tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50907651358263161932023-11-15T11:19:25.174-08:00Islam and the West OR Monotheism and the West?And since submission to the divine will is named Islam, then in Islam we all live and die ~ Johann Wolfgang von GoetheSchnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090765135826316193.post-15186212680964915222010-03-13T12:14:00.000-08:002011-06-09T10:54:05.115-07:00"Christians" OR "Christianized & Civilized Barbarians"?This post is about those self-declared "Christians" of European origins, who are on the band-wagon of "Islam and the West."<br />
<br />
In their minds, those self-declared "Christians" have a picture of the 'Disciples of the Lord' reaching their ancestral shores, raising their hands saying <span style="font-style: italic;">"Good News!"</span> and everybody came rushing to the 'Disciples' with a shout of joy <span style="font-style: italic;">"Heeeeyy! We are ALL Christians!"</span><br />
<br />
And just like that, their ancestral Valhalla and Druid traditions--among others--became a bygone story.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;">Now, </span><br />
<br />
Let's start with some questions to see how genuine and authentic was the Christianity that was "adopted" by the Barbarians, west and north of Rome. The questions were put forward by a noted missionary of the last century, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Scott_Latourette"><i>Kenneth Scott Latourette</i></a>, in his introduction to volume one of his book<a href="http://www.archive.org/details/firstfivecenturi008505mbp">: <i>A History Of The Expansion Of Christianity: </i><i>The First Five Centuries, pp. x-xv:<br />
</i></a><br />
<blockquote>What was the Christianity which spread?<br />
<br />
Why did Christianity spread?<br />
<br />
Why has Christianity suffered reverses and at times met only partial success?<br />
<br />
By what processes did Christianity spread?<br />
<br />
What effect has Christianity had upon its environment?<br />
<br />
What effect has environment had upon Christianity?<br />
<br />
What bearing do the processes by which Christianity spread have upon the effect of Christianity on its environment, and of the environment upon Christianity?</blockquote>James C. Russell's <a href="http://schnacht.blogspot.com/2010/01/christendom-or-germandom.html">afore-mentioned book</a> takes those questions as a launching pad (<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=RmWyf2pvGR0C&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=Kenneth+Scott+Latourette,+germanization&source=bl&ots=jyfw7cy-8H&sig=lUd3ZWOStfcP293OPGyAxI3DkTk&hl=en&ei=xJ6lTKCIN4P88Ab1uLz6AQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false">pp. 15-16</a>).<br />
<br />
<span class="addmd">Richard A. Fletcher took them into consideration too, albeit in a modified form, in his book </span><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=RB5aWgr7l-gC&source=gbs_navlinks_s"><span style="font-style: italic;">The Barbarian Conversion: From Paganism to Christianity</span></a> (pp. 6-9). Here they are summarized by a <a href="http://www.catholicity.com/mccloskey/fletcher.html">reviewer who happens to be one of the christianized & civilized barbarians himself:</a><br />
<blockquote><br />
First: The problem of the apostolic impulse. Why, for example, did Saint Gregory I decide to send a mission to convert the English to Christianity?"<br />
<br />
Second: "Who were these activists who engaged themselves in the work–the toilsome, often unrewarding, sometimes dangerous work–of missionary preaching?"<br />
<br />
Third: "Who were identified as the potential converts, individuals or groups, central people or marginal people, kings, nobleman?"<br />
<br />
Fourth: "What were the expectations of the potential converts, founded in their experience of the traditional religion in whose observances they were brought up? What did they expect of it?"<br />
<br />
Fifth: "How did evangelists set about the business of putting over the faith and its associated standard of conduct to potential converts?"<br />
<br />
Sixth: And this is a question apropos of current day evangelization in Asia and Africa, the question of "enculturation." "What compromises or adjustments did missionary Christianity have in a early medieval context? How and what were the limits drawn between what was tolerable in traditional belief and practice and what was not? Take, for example, 'marriage, penal practice, the disposal of the dead, warfare, bloodfeuds, slave trading.'"<br />
<br />
Seventh: "What did the new converts make of the new faith and its demands? What models of Christian living were presented to them?"<br />
<br />
Eighth: "How did a structure of ecclesiastical government come into being in the mission field, and how did it differ from the Mediterranean model whence it derived?"<br />
<br />
Ninth: And perhaps most importantly, "What makes a Christian? At what point may one say of an individual, or a society, ‘He has become, is now a Christian?'"</blockquote><br />
To the above three authors, one can add others from different schools of thought who questioned the genuineness of the Christianity that was adopted by the Barbaric West. (e.g. <a href="http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/tribes.html" style="font-weight: bold;">here</a> and <a href="http://www.pocm.info/" style="font-weight: bold;">here</a>).<br />
<br />
Of late, a great anthology of research on the subject at hand came to my attention: "<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=4YKrpH222eYC&source=gbs_navlinks_s">The Cross Goes North: Processes of Conversion in Northern Europe, AD 300-1300</a>" - Martin Carver (ed.)<br />
