[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!


File: 1771206431345.jpg (231.29 KB, 1200x1200, s-l1200.jpg)

 

What is the materialist reason that Christianity supplanted Paganism as the prefered religion. Surely it's not as simple as some Emperor having a 'schizo' vision during a battle

>>2693047
>Surely it's not as simple as some Emperor having a 'schizo' vision during a battle
After his schizo vision, he had a big ass army and personally saw to it that the faith was populist enough to spread but deferential enough to post no future threat. He would than establish a central church that violently enforced Christianity by destroying Pagan festivals, temples, relics, and eventually people.

>>2693049
I mentioned it because it can't be as simple as that. People went along with it, and continued up til now.

>>2693058
Constintine became emperor in 306, and Christianity became the Empire's religion in 380, so that's over 70 years, or two and a half generations, of Paganism being stripped of legitimacy, legally persecuted, and the church being sold as a revolutionary good. I think seventy years is roughly long enough to radically reshape an empire like that.

As for why it persists to this day, Christianity has evolved a lot since the 300's and has more economic advantages over paganism (access to trade and common forms to legitimize your states).

>>2693047
>>2693049
>>2693058

Prior to Constantine Christianity was still growing immensely. Frankly I think there's this ridiculous idea that he was basically just picking religions out of a hat and it just happened to land on Christianity. Emperors (such as Aurelian) tried to institute some religious reforms before, but it's genuinely not easy to shift the entire religious structure of society just by the head guy in charge saying "I declare this is our official religion!"

A big reason for Christianity's growth was because it had a popular, universalist message that appealed broadly to the lower classes of Roman society. The old line that "Oh you could've replaced it with worship of Mithra" ain't quite true because Mithraism was far closer to the ritual societies of the Masons than a mass, popular religion. Helping things was St. Paul genuinely spreading the faith outwards towards the gentiles and being a diligent and effective leader. The line "He who shall not work, neither shall he eat" came about as him reprimanding some early Christians who chose to subsist off the goodwill of their community rather than working because "Why work? Jesus will be coming back soon!"

Paganism didn't have the same universalist missionary impulse. Several competing religions like the worshippers of Mithras basically were only popular among the military and certain "elite" echelons. When Constantine made it the official religion of the land, it already had years of explosive growth before that and Paganism couldn't really compete.

The last attempt was Julian the Apostate, and I can try to explain him a little more when I've got the time.

>>2693070
Jesus' story is also very cool. In fact, the fact that Jesus' story is so grounded and based on working-class norms is often used as evidence that he was a historical figure, since most fictional gods are much cooler and wouldn't do pussy shit like getting executed.

>>2693076
Martyrdom takes balls for sure but is it really “more hardcore” than leading armies of your cause on the battlefield and winning? I’m not so sure and that’s part of why Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism are still very much extant forces in the world of actually existing religious idealisms shaping material reality.

>>2693077
>Martyrdom takes balls for sure but is it really “more hardcore” than leading armies of your cause on the battlefield and winning?
Yes. Anybody is tough with an army in front of them. However what impressed many people about Christian martyrs was how calmly and readily they went to their deaths. I'd say it takes a lot more bravery and conviction to go with grace and dignity into an arena to be ripped apart by lions. Certainty in a euphoric afterlife was a spiritual innovation of Christianity that didn't really exist in other faiths at the time.

>>2693083
It’s certainly worked for a third of the world’s population, what I’m curious about is how the other two thirds think differently about it

>>2693083
You also have to keep in mind that leading an army in battle meant being in the action much more than before the invention of firearms

>>2693086
Even still, there's a big difference going into a fight armed, intending to fight and kill, and knowing that there's a good chance you'll survive. That's not the same as going unarmed and passively to certain death because you arent afraid of dying. I'd say the latter requires a lot more bravery.
>>2693085
For the other two thirds the gaps were already filled by Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduidm which by then were similarly more organized and intertwined with state power.

Jews ultimately won their war with Rome and assimilated the Roman elites into their Yahweh cult. Christianity is just the exoteric manifestation for the goyim. "Materialist?" All great civilizations die from blood poisoning. How's that for materialism? Charlemagne was a crypto-Jew just like Cyrus.

Thats because European gods are rapist pieces of shit associated with a crumbling slaveowning aristocracy
Hindu gods are for whatever else you can say about them are not rapists and provide spaces for horizontal religious services (bhakti movement, lingayatis, etc) and not just hierarchical top down ones.

