[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement:
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 05:49:18 02/15/08 Fri
Author: Joan
Author Host/IP: ip68-0-253-131.ri.ri.cox.net / 68.0.253.131
Subject: 
Revise History?
Another post brings up this question about revising history. Do you have an opinion on revising histor-- meaning to do more research, incorporate new findings, and publish the new information.
I disagree with putting a modern spin on ancient facts, which is why it's important to understand context. Not understanding context makes it easy for the propagandists to do their job. Without understanding legal, political, and social context, and particulary that secular courts were more brutal than inquisitorial courts, it's easy to mistakenly believe that the inquisitions were something out of the ordinary (and worse) in their time.
The "history" of the inquisitions sorely needed revising, since it was lies that people were learning.
If we kept the history of the US intact, as it was originally written, what would we know of early European settlement? What would we know of Native Americans and their history? There are plenty of "facts" that have been turned over by research.
I guess there are the facts as we know them. And then there is the truth. Good history tries to find facts that are also true.
Fact. Columbus landed in Asia.
I think we all agree that that historical fact was rightly revised. :)
And who writes there histories. Certainly Germany needed to revise its history books post Hitler.
And what of the Muslim countries who are using textbooks with questionable facts. Don't those histories need to be revised?
If no one can revise history, Germany would still be teaching its children racism. And what of the Muslim children? And some Asian children?
There is a lot of junk history out there that needs revising. Here, we're talking about the history of the inquistions and the history of the myth that's know as The Inquisition.
Maybe people just don't want to do the work. They learned what they learned, and that's all they know. Like it's their story and they're stinking to it. Don't rock their boat with such a little thing as truth. :)
Joan
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Replies:
[>
Re: Revise History? -- Phil from AZ, 09:27:59 02/15/08 Fri [1] (71-223-7-96.phnx.qwest.net/71.223.7.96)
Revisionist history is not the same as 'revised' history. Revisionist history implies that history is changed to suit an agenda. Revised history takes new facts, based on scholarship, into acct. Of cse, I spt revising history if you have a new set of facts, based on docs, testimony and archeology. For example, Schliemann (spelling) set out to find Troy. Some in the archeology field thought he was a nut. He found so many sites in what is now Turkey that he's considered an immortal in the archeological community. So there is a difference.
If you want to refer to folks who are lazy and un-cultured, perhaps you should check on some of the 'usual suspects' and the self-annointed Oracles of Delphi on other forums. One was so narrow-minded that she thought that other countries celebrated all American holidays. She also thought that Canada was a US State. Another didn't even know that we have 37000 brave men and women serving in Korea...and ridiculed me for being elderly...as if I served in Korean War. Another person claimed that my short story did not exist, even though a couple thousand people in Brit and Ireland knew that it did. One guy questioned my patriotism, even though he never served a day in military. Another considered joining Scientology cuz a nutty Hollywood type looked so happy on TV.
These are just a few incidents of things I observed from laziness...folks typing b4 they check what they're saying. If it wasnt so amusing it would be sad. So, just cuz I question 1 of your assertions hardly makes me lazy. I have studied these subject for a long time and I am wary of overturning well-researched beliefs.
The red flags went up on this Madden guy when he said that 'only 1%' of people were tortured, maimed and murdered. Those kind of stats concern me, when we're talking abt thousands of people. The fact is that the Church used intimidation to keep people in line. Any dissent was met with immense hostility. As in Totalitarian societies, this is effective to a point. It also explains why there are so many Atheists in the world.
As for being a disgruntled Catholic, its more that I just found something better in Prot'sm. LoL. Take care, God Bless,
Phil from AZ
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: Revise History? -- Joan, 03:56:53 02/16/08 Sat [1] (ip68-0-253-131.ri.ri.cox.net/68.0.253.131)
We all know the people you are talking about. And we know that you were banned from those sites. So please keep your discussions here respectful to *all* who post here, and to those who may be lurking.
Talking about people isn't respectful.
Still, your credentials look a little sad compared to Maddens. You have to agree on that fact/truth. ;)
I'm glad you've found something that you think is better for yourself. Good thing this country is still free, and we don't all have to be one religion.
Which branch of Protestantism did you choose? What made you pick that one, over all the others?
Joan
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Then we agree? -- Joan, 04:08:02 02/16/08 Sat [1] (ip68-0-253-131.ri.ri.cox.net/68.0.253.131)
"Revised history takes new facts, based on scholarship, into acct. Of cse, I spt revising history if you have a new set of facts, based on docs, testimony and archeology."
We agree on revising history. Unfortunately, in your knee-jerk reaction to new (to you) facts on the inquisitions, you called that scholarship revisionist.
When people don't like what they're hearing, when it upsets their world view, they get a little cranky and defensive.
Historians are supposed to try, to the best of their ability, to be impartial. And you say you have a history degree. But you have such a bias against the Catholic Church, and your reaction to a statement that the inquisitions aren't what you thought they were was so strong, that you called it a revisionist idea!
You were calling the more unbiased historians' valid work revisionist, while you choose to hold on to an invalid set of "facts" that are known only from propaganist literature. (And there's been a lot of it!)
Remember, you're not the only one who hates the Catholic Church. You don't have a unique view because you used to be Catholic. Some of the most notorious anti-Catholics (and atheists for that matter) were former Catholics, disgruntled as you are. You're not the first to insist on calling lies about the CC truth, not by a long shot. They've been working at their literature for centuries.
I have some of the more recent pamphlets right here!
We all know that you can't beleive everything you read. But print a lie about the CC, and everyone is willing to believe. That actually says more about the reader than it does the writer.
Joan
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
For sale on eBay now. -- Joan, 04:24:26 02/16/08 Sat [1] (ip68-0-253-131.ri.ri.cox.net/68.0.253.131)
http://www.novemberfire.com/shirtspopup/NFTpop231.gif
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Now, we're all about spreading the truth -- Joan, 04:34:06 02/16/08 Sat [1] (ip68-0-253-131.ri.ri.cox.net/68.0.253.131)
and stopping the liars in their tracts. But if you want to help them out by continuing to support the lies and propaganda, visit this site. There is even a little "How to" link at the bottom of the page.
Just remember, if you don't want to look like an idiot, check the facts in the tracts. If you come upon a Catholic who will actually talk to you, you're going to look mighty foolish trying to explain why you're handing out lies, and why you don't know the truth when it's even more readily available than these tracts. Good luck. :)
Joan
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0074/0074_01.asp
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