<br />
The editor has this to say on page-4:<br />
<blockquote>Our authors show us the under-side of the process, more secret and more subtle, and ultimately more significant, by turning the spotlight from the missionaries onto the converted, and exploring their local situations and motives.<br />
<br />
What were the reactions of northern peoples to the Christian message?<br />
<br />
Why would they wish to adopt its structures and its strictures for the sake of its alliances?<br />
<br />
In what way did they adapt the Christian ethos and infrastructure to suit the social structure and natural environment of their own community?<br />
<br />
How did conversion effect the status of farmers, of smiths, of princes and of women?<br />
<br />
Was society wholly changed, or only in marginal matters of devotion and superstition?<br />
<br />
These are the questions we address in this book, using the techniques of different disciplines and the experience of different parts of Europe.</blockquote><span style="font-style: italic;"><br />
In nowadays, </span><br />
<br />
The descendants of the christianized and civilized barbarians, who neither kept their ancestral traditions nor got Christianity right, are perpetuating the ideology of the Romanized church. It is still alive and well--and in North America, out of all places. Jesus is God and God is Jesus, and what does not look like JesusGod is of the Devil.<br />
<br />
We say in North America out of all places because the founding of the U.S. of A. was based on the One God-One Adam monotheistic principle of unity, which in turn was based on the primordial covenant between God and Adam, and Creation as a whole. <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=fhPbPAsgmkwC&source=gbs_navlinks_s">A subject sorely missing in nowadays American mentality</a>.<br />
<br />
And most disturbing of all is the fact that a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/books/review/19brink.html">morally bankrupt political leadership has been employing those deluded descendants of the christianized & civilized barbarians of the holy Roman empire to their own Oil agenda</a><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span style="font-style: italic;">-- Crusades anybody? ~<br />
<br />
</span><span style="font-style: italic;"><br />
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.barnesandnoble.com/images/9780000/9783338.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://images.barnesandnoble.com/images/9780000/9783338.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 648px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 432px;" /></a><br />
<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=n_zcNMoTYgkC&source=gbs_navlinks_s"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">books.google.com</span></span></a><br />
<br />
</div>Schnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090765135826316193.post-7724796722307459532010-01-15T18:47:00.000-08:002010-09-15T19:06:20.382-07:00"Christendom" OR "Germandom"?<h3 class="post-title entry-title"> </h3> <div class="post-header"> </div> <div class="post-body entry-content"> <a href="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0195076966.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 314px; height: 500px;" src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0195076966.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cover illustration of James C. Russell’s book is Warrior Christ</span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">from a terracotta funerary plaque of central Gaul circa fifth/sixth centuries</span></span><br /></div><br /><br />This post is for those who speak of "Christendom" as an epithet for the "Christian West" which happens to be facing the "Monolith of Islam," so they tell us.<br /><br />On the cover of the book above is the image of the Christ according to those who became the "Christianized and Civilized Barbarians" of the Holy Roman Empire--which was <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=tnZuxyKp66IC&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq=%22neither+holy+nor+Roman+nor+an+empire,%22+Voltaire&source=bl&ots=SujqUva-QZ&sig=_qv7TCLZpN4WQWZ-89UsnorW9Ms&hl=en&ei=32FSS-rSJ5j4tQOl4eD4DA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAcQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=%22neither%20holy%20nor%20Roman%20nor%20an%20empire%2C%22%20Voltaire&f=false">neither holy nor Roman nor an empire, as Voltaire</a> once said -<br /><br /> <style>p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: Times; }a:link, span.MsoHyperlink { color: blue; text-decoration: underline; }a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { color: purple; text-decoration: underline; }span.highlight { }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }</style> Please note the sword and what looks like <span style="font-style: italic;">something</span> dangling from his left arm, plus the other things -<br /><br />So, do you think they got Christianity right?<br /><br />How about their descendants? - Did they get Christianity right?<br /><br />The following is from a <a href="https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2022/3982/94.06.04.html?sequence=1">review of Russell's book</a> that may help give a clue to the right answer:<span><br /><br /></span><pre><blockquote><span style="font-size:100%;">That the Germanic peoples had an impact on the Christian<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">faith to which they became "converted" in the early middle ages<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">has long been recognized. Like many other peoples in different<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">times and different places, the Germans reshaped their Christian<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">heroes and beliefs in an image substantially their own. The<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">staunchly heroic warrior-Christ whose <span style="font-style: italic;">comitatus</span> gathers beneath<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">the blood-stained rood is a far cry indeed from the gentle<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">beardless aristocrat of the Hinton St. Mary mosaic.