Religion Being Winsome and Nice Won’t Cut It Anymore, Christian

[Syzygy]

I see the actions against Native Americans, Norse, and other 'pagan/heathen' groups in the New World and other places under guise of 'converting them' doesn't really seem to actually factor into your thinking on why people have problems with Christianity.

It does, but it was not the focus of my statement, which is why I brought up the Northern Crusades and admit many facets of it weren't just wrong, but unjustifiable. I don't get into consequences of religious persecution in the Americas beyond Spain's conquest of everything south of the equator (which I will argue had some justification given the many practices of indigenous religions, though even then the censuring of its practitioners was done with plenty of mistakes) given how difficult it is to pin the crimes committed against Native Americans on one specific group. I do get a sad chuckle every now and then learning about hopeful missionaries being killed or worse for wandering into native territory without (and sometimes with) an escort.

That aside, would you mind sharing the forced conversions of the Native Americans specifically? I'm more familiar with Christian/pagan conflicts in Europe than I am with those confrontations in America.

What Christianity did in the New World is why I say it is no more righteous than Islam when it comes to 'convert or die' actions.

And while I will readily agree Christianity participated, and even motivated, a number of crimes in America, I will not agree it is similar to Islam. Comparable, yes, but not similar, and certainly not equivalent.

 

[Bacle]

It does, but it was not the focus of my statement, which is why I brought up the Northern Crusades and admit many facets of it weren't just wrong, but unjustifiable. I don't get into consequences of religious persecution in the Americas beyond Spain's conquest of everything south of the equator (which I will argue had some justification given the many practices of indigenous religions, though even then the censuring of its practitioners was done with plenty of mistakes) given how difficult it is to pin the crimes committed against Native Americans on one specific group. I do get a sad chuckle every now and then learning about hopeful missionaries being killed or worse for wandering into native territory without (and sometimes with) an escort.

That aside, would you mind sharing the forced conversions of the Native Americans specifically? I'm more familiar with Christian/pagan conflicts in Europe than I am with those confrontations in America.

This was not done by some anonymous group, Pizzaro's actions are well documented, as are the religious aspect.

Just one of the more famous examples.

And while I will readily agree Christianity participated, and even motivated, a number of crimes in America, I will not agree it is similar to Islam. Comparable, yes, but not similar, and certainly not equivalent.

The lack of child brides, pork restrictions, and 'it's ok to lie to infidels' in Christianity do set the religions apart ideologically, however it wasn't Islam that converted by the sword in the Americas.

The Spanish that conquered the New World weren't above using their religion as an excuse or motivation for conquest.

 

[Syzygy]

This was not done by some anonymous group, Pizzaro's actions are well documented, as are the religious aspect.

Just one of the more famous examples.

Thank you, but I meant North American conflicts specifically. I am not familiar with the interaction of Native tribes and Christianity beyond some Spanish missionaries in the southwest.

The Spanish that conquered the New World weren't above using their religion as an excuse or motivation for conquest.

Was it a religious war?

 

[Bacle]

Thank you, but I meant North American conflicts specifically. I am not familiar with the interaction of Native tribes and Christianity beyond some Spanish missionaries in the southwest.

Yes, there were some missionaries in Cali who abused the natives during their settlement conflict with the other powers in the Pacific.

Also, you have heard about the Canadian 'residential' schools, correct; those got their start to 'convert' the natives into 'proper Christian civilization'.

And well, if you want we could bring up all the crazy shit the Mormons did back in the day that had it's foundations in some Old Testament stuff, and they are a Christian sect.

Was it a religious war?

They strangled the Inca's chief/king after holding him ransom for months to get gold, and after saying they would would not burn him alive if he converted.

The Incan king allowed himself to be baptized thinking the Spanish would let him live, and instead they killed him so he would 'die a Christian', and this was hardly the only time things like this happened, Pizarro's actions are just more well documented than many.

It was a war for land, gold, and influence that was at least partially motivated and justified by a belief that converting people to Christianity via the sword is an acceptable tactic, and frankly Christianity has been like that about people it conquered since before Islam was a thing.

It's just the Christian persecution complex built into Church dogma mean admitting Christianity has been very nasty to outside groups during it's rise is never truly done in good faith, only in an attempt of whataboutism, because deflecting the 'attacks on Christianity' matters more than dealing with the cultural legacy of the less righteous parts of Christian history in the world as a whole.

