Quote:
Originally Posted by mcpon14
The relief of poverty to a certain extent certainly helped the poor but the belief in a salvation, also did, too.
I don't deny that. But your argument was terrible and doesn't support your thesis. I'll break it down for you sentence-by-sentence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentence 1
I think that Christianity becoming so popular partly shows how miserable the lives of peasants were in the past.
No. The popularity of Christianity doesn't count as evidence of "how miserable the lives of peasants were in the past." Yes, they didn't live great lives. No, Christianity's popularity is absurdly weak evidence of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentence 2
They were willing to full-heartedly believe in something just to make their lives more bearable which is that, in the end, Salvation is waiting for them.
This is also a poor historical analysis. The assertion that they believed "just to make their lives more bearable [because] Salvation is waiting for them" is false. The reason for belief was much more than "just to make their lives more bearable" on the basis of abstract future salvation. It's clearly the case that present tense concerns dominated. Yes, there was some sense of abstract hope in the future, but abstract hope is not enough. (Especially considering that the early church was persecuted and Christians were viewed with fear and disdain.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentence 3
A non-religious example is the Taiping Rebellion where the peasants were recruited in droves because of the promise of a planned paradisal place that they might reside in and they because zealous fighters for this dream.
So... while I admit I don't know much about Chinese history, it seems really strange that you're claiming that a political uprising is evidence of support of a "planned paradisal place" as the driving mechanism. Doesn't the the fact that they were taking political/militaristic action imply that there was a very real place that they were trying to create?
Also, at least at a cursory glance, I see very few parallels in the structure of early Christianity and in the Taiping Rebellion. Early Christianity was relatively docile. It simply existed within the political structure without trying to overturn it. It did certainly upset the social structures by claiming to bring together cultures that have historically been against each other. And it wasn't a unified local movement, especially after it got scattered under persecution.
----
Quote:
If you want someone credible that says it then it is Napoleon Bonaparte.
LOL -- Because Napoleon Bonaparte is a renowned historian that is known for insightful analysis of religion in first century Rome? This isn't helping you argue that you actually know what you're talking about here.
Quote:
He said that he liked Christianity because it kept the lower classes content with their lot in life because they had salvation to look forward to. Napoleon probably meant that it kept them from being rebellious or more rebellious.
You're welcome to try to interpret Napoleon however you choose. But if I were you, I wouldn't use that as support for your argument regarding the historical accuracy of your basic claim.