Europe made Christianity great or Christianity made Europe great?

Discuss Sup Forumstards

both

Fpbp

We became great when we embraced secularism

...

>Pagans believed in sharing Gods with other religions
>Christians didn't
>Pagans tried to integrate Christians into their polytheistic religion, but the Christians believed that their one God was better
>Pagans converted to Christianity, but Christians never converted to paganism
>Eventually everyone was Christian

Christianity was literally the Islam of 0-500 AD. The parasites who took over Europe due to their refusal to integrate

Well, Europe was pretty damn great before christianity. Romans, greeks and all that shit. On the other hand let's say Ethiopia was christian for just as long.
Christianity didn't made Europe great, it was what christianity was bringing. Christianity itself was more like a vessel.

Dumbfuck.

Yes and yes. Without the existing substrate, so to speak, Christianity wouldn't have been able to become that big and important but on the other hand it took Christianity together with its moral obligations which the people needed to "create" either in the name of the Lord or against him.

You can clearly see that the more atheistic/nihilistic society becomes - meaning the farther society is away from God - the more it erodes up to a point in the (hopefully not too near future) where it will most likely collapse, if the developments of the latest 40-50 years were sustainable.

First of all we need to erase the corruption and degeneracy from within the Churches, then we go ahead and change society for the better.

fuck off kike, go shove your nose into some other thread and shit it up.

as always, fpbp

>imblyign das a bad thing

Also your argument is plain wrong. There's enough historical evidence of Christians adapting to the heathen folks in terms of rites and traditions.

Also, why didn't your amazing vikangz and germanic """"""aryan"""""" kangz simply refuse to convert and fight back ? Right, because they were savage faggots and nothing that we associate with the super duper coolio germanic paganism today is what was prevalent back then in the mindset of the people.

Savages don't care for God (or gods) or morality when they have enough to eat, drink and fuck.

That analogy would only work if the people in the modern-day West were to convert to Islam en-masse instead of being invaded by people who are already Muslims. The spread of Christianity in Europe from 0-500 AD wasn't the result of some invasion displacing the pagans, it was the result of Europeans replacing their pagan beliefs with Christian beliefs.

Both

europe has always been great christianity has never been great

The conversion between two religions doesn't need to be en masse for a transformation to take place, it just needs to be asymmetrical. Islam considers apostasy to be a grave sin, while Christianity does not. Thus, Christians convert but Muslims stay muslim. The slow trickle of Christians converting to Islam will accumulate until society shifts to being Islamic.

Ethiopia was actually Christian far before Europe. At the same time it's almost objectively the least bad and most civilized part of Africa, at least historically speaking on average.

It was basically uncivilized woods-dwellers who killed and stole eachothers shit.

Sort of like Chicago tier niggers

This is a way too simplified view. It might be true for protestant heretics which are in principle "free" in an institutional sense, but for all the catholics (ancient, orthodox and roman) this will not be true as the Churches will prevent this by adapting and being more aggressive etc.. Well ... hopefully I gotta say, because Rome doesn't look so well these days.

Christianity exists in Africa, and Africa is shit.

Europe was great even before Christ, think Greece or Rome.

Old Christianity was full on Marxist bullshit, we made it make some sense.

I don't think the corruption of the existing Christian churches is reversible. The corruption is due in large part to the philosophical framework on which Western civilization has been building for the last 300-400 years, and any attempt to halt that process and move in a more traditionalist/spiritual direction is met with widespread ridicule and scorn. Even if we could scrap the ideas which have poisoned our societies we'd have to throw out the good with the bad since the same philosophical foundations which give us the ability to speak freely about matters like these or to do anything about them are the same ones that are corroding the values we seek to preserve/restore - it would be like trying to defuse a bomb by pouring nitroglycerin all over it.

What we need is not to huddle around the corpse of spirituality and try to build a temple from its ashes, but to give new life to a dead God. We need a new church. A new interpretation of Christianity that addresses the problems of the old church and the new world simultaneously, and offers everybody a rich and genuine understanding of what Christianity was always meant to be about - the way for humanity to prosper.

Christians abolished the practice of prisoners fighting to their deaths in arenas for entertainment, saved unwanted babies, and built the first hospitals, so I would say Christianity made it great.

The latter
Europe was a shithole with a bunch of snowniggers in the beginning.

Christianity destroyed Europe.

I fear you're right

I would argue that more Muslims convert to Christianity because the factors that lead to conversion are based more upon the happiness and fulfillment one receives from their religion than the strictness of its tenants.

While Islam is growing faster than Christianity, this is because Muslims have a higher birthrate than Christians, not because of conversions. Christians do in fact receive more conversions from other faiths than Muslims, and the majority of those are by Muslims.

**
But I don't think that it would be necessary to "reinvent the wheel" so to speak.

With the right changes in attitude and at the right places - a bit of modernization beside keeping the good and profound traditions that bring us near to God in the liturgy - it might already be enough.

I mean of course, weeding out the corruption and degeneracy will not work or at least not so well anyway as humans are weak by definition and some manage to hide their weakness before us in order to live it out secretly in high positions. There's baiscally no way to eradicate this.
Not even cardinal Ratzinger was able to erase the corruption in the innermost circles of Vatican, let alone in other remote areas where the roman catholic church exists but is not controlled by the institution.

Anyway, the process needed taking place slowly. One bit at a time. Subtly but steady, in order to not scare people that love tradition etc. are not scared away.

>But I don't think that it would be necessary to "reinvent the wheel" so to speak.

You're right, we don't need to reinvent Christianity, but I do think we need to take it in a new direction. Many millenials have been turned off of Christianity because they have been fed ridiculous interpretations of Christianity that no one with a brain stem could in good conscience accept, and though a huge part of the problem is the secular media/propaganda machine making up bullshit about Christianity and its history, a good chunk of the problem is that stupid Protestant Evangelicals and overly-dogmatic Catholics do the secularist's work for them by either not understanding the substance of which they speak or by altogether ignoring the valid criticisms that non-Christians have of the faith. I believe it is every serious Christian's duty to study the history of Christianity and the church, as well as to keep a critical and rational mind while doing so. I also believe it's necessary for Christians to understand the origins of the myths surrounding the faith, their deepest/most esoteric meanings, their pagan and non-pagan counterparts, and the hidden symbolism which they contain in order to be able to offer the wider public an understanding of Christianity that isn't vapid and devoid of use.

Ancient astrology, numerology, mystery rites, and prophetic mysticism are all part of the message, and the only way to breathe new life into the nostrils of the Christian faith is to speak of these things during evangelism.

>Anyway, the process needed taking place slowly. One bit at a time. Subtly but steady, in order to not scare people that love tradition etc. are not scared away.

I do agree that the situation is sensitive, but those still beholden to the rigid traditional models of Christian liturgy are mostly old and dying. A new church can offer a richer look at the traditions of Christianity than the current corrupt ones.