In China Mahayana the nirvana aspect of Buddhism was greatly appealing to some people but the idea of a foreign religion dominating in China made some people hate Buddhism. However, in this mix of people there were some people who were in the middle and felt neutral about Buddhism and its beliefs. There was a similar reaction in Rome with Christianity and its beliefs. Some people, mostly the lower class and Jews, found Christianity a way of escape and some even thought of as safety. On the other hand some people hated the beliefs of Christianity because it went against their norms and old traditions.
While Chinese initially accepted Buddhism and defended its policies, over the centuries others increasingly scrutinized Buddhism’s absence from past texts and used it as a scapegoat for political and social problems. When there was no empire to enforce laws, Buddhism gained popularity, but after imperial authority reemerged, Buddhism faced mounting opposition. An additional document that shows the actual numbers of converts to Buddhism during this time, preferably in a graph, would be useful in determining whether or not the worries of the authors in documents against Buddhism were grounded. For a few centuries after arriving in China, Chinese defended and supported Buddhism. Zhi Dun praised Buddhism as providing a path to nirvana, though as an upper class scholar who probably did not personally feel threatened by invading nomads, his testimony does not necessarily reflect the danger lower classes likely felt.
However, they did not follow the true Confucian philosophies. Instead, the emperor, Emperor Wu, had a very influential Confucian philosopher create a more emperor-centric base of Confucianism. Being forced to study a religion did not drive the Han scholars to work harder, they began to slack and almost
The attitudes of Christianity and Islam towards merchants and trade are different from one another in the beginning stages, but as time progress each moderate their earlier views. In the beginning Christians found it unfit to be a rich merchant, while Islam’s judgment on trade was acceptable as long as they were honest and the trading was just. As time went by over a couple hundred years, the followers if each belief changed their views on trade, though it was acceptable, merchants were expected to trade geniuses. In the beginning Christians found it unfit to be a rich merchant, while Islam’s judgment on trade was acceptable as long as they were honest and the trading was just. To sell a product for true value or to sell it for a profit has always been a debate.
However, Las Casas felt that the Natives should be treated equally, since he believed Jesus died for the Natives just like he died for the Europeans. He noted their sophisticated, very well-developed societies. When Europeans came into contact with Native Americans, they tried to spread Christianity and force Natives to convert to their religion. This is because people who sided with Sepúlveda felt that their religion was superior and wouldn’t ever fathom that they could adopt any of the Natives’ religions. Places in the “new world” that were under Spanish rule often were exceedingly religiously intolerant.
Christianity vs Greek Mythology Even though both Greek mythology and Christianity is still referenced to in today’s society, Greek mythology was a lot more corrupt allowing Christianity to last longer. The reason Christianity outlived Greek mythology was because Greek mythology had a numerous amount of flaws, was mainly used for scientific explanations, and caused false hope that’s based on a fantasized religion. Use the sources such as Antigone, the Bible, and Mythology: Times Tale of Gods and Heroes and other internet materials to debate the topic . Using examples such as how the Greeks believes how wheat and other crops were made to prove how in depth they would use their religion to explain how nature works. When simply describing the
Edward Gibbon, was a Modern historian of ancient Rome, his work has some extreme biases against Christianity but other than that he is thesis seems a little clouded to me besides the fact blaming Christianity for the on stability brought on to the ancient Romans. However, The point of view that he is trying to get across I also see his theories as being true just as much is Heather 's theories. Giddon, may not have brought up significant reasons behind the economic reasoning behind the loss but he did see barbarian tried as a force that needed to be dealt with early and often. But he does explain as well that the loss of the Roman military power was a major reason behind their lack a fight against these border tribes. Like Heather he brings
As it is advancing, the general public’s attention moves from agricultural society into more like a modern technology-based society. This progression changes the way individuals used to think and believe. As in the more established era, individuals have confidence in what they cannot see, for instance, Gods, which is the reason why Theism was so popular in the past. However, numerous scientists had come up with various hypotheses that clarify what individuals cannot explain and those speculations have also influenced many religions in negative ways, leading to certain groups of people into believing that Karma is just a superstition. Thankfully, Buddhism is a religion that does not concern deity and deals with causes and reasons, which sounds reasonable to this generation of human enough to be taken into consideration.
One of the main ways to encourage this growth is through the use of of art and architecture and Romanesque art is one of the most known. During this period architectural creation grew abundant and attracted many worldwide to make pilgrimages and see for themselves. Christians were especially enticed by the building of places such as St. Peter 's Basilica in Rome or St. James ' in Spain. These churches were not only architecturally significant but also
The article “The Puritans and Sex” and the article “When Cotton Mather Fought the Smallpox” both talk about how the Puritans did not have a lot of influence. Whereas The article “Persistent Localism” talks about how they did. The top two article gave a more compelling case then the bottom one because the bottom article talks about how the Puritans had central control of the religion but the top two article talked about how they had the central religion but they people didn’t always follow