<p>I think you sorta overlooked the point that was being made: How can we know it's the word of God? The Canterbury Tales is almost certainly unchanged from its original form, but it's by no means the word of God.</p>
<p>Just saying that the scripture states that it's the word of God doesn't exactly escape the allegations of circular reasoning either. Concrete proof?</p>
<p>Faith. And also, there are plenty of verses that could not have been written by an illiterate man 1400 years ago. Yes, I know you want solid proof. I will provide you with it, just not right now.</p>
<p>I'm aware that faith isn't considered proof, which is why I said:</p>
<p>
[quote]
And also, there are plenty of verses that could not have been written by an illiterate man 1400 years ago. Yes, I know you want solid proof. I will provide you with it, just not right now.
<p>Then why did you list faith as a reason to begin with, if you didn't expect scrutiny?</p>
<p>Who's to say that he wrote those verses? If we can't even prove that Shakespeare wrote some of his greatest works, how can we hope to prove the authorship of the Quran?</p>
<p>I am a theist, and I do not wish for this thread to be ended. Quite frankly, I am addicted to this particular thread. This thread is a lot better than the pointless threads on the High School Life forum, no es verdad?</p>
<p>Trancestorm,
I still deny that fact with a vehement passion. I find it quite difficult to believe that a religion would lead to the proverbial holocaust of the Aztecs/Mayas. Cortes, a conquistador, literally destroyed the Aztecs because of a pursuit of riches. I believe it has been acknowledged that disease from the Europeans led to the to major destruction of these people. How could the Bible have destroyed these folks.
The practices of the Aztec were gruesome. If anything, Biblical morals helped change these people.
In conclusion, my personal opinion would conclude this by saying that the Maya/Aztecs were extinguished because of a desire of personal gain and expansion of a world power.</p>
<p>Also, Trancestorm, have not hundreds of tribal people been extinguished by the result of colonization and expansion. Myriads of African tribes were eradicated because of colonization and expansion. Should we also blame the destruction of these people on Christianity?
It saddens me in our society today when it comes to atheism. Christianity has really become the scapecoat of all wrong doing and destruction in society.</p>
<p>If we are not allowed to blame the horrific acts perpetrated by people who were in fact Christians, then you should stop brings praising the Christians who you believe have brought "good".</p>
<p>Trancestorm: First of all, I have to say that the Aztecs and Mayans were not driven to extinction because I would not be here if they had been. You might want to correct that statement.</p>
<p>Of course, I am deeply aware of the encomienda system, the downfalls of Montezuma and Atahualpa. Like I said, the Church is not flawless and has committed several tragedies throughout its history. However, we have to distinguish between the Catholic Church and the Spanish conquistadors. They are not one in the same even though most of the Spanish conquistadors were Catholic. It was the SPANISH ARMY that established the encomienda camps and instituted slave labor and not the Catholic Church. </p>
<p>In fact, Pope Alexander VI prohibited the enslavement of the indigenous peoples of the Americas. The Spanish general disregarded the papal decree and enslaved the Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas anyways. Queen Isabella of Spain also decreed that the indigenous peoples were not to be enslaved. However, she died shortly after making that decree and her successors disregarded the papal decree and the Queen's decree. It was Cortez, Nuneo de Guzman and his generals who cowardly defeated the Aztec empire and enslaved its people. Keep in mind that Cortez only had to report to his monarch only that he had not enslaved the indigenous peoples. He only had to lie and he would have gotten away with it. The Spanish monarch caught on to Cortez's lies but refused to do anything about it because quite frankly the Spanish monarch (not the Catholic Church) had everything to gain from the enslavement of the indigenous peoples (IP). </p>
<p>Father Bartoleme de las Casas vigorously argued against slave labor and persuaded Emperor Charles V to ban slavery. Once again, the colonizers disregarded their monarch's decree. The emperor was busy fighting intense wars with other European powers and granted the violent colonizers a great amount of autonomy. In addition, to Father Bartoleme de las Casas, Archbishop Zumarraga and Vasco de Quiroga (bishop of Michoacan) received money from the Church to construct churches, schools and basic medical clinics to help the ailing indigenous population. Gradually, the conditions of the encomienda system were improved after a new viceroy was appointed for the management of New Spain (Mexico). The viceroy appointed government officials and parish priests to make sure that the slaves were treated fairly. The Church continued to try to convince the colonizers to ban slavery to no avail. So, they decided to help the Indians in what every way they could especially by overseeing their fair treatment. Finally in 1824, Mexico abolished slavery long before other nations.</p>
<p>Thus, the Church vigorously tried to abolish slavery and to protect and aid the IP. It was the Spanish colonizers that allowed their greed to trump their Catholic teachings.</p>
<p>The Spanish conquistadors were indeed Catholic and their actions were disgusting. However, we need to keep in mind that in the Catholic Church the actions and decrees carry more weight than those of a common layman. There is a well-defined hierarchy within the Church that assigns more importance to the actions and words of some over those of others. Popes carry the most importance because they are the ultimate leaders of the Church and in a sense speak for all Catholics. Over 500 years ago, Pope Alexander VI condemned slavery in all of its forms. However, the Spanish colonizers chose to disregard his rulings in order to economically finance their gold-laden coffers. How can you guys (except for Justinian I) say that the greatest reason for the Spanish colonization efforts was to spread Catholicism. Oh please. Economic, military and political reasons carried much more weight than any religious reasons in the Spanish expansion efforts. Yes, the Spanish were devout but not devout enough to spend the equivalent of BILLIONS of dollars to convert savages. If the Spanish were only there to convert the Aztecs/Mayas/Incas to Catholicism, then why didn't the Spanish just leave after converting them? Why did the start the encomienda system and other forms of slavery if not for economic reasons?</p>
<p>P.S. Justinian I: The Catholic Church believes that one attains salvation through FAITH in the Lord and through generous works. Jesus Christ was both faithful and generous (in terms of servitude to the poor and oppressed). Thus, we try to emulate the Lord in our commitment to faith and to community service and generosity. You might want to take a look at Catholic reference guides to find out about what we Catholics actually believe before you make such comments. But, I also agree that we should not regard the Catholic Church as the only church in all of Christianity. We should also respect the opinions and actions of the Protestant and Orthodox churches. After all, they cumulatively account for half of all Christians.</p>