Did Christianity do anything unique in history?

[my_wan]

The BIG DIFFERENCE between the slavery practices of ancient peoples and Colonial Slavery is that the new Slavery was Mass Commerce, with a Racism component, justified by appeals to the Bible.

Ancient Slavery was built on "spoils of war", and class issues. It wasn't a massive (corporate) industry unto itself, geared up to make other cororations profitable.

GB

What was the real difference. Slaves were labor saving devices for the wealthy. Industrial mechanization is a labor saving device for industry.


It was only with mechanization in the north, were slaves were more valuable as employees than slaves while requiring less care, that slavery fell in disfavor. Only then did the moral argument not fall on deaf ears. It wasn't a Christian movement, but religions false claim of ownership of morality which leads people to pretend it was. In the south it was a Christian moral argument being used to justify slavery. Yet the distinction between the "slave industry" and slavery of old was meaningless to the farms in the south. The "industry" was growing in the north, while the south was a more traditional economy with some economic mixing. Thus industrialization, not moral arguments nor Christian movement was behind emancipation.

 

[Aepervius]

Possibly Christianity's Greatest Gift to Mankind (not sure about uniquest, but certainly one of my favourites), bringing out the "Inner Pagan" of CS Lewis , and thus The Chronicles of Narnia, one of the great Pagan children's series of our time.

GB

That is debatable, it looks to me that it is more like a pagan surface/cosmetic but deeply it is all christian propaganda.

 

[Matt the Poet]

Four pages, nobody talking about the art. I am an atheist to the core, but nobody’s telling me that Bach’s St Matthew Passion isn’t a towering achievement of human culture.

 

[my_wan]

Four pages, nobody talking about the art. I am an atheist to the core, but nobody’s telling me that Bach’s St Matthew Passion isn’t a towering achievement of human culture.

Question is, how dependent is the greatness of such work on the specific sensory package humans posses, and their relationship to our emotional/meaning core systems? I really doubt a canine endowed with an intellectual capacity comparable to humans would agree on the artistic value of such work.

At the sensory level its unlikely to even have the same content. Assuming the sensory content is the same, the emotional content may come off more as a whiny tear in your beer depressive retarded joke. Even our own sensibilities in what is artistic can vary as a result of our sensibilities about reality. The fins on early model cars were an expression of false notions of aerodynamics. To this day cars would often be more aerodynamic driven backward, with proper modifications. The best aerodynamic cars are generally avoided by designers because of the perception they would be too ugly, which is a product of our backward sensibilities about aerodynamics. Our appreciation of art is predicated on a whole range of human specific sensibilities about reality, culture, truth, etc., and often malleable in individuals.

The development of proper perspective in art, in the renaissance, is an achievement based in physical principles, but not something that can be ascribed to religion. As much as art plays a very important role in our human expression, I can't assign any specific achievement value to any particular instance of art, however much I may love it. So called universals in human perception are not even universal in humans.

 

[Matt the Poet]

OK, probably being a bit glib on the Bach, but I do think that art is the right place to look for an answer to the OP – nearly everything else that might count (philosophy/morality) is very similar to lots of existing religions, quite possibly because it was largely nicked from the Greeks and Romans and bolted on to what was a fairly minimal set of original precepts.

I would argue that Christian art, particularly music, is unique and driven by the structure of the religion. It’s reliant on a personal and emotive, relationship to the ‘divine’ that inspires devotional creativity, but it’s also taken a legacy of public, communal ritual worship from Judaism that means that what is created has a place and a time to be performed and shared.

I can’t think of any other dominant religion that balances those two sufficiently to create the sort of culturally significant output you get from Christianity. We’d still have art, of course, but I don’t think we’d have anything like the same kind of art.

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

What was the real difference. Slaves were labor saving devices for the wealthy. Industrial mechanization is a labor saving device for industry.


