magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
Your understanding of the origins of Christianity are a touch bizarre and in reality were nothing at all like the scenario you have portrayed.
The EU deal
- Thread starter davek
- Start date
- Status
Your understanding of the origins of Christianity are a touch bizarre and in reality were nothing at all like the scenario you have portrayed.
Here's a good article regarding the growth of Christianity.
MASSIVE DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
So why do they succeed? Why do people become Christians? I think there are some important historical observations to make here. One is that we have to realize that the Roman Empire itself was going through some massive demographic changes at this time. Now let's think about it this way... cities are growing but the population itself, at least within cities, was probably not growing easily. There's more people dying than are being born in most major cities. In other words, the old pagan aristocracy is shrinking, not growing. Where are they coming from, these new people in the cities? Probably they're immigrating from the countryside or moving from other countries, but then again that's exactly what we hear about the Christians. They're on the move. They travel to the cities. They're the new population along with a lot of other people, so I think from a kind of social perspective we have to see the growth of Christianity as a product of the changing face of the city life in the Roman world....
On top of all that there are plagues and famine, and it's been suggested by demographers now that if you've got a survival rate of only one tenth more among one part of the population than another segment of population when you have a massive die off... the result will be that at the end of this process [there will be] far more members of that one group relative to the total population. In other words, in a very short period of time you can have a group that was at one point a very small minority seemingly become miraculously now the majority, and I think in part that's what happens to the Christians. That through this period of very turbulent times in the second and third century, the Christians now become a significant proportion of the leading citizens of some of the major cities of the Roman world.
A SENSE OF BELONGING
Now what are they offering? It's very simple. With new immigrant groups, all of them trying to find their way into Roman society -- to make it in the Roman world, to be a part of the mainstream, to march up the ladder of success -- belonging is one of the key issues, and what I think the Christians offer probably as well or better than anybody else in the Roman world is a sense of belonging. To be part of the Christian community... to be part of the church, is to belong to a society of closely knit friends, brothers and sisters and Christ, and it may be something as simple as that that spells the [basis] of the success of Christianity in the Roman world....
Christianity was beginning to grow in substantial ways by the late second and early third century precisely because it was responding to some basic, deeply felt human needs. It really was probably beginning to answer the questions that people were asking, and we can see that growth in a variety of ways. For one thing, there really is no empire wide persecution of Christianity throughout the entire second century and into the first half of the third century. It was always sporadic; it was always local concerns. The first time the empire as a whole says "We have to eradicate Christianity," is not until the year 249, 50, the persecution of Decius, ... but by that time, the Christians are so numerous that they can't possibly be eradicated; they've already grown that much.
So, in the sense, the persecution really doesn't catch up until it's already too late. We have some indication of the basic growth of Christianity at this time, especially in the cities, in terms of the records of the city of Rome. In the year 251, right at the time of the persecution of Decius, we have a register of the church at Rome, which says that they had 46 presbyters and 56 exorcists and doorkeepers and a number of other people that they catalogued; seven of this and seven of that; quite a lot of people are in this catalog. And at the end, it says over 1,500 widows [and needy persons] on the roster of the church at Rome; that is, people, women who are being taken care of by the church. The church becomes, in a lot of ways, a new kind of social welfare agency in the Roman Empire. The leaders of the church are the patrons of society. By the end of the third century, Christian bishops in many places will have taken over the role of the old civic patrons that had led the processions at Ephesus and Corinth and Rome. They've made it into society.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/appeal.html
MASSIVE DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
So why do they succeed? Why do people become Christians? I think there are some important historical observations to make here. One is that we have to realize that the Roman Empire itself was going through some massive demographic changes at this time. Now let's think about it this way... cities are growing but the population itself, at least within cities, was probably not growing easily. There's more people dying than are being born in most major cities. In other words, the old pagan aristocracy is shrinking, not growing. Where are they coming from, these new people in the cities? Probably they're immigrating from the countryside or moving from other countries, but then again that's exactly what we hear about the Christians. They're on the move. They travel to the cities. They're the new population along with a lot of other people, so I think from a kind of social perspective we have to see the growth of Christianity as a product of the changing face of the city life in the Roman world....