>>2693110
Dasyu detected. Your daily reminder that "varna" literally means "color." Brahmin = Nordic

>>2693110
you have no apna go back to Bihar you fucking dalit

Because Christ-insanity is inherently expansionist and genocidal in a way no other religion had ever been before it, which is why it's a unique evil that should be actively and vigorously fought against by all progressive people.

>>2693113
Go read Bhimrao Ambedkar's book about who are the shudras dumbass, he btfo'd Max Muller and other crackkker theorists interpreting varna as colour and other geneticist-readings of the vedas by doing literary criticism. The Aryan entry into India was followed by large scale genetic intermixing with caste only calcifying during the Iron Age period as a way to enforce ritual purity and foster national building.
Furthermore, let me reiterate my point: European-Nordic paganism collapsed upon contract with Christianity because European gods are rapist monsters and their priestly classes were Epsteinian tier sex criminals who committed human sacrifice and constant diddy parties with prepubescent boys as a way of enforcing class domination. Christianity is a social revolt against this adharmic degenerate class, and every Evro neopagan trads like BAP will openly admit this

>>2693047
>materialist reason
there is none, christianity was natural successor of the ideological west
it's nothing to do with material sphere, western civilisation ceased to be chthonic back in neolith

>>2693146
holy retard

>>2693152
because the white man uniquely amongst the races possess faustian spirit as soon as our ancestors started creating tools it became apparent that nature is no longer going to rule us, we are going to rule nature. as a result primal deities (father sky, mother earth, elemental fire and water basins) became obsolete and the void got filled with the world of ideas. nothing in western world in the span of last 5000+ years can be explained with materialism (accurately not as in coping) because that's when western people dropped materialism as a means of judging surrounding world.
hope this helps.

>>2693076
>>2693077
>>2693083
So funny enough if you look at the early Roman views on Christianity they were genuinely baffled by the whole martyrdom on The Cross thing. Crucifixion was genuinely one of the worst deaths you could experience and it basically left you out as a public statement "This is what happens when you fuck with us." Like it was a psychological terror tactic and there was nothing "romantic" about it, it functioned as a symbol of Roman dominance.

So the Christians celebrating a guy that they themselves portrayed as being given the "don't fuck with Rome" treatment was baffling, even moreso when contrasted with the masculine and triumphant gods of Greco-Roman mythology. We even have archeological evidence of some Roman kid bullying a Christian kid by depicting Jesus on the cross with the head of a mule and writing something like "Titus' 'god'" next to it. Their conception of gods was so far above them that having a god you yourselves claim was tortured and murdered by the Romans is bizarre. Like even contemporary pagan tribes would try to humiliate their opponents by smashing the idols of their gods (thus asserting their own deity's conquest of theirs in some spiritual sense) yet Jesus as they saw it was a 'god' killed by mere men, why worship that?

I think there was something really resonant in Jesus' teachings, especially since the Roman Empire was so ethnically and culturally diverse, such that "A holy man that was murdered by the Romans for preaching peace and love" spoke to many different peoples' cultural experiences. Even within thoroughly Romanized parts of The Empire, there was enough class disparity that the Christians being a people that cared for The Poor and were fearless in the face of death had a powerful effect on the masses.

>>2693158
>murdered by the Romans
is that what happened?

>>2693142
Imagine a uygha from the animal gang rape capitol of the world lecturing me about the superiority of Levantine pedo cults over my ancestral traditions lmao

Shut your mouth. It smells like cow shit in here

>>2693047

there's a million theoretical answers to your question about why "abrahamic" monotheism replaced local "pagan" polytheisms, cults, animisms, ancestor worship, etc.

rather than answer your question with certainty and confidence, like some kind of dogmatic ideologue, I would rather reformulate your question into more granular questions you can investigate on your own time.

instead of attributing the christianization of the roman empire to a single event like constantine's alleged vision, what structural social, economic, and political conditions within the later roman empire made christianity more adaptable and institutionally advantageous than traditional greco-roman polytheism?

how did shifts in class relations, urbanization, imperial administration, and patterns of patronage contribute to the decline of civic "pagan" cults and the rise of a centralized ecclesiastical structure?

in what ways did christianity’s organizational model, moral universalism, and trans-local networks function as a stabilizing ideological apparatus within a transforming imperial economy?

to what extent can the christianization process be explained through material incentives, demographic trends, and institutional competition rather than personal belief or singular charismatic events?

how can the christianization of the roman empire be understood as a transformation in the empire’s ideological superstructure corresponding to shifts in its material base?

