The debate "The form of government could have affected the way Christianity developed" was started by
November 1, 2015, 12:11 am.
10 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 2 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
Lane posted 2 arguments, historybuff posted 2 arguments to the agreers part.
Lane, TheChosenProphecy, historybuff, Yuki_Amayane, sophistry, Nethersquid, pajrc1234 and 3 visitors agree.
windu2420 and 1 visitor disagree.
Yeah. I was pondering this. Society probably first became organized under "kings" because it is natural for one person to rule the pack. In nature, animals challenge the leader of a pack if they want to become the leader. There never was a a group of lions that got together to decide where to go for food or something, it was always one person. The same went for early humans, and that turned into royalty, where it became wrong and almost unnatural to challenge the leader, or king. This is what could have been transposed to Christianity and other religions. God would have become the kingly figure that you did not challenge.
If democracy had been the main form of government though, would humans believe that there is more than one Christian God ruling everything? The Ancient Greeks had the first basic form of democracy, and their religion had a council of Gods.
the very top down way the church was (and is) oriented certainly affected the way the church developed. it made the church reactionary and suppressive.
the question isn't about in the beginning when they were under the Romans. it is more about when Christian feudalism sprang up. from shortly after the Romans up until the fall of the Christian monarchies, Christian people were ruled by kings. the debate is about whether Christianity would be different if they hadn't been kings, but another form of government. correct me if I'm wrong lane.
I think, before christ because God did not want kings a democracy would have worked the best. the isrealites would not have had bad kings to thow them off. their faith would have been stronger, and the nation closer to God.
Christianity after jesus would have been disliked and outlawed in a democracy too. most romans were pagan, so in a democracy vote, pagans win. no change there.
that's an interesting question. kings certainly used religion to suit themselves. for example if was generally accepted that kings ruled by divine right. it also left a single person at the top to enforce church doctrine. both the pope and king. democracy might have allowed other ideas to exist without immediately trying to destroy them. Christianity might have become more tolerant.
I am interested in what others might think of this... In Christianity, there is an obvious hierarchy, with God at the zenith. God is often portrayed as a king. The word "throne is often associated with God. Maybe there is a correlation between these royal portrayals of God and the form of government that functioned in the time that the major events in the bible took place.
If you agree, then my question would be to you, what would have happened if democracy or other more modern forms of government had existed in biblical times?