Atheist author explains how Christianity conquered Europe like Starbucks monopolized coffee

[rug]

Travis Gettys
30 Jun 2016 at 08:42 ET

A British author who angered Christians when he compared their religion to a virus has found an even more virulent analogy to explain how the faith spread throughout Europe.

Science writer Matt Ridley explained that Christianity spread across Europe and established a “monopoly religion” in much the same way that Starbucks — perhaps the only thing more contagious than infectious disease — has conquered the global coffee market, reported the Daily Mail.

“Religions are a good example of things that have taken a very specific form but have a sort of inevitability,” explained Ridley, a Conservative member of the House of Lords.

He examined his theory, which he explores in his most recent book, The Evolution of Everything: How Ideas Emerge, that history’s most successful trends came from the “bottom up” during this week’s Chalke Valley History Festival.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/atheist-author-explains-how-christianity-conquered-europe-like-starbucks-monopolized-coffee/

I put great stock in the speeches of a Conservative member of the House of Lords.

[msongs]

1. terror and fear, plus excommunication and murder. the priest class and the ruling class suppressing

the peasants.

[rug]

2. Do you consider a Conservative Member of the House of Lords to be art of the ruling class?

[Igel]

13. Much more than that.

Much more.

It spread by word of mouth for a while. As it spread, it assimilated to similar beliefs to make adopting it easier. At this point it was persecuted.

It became a state religion, but still first among equals. However, the official version continued to adapt and assimilate. It was only after it stopped adapting itself to local cultures and it was a means to power that a few other things happened.

First is that it was a means to success. You adopt Latin to advance. You adopt Xianity to advance.

Second, when there were enough adherents of sufficient stature other religions could have obstacles put in their way. Later, observance of the religion could be required. Note that merely being the state religion isn't enough--the Church of England is the state religion of Britain. Meh. When Vladymir I was baptized and brought Xianity to Kievan Rus', it's not like he forced massive conversions.

Russia, of course, is back to the point of putting obstacles in the way of other religions. Not to the point of banning them. The DNR has actively shut churches, and in Crimea unless you're not just Orthodox but the right kind of Orthodox you've had troubles worshipping.

This spread didn't stop local pagan customs from continuing. We know a fair amount of British and Russian pagan customs because of traditions documented in the 1800s. Divination, fertility rites, that sort of thing. At the local level, syncretism was a big thing. Continued to be in Latin America in the 1600s and 1700s, when it was not in vogue in Europe. And in the 1900s to this day in Africa and even parts of Asia.

This is much like how Islam spread, minus a lot of the "assimilating to" aspects. It spread by conquest, and didn't need the quiet spreading by word of mouth. It was advantageous to convert, as if the idea of a superior army's religion wasn't enough. Then when a sufficient number of people were converted and learned Arabic, Greek and Aramaic were no longer acceptable for public office, and you had to be Muslim (otherwise an inferior would have authority over a superior). It's really been church & state since its start. Tolerance was still the official word until a sufficient number of people were converts, then the Islamists consistently took over. Then it was time for intolerance, ghettoization, pogroms. Public observance of other religions was squashed until sufficient levels of obeisance and submission (the name of the game) were obtained; conversion from them blessed (but conversion to them punished). Preaching the "wrong" religion still got you killed under official sanction in Golden Age Iraq, Ottoman Turkey, or Golden Age Andalusia. Beheaded, actually, because "striking the neck" was the punishment--it could be ritual, as a sign of servitude, or lethal. And can still get you killed today, except now a lot of folks can't figure out the whole beheading thing.

[struggle4progress]

3. The Christianization of Europe took about a thousand years: progress was complicated

and quite local

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Assuming you were being sarcastic, why did you start this thread?

It's an odd thing to do - post a link and then say "it's not worth paying attention to". You know you're not honour-bound to post everything that turns up from an 'atheist' keyword news alert, don't you?

[rug]

5. My, did you read "it's not worth paying attention to"?

What assemblage of pixels led you to that, muriel?

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. It's the one comment of your own you put in your own OP

As I said, I assume you were being sarcastic; that you were really saying that you don't put much stock in what a Tory lord says. If you were being straightforward, then say so - because it would be a remarkable change of view for you.

It's strange, and a waste of everyone's time, to post something that all you have to say about is "I don't think much of it". There are all kinds of things going on in the world that we don't think much of; why bother trying to post them with just that as a comment?

[rug]

8. No, that's not my comment at all, muriel. It's yours.

As a matter of fact I pay very close attention to what right wingers say. I simply do not give them credence. That's the exact opposite of your churlish inference.

What is odd is you spending time telling me what I didn't say and then suggesting it is I who am wasting people's time.

Maybe you'd enjoy spending your time on that thoughtful thread equating religion with mental illness. I'm sure you won't find a single comment there that is not a waste of DU's bandwidth.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Strange that you claim you pay close attention, when you've never commented on Ridley before

despite him coming up on the board many times. Strange that despite you not giving him credence, you think it's worth reporting what he says at a Daily Mail-sponsored festival, when all you're doing is giving his opinion publicity. Strange that it's a minor opinion on the past development of ideas, and the spread of Christianity in Europe, that you've publicised (without actually commenting on it - it's just an ad hominem, really), rather than a political, social or economic opinion of his.

If your claim is that you posted this because you monitor the public writings or speeches of British Conservative lords, perhaps you could point to all the other threads by such lords that you've started? You could even give an opinion on one beyond "it's a Conservative lord, so it's not important".

[rug]

10. Strange that you're giving such thought to what you think I'm thinking.

I would be flattered were it not so creepy.

Here's a thought, muriel. Why don't you just state what it is you're itching to say?

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. I've said it: you've started a thread saying the article isn't worth paying attention to

and without giving any opinion of your own on the subject of how Christianity did spread. Your thread was designed to be pointless.

[rug]

12. And I've said, "What assemblage of pixels led you to that, muriel?"

Yoiur opinion of what you think I've said does not create reality.

And to be precise, my comment was about a Conservative member of your House of Lords.

[cleanhippie]

15. It wasnt designed to be pointless, it was designed to be flame bait.

[rug]

16. Like this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218231415

[goldent]

7. He needs a better analogy

as I think Starbucks is very far from having monopolized coffee.

[rug]

14. He's also a notorious climate change denier.