On top of all that there are plagues and famine, and it's been suggested by demographers now that if you've got a survival rate of only one tenth more among one part of the population than another segment of population when you have a massive die off... the result will be that at the end of this process [there will be] far more members of that one group relative to the total population. In other words, in a very short period of time you can have a group that was at one point a very small minority seemingly become miraculously now the majority, and I think in part that's what happens to the Christians. That through this period of very turbulent times in the second and third century, the Christians now become a significant proportion of the leading citizens of some of the major cities of the Roman world.
A SENSE OF BELONGING
Now what are they offering? It's very simple. With new immigrant groups, all of them trying to find their way into Roman society -- to make it in the Roman world, to be a part of the mainstream, to march up the ladder of success -- belonging is one of the key issues, and what I think the Christians offer probably as well or better than anybody else in the Roman world is a sense of belonging. To be part of the Christian community... to be part of the church, is to belong to a society of closely knit friends, brothers and sisters and Christ, and it may be something as simple as that that spells the [basis] of the success of Christianity in the Roman world....
Christianity was beginning to grow in substantial ways by the late second and early third century precisely because it was responding to some basic, deeply felt human needs. It really was probably beginning to answer the questions that people were asking, and we can see that growth in a variety of ways. For one thing, there really is no empire wide persecution of Christianity throughout the entire second century and into the first half of the third century. It was always sporadic; it was always local concerns. The first time the empire as a whole says "We have to eradicate Christianity," is not until the year 249, 50, the persecution of Decius, ... but by that time, the Christians are so numerous that they can't possibly be eradicated; they've already grown that much.
So, in the sense, the persecution really doesn't catch up until it's already too late. We have some indication of the basic growth of Christianity at this time, especially in the cities, in terms of the records of the city of Rome. In the year 251, right at the time of the persecution of Decius, we have a register of the church at Rome, which says that they had 46 presbyters and 56 exorcists and doorkeepers and a number of other people that they catalogued; seven of this and seven of that; quite a lot of people are in this catalog. And at the end, it says over 1,500 widows [and needy persons] on the roster of the church at Rome; that is, people, women who are being taken care of by the church. The church becomes, in a lot of ways, a new kind of social welfare agency in the Roman Empire. The leaders of the church are the patrons of society. By the end of the third century, Christian bishops in many places will have taken over the role of the old civic patrons that had led the processions at Ephesus and Corinth and Rome. They've made it into society.
daylightrobber
Player Valuation: £15m
Just returning to the DNA conversation from the other day.
An open world begins with an open mind
An open world begins with an open mind
SNova
Player Valuation: £15m
MPs 'considering using majority' to keep UK in single market
Cringe.
By James LandaleDiplomatic correspondent
Image copyrightREUTERS
Pro-Remain MPs are considering using their Commons majority to keep Britain inside the EU single market if there is a vote for Brexit, the BBC has learned.
The MPs fear a post-Brexit government might negotiate a limited free trade deal with the EU, which they say would damage the UK's economy.
There is a pro-Remain majority in the House of Commons of 454 MPs to 147.
A Vote Leave campaign spokesman said MPs will not be able to "defy the will of the electorate" on key issues.
The single market guarantees the free movement of goods, people, services and capital.
The BBC has learned pro-Remain MPs would use their voting power in the House of Commons to protect what they see as the economic benefits of a single market, which gives the UK access to 500 million consumers.
Staying inside the single market would mean Britain would have to keep its borders open to EU workers and continue paying into EU coffers.
Free trade area v single market - what's the difference?
Who has access to the single market?
How does Norway's relationship with the EU work?
Ministers have told the BBC they expect pro-EU MPs to conduct what one called a "reverse Maastricht" process - a reference to the long parliamentary campaign fought by Tory eurosceptic MPs in the 1990s against legislation deepening EU integration.
Like then as now, the Conservative government has a small working majority of just 17.
They say it would be legitimate for MPs to push for the UK to stay in the single market because the Leave campaign has refused to spell out what trading relationship it wants the UK to have with the EU in the future.
As such, a post-Brexit government could not claim it had a popular mandate for a particular model.
One minister said: "This is not fantasy. This is a huge probability.
"The longer we move away from the referendum, the more the economic pressures will grow to keep some links with the single market."
Another said: "We would accept the mandate of the people to leave the EU.
