Was Christianity good for Europe?

>>2572827
Yes.

>>2572846
/thread

>>2572827

I suspect if Christianity never took off, some other cult would have and fulfilled the same role in almost the same way.

>>2572827
Ultimately, yes.

it depends on what you mean by europe

if you mean roman empire - then christianity was the worst thing ever
if you mean europe as in northern germanic barbarians - then christianity led to europe being ruled by them

one of the other practically identical cults would have taken off, all the major stories in the bible are suspiciously similar to older works, christianity just happened to be the one cult that gained traction.

>>2573394
>all the major stories in the bible are suspiciously similar to older works
I wonder how this could be?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_School

>>2573409
can't be explained away that easily.

>>2573419
Its not "easy" how they come to their conclusions but through academic work.

>>2573426
your response to a question you can't answer is to literally link the Wikipedia article of an ideology that is in no way accepted by historians as fact (the idea of universal truths being particularly hilarious) because you have nothing to say on your own. You just put it on faith, much like everything else, that the people that you agree with are right and the people you don't agree with are wrong, always creating the illusion of an opposition wherever you go, linking blogs or Wikipedia articles. A massive confirmation bias really, absent any critical thought on your part at any stage of the process.

To make the claim that stories will virtually identical situations and themes are that way because humanity has some sort of innate morality that is the same across cultures, it sounds stupid even typing that out but I can understand that for a Christian a leap like that is no different than any other leaps you make in that massive confirmation bias you call a brain.

>>2573458
So your argument is that there is no universal truth.

Let's test out that argument.

"There is no universal truth."

In order for that to be true, it would have to be UNIVERSALLY TRUE, in which case universal truth exists.

Next.

>>2572827
Yes, but it could have been accomplished by another monotheistic religion

>>2573472
>and then he walked off the stage thinking very highly of himself for his semantics garbage he thought was really clever, whilst everyone else saw it for the sidestep that it was and continued being just as critical of his position

>>2572827
It's kind of hard to say considering Christianity has been a large aspect of European cultures for like 2000 years

>>2573409
lol traditionalism is so flawed you can poke holes in it willy nilly without effort just by demonstrating the evolution of morality and having a simple logic game in order to prove moral relativism.

>>2573498

"There is no universal truth" is self-refuting.

I don't mean to condescend to you, which means to speak down to you, but self-refuting ideas or self-defeating ideas are ideas or statements whose falsehood is a logical consequence of the act or situation of holding them to be true.

>>2573549
am I suppose to be impressed by semantics garbage designed to miss the point?

>>2573562
No, you're supposed to shut your mouth in humiliation at proposing that there is no such thing as universal truth, when it has already been demonstrated for you that it exists.

Now go away.

>>2573537
>Traditionalism isn't morally relativistic in many cases
Wew.

File: 218B443B-7D80-44AB-ACF3-B6F8FCE76C46-1112-00000136EE0900BF.jpg (34KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x450px

>your response to a question you can't answer is to literally link the Wikipedia article of an ideology that is in no way accepted by historians as fact (the idea of universal truths being particularly hilarious) because you have nothing to say on your own. You just put it on faith, much like everything else, that the people that you agree with are right and the people you don't agree with are wrong, always creating the illusion of an opposition wherever you go, linking blogs or Wikipedia articles. A massive confirmation bias really, absent any critical thought on your part at any stage of the process.

>To make the claim that stories will virtually identical situations and themes are that way because humanity has some sort of innate morality that is the same across cultures, it sounds stupid even typing that out but I can understand that for a Christian a leap like that is no different than any other leaps you make in that massive confirmation bias you call a brain.

>>2573569
but your argument is a simple logical fallacy and you haven't proven anything.

>>2573645
>hurr durr I don't like a school of metaphysical histography therefore it is false
Neck yourself fedora.

>>2572827
Yes. Before Rome, Europe was Literally Who: The Continent. Constantine gave Europe its golden years.

>>2573683
>what is the Hellenistic era
Cringe

>>2573687
Greeks were Romanboos.

File: smugbe.jpg (134KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 960x960px

Better than the alternative but still not as good as the one true faith.

>>2572827
Christianity is good wherever it goes.

No, Christians along with all the other Semite religions demand that their can only be one God. Their God and that all other people must become Christians or "they will go to hell". The pagans simply accepted that different people from different lands bad their own gods and that was that. When Christian took over they immediately cracked down on the pagans in Rome, they would slander against other Europeans with lie after lie so just they could lead crusades to forcefully convert. They killed all of the druids and bards of the Celtic religion which we know little about now as a result. They killed the religious leaders of the Slavic religions and destroyed all records of their gods. They also took old pagan holidays and rewrote them to be Christian related in order to subvert people to join their side or accept it. Overall Christianity destroyed much of Europe's culture and history.

>>2572827
Bad question. What should be asked is would europe be better off with neoplatanism

How can a dark age be good?

>>2573708
I guess by alternative you mean Islam and by one true faith you mean shamanism.

>>2575604
>Their God and that all other people must become Christians or "they will go to hell".
That's not true. At least Catholics believe in multiple places you could end up. It's just that Christian Catholicism is the closet faith to the truth.

>>2572827
>Forbid polygamy
>limiting the natality of the most successful
>Forbid abortion
>creating dysgenic problem
>Forbid hate and anger
>creating cucked people

>>2573708
this desu

>>2577126
Knights, kings and peasants all had uber children while being Christian. However I guess getting deflecting the social ills of secular humanism on Christianity is a great way to avoid philosophical introspection.

>>2577126
>forbid honor killing
>allowing whore to destroy family
>encourage disrespect towards parents
>framenting family

>>2573053

This. It spread better than some other religion because it simply was most popular.

The greatest meme ever told.

>>2577126
>creating dysgenic problem

Actually if there is a measureable contribution of Christianity to Europe, then it's genetical improvement. Churches kept record of people and wouldn't allow marriage between close relatives.

>>2573645
Name the logical fallacy involved.

And this. >>2573667

>>2572827
there wouldn't even be a europe without the church

>>2577200

You mean like, there would not been a bunch of states with warlike history?

>>2577249
Are you talking about sub-Saharan Africa or America?