<br /><br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">Traditionally, however, scholarly accounts of the development of<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">Christianity have acknowledged the Germanic contribution without<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">according too much prominence to it. Historians have tended<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">instead to stress more obviously confrontational or institutional<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">sources of religious change, most associated usually with the<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">high middle ages: doctrinal debates, papal pronouncements, and<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">the like.</span><span style="font-size:100%;"><br /><br />James C. Russell's new book, *The Germanization of Early<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">Medieval Christianity*, argues by contrast for a degree of<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">Germanic influence on church doctrine and practice far greater<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">than has previously been acknowledged. So profoundly in his view<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">did the Germans transform the faith they had supposedly adopted<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">by Boniface's death in 754 that he is reluctant even to term it<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">unequivocally "Christianity".<br /><br />Only if "a relativist or subjectivist definition of Christianity is adopted,<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">in which the essence of Christianity is not considered immutable,<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">or in which religious affiliation is determined primarily by<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">self-identification" may it "be argued that the Germanic peoples<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">were Christianized by this time". And even so, "it would be<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">necessary to specify that the form of Christianity with which<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">they became affiliated was a Germanized one" (p. 214). The<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">Germans had as much impact on their new religion as their<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">religion had on them, and it was their radically reinterpreted<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">version of the faith that was transmitted to western Christendom<br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">under the influence of the Ottonians.</span><br /></blockquote></pre><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />* * *<br /><br /><span style="font-size:100%;">The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity: A Sociohistorical Approach</span></span><span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /><br />By James C. Russell</span></span><br /><blockquote>While historians of Christianity have generally acknowledged some degree of Germanic influence in the development of early medieval Christianity, Russell goes further, arguing for a fundamental Germanic reinterpretation of Christianity.<br /><br />This first full-scale treatment of the subject follows a truly interdisciplinary approach, applying to the early medieval period a sociohistorical method similar to that which has already proven fruitful in explicating the history of Early Christianity and Late Antiquity.<br /><br />The encounter of the Germanic peoples with Christianity is studied from within the larger context of the encounter of a predominantly "world-accepting" Indo-European folk-religiosity with predominantly "world-rejecting" religious movements.<br /><br />While the first part of the book develops a general model of religious transformation for such encounters, the second part applies this model to the Germano-Christian scenario. Russell shows how a Christian missionary policy of temporary accommodation inadvertently contributed to a reciprocal Germanization of Christianity.</blockquote><br /><a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/37524347/The-Germanization-of-Early-Medieval-Christianity-James-C-Russell">www.scribd.com</a><br /><br /><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=y9Ysp4U4C_IC&source=gbs_navlinks_s"><span style="font-weight: bold;">books.google.com</span></a><br /><br /></div>Schnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090765135826316193.post-70859327609288610522009-12-20T08:59:00.000-08:002009-12-20T09:00:59.576-08:00Jesus in the West ~ Once More ~<span style="font-style: italic;">~ And, </span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Another special delivery from HRN:</span><br /><br /><blockquote>A second frequent form of the deformation of radical monotheism in Christianity occurs when Jesus Christ is made the absolute center of confidence and loyalty.