did the crisis of the slave-based economy, increasing social stratification, and political centralization create conditions in which christianity functioned as a more effective instrument of class cohesion than traditional civic polytheism?

to what extent did christianity provide ideological legitimation for emerging imperial absolutism and later feudal relations, particularly after its adoption under constantine?

can the decline of "pagan" civic cults be explained as the erosion of the municipal aristocracy that had materially sustained them?

how did christianity’s rise within the late roman empire reflect broader processes of rationalization and bureaucratic centralization?

in what ways did christianity’s universal ethics, textual canon, and formal clerical hierarchy represent a shift from localized, ritual-based religiosity toward a more systematized and ethically coherent worldview?

did christianity’s institutional structure better align with the administrative needs of a territorially expansive and bureaucratically complex empire than traditional polytheistic cults?

how might the conversion of rulers such as constantine be interpreted less as mystical experience and more as a convergence between religious organization and imperial governance?

what selective pressures within the social ecology of the late roman empire favored the spread of christianity over competing religious systems?

did christianity’s strong in-group solidarity, care networks during plagues, reproductive norms, and costly signaling practices enhance group survival and expansion relative to "pagan" cults?

can the religion’s success be modeled in terms of network effects, demographic growth, and intergroup competition rather than theological appeal?

how did state patronage after constantine the great alter the selection landscape?

why did christianity succeed where other universalizing religions and mystery cults (for example, mithraism, the cult of isis) did not within the roman empire?

what institutional advantages did christianity possess in terms of textual standardization, doctrinal boundary-setting, episcopal authority, and transregional coordination?

how did the relationship between church and imperial authority evolve from toleration to exclusivity, particularly by the reign of theodosius?

to what extent was the decline of "paganism" a bottom-up cultural shift versus a top-down reallocation of state resources and coercive power?

are the categories "pagan" and "christian even analytically coherent?

is “paganism” a retrospective christian polemical category rather than a self-identifying religious system?

to what extent does grouping the diverse cults of the roman empire (or even, in some cases, all non-abrahamic religions) under one label obscure significant theological, ritual, and institutional differences?

was there ever a unified “paganism” capable of competing with christianity, or was christianity competing with a fragmented field of localized civic cults, mystery religions, and philosophical theologies?

how did late antique christian authors construct “paganism” as a conceptual other in order to define orthodoxy?

is christianity best described as strict monotheism, or as a reconfiguration of ancient henotheistic and intermediary-being traditions into trinitarian metaphysics?

does the veneration of saints, angels, and the virgin mary function sociologically in ways structurally analogous to polytheistic devotional systems?

how did trinitarian doctrine formalized after the council of nicaea attempt to stabilize internal tensions between inherited jewish monotheism and emerging christological worship?

from an anthropological perspective, is the difference between polytheism and monotheism categorical, or scalar?

to what degree did early israelite religion emerge from within the religious matrix of ancient canaanite polytheism rather than in opposition to it?

was yahweh originally one deity among others in a wider west semitic pantheon, comparable to el or baal?

how should we interpret archaeological evidence (like inscriptions referencing “yahweh and his asherah”) in reconstructing the shift from polytheism to monolatry and eventually to exclusive monotheism?

did israelite monotheism develop gradually through political centralization and cult reform (under rulers like josiah), rather than through a sudden theological revolution?

is exclusive monotheism structurally analogous to imperial sovereignty, with one universal god mirroring one universal ruler?

did the consolidation of divine authority into a single transcendent deity parallel processes of state centralization in the ancient near east and mediterranean?

in what ways did christian monotheism under rulers like theodosius function as a theological justification for religious exclusivity and imperial unity?

rather than asking why christianity replaced paganism, should we ask how much of late antique christianity was structurally continuous with mediterranean polytheistic practice?

did christian liturgy, sacred space, relic veneration, pilgrimage, and ritual calendar absorb and reorganize earlier religious forms rather than abolish them?

is the "triumph" of "christianity" better understood as a semantic and institutional transformation of mediterranean religiosity rather than its replacement?

is the category “abrahamic religions” a modern comparative construct rather than an ancient self-understanding?

how did judaism, christianity, and later islam retrospectively narrate continuity with figures like abraham to construct genealogical legitimacy?

to what extent do these traditions share structural features because of common near eastern origins versus later theological self-definition?