It was only with mechanization in the north, were slaves were more valuable as employees than slaves while requiring less care, that slavery fell in disfavor. Only then did the moral argument not fall on deaf ears. It wasn't a Christian movement, but religions false claim of ownership of morality which leads people to pretend it was. In the south it was a Christian moral argument being used to justify slavery. Yet the distinction between the "slave industry" and slavery of old was meaningless to the farms in the south. The "industry" was growing in the north, while the south was a more traditional economy with some economic mixing. Thus industrialization, not moral arguments nor Christian movement was behind emancipation.

Fair and True Points. But my point in highlighting the distinctions of the Slavery of the Ancient World and Slavery during the "enlightenment" era, is that:

1) Christianity's portrayal of Light=Good, Dark=Bad led to racially based slavery and eventually to discredited Racialist Theories. (in keeping with the topic of this thread)

2) That this Race Based Slavery became a massive industry unto itself (the profits of which founded many modern American and British Corporate Dynasties).

GB

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Possibly Christianity's Greatest Gift to Mankind (not sure about uniquest, but certainly one of my favourites), bringing out the "Inner Pagan" of CS Lewis , and thus The Chronicles of Narnia, one of the great Pagan children's series of our time.

GB

And this very C S Lewis found God, got spiritually born-again and reigns with Christ evermore.

Possibly Christianity's Greatest Gift to Mankind (not sure about uniquest, but certainly one of my favourites), bringing out the "Inner Pagan" of CS Lewis , and thus The Chronicles of Narnia, one of the great Pagan children's series of our time.

GB

That is debatable, it looks to me that it is more like a pagan surface/cosmetic but deeply it is all christian propaganda.

Yes, the point is "debatable" Aepervius , and John. But I have been studying Lewis and Tolkien for years. It would disrupt this thread far too much for me to begin posting excerpts of my research. But it has thus far led me to conclude that Lewis was a "Pagan-Christian"; he saw Christianity through a Pagan lens.

I submit that The Chronicles of Narnia, like the Deep and Deeper Magic Lewis described in the book, is multi-layered. The "Christian Propaganda" maybe at the "Deep" level, but even Deeper still lurks the Passionate Pagan Propaganda.

By directly associating Aslan (supposedly Jesus)with the Lion, and the Rising Sun, Lewis was directly associating Aslan (and by extension Jesus) with all the Pagan dying and resurrected Sun Gods. Prince Caspian describes a full on Bacchanal in a positive light. The land of Narnia is inhabited by Nature Spirits and Gods (such as the River God and the slumbering God of Time).

The Cosmology of Narnia is Polytheistic folded into a Gnostic Monism (going deeper, Gnostic Dualism resolves into a Monism), and if you read enough Lewis, you will find that his Cosmology is also.

He just can't away from it; even in his Christian Apologetics one finds passages that reveal his underlying Universalism, and his belief in the doctrine that all humans are to become as gods themselves.

Mere Christianity, The Abolition of Man, and The Discarded Image are very revealing of the sort of Christianity that Lewis came to Imagine: A Mystical, Gnostic, Universalist, and Pagan Christianity; not the Muscular Christianity of American Evangelical Fundamentalism (he was no "Born Again" JohnJohn). Lewis's Aslan is as much a "Pagan Christ" (if not more-so) as is Dan Brown's in the Da Vinci Code.

Thus Lewis, and by extension Tolkien, are among the best things associated with Christianity, if not necessarily the uniquest, simply by virtue of their reintroduction of Pagan ideas into the modern popular mainstream. Narnia and Middle Earth led many including Starhawk (semi-famous Wiccan) and myself to discover Paganism (though I am a Non-theistic Pagan ).

The Irony of it all sometimes knocks me flat.