"But everything after that is negotiable and Parliament would have its say. The terms on which we leave are entirely within my remit as a parliamentarian and that is something for me to take a view on."
Image copyrightREUTERS
Image captionJustice Secretary Michael Gove has said he wants the UK to leave the single market
Labour frontbenchers say they have also been discussing the option.
One said it would be hard for pro-Brexit MPs to resist the Commons deciding Britain's future relationship with the EU, as it would demonstrate the principle of parliamentary sovereignty eurosceptics have been demanding for years.
One SNP frontbencher said: "Parliament is not going to let Boris Johnson and Michael Gove get away with murder. I just don't think people are going to roll over, particularly on our trading relationship with the EU."
Many pro-Leave campaigners support a limited free trade relationship with the EU, based on the deal about to be signed between Canada and the EU.
It would reduce some barriers to trade in basic goods but other areas - such as services - are largely excluded.
One alternative option put forward by pro-EU MPs would be for the UK to stay part of the single market by continuing its membership of the European Economic Area.
The EEA includes all EU countries, as well as Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland.
'Lose-lose situation'
The advantages of EEA membership for non-EU countries - known by some as the "Norway model" - include access to the single market without having to agree agriculture or fishing quotas, to cooperate on justice or foreign affairs, or be a member of the eurozone or the Schengen border-free arrangement.
The disadvantages include having to make a contribution to the EU budget, accepting the free movement of people, and having little ability to influence EU rules.
Stephen Kinnock, the Labour MP for Aberavon, said: "If the British people voted to leave the EU that's one thing.
"But can we really say that they voted for the devastation and destruction of the entire exporting sector of our economy? I don't think you can necessarily say that there's a democratic mandate for that."
But he warned there could be a constitutional crisis if MPs voted to keep Britain's borders open, something people would have rejected in the referendum.
"In a sense it's a lose-lose situation. I don't see how you untie that Gordian knot because you're looking at a massive economic crisis going down the track of the Canada model and a constitutional crisis going down the track of the Norway model."
Image copyrightMATT CARDY
Image captionIceland, alongside Liechtenstein and Norway, has negotiated access to the single market
Pro-EU MPs could use their voting muscle later this year when a post-Brexit Tory government would be expected to put its negotiating plans to parliament.
The government would struggle to negotiate with the EU if it could not secure the support of the Commons.
MPs could also bring pressure to bear once the withdrawal agreement has been settled and a huge amount of legislation would have to be changed.
The European Communities Act 1972 that took Britain into the EU would have to be repealed.
New Acts of Parliament would be needed to implement the withdrawal agreement. Acts that implement EU directives would need to be repealed or amended.
Thousands of EU regulations - that were automatically transferred into UK law - would have to be reintroduced, amended or allowed to lapse. And secondary legislation dependent on the European Communities Act would also have to be given new enabling laws.
Ministers say this process could take years and would provide determined pro-EU MPs lots of opportunity to cause trouble.
Charles Grant, director of the pro-EU Centre for European Reform think tank, said: "I think it is quite possible that Parliament would vote to impose the Norway model on a post-Brexit Tory government.
"Boris Johnson and Michael Gove are free marketers down to their finger tips and might be quite happy to be beaten up by Parliament and have this model imposed on them. They might protest but secretly quite like it. The pressure for Britain to retain some linkage with the single market would be overwhelming."
'Enormous pressure'
One senior Tory MP said: "There is all this talk of eurosceptics engaging in guerrilla warfare after a vote for Remain. It could be the other way round.
"The overwhelming majority of Labour, SNP, odds and sods and a hard core of Conservative MPs could make life very difficult."
Another said there would be "enormous pressure" from businesses to get "much better access to the single market".
One Labour MP added: "There will be as much fun and games as possible to stop it and block it and delay it."
Another said the government may try to get Labour to support an early general election being called, by voting to suspend the Fixed Term Parliament Act.
A newly-elected Tory government - potentially with a larger majority - would then have a mandate for its renegotiation plan.
Some pro-Leave campaigners also question how pro-EU parliament really is, suggesting that many MPs are backing Remain simply out of loyalty to David Cameron.
A spokesman for the Leave campaign said: "If you vote Leave, Britain will negotiate a British option which will end the supremacy of EU law and take back control of our borders and our democracy and our economy."
