Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SOLDIER First]

I absolutely love NerdCubed.

[Tack]

I wonder if, had Islam spread as prolifically as Christianity had, would it now be as watered down as Christianity is?

That being said I'm not sure if I know any non-churchgoing Muslim equivalents, feasting without fasting, letting their hair out and all that.

[TempAcc]

It kinda did spread a whole lot though. Its just that it spread in a very different manner, which is prob why it kept itself as (mostly) one thing instead of tons of different denominations. The early spread of christianity was more through progressive absorption of cultures, conversion and syncretism rather than war, while Islam spread through war basically at its genesis. The Quran itself mentions Muhammad's men "destroying tribes and their idols" or somesuch, which is exemplified in what they did with the zoroastrians.

Syncretism was also a big thing with christianity. Hell, for a while in scandinavia, thor and jesus were worshipped at the same time, by the same people. Saint worship helped this a fair bit.

It was kinda impossible for it to have spread in any other way in its early days, really, what with both the temple priesthood at jerusalem and the roman empire persecuting it, so the apostles post-jesus had to do some clever things to get people to like them. Paul allegedly tried to convince the athenians that their worship of "agnosto theo" (the unknown god) was actualy just the god christ talked about, which almost worked, but when he started talking about all the ~lol u guys btw orgies are bad and you should prob not party so much~ they kinda laughed at him and kicked him out :v

[Orange Wizard]

I wonder if, had Islam spread as prolifically as Christianity had, would it now be as watered down as Christianity is?

I think that "watered-down" Christianity has more to do with the Enlightenment and modern secularism. Islam is a hugely prolific religion, something like 1.5 billion adherents, and if the raw population has anything to do with the devotion of its followers we'd probably have seen some major changes by now.
If we look at, say, Iran in the 1950s, we have a country that looks pretty similar to any Western nation. Although Islam was the primary religion, the government was based on secular principles, and the culture of the country followed suit.

[Tack]

True, just followed that timeline on Wikipedia from headscarves banned --> headscarves mandatory.
I guess even that sort of change from "eyes only" to "hands, feet and face" is a liberal progression.
Doubt many people symbolically pray five times a day either.

[Transcendant]

Damn lack of motivation.

I want to create and host a game but I'm not motivated and still kinda afraid if I do that it'll fail. Meh.

[EnigmaticHat]

Because of its history with the Roman Empire, Christianity was kinda always a Big Deal from the moment the first emperor converted.  Whereas Islam built up more slowly and gradually.  Christianity is like a poor orphan that got adopted and turned into a trust fund kid, while Islam is more akin to a ruthless and ambitious businessman who got his start as a janitor and worked his way up.  Their histories are not easily comparable.  It requires a very careful eye to separate what's motivated by religion and what's motivated by the economic and politic pragmaticism of powerful practitioners.

To say Christianity had the less violent spread isn't wrong for their early history, but that's because they were a weird backwoods cult.  There was still plenty of violence, its just that most of it was direct at them.  To say either is more violent or intolerant in general is getting into dangerous territory.  I'd honestly stand back from an generalization like that.  All I'll say is that, in most time periods except right now, the average Muslim ruler preferred a softer attitude towards conversion.  It was less of a threat than it was a economically coercive suggestion.  Christians did that shit as well but it was more of a concession that you can't convert a whole region in a day.  Whereas in some areas non-Muslim communities have coexisted with Muslims for literally over a 1000 years.

The Crusades and Jihads are fixated on, at least in American history classes, but the truth of the matter is they resulted in very few converts to either religion and very many dead bodies.  Not how either religion was spread at all.

[Egan_BW]

The first step to getting someone to accept or follow your philosophy is to not kill them. Any successful religion understands this, or else they would not be successful.
On the other hand, if your aim is not to convert others, then feel free to sacrifice them to the sun.

[TempAcc]

Neither the crusades or any of the jihads were about conversion, by the way :v

[Neonivek]

Neither the crusades or any of the jihads were about conversion, by the way :v

SHHHH! Revisionist history is always allowed to win in the case of the Crusades.

[Frumple]

The first step to getting someone to accept or follow your philosophy is to not kill them. Any successful religion understands this, or else they would not be successful.

Killing the occasional person that worships something else works pretty well, though -- examples and whatnot. Same for forcing folks to go through the motions of your beliefs, and stopping their kids from doing anything else. Some softer incentives to go along with that (such as only allowing civil promotion or economic coordination if you're a professed believer) and you're in pretty good shape. Keep that up for a generation or three and you'll probably have converted enough you're a self-perpetuating majority.

Is fair degree what happened in the U.S. to the natives, ferex :V

Most of the major religions and a fair chunk of the smaller ones are perfectly competent at leveraging violence and conquest and whatnot into religious adherence, really, even if they're just inheriting the results thereof. The bigger ones just have more practice at it. It's not exactly a surprise that much of their expansion was in areas where their believers held military dominance. Killing folks may not convert 'em but it helps a lot when they're worried their family's going to die if they snub the priests. Or if their neighbors can get away with occasionally beating them or whatev'. Soft influence is often a lot less soft than it appears if you resist too much.

[pisskop]

>.>

<.<

Completely off the record, Im a fan of the agression and fanaticism of Islam.  Those aspects are aspects I could see myself fall to in another time.


Also, Could I ask for feedback on this wiki page?

Its a basic overview of critters in my mod, and its purpose to serve as a faq while still keeping some things secret or mysterious.  And also put down a little lore for people to eat up.

[Neonivek]

Well I jumped into Infinity Wars AND

There is absolutely nothing for me to do but grind.

I am not sure if this is better or worse than Hearthstone.... Since the starter decks in Infinity Wars are decent and the starter decks in Hearthstone are FREEKEN ATTROCIOUS! (some starter decks are worse then choosing monsters at random)

Yet BECAUSE the starter decks in Infinity Wars doesn't suck unrelentingly it means changing it is difficult.

[Tack]

I guess it's still pretty expected of a POTUS to be a good Christian, but I think that's democracy at work.

[Egan_BW]

Well I jumped into Infinity Wars AND

There is absolutely nothing for me to do but grind.

I am not sure if this is better or worse than Hearthstone.... Since the starter decks in Infinity Wars are decent and the starter decks in Hearthstone are FREEKEN ATTROCIOUS! (some starter decks are worse then choosing monsters at random)

Yet BECAUSE the starter decks in Infinity Wars doesn't suck unrelentingly it means changing it is difficult.

That must be why they call it infinity wars, no?