Why don't pagans have access to jews?
- Thread starter Kanaric
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Which God? And wouldn't it be the other way around? The Pope's God called them with the voice of the Pope?
It's complicated, but in short - yes, something like that; at least faithful catholics supposed to agree with it.
You're right. That dude has no idea what's he is talking about. A religion cannot be Atheistic, and Christianity is most definitely Monotheistic.
Last edited:
Also, a few centuries before the game, the Sassanids started letting the Jews escape from the persecution of Rome into their lands.
Oh cripes, I completely forgot about the early Church and the mob violence - what a thing to slip my mind. Been spending too much time in medieval Europe.
Talk about a really ugly religious conflict.
Fort hose wondering about my sanity - religion is what I study at university, heresy specifically, and I find it deeply interesting. What I have taken away from the past nine years or so is that people were a lot less nasty to each other in medieval Europe and the Middle East than they sometimes are today.
Talk about a really ugly religious conflict.
Fort hose wondering about my sanity - religion is what I study at university, heresy specifically, and I find it deeply interesting. What I have taken away from the past nine years or so is that people were a lot less nasty to each other in medieval Europe and the Middle East than they sometimes are today.
Are we speaking about that Germanic pagans who take Christianity from 4th century and became most faithful to 10th? And about that Germanic pagans who making negotiations with Romans with Papal mediating? Sure, there was incidents, a lot of them (well, paganic life was not very safe, you're using similar thesis about wars), but in general christian missioners was quite successful with German tribals.
And, well, we have not-so-bad sources about germanic paganism in its norse version. Better that a lot of other pagan religions. We have Eddas after all.
Not quite.
Really Classical "atheism" means reject belief to local community gods. So, Christianity was atheistic in 1st century Rome, but wasn't in 10th century Paris; Zeus worshiping was quite the opposite.
P.S. I want to clarify - do you mean Classical word usage or current? Because as I know word "Atheism" haven't used by Classical people, and modern term about "the worship of only one god between others" is "henotheism".
Last edited:
Well, you just triggered me with your thread-derailing comment and considering it isn't removed I won't just let it stand there without a even more thread-derailing rebuttal.
The new testament on multiple occasions mention that the clergy of jewish Pharisaic sect is plotting to kill Jesus. Examples are Matthew 12:14 where it specifically says that Pharisees were conspiring to destroy him and John 11:45-57 where it describes more in dept that the pharisees were planning the killing of Jesus. Another example is Matthew 23 where Jesus describes the Pharisees as greedy corruptors and hypocrites whose teaching lead people away from god.
As described(although I admit, not very precise) in the bible, killing Jesus was basically a plot done by the jewish Sadduccaic and Pharisaic sects, who were normally rivals but temporarily made a truce to depose of a common enemy which threatened the survival of both their sects. The Sadduccees were basically destroyed with the destruction of the second temple in the Jewish revolt agianst the Romans and became mostly irrelevant later in history.
The teachings in the (written)Torah/Old Testament wasn't the only religious component of the Pharisaic sect, they also had the Oral Torah, which contained many more laws and interpretations of the laws in the Written Torah and told the jews how to live. After a second failed revolt in the 2nd century the Jewish clergy decided that the Oral Torah should be written down, as the jewish rebellions instigated fear that it could be lost in another devasting rebellion. This basically was the start of what is now Rabbinic Judaism, with the Mishnah being the written version of the oral torah which was supplemented by various other teachings of rabbis to eventually create the Talmud, which is the holiest book now in modern day Judaism along with the Torah.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_Torah
There's 2 reasons why this is important. First off, the Pharisees are blamed in the bible to be the killers of Jesus. Mainstream (Rabbinical)Judaism is the direct successor to the same pharisees accused in the bible of plotting Jesus' murder. The association with the Pharisees is the reason why Christians blame the jews for the killing of Jesus. The other reason is that the Talmud has certain passages where they acknowledge the existence of Jesus but also curse him and make some very negative remarks about Jesus(I won't post them here for fear of getting a ban). The consequences of this can be recognized in several instances of Christian history like the 7 papal bulls issued by the Catholic Church agianst the Talmud and the transformation of the important protestant leader Martin Luther from someone who tolerated the jews and sought to convert them peacefully into a zealous anti-semite who advocated for the expulsion and destruction of the jewish community after a converted jew read him a Talmud and told him of the teachings of the jews.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_papal_bulls
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_and_antisemitism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Margaritha
...and, I believe, it should be noticed.
In 1965 Catholic Church decided that "what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today."
In 1965 Catholic Church decided that "what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today."
While the Eddas are useful sources they're written by Christians and are several centuries after Iceland was converted to Christianity, they're also not completely extant. I know of no contemporary ehtnographic study of Norse Paganism in, say, the 9th Century. There's a fairly obvious reason for that - it was detrimental to your health as a Christian Cleric to spend too much time around Danes.
As regards the terms I'm using, I'm trying to talk about Christianity and Paganism from the point of view of a Polytheistic Pagan philosopher, anachronistic I know but someone asked why Pagans don't have access to Jews - so that was what I was trying to explain.
Unfortunately I let myself get distracted by another person who thinks all medieval Catholics did was go on Crusade to kill Jews, Muslims and Orthodox Christians. A view which gets my back up.
Well, to be honest it was detrimental to your health to live in Medieval age at all. But, really, german pagans were toleranted enough in 9th century to became Christians - Saint Anschar's life was 801-865, and "Vita Ansgari" is good ehtnographic material about Norses. Not good ehtnographic study, of course, but it's not a problem with bad health among Danes for Christian Clerics, but some issues with Christian Clerics goals. They tried to converse germanics (successfully, I should notice), not to study them.
Not to be empty-worded, just some cites from "Vita Angsari":
"Meanwhile [I.e. in 829] it happened that Swedish ambassadors had come to the Emperor Ludovic, and, amongst other matters which they had been ordered to bring to the attention of the emperor, they informed him that there were many belonging to their nation who desired to embrace the Christian religion, and that their king so far favoured this suggestion that lie would permit God's priests to reside there, provided that they might be deemed worthy of such a favour and that the emperor would send them suitable preachers."
"They were kindly received here by the king, who was called Biörn, whose messengers had informed him of the reason for which they had come. When he understood the object of their mission, and had discussed the matter with his friends, with the approval and consent of all be granted them permission to remain there and to preach the gospel of Christ, and offered liberty to any who desired it to accept their teaching."
And, of course, our sources about Norse paganism aren't completely extant. Well, sources about what paganism are? Roman and Hellenic?
That's a vague and misleading phrasing. Plenty of people believe that "The Jews killed Jesus", sure, but that's not necessarily (and not at all likely) "The Jews living today are responsible for the murder of Jesus" which was the typical Medieval position. That's like saying people who believe "The Germans were responsible for the Holocaust" really believe "All Germans living today need to be tried for and convicted of crimes against humanity." There is an important distinction here, I think, and not just one of synecdoche.
I will dispute that. I do not think medieval Jews would lend money to pagans. There were objections about even conducting ordinary business with Christians which medieval Jewish scholars, lawyers, and judges had to argue against. In general, Judaism takes a, shall we say, dim view of idolatry. Deuteronomy 13, for example, prescribes that any pagan who proselytizes a Jew should be put to death and if that person was a foreigner, then their whole town should be put to the sword.
Stop unloading your entire history studies in these forums. There are other things in life! Like playing CK2!
No! Some of us really enjoy reading these discussions, even if we don't participate in them. Bugger off.