GB

 

[my_wan]

Fair and True Points. But my point in highlighting the distinctions of the Slavery of the Ancient World and Slavery during the "enlightenment" era, is that:

1) Christianity's portrayal of Light=Good, Dark=Bad led to racially based slavery and eventually to discredited Racialist Theories. (in keeping with the topic of this thread)

2) That this Race Based Slavery became a massive industry unto itself (the profits of which founded many modern American and British Corporate Dynasties).

GB

We are not in disagreement here.

Since the transitions from nomadic->farming->colonial->industrial markets weren't events, but a growth of one over the other, characterizations at any one time can be highly subjective. The slavery industry itself was the industrial side of a market at time when farm based economies still existed, such that its existence supplied demand for the growing market based economies.

Slavery of the past was more often a form of debt resolution, rather than profit based. When your survival is seriously in question, and being owned by someone fair minded in comparison to those survival realities can massively increase you suvival chances, it doesn't look so bad on a personal level.

 

[Filippo Lippi]

Art happened before christianity and it still goes on now that christianity has been marginalised.

 

[Matt the Poet]

I’m not claiming that Christianity created or is necessary for art in general – that would be insane. I’m claiming that its structure has encouraged the creation of certain kinds of art and placed them in the public sphere in a unique way.

I think it’s the music that’s the thing here. You’ve got a liturgical calendar which specified the timing and content but not necessarily the strict forms of worship, said worship takes place in highly resonant architectural spaces, and your sacred text is particularly easy to set to music because a) it’s an actual dramatic narrative and b) it’s full of separable and rather exquisite poetry (e.g. the traditional pairing of the Magnificant and Nunc Dimittis). You’ve also got this idea of art as a individual conduit to experience of divinity which I don’t think exists elsewhere.

Judaism has unvarying, highly ritualised forms of worship that doesn't really encourage individual ‘creative offerings’. The Quran lends itself to recitation more than singing. Buddhism is too internally focussed. Hinduism, I suppose, might replicate a few of these things, but I don’t think it or indeed any other religion has such an extensive and varied tradition of sacred musical work.

 

[TimCallahan]

I’m not claiming that Christianity created or is necessary for art in general – that would be insane. I’m claiming that its structure has encouraged the creation of certain kinds of art and placed them in the public sphere in a unique way.

I think it’s the music that’s the thing here. You’ve got a liturgical calendar which specified the timing and content but not necessarily the strict forms of worship, said worship takes place in highly resonant architectural spaces, and your sacred text is particularly easy to set to music because a) it’s an actual dramatic narrative and b) it’s full of separable and rather exquisite poetry (e.g. the traditional pairing of the Magnificant and Nunc Dimittis). You’ve also got this idea of art as a individual conduit to experience of divinity which I don’t think exists elsewhere.

Judaism has unvarying, highly ritualised forms of worship that doesn't really encourage individual ‘creative offerings’. The Quran lends itself to recitation more than singing. Buddhism is too internally focussed. Hinduism, I suppose, might replicate a few of these things, but I don’t think it or indeed any other religion has such an extensive and varied tradition of sacred musical work.

Concerning the hilited area: Jews, whether they are rabbinical scholars or just ordinary lay people, argue about everything. Here's an interesting anecdote for you. When I was in college, my roommate was a Roman Catholic. I went with him to a number of his Catholic Youth Organization (CYO) meetings. We had a Jewish teacher, who had in fact been a rabbinical student, who agreed to come to one of the CYO meetings and talk to the RC youth about what Judaism was. During the Q and A period, a number of the young people pressed out teacher on who was the ultimate authority in matters of doctrine in Judaism. He parried the questions, saying that some Jews followed the teachings of this rabbi or that one, which only made the questioners press him further or who had the final say. In essence, they were asking who was the pope of the Jews, and couldn't understand that there wasn't one. Finally, our teacher said, "Look, we have a saying: If two Jews are arguing religion, you get three opinions of what Judaism is."

This really doesn't sound all that rigid.

