So I was thinking about five months ago when in Georgia Gov. Purdue had a day of prayer for Rain and it dawned on me that this was an odd thing to celebrate, as a Christian, mainly because of the other religions that were represented there as well. Other religious people were given opportunities to pray to their god(s). Is this not the establishment of an American Pantheon? The great Greek and Roman Pantheon’s were destroyed by the Christian Faith only now to be absorbed back into new Pantheon under the titles of “tolerance” and “plurality.”
Are you saying this was a good thing, or a bad thing?
This is definitely a bad thing.
Interesting. You should write more.
Were Greek and Roman Pantheons destroyed by Christian faith or merely by people who believed they were doing the work of a “Christian” God? I would say the end of pluralism was a horrible thing for the Judeo-Christian tradition. It just cast away leading by example and showing people Christ in favor of making it illegal or immoral to believe in anything else. Because that is really the only alternative? Legislating religious tolerance. When you take away pluralism and tolerance in favor of one religion, in this case Christianity, Christianity becomes the ruler or oppressor of those who dissent. So in a sense by making Christ the oppressor instead of the savior and relief of those who are oppressed, you are making Jesus the enemy of the people who need him most. But if that is the goal, it has worked miraculously for over 1700 years!
Were Greek and Roman Pantheons destroyed by Christian faith or merely by people who believed they were doing the work of a “Christian” God?
What do you think I meant by “Destroyed.” It was by the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity that the pantheon was destroyed. Not physically but as a religious system.
I would say the end of pluralism was a horrible thing for the Judeo-Christian tradition. It just cast away leading by example and showing people Christ in favor of making it illegal or immoral to believe in anything else.
That is not what pluralism is my friend. Allowing freedom of worship is not “pluralism.” There has always been a back and forth in Christian lands the ability to worship as you chose. A sad situation indeed when that is not allowed. But to encourage multiple religions and preach that they are all equal is a horrible thing indeed. That is pluralism. Freedom of worship and degenerated into pluralism and that my friend is sad as well. Because “freedom of worship” is a part of Christian government.
When you take away pluralism and tolerance in favor of one religion, in this case Christianity, Christianity becomes the ruler or oppressor of those who dissent. So in a sense by making Christ the oppressor instead of the savior and relief of those who are oppressed, you are making Jesus the enemy of the people who need him most. But if that is the goal, it has worked miraculously for over 1700 years!
I think all of these is non-sense. All I see is post-enlightenment rhetoric and ambiguous terms (pluralism and tolerance) based off of a fictitious historical narrative. You look at the conversion of Constantine as the worse thing in the world. A protestant/atheistic assumption. I see the Enlightenment as the worse thing to happen over the past two thousand years. There is no way to really speak to that right now. But I am sure it will flesh itself out through my posts.
Pax,
Br. Dale