<br /><br />The significance of Jesus Christ for the Christian church is so great that high expressions about his centrality to faith are the rule rather than the exception in the language of preaching and of worship.<br /><br />Yet it is one thing for Christians to look forward to the day when "every tongue [will] confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" -- to use the words of an ancient liturgical hymn (Phil. 2.11) -- and another thing for theology as well as popular piety to substitute the Lordship of Christ for the Lordship of God.<br /><br />At various times in history and in many areas of piety and theology Christianity has been transformed not only into a Christ-cult or a Jesus-cult but into a Christ- or Jesus-faith.<br /><br />The person through whom Christians have received access to God, the one who so reconciled them to the source of being that they are bold to say "Our father who art in heaven," the one who in unique obedience, trust, and loyalty lived, died, and rose again as Son of God, is now invested with such absolute significance that his relation to the One beyond himself is so slurred over that he becomes the center of value and the object of loyalty.<br /><br />The confidence that is expected of Christians is confidence in him; the formulation of the confidence in creed and theology becomes a set of assertions about Jesus Christ; theology is turned into Christology.<br /><br />And with this turn there is also a frequent turn to ecclesiasticism insofar as the community that centers in Jesus Christ is set forth both as the object of his loyalty and of the Christian's loyalty.<br /><br />To be a Christian now means not so much that through the mediation and the pioneering faith of Jesus Christ a man has become wholly human, has been called into membership in the society of universal being, and has accepted the fact that amidst the totality of existence he is not exempt from the human lot; it means rather that he has become a member of a special group, with a special god, a special destiny, and a separate existence.</blockquote><span style="font-style: italic;"><br />-- H. R. Niebuhr</span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;"><br /></span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://books.google.com/books?id=HSIDl7pZ1lEC&pg=PA59&lpg=PA59&dq=Radical+Monotheism+and+Western+Culture,+%28Phil.+2.11%29&source=bl&ots=rAxioDshon&sig=cLdnEfr5BtCwgydBaNQR3xMmkFM&hl=en&ei=iWwtS6bGGJX2NNWWueQO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false">Radical Monotheism and Western Culture</a><span style="font-style: italic;">, p-59.<br /><br /></span>Schnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090765135826316193.post-825898053410053472009-12-19T10:02:00.000-08:002010-01-10T14:16:12.469-08:00Jesus in the WestIn the "Christian West" Jesus became God and God became Jesus officially at the Council of Nicea - The One God was short-circuited by a trinitarian equation that lumped together the God-Head (father, son, and holy spirit) with God-as-such:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">One God = God-Head = Father, Son, Holy Spirit</span><br /></div><br /><span>Athanasius et al saw that:</span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Father = Son = Holy Spirit</span><br /></div><br /><span>And, </span>since:<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span> <div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Jesus is the Son</span><br /></div> <div style="text-align: center;"><br /><div style="text-align: left;">Then:</div> </div><div style="text-align: center; font-weight: bold;">Jesus the Son = the Father = the Holy Spirit = God<br /></div><br />But when the "Christian West" made JesusGod, there followed grave consequences on all levels - By making Jesus the ULTIMATE point of reference, a plethora of issues popped-up on the scene:<br /><br />Which JesusGod should one attest to? ... <span style="font-style: italic;">Our</span> JesusGod or <span style="font-style: italic;">theirs</span>? ... <span style="font-style: italic;">Mine</span> or <span style="font-style: italic;">yours</span>? ... <span style="font-style: italic;">His</span> or <span style="font-style: italic;">hers</span>? ... Of <span style="font-style: italic;">this</span> Church or <span style="font-style: italic;">that</span>? ...<br /><br />What about other sacred figures in the world? - They surely don't look like <span style="font-style: italic;">our</span> JesusGod, no? -<br /><br />And so forth and so on -<br /><br />In short, it was very convenient for the Emperor, Constantine, to claim Jesus as God - Not just any god, mind you, but the One God that is -<br /><br />All other gods shall kneel to Him and to his devout servants: the Emperor and the Church <span style="font-style: italic;">(</span><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:85%;" >But of course!</span><span style="font-style: italic;">)</span> -<br /><br />So better watch out, ye Barbarians! - Here comes the army of the Lord to Christianize and Civilize you and help you out of your heathen ways!<span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-style: italic;"> - (Hallelujah anyone?) </span>~</span><br /><br />* * *<br /><br /><div id="titlebar"><span style="font-weight: bold;">When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity During the Last </span><span style="font-weight: bold;">Days of Rome</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">By Richard E. Rubenstein</span></div><br />Book Overview:<br /><br />The story of Jesus is well known, as is the story of Christian persecutions during the Roman Empire. The history of fervent debate, civil strife, and bloody riots within the Christian community as it was coming into being, however, is a side of ancient history rarely described.