>>2693176
but ambedhkar was against the caste system and other reactionary aspects of indian society. (not the anon)

>>2693157
>ancestors started creating tools
>that's when western people dropped materialism
You realize tools interact with the material world, right? Human ability to shape and use physical tools explains the past 5000 years of history easily. Stop smoking meth and think about what you are saying for a second.
>>2693158
Considering the heresy of Donatism was created because most Christians but especially priests publicly denounced Jesus in order to not be martyred by Diocletian prove martyrdom is simply Christian propaganda of a few outliers more than a widespread reality of persecution.

>>2693179
>most Christians but especially priests publicly denounced Jesus in order to not be martyred by Diocletian
"when shit hit the fan is you still a fan?"

>>2693179
>You realize tools interact with the material world, right?
yeah and thanks to that interaction we became masters of the material world and thus the material became irrelevant to the western mind

>>2693183
overcooked conclusion from an incomplete premise (not the anon)

>>2693188
it's not
the answer to op's question is very simple:
(spiritual) jesus is the synthesis of the (western) mythos that came before him:
- he's the heracles toiling alongside the mortals
- he the mirthras, steward of truth and justice
- he's the prometheus bringing salvation at cost of self
- he's the sol invictus returning in glory
- he's the balder that will prevail and enact absolute harmony

>>2693200
I am unclear about the relationship between this new post you have made and the previous two posts in the exchange.

>>2693202
none of this has anything to do with >>>materialism<<<

>>2693047
kautsky wrote a good book about this

>>2693203
let's rewind to >>2693183
>we became masters of the material world
who is "we?" the material world still puts many constraints on humanity in general, and humans not in the ruling class specifically.
>the material became irrelevant to the western mind
what is "the western mind?" and how is the material "irrelevant" to it?

>>2693179
>Considering the heresy of Donatism was created because most Christians but especially priests publicly denounced Jesus in order to not be martyred by Diocletian prove martyrdom is simply Christian propaganda of a few outliers more than a widespread reality of persecution.
yeah a lot of the persecution myths are undeniably fabrications, the most blatant one i can think of is the neronic persecution, despite this being a persecution of jews (and christians happened to be included), this is almost always framed as being a persecution of christians, since they happened to win out the war
>>2693158
christianity didn't win because it simply competed to the distant castes of the empire, it won out because it provided delusions to many of the masses, the idea for example that christians were these lovers of the poor is incorrect, certainly was in the beginning, for the most part they had powerful connections and were in many ways similar to the stoics, then only in the mid second century did they start becoming more than an ant on a giant, eventually they grew enough support in the celtic areas and amongst the north africans that they somewhat were a threat, but they bowed down and simply evolved, eventually getting an ear to the next emperor after diocletian, and becoming the dominant religion, the honest answer is they got really damn lucky

>>2693047
It comes down to memetics or cultural evolution. More virulent ideas spread faster and fester in the brains of the victims harder. The virulent aspect being the promise of paradise after death. But the single biggest reason why the idea of christianity managed to kill its competitors was monotheism. Christians didnt tolerate any other gods as a result.

>>2693215
>who is "we?"
late stone age europeans
>what is "the western mind?
collective imagination and understaning of the people of europe

>>2693239
>The virulent aspect being the promise of paradise after death
as opposed to valhalla or elysian fields?

>>2693239
christianity's unique elements (what made it "virulent" in your memetic understanding) was not eternal salvation, but the benefits coming from church membership that weren't provided for in "pagan" religions, if you prayed to a god like vulcan, you offered, yet received very little in return, whereas if you joined a christian church, you were offered items, this was the same dynamic with islam too

>>2693242
The idea of the Elysian Fields being a paradise for the righteous is a fairly late one, most of the time it was exclusive to heroes and demigods. Valhalla was also exclusive to the warrior caste.
Christianity pioneered the idea of an universal, transcedental and euphoric paradise. For most pagans the afterlife was just a continuation of mundane life.

>>2693242
valhalla is more like, if earth was a big pvp tournament, valhalla is the lobby for the top players who are waiting for the final boss fight.
it's a position of honor but not paradise

>>2693241
But I'm neither stone age nor European. But if I were, my "collective imagination and understanding" wouldn't make material reality "irrelevant"

>>2693200
He's also the Jewish Messiah who will smash the idols of the goyim and reduce them to spiritual slavery, but yeah
>>2693277
This. It's a religion for ricebaggers, not men.

Habermas suggests that it is because "paganism" could not account for the cognitive dissonances resultant from new forms of empirical knowledge and a greater moral sensitivity, which had coincided with the general precarity of these great "pagan" powers, and Judeo-Christianity (as well as Greek philosophy, and elsewhere Chinese and Indian religion/philosophy) offered a better conceptual framework.


Unique IPs: 21

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]