A spokesman for the Remain campaign said: "The Leave campaign can't tell us what would happen if we vote to leave. At every point, they have admitted they 'just don't know'. Leaving Europe would be a leap in the dark that would damage our economy, lead to price rises and job cuts. That's why we will be spending the next two and a half weeks campaigning for every vote to protect Britain's future."
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36457120
- 6 June 2016
- From the sectionEU Referendum
Pro-Remain MPs are considering using their Commons majority to keep Britain inside the EU single market if there is a vote for Brexit, the BBC has learned.
The MPs fear a post-Brexit government might negotiate a limited free trade deal with the EU, which they say would damage the UK's economy.
There is a pro-Remain majority in the House of Commons of 454 MPs to 147.
A Vote Leave campaign spokesman said MPs will not be able to "defy the will of the electorate" on key issues.
The single market guarantees the free movement of goods, people, services and capital.
The BBC has learned pro-Remain MPs would use their voting power in the House of Commons to protect what they see as the economic benefits of a single market, which gives the UK access to 500 million consumers.
Staying inside the single market would mean Britain would have to keep its borders open to EU workers and continue paying into EU coffers.
Free trade area v single market - what's the difference?
Who has access to the single market?
How does Norway's relationship with the EU work?
Ministers have told the BBC they expect pro-EU MPs to conduct what one called a "reverse Maastricht" process - a reference to the long parliamentary campaign fought by Tory eurosceptic MPs in the 1990s against legislation deepening EU integration.
Like then as now, the Conservative government has a small working majority of just 17.
They say it would be legitimate for MPs to push for the UK to stay in the single market because the Leave campaign has refused to spell out what trading relationship it wants the UK to have with the EU in the future.
As such, a post-Brexit government could not claim it had a popular mandate for a particular model.
One minister said: "This is not fantasy. This is a huge probability.
"The longer we move away from the referendum, the more the economic pressures will grow to keep some links with the single market."
Another said: "We would accept the mandate of the people to leave the EU.
"But everything after that is negotiable and Parliament would have its say. The terms on which we leave are entirely within my remit as a parliamentarian and that is something for me to take a view on."
Image captionJustice Secretary Michael Gove has said he wants the UK to leave the single market
Labour frontbenchers say they have also been discussing the option.
One said it would be hard for pro-Brexit MPs to resist the Commons deciding Britain's future relationship with the EU, as it would demonstrate the principle of parliamentary sovereignty eurosceptics have been demanding for years.
One SNP frontbencher said: "Parliament is not going to let Boris Johnson and Michael Gove get away with murder. I just don't think people are going to roll over, particularly on our trading relationship with the EU."
Many pro-Leave campaigners support a limited free trade relationship with the EU, based on the deal about to be signed between Canada and the EU.
It would reduce some barriers to trade in basic goods but other areas - such as services - are largely excluded.
One alternative option put forward by pro-EU MPs would be for the UK to stay part of the single market by continuing its membership of the European Economic Area.
The EEA includes all EU countries, as well as Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland.
'Lose-lose situation'
The advantages of EEA membership for non-EU countries - known by some as the "Norway model" - include access to the single market without having to agree agriculture or fishing quotas, to cooperate on justice or foreign affairs, or be a member of the eurozone or the Schengen border-free arrangement.
The disadvantages include having to make a contribution to the EU budget, accepting the free movement of people, and having little ability to influence EU rules.
Stephen Kinnock, the Labour MP for Aberavon, said: "If the British people voted to leave the EU that's one thing.
"But can we really say that they voted for the devastation and destruction of the entire exporting sector of our economy? I don't think you can necessarily say that there's a democratic mandate for that."
But he warned there could be a constitutional crisis if MPs voted to keep Britain's borders open, something people would have rejected in the referendum.
"In a sense it's a lose-lose situation. I don't see how you untie that Gordian knot because you're looking at a massive economic crisis going down the track of the Canada model and a constitutional crisis going down the track of the Norway model."
Image captionIceland, alongside Liechtenstein and Norway, has negotiated access to the single market
Pro-EU MPs could use their voting muscle later this year when a post-Brexit Tory government would be expected to put its negotiating plans to parliament.
The government would struggle to negotiate with the EU if it could not secure the support of the Commons.
