tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post6062872009613017037..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: The Godless, Inhuman Dark AgesAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-8385212188036842502007-03-03T10:32:00.000-07:002007-03-03T10:32:00.000-07:00I can't even tell you how glad I am that that I am...I can't even tell you how glad I am that that I am not the only person frustrated by the History Channel. I remember it wasn't too long ago they had aired a special called "The Rivals of Jesus." Of COURSE they were rivals, otherwise how could Jesus be the "Winner." They could have just as easily called them "Comtemporaries" or something less confrontational. The History Channel seems to have only two real areas of study: Jesus and Nazis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-35174390336274467402007-02-28T16:21:00.000-07:002007-02-28T16:21:00.000-07:00Alonzo, you're argument prevails in context of the...Alonzo, you're argument prevails in context of the audience, if indeed that was their intent. I agree with you there, but a small benefit of the doubt is deserved for those who simply thought it was a cool title without repercussions. As a true believer in hanlon's razor, it is easier to attribute stupidity over malice.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous, the Germanic tribes which invaded the Western Roman Empire held beliefs in gods and godesses similar to the Norse, like Thor et al. In a sense, 'Godlessness' could be a really oversimplified view on the religious beliefs of the invading tribes. But since the series goes beyond this an into the Crusades, I doubt this is what was meant.<BR/><BR/>Now, the Church was definitely in power, and the Church definitely did a lot of atrocious things during the Middle Ages. However, I have reservations for blaming the entirety of the 'Dark Ages' on Catholicism and a strict adherence to scholasticism. I am not well verse in this time period as, say, Daniel Smail of Harvard. But from my understanding, Christian Rome had little to do with its own demise but the vigor of the invaders from the North. The cultural infusion which ensued set Rome and Europe back in terms of social progress, not simply Christianity. Just my two cents.Shawn Wilkinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18308205724057373941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-76079349531664014172007-02-28T02:07:00.000-07:002007-02-28T02:07:00.000-07:00This title is utter-nonsence. Anyone with half a b...This title is utter-nonsence. Anyone with half a brain knows that during the Dark Ages 'The Church' was the dominated the old world.<BR/><BR/> After Christianity aided in bringing Rome to ruin, "The Church" seized control of the rest of Europe and drove the continent into the Dark Ages. It was not "Godlessness" in the sense of being Non-Theistic. It was a brutal and savage time that was ruled by "The Church". <BR/><BR/> If Rome was allowed to continue things would be different. The rise of the Chistian Cult is what lead to the demise of civil society and the Dark Ages.<BR/><BR/> The History Channel seems to be moving towards a Xtian/right-wing palette as of late. I used to like The History Channel, but I think I will back off on watching.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-39793959820572779332007-02-27T21:53:00.000-07:002007-02-27T21:53:00.000-07:00In order to interpret what somebody says, it is us...In order to interpret what somebody says, it is useful to look at the context in which it is said.<BR/><BR/>The advertisement was meant for the general public. As such, the most reasonable interpretation is that it used the general public concept of "Godless" - the equivalent of "atheist".<BR/><BR/>The fact is, the people at the time very much thought of their actions as God-worthy. Come modern Christians do not. However, this does not change the fact that the people we are talking about thought very much that God gave their actions legitimacy.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-17566182341242303292007-02-27T20:16:00.000-07:002007-02-27T20:16:00.000-07:00I dunno, gentlemen. The reference to death metal i...I dunno, gentlemen. The reference to death metal is pretty straightforward. Death metal <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_metal#Historical_events_in_black_metal" REL="nofollow">stems strongly from anti-christian rhetoric and proclaimed satanism.</A> However, it requires a little more of me to believe that "600 years of godlessness" in any way matches up with that. I'm curious to see where and how they'll pass blame.<BR/><BR/>It wouldn't be the first time a group of people deliberately turned their back on history.Patnesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03028714603380383631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-71330075758107023892007-02-27T19:18:00.000-07:002007-02-27T19:18:00.000-07:00I wonder if bpabbott is on the right track. The b...I wonder if bpabbott is on the right track. The behavior of some kings, nobles, and evern clergy is hardly able to be described as God-worthy, both in a general abstract way or specific to modern Christiany. But if they refer to 'Godless' in the sense of non-believers being the sole cause, a severe historical oversight incurred in their ad campaign.<BR/><BR/>Luckily, historians and marketers are a different species. I don't think it's right of the history channel, in any context, to devise a quip which can be misleading. I agree with your post.Shawn Wilkinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18308205724057373941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-35600474056827252692007-02-27T17:36:00.000-07:002007-02-27T17:36:00.000-07:00Personally, I find the words and actions of too ma...Personally, I find the words and actions of too many self-proclaimed theists to be "Godless" ... I'd <EM>hate</EM> to know what they might be <EM>thinking</EM> ;-)<BR/><BR/>My point being, that the reference to "Godless" may not refer to what people of that age believed, but how we would characterize their actions/morality today.<BR/><BR/>Even so ... poor choice of words on their part.<BR/><BR/>If I'm wrong, I hope the History Channel isn't planning a show on our Founding Father's intentions when writing the first amendment ;-)bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.com