 

[King Arts]

Yes, there were some missionaries in Cali who abused the natives during their settlement conflict with the other powers in the Pacific.

Also, you have heard about the Canadian 'residential' schools, correct; those got their start to 'convert' the natives into 'proper Christian civilization'.

And well, if you want we could bring up all the crazy shit the Mormons did back in the day that had it's foundations in some Old Testament stuff, and they are a Christian sect.

What did Mormons do?

Also for the bolded part no Mormons are not Christian.

 

[Cherico]

I see the actions against Native Americans, Norse, and other 'pagan/heathen' groups in the New World and other places under guise of 'converting them' doesn't really seem to actually factor into your thinking on why people have problems with Christianity.

What Christianity did in the New World is why I say it is no more righteous than Islam when it comes to 'convert or die' actions.

The Catholic church tended to treat native populations better then the conquistadors and often limited the worst abuse's.

Put into the historical context they were by far the lesser evil when it comes to the Spanish empire.

 

[Blasterbot]

Also Compare how the Aztecs were ruling as the big dog in mexico to the Christians. Regular ritualistic sacrifice was a thing. The Spanish convinced the various conquered people to rebel against them. they would not have been able to bring enough men and guns over to take over without that. finally disease killed off most of the natives. while yeah the spanish were absolutely the most brutal towards the natives they conquered it was diseases from the old world that ravaged the populations so bad they took centuries to recover.

 

[King Arts]

Also Compare how the Aztecs were ruling as the big dog in mexico to the Christians. Regular ritualistic sacrifice was a thing. The Spanish convinced the various conquered people to rebel against them. they would not have been able to bring enough men and guns over to take over without that. finally disease killed off most of the natives. while yeah the spanish were absolutely the most brutal towards the natives they conquered it was diseases from the old world that ravaged the populations so bad they took centuries to recover.

What is this nonsense? No the Spanish were not the most brutal It was the English who were more brutal since they wiped out the natives in their colonies while the Spanish conquered and intermixed.

 

[Blasterbot]

What is this nonsense? No the Spanish were not the most brutal It was the English who were more brutal since they wiped out the natives in their colonies while the Spanish conquered and intermixed.

incorrect. different tribes and colonies had different relations. trade and diplomacy was rather common. it took a while for a real amount of anti-native sentiment to be pushed. that said an in depth analysis of who was worse to who in the colonial times of America is probably its own thread.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

I think it is very important to remember that the worst thing that happened to the natives, 90% of their people dying, was an accident.

Holding pre-germ theory societies accountable for the spread of disease is utter folly. We don't blame the Mongols for the Black Death, and we shouldn't blame the Europeans for smallpox.

 

[ShieldWife]

Not being a Christian, I don’t think I’m in any position to say what the “True Christian” course of action is. I’ll let Christians discuss theology.

What I do think is that social conservatives in the West (who are overwhelmingly but not completely Christian) need to fiercely stand up to the woke left who have been destroying Western civilization for decades now.

Though, don’t get distracted, it’s the left doing this, not non-Christians in general. Don’t attack right leaning or moderate non-Christians, who could be allies, in your efforts to fight back. Likewise, don’t think that someone is your friend because they espouse Christianity or quote the scriptures.

 

[Bigking321]

Likewise, don’t think that someone is your friend because they espouse Christianity or quote the scriptures.

Very true. There are plenty of churches out there that preach wokeness and other leftist nonsense.

Fortunately, this isn't a new phenomenon and has had a solution since the beginning. Compare the teachings to the Bible and if they go against the scriptures, then they are frauds wearing their fake Christianity like a skinsuit. Rebuke them.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

There are those who can repeat the text word for word, and not know Christ.

There are ardent atheists whom through action and thought know him very well.

 

[S'task]

The Virginians at least were pretty chill they were just here to make money and get a better life.

I don't know if there is some pathological English gene that makes them insufferable assholes who have to moralize everywhere and have to act holier than thou.

. . .

. . .

You DO know the Virginia Colony was settled by the English too, right? Like, Virginia is actually noteworthy for being the first successful English colony in North America and many of those who came to Virginia were "second sons" of English aristocracy to the point where there was a pseudo Virginia aristocracy known as the "First Families" from the 17th to the 19th century (they fell on hard times after the US Civil War for... obvious reasons). Virginia is NAMED Virginia in honor of Queen of England Elizabeth I, the Virgin Queen and the first settlement was named Jamestown in honor of King James I. The oldest (or second oldest depending on how you want to count it) college located in Virginia in the US was named for the joint reign of William III and Mary II of England.