MPs could also bring pressure to bear once the withdrawal agreement has been settled and a huge amount of legislation would have to be changed.
The European Communities Act 1972 that took Britain into the EU would have to be repealed.
New Acts of Parliament would be needed to implement the withdrawal agreement. Acts that implement EU directives would need to be repealed or amended.
Thousands of EU regulations - that were automatically transferred into UK law - would have to be reintroduced, amended or allowed to lapse. And secondary legislation dependent on the European Communities Act would also have to be given new enabling laws.
Ministers say this process could take years and would provide determined pro-EU MPs lots of opportunity to cause trouble.
Charles Grant, director of the pro-EU Centre for European Reform think tank, said: "I think it is quite possible that Parliament would vote to impose the Norway model on a post-Brexit Tory government.
"Boris Johnson and Michael Gove are free marketers down to their finger tips and might be quite happy to be beaten up by Parliament and have this model imposed on them. They might protest but secretly quite like it. The pressure for Britain to retain some linkage with the single market would be overwhelming."
'Enormous pressure'
One senior Tory MP said: "There is all this talk of eurosceptics engaging in guerrilla warfare after a vote for Remain. It could be the other way round.
"The overwhelming majority of Labour, SNP, odds and sods and a hard core of Conservative MPs could make life very difficult."
Another said there would be "enormous pressure" from businesses to get "much better access to the single market".
One Labour MP added: "There will be as much fun and games as possible to stop it and block it and delay it."
Another said the government may try to get Labour to support an early general election being called, by voting to suspend the Fixed Term Parliament Act.
A newly-elected Tory government - potentially with a larger majority - would then have a mandate for its renegotiation plan.
Some pro-Leave campaigners also question how pro-EU parliament really is, suggesting that many MPs are backing Remain simply out of loyalty to David Cameron.
A spokesman for the Leave campaign said: "If you vote Leave, Britain will negotiate a British option which will end the supremacy of EU law and take back control of our borders and our democracy and our economy."
A spokesman for the Remain campaign said: "The Leave campaign can't tell us what would happen if we vote to leave. At every point, they have admitted they 'just don't know'. Leaving Europe would be a leap in the dark that would damage our economy, lead to price rises and job cuts. That's why we will be spending the next two and a half weeks campaigning for every vote to protect Britain's future."
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36457120
Cringe.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
So far we have one bunch of lying politicians arguing with another bunch of lying politicians, all supported by other groups of lying/paid for experts and other governments looking after themselves........ Vote leave and let's get our country sorted out again.......
dandydan
Player Valuation: £40m
I think chamberlain got a bit of a bum deal from history, we started to ramp up arms production in 1936 so he must have had some idea of what was coming an bought time at Munich.
Sorry for the off topic revisionist historian indulgence.
dandydan
Player Valuation: £40m
To make the French feel important.
dandydan
Player Valuation: £40m
Far right? pure hyperbole.
magicjuan
Player Valuation: £60m
Interesting piece, from the point of view of indoctrinated thought. Although it is worth noting that Christianity is a composite religion not a ready made societal panacea as the article suggests.
Historical sources detail small pockets of Christianity throughout th Roman kingdom, due to trade, slavery and general servitude. Then it was adopted as a state religion. The big bang moment, not slow demographic shifting but through imposition, and in a totally different form. The original christians the piece speaks of were nothing comparable to those spoken of and the further time shifted the further away from its roots it was. It became a political system imposing hierarchies and taxation.
This wasn't a stealth development at all.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
Is the correct answer.......
Clint Planet
Utter Cad.
Farage accused of racism again.
Clint Planet
Utter Cad.
PiS in Poland are demonstrating clear signs of fascism, sacking journalists in state TV, behaving unconstitutionally and accusing all and sundry of being communists. They're also closely aligned with the anti-Semitic Radio Maria.
My in laws, some of them in their 70s, take to the streets of Warsaw almost every Saturday in protest at their erosion of democracy in Poland.
Hyperbole? Nah. More like far-right apologism on your part.
dandydan
Player Valuation: £40m
Oh the irony. Imagine the left accusing opponents of following fascism and being anti semetic? Never happen in this country!
SNova
Player Valuation: £15m
Source?
- Status
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