<br /><br />Richard E. Rubenstein takes the reader to the streets of the Roman Empire during the fourth century, when a fateful debate over the divinity of Jesus Christ is being fought. Ruled by a Christian emperor, followers of Jesus no longer fear for the survival of their monotheistic faith but break into two camps regarding the direction of their worship.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Is Jesus the son of God and therefore not the same as God? </span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Or is Jesus precisely God on earth and therefore equal to Him? </span><br /></div><br />The vicious debate is led by two charismatic priests:<br /><br />Arius, an Alexandrian priest and poet, preaches that Jesus, though holy, is less than God.<br /><br />And, Athanasius, a brilliant and violent bishop, sees any diminution of Jesus' godhead as the work of the devil.<br /><br />Between them stands Alexander, the powerful Bishop of Alexandria, who must find a resolution that will keep the empire united and the Christian faith alive.<br /><br />With thorough historical, religious, and social research, Rubenstein vividly recreates one of the most critical moments in the history of religion.<br /><br /><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=H0URZx9gzUUC&dq=when+jesus+became+god&source=gbs_navlinks_s"><span style="font-weight: bold;">books.google.com</span></a><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance</span><div id="titlebar"><span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span><br /><span class="addmd"><span style="font-weight: bold;">By H. A. Drake</span><br /></span><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>Book Overview:<div id="synopsistext" dir="ltr" class="sa"><br />Historians who viewed imperial Rome in terms of a conflict between pagans and Christians have often regarded the emperor Constantine's conversion as the triumph of Christianity over paganism. But in Constantine and the Bishops, historian H. A. Drake offers a fresh and more nuanced understanding of Constantine's rule and, especially, of his relations with Christians.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Constantine, Drake suggests, was looking not only for a god in whom to believe but also a policy he could adopt. Uncovering the political motivations behind Constantine's policies, Drake shows how those policies were constructed to ensure the stability of the empire and fulfill Constantine's imperial duty in securing the favor of heaven. Despite the emperor's conversion to Christianity, Drake concludes, Rome remained a world filled with gods and with men seeking to depose rivals from power.</span><br /><br />A book for students and scholars of ancient history and religion, Constantine and the Bishops shows how Christian belief motivated and gave shape to imperial rule.</div><br /></div><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=RDqyIcSLJ0AC&dq=drake+constantine&source=gbs_navlinks_s"><span style="font-weight: bold;">books.google.com</span></a>Schnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090765135826316193.post-87655372375637229132009-12-11T08:27:00.000-08:002009-12-19T19:14:56.503-08:00Credo in Unum Deum: A ChallengeAnd here are questions to consider for the those who speak of "Christian West" and "Islam and the West" and what not:<br /><blockquote>The Issue Today<br /><br />We leave to Jews and Muslims to point out where synagogue and mosque fall shofrt of belief in One God of all. The issue here is whether Christianity can be redeemed, or whether it has become so exclusivist that it is lost in its hundreds of different views of its own identity, each claiming to be the right one. It may be that this is one of the reasons God raised up Islam and many other ancient religions, and has preserved Judaism, so that Christians may be reminded of what Jesus himself taught, especially about the One God of All.<br /><br />Christians must ask themselves:<br /><br />* Whether their claims to exclusivity do not belie belief in One God;<br /><br />* Whether they understand the vast difference between henotheism and true monotheism;<br /><br />* Whether any one view of Christ is the only true one;<br /><br />* Why churches tend still to be the most segregated institutions in the culture;<br /><br />* Why "the other" is often called evil;<br /><br />* WHY Christians often find war and killing others noble;<br /><br />* Why the churches tend to uphold whatever culture they find themselves in and sponsor the status quo even when it is oppressive and demonizes those the culture excludes.<br /><br />Have Christians made distortions of Christ into an idol, in effect displacing God?<br /><br />Indeed, would a theocentric Christology not be more responsible to Scripture and sound theology than the traditional Christocentric theology?<br /><br />What would a One-God centered understanding of the Trinity, of Christ and the Holy Spirit truly mean?<br /><br />The ancient cry, Credo in Unum Deum, has become largely meaningless to those who claim to be Christian today. These are a few of the questions that must be addressed if the church and the earth as we know them are to survive through the twenty-first century<br /></blockquote>-- James A. Sanders, Paul E. Capetz<br /><br /><a href="http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Credo+in+unum+deum:+a+challenge.