals, worship and prayers, but they have no interest in interfering in human affairs. They simply live their own dignified existence.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]NeoRail 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      you have deeply misunderstood most of the doctrines you mentioned, probably because you only know them in the version touted by the European hippie left. Obviously Buddhism and Hinduism know the concept of heaven. You can ask any Brahmin.

      Have you read the Gita? I assume that you have, since you've posted a quote from it. You must have seen the part where Krishna openly tells Arjuna that those who seek the minor deities will end up with the minor deities. This would refer to an experience equivalent to our "heaven". Krishna also mentions that other sages, who are willing to face the greatest possible difficulty, instead choose to pursue knowledge of the Unconditioned, which is completely above theism and any "heaven". This is a very expansive subject which can be discussed at length, although I would prefer not to, since that would require some effort.

      Buddhism also acknowledges the concept of heaven and the possibility to become a deity. In Buddhism, taking this route is considered a failure, since monks are expected to pursue Nirvana, which goes beyond the level of theism.

      edit: moreover, i would like to ask you how do you know which are the theological points in the "ancient pagan religion". I was personallly involved in the religious tasks of this group https://www.facebook.com/Il-Solco-della-Tradizione-497818260415086/ who practices the pagan religion with a traditionalist and reconstructionist orientation, and i was completely unaware of fact that the Gods have no interest in the human affairs, since the mere act of ignoring the Lares can cast disgrace upon you and your family.

      My perspective on this matter borrows very extensively from the Traditionalist school. I have read a good amount of Traditionalist literature. In many areas, I have also supplemented that knowledge with my own research.

      As to the Lares, first of all, they are not typical gods. If you have a background in paganism you must be very well aware of that. Secondly, lack of piety was indeed considered a great source of disgrace and shame. The nuance is in how this shame is understood. It is a personal and social shame - lack of piety is treachery against one's own character, that of one's family, and of one's ancestors. Lack of piety does not directly lead to being condemned to hell, as with the Christian religion, for example.

      [–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      which is one of the reasons for the strife between clergy and aristocracy

      Great point. I would also add Nietzsche's observation of the ressentiment the clergy felt towards the aristocracy.

      [–]NeoRail 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      What is that about?