Like, Virginia was VERY English, like SUPER English. Even to the point where the dominate lowland dwelling English descended people persecuted and dominated the highland dwelling Scottish and Irish descended ones. (As an aside, yes, those highland dwelling ones are even noted for their particular kind of whiskey they distill!)

I think you might need a better explanation than "they were English" for the domineering and utopianism of the damnyankees.

 

[Cherico]

Oh this I agree with. The puritans were just as insufferable assholes as their modern day New England types. The Virginians at least were pretty chill they were just here to make money and get a better life.

I don't know if there is some pathological English gene that makes them insufferable assholes who have to moralize everywhere and have to act holier than thou.

Its a cultural thing.

. . .

. . .

You DO know the Virginia Colony was settled by the English too, right? Like, Virginia is actually noteworthy for being the first successful English colony in North America and many of those who came to Virginia were "second sons" of English aristocracy to the point where there was a pseudo Virginia aristocracy known as the "First Families" from the 17th to the 19th century (they fell on hard times after the US Civil War for... obvious reasons). Virginia is NAMED Virginia in honor of Queen of England Elizabeth I, the Virgin Queen and the first settlement was named Jamestown in honor of King James I. The oldest (or second oldest depending on how you want to count it) college located in Virginia in the US was named for the joint reign of William III and Mary II of England.

Like, Virginia was VERY English, like SUPER English. Even to the point where the dominate lowland dwelling English descended people persecuted and dominated the highland dwelling Scottish and Irish descended ones. (As an aside, yes, those highland dwelling ones are even noted for their particular kind of whiskey they distill!)

I think you might need a better explanation than "they were English" for the domineering and utopianism of the damnyankees.

You have to remember that different parts of the america's were settled by different people who brought their cultures with them.


New england or Yankeedom was started as a theocratic ethnostate, by Puritans who other puratians thought were too extreme. These were not normal people like at all.

Below that you had the midlanders who basically started off as an ancap libertarian settlement by people who were fleeing tyranny. The Purtatains hated them most likely because they were tyrants.

Below that you had Virginia which was founded by second sons and royalists who lost the english civil war (Which is why their called the old dominion.)

Then below them you had caribian slave masters who just cared about making a profit, to the west you got the scots Irish people who were forged in the blood soaked boarder lands between england and scotland and just wanted to be left the fuck alone. (They made good whisky and honestly got fucked over like a lot)

America is not a normal nation state as europe knows and understands it, it was a coalition of different cultures who mediated their differences through the government. We honestly have more in common with the HRE then we do with a country like modern day france.

I consider that to be a good thing by the way because over concentration of power leads to seriously bad shit.

 

[Blasterbot]

And that doesn't even account for the waves of immigration after the initial settlement. Immigrants who came over during the irish potato famine had a culture. Germans brought some. Norwegians brought some. and if you track demographics along those lines you even find they tend to vote together in some areas. demographics aren't destiny but culture matters. and the family unit is one of the best ways to to teach it.

 

[ATP]

This was not done by some anonymous group, Pizzaro's actions are well documented, as are the religious aspect.

Just one of the more famous examples.

The lack of child brides, pork restrictions, and 'it's ok to lie to infidels' in Christianity do set the religions apart ideologically, however it wasn't Islam that converted by the sword in the Americas.

The Spanish that conquered the New World weren't above using their religion as an excuse or motivation for conquest.

Pizarro did many crimes - but not as envoy of spanish King,becouse spanish King do not even knew about Inca Empire till it get conqered.It was private expedition. Later Catholic Church helped natives everywhere when they have any power.
When spanish settlers fought it.

And,if you forget,Pizarro win thanks to local indian helpers.Who preferred him to Incas.

 

[LordDemiurge]

I am not particularly religious, but I do somewhat always feel the discussions on what Christians did in mesoamerica to be a bit myopic.

These things happened close to half a millennia and were done by opportunistic warlords looking for treasure. Its not as if any of them had a phoneline to Jesus or the Pope asking for approval.

Furthermore, no religion can really be treated as having a single coherent agenda across time and space. Not especially ones as large as the Abrahamic ones. I always feel a better discussion should be had on present day topics that are more relevant in looking at these things.