-a0209695568"><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><span style="font-style: italic;">Credo in Unum Deum</span>: A Challenge</a><br /><br /><span style=";font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:85%;" >Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology, Vol. 39, No. 4, 204-213 (2009)<br /><br /></span>Schnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090765135826316193.post-28636418596658364222009-11-19T00:58:00.000-08:002009-12-20T08:58:20.729-08:00More Rock ~<span style="font-family:courier new;"></span><span style="font-family:georgia;">So some say: it is the "Christian West" vs. "Islam." </span><div style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: georgia;">Now leaving aside which and what "Islam" they're talking about, more to the fact they should say: it is the Duotheist Manichean "West" disguised as a Christian vs. "Islam" -- if not "the Rest" for that matter.<br /><br />For one cannot claim being a Christian without being a Monotheist at the same time. And being a Monotheist, the "West" never was nor is.<br /><br />The state of being dedicated to the One God as the origin and end of all, as the ultimate point of reference and value-center, the "West" never knew what <i>that</i> was/is all about.<br /><br />So why bother calling it "Christian"? . . .<br /><br />* * *<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">~ And,</span><span style="font-style: italic;"><br /><br />Here is from H. R. Niebuhr:</span><br /><blockquote>There is a third form of human faith [beside Polytheism and Henotheism] with which we are acquainted in the West, more as hope than as datum, more perhaps as a possibility than as an actuality, yet also as an actuality that has modified at certain emergent periods our natural social faith and our polytheism.<br /><br />In all the times and areas of our Western history this faith has struggled with its rivals, without becoming triumphant save in passing moments and in the clarified intervals of personal existence.<br /><br />We look back longingly at times to some past age when, we think, confidence in the One God was the pervasive faith of men; for instance, to early Christianity, or to the church society of the Middle Ages, or to early Protestantism, or to Puritan New England, or to the pious nineteenth century.<br /><br />But when we study these periods we invariably find in them a mixture of the faith in the One God with social faith [henotheism ] and polytheism; and when we examine our longings we often discover that what we yearn for is the security of the closed society with its social confidence and social loyalty.<br /><br />It is very questionable, despite many protestations to the contrary, despite the prevalence of self-pity among some modern men because "God is dead," that anyone has ever yearned for radical faith in the One God.</blockquote><span><span><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=HSIDl7pZ1lEC&dq=Radical+Monotheism"><span class="Apple-style-span"></span></a><blockquote><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://books.google.com/books?id=HSIDl7pZ1lEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Radical+monotheism#v=onepage&q=&f=false"><span class="Apple-style-span">Radical Monotheism and Western Culture</span></a><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://books.google.com/books?id=HSIDl7pZ1lEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Radical+monotheism#v=onepage&q=&f=false"><span class="Apple-style-span">, p. 31</span></a><br /><br /></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span"></span></span></span></div>Schnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090765135826316193.post-90987419658768324292009-11-12T14:53:00.000-08:002010-09-13T14:51:57.631-07:00Let's Rock!<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'courier new';"></span>Which "Islam" and which "West" are people talking about?<br /><br />It is as if there are two monoliths out there diametrically opposed to each other--is that true?<br /><br />Some people say "Islam" is not understood in the "West" - Fine, but is "Christianity" itself understood in the "West", let alone other religions of the world?<br /><br />"Christianity" is taken to be a Monotheistic religion, given its origin in the Abrahamic faith. But then again one looks in vain to see such Monotheism in the "Christian West."<br /><br />The One God of Abraham was short-circuited, equated with Jesus a long time ago. A mistake anyone with a modicum of education in Monotheism does not do.<br /><br />For when one equates Jesus with the One God of Abraham one ends up positing TWO GODS:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">One is GOOD = Jesus = God<br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;">The other is EVIL = Devil = Satan<br /></div><br />And, what does not look like Jesus=God the "Christian West" deemed and still deems it to be of the Devil, be it Muslim or Hindu or Native American, or what have you--not forgetting the other "Jesuses" of other "Christians."<br /><br />No wonder why a lot of "Christians" are so fond of talking about Satan, since he is in a perpetual struggle against their Jesus=God, naturally.<br /><br />Here, then, we see the "Christian West" looks more like a Duo-theist Manichean disguised as a Christian than a Mono-theist Christian.<br /><br />In short,<br /><br />The "West" never really knew what the One God of Abraham was/is all about, and, concomitantly, what the Christ was/is all about.<br /><br />Never knew what One God & One Adam, Love God & Neighbor was/is all about.<br /><br />The disastrous political consequences of this ILL-conceived Abrahamic Monotheism for the "West," and for other cultures that came in contact with it, are written all over the pages of "Western" history.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"></span>Schnachthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06510098736287720412noreply@blogger.com