 

[Matt the Poet]

I'm sure the doctrine isn't rigid, but the rituals are - in fact as far as I understand it there's a kind of pride in the fact that the observances are maintained in their original form despite the various diasporas, pogroms etc. Which is fine if you like that sort of thing but it's not going to encourage a lot of original composition.

 

[epix]

It got me thinking, is there anything Christianity did in history that was unique, that uniquely changed civilisation for the better?

Uniqueness is a property that can be attached to both bad and good. Obviously, the spread of Christianity put the end to pagan rituals involving human sacrifice.

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Uniqueness is a property that can be attached to both bad and good. Obviously, the spread of Christianity put the end to pagan rituals involving human sacrifice.

You're kidding right??? What were all the Crusades, Pogroms, Massacres, Torture, and Witch-burnings if not rituals involving Human Sacrifice? Not to mention that worshiping the Death of God (and his supposed Resurrection, amounts to the Biggest Death Cult on the Planet). Not to mention the Ritual Cannibalism of eating the Flesh and Blood of the Dead God (Transubstantiation).

GB

 

[epix]

You're kidding right??? What were all the Crusades, Pogroms, Massacres, Torture, and Witch-burnings if not rituals involving Human Sacrifice? Not to mention that worshiping the Death of God (and his supposed Resurrection, amounts to the Biggest Death Cult on the Planet). Not to mention the Ritual Cannibalism of eating the Flesh and Blood of the Dead God (Transubstantiation).

GB

You've become infected with the ideas of primitive militant atheism. This mental deficiency still survives in atheist states, like North Korea, but eventually it will collapse as well, as it did elsewhere.

"Religious wars" got nothing to do with religion per se but with the usual grab for worldly power. In the past, strong political dissent was oftentimes expressed by choosing different religious affiliation.

Transubstantiation is just a symbolic ritual -- no one gets his head chopped off, as it was the case during pagan rituals.

 

[TimCallahan]

I'm sure the doctrine isn't rigid, but the rituals are - in fact as far as I understand it there's a kind of pride in the fact that the observances are maintained in their original form despite the various diasporas, pogroms etc. Which is fine if you like that sort of thing but it's not going to encourage a lot of original composition.

Well, ritual is, by its very nature, rigid. I think you will find a whole lot of originality in Jewish commentary, all of which inspires a whole lot of creative argumentation.

 

[Resume]

You've become infected with the ideas of primitive militant atheism. This mental deficiency still survives in atheist states, like North Korea, but eventually it will collapse as well, as it did elsewhere.

"Religious wars" got nothing to do with religion per se but with the usual grab for worldly power. In the past, strong political dissent was oftentimes expressed by choosing different religious affiliation.

Transubstantiation is just a symbolic ritual -- no one gets his head chopped off, as it was the case during pagan rituals.

The event that started the whole christian cult thing was a bloody human sacrifice.

Allegedly.

Oh, and to a catholic, transubstantiation is hardly symbolic. Did you miss that question on the religion test?

 

[Resume]

.

"Religious wars" got nothing to do with religion per se but with the usual grab for worldly power.QUOTE]

Exactly what kind of power do you figure Falwell, Robertson, Haggard, et al are/were interested in?

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

What happened to Avalon?

 

[Matt the Poet]

Well, ritual is, by its very nature, rigid. I think you will find a whole lot of originality in Jewish commentary, all of which inspires a whole lot of creative argumentation.

That may well be. I'm not comparing the general flexibility or other merits of world religions. I'm suggesting an answer to the OP, which is that the large body of music produced for explicitly sacred purposes by the Christian religion is unique in that it wouldn't have existed if Christianity hadn't become prominent or had taken a different form.

My evidence for this is that no other religion does, in fact, have a comparable musical culture. I'm trying to suggest reasons for this, one of which is the comparitive openness of ritual structure in Christianity. In the absence of prescribed ritual behaviour in the new testament (one suggested prayer, one pretty informal ceremony), there's space to drop hymns, anthems, oratorios etc. into the mix.