• yemmly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    And I’m supposed to believe people paid good money for a blowie from that face?

    Actually, nevermind, I believe it.

    • merari42@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      6 months ago

      I like Martin Luther’s polemic about relics: “How many pieces of the true cross are there in the world? How many thorns from Christ’s crown of thorns? How many nails from the crucifixion? There are enough nails to shoe all the horses in Saxony. And if all the relics of the saints were gathered together, there would be enough bones to build a ship and enough wood to boil all the water in the sea.”

      In that sense it’s one of Mary Magdalene’s many heads.

  • ProvableGecko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    6 months ago

    As someone who grew up in a Muslim country, I have to say, Westerners this is some weird shit man. Like, call the police weird. We are supposed to be the barbarians yet you get to have skull thrones and shit? WTF?

    • pyrflie@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Dude these sprang from Mesopotamian/Egyptian necropoli. This is a Mediterranean/Middle Eastern tradition springing from Egypt and Summer.

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      All the Abrahamic religions are death cults. It’s just as morbid as muslim sects that force women to dress head to toe black robes or w/e. The extremism just becomes part of the scenery when you’re around it, but it’s all objectively bizzare.

      Like think about it, these religions were literally invented by bronze age goat herds who thought the earth was flat and covered by a dome, and people in the modern day still believe in them. It’s literally group insanity.

      It would be like someone who still believes in the greek gods or something.

      • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        31
        ·
        6 months ago

        How to say that you have no idea about Abrahamic religions without saying that you have no idea about Abrahamic religions.

        The Bronze Age ended around 1200 BC. 1200 Before Christ. Most of the prophets of the Torah are estimated to have lived around 1000 BC up until Jesus was born. Mohammed s.a.s. lived in the 7th century AD.

        Also if your argument is that something originating in the bronze age is bad, i recommend you to stop using metal tools, eat bread and cultivated fruits. Obviously no beer and while you are at it reject math, astronomy and most of architecture. All stuff originating in the Bronze Age.

        • retrospectology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          35
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The Abrahamic religions are based on superstious oral traditions that extend into the bronze age. They are a hodge podge of cults and spiritual traditions that got absorbed as tribes genocided eachother over the millenia. Taking over a conquered group’s pantheon is a regular occurrence throughout history, similar to how the Romans took Christianity and adapted it. There are remnants in the torah/old testament of the stitching together of different polytheistic religious narratives that eventually became the Abrahamic traditions.

          I don’t really care about technical specifics of when any given era of the Abrahamic religions began, believing in invisible skymen is not the same as a material tool or a mathematical proof. It’s a bunch of bullshit stories people told eachother for why the rain fell or why lightning happened, it belongs in the past, there’s no excuse to still believe it now.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      The whole point of religion was to keep the psychopaths in control. Sometimes you had to throw them a bone to keep them in line.

    • The Dark Lord ☑️@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 months ago

      Chances are, it isn’t. The early Catholic Church did a lot of this kind of thing, where they would claim to have a piece of the cross, or a bone of St Peter in a church. It was just to drive tourism into their churches. If you took all the claimed pieces of the cross and assembled them, it would make far more than one cross.

      • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not only early, they did such things in medieval times too.

        Argh, what was it again. I’ve read about something the catholic church used in switzerland in 14. or 15. century for this.

    • pyrflie@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Considering Catholic practices only the stupidest adherents would. You betcha they pulled a bitch Roman Catholics hated out of Syria to enshrine in Rome 50 years after the fact; during a civil war.

  • Holzkohlen@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    Sure it is. Let’s just pretend there is no monetary incentive for a region to have a holy relic which brings them a bunch of tourism. Ain’t nothing holy under capitalism.

    • TurtleJoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Every single consecrated Catholic altar contains a relic of a saint. Usually they’re pretty small, maybe a piece of a fingerbone or something. You’re right that a good one like this would bring in lots of pilgrims (tourist dollars,) but it’s a tradition that way predates capitalism.

      I’m not in the business of defending the Catholic Church or capitalism, just wanted to clarify.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Socialists don’t see a fundamental difference between a king or church owning the means of production and a merchant/capitalist/whatever owning it, because there isn’t a significant difference. Adam Smith was observing truths on the nature of property ownership and how to increase the gains from such, not describing the idea of rich and powerful people owning property that would make them money by exploiting the value of labor. That idea is as old as agriculture.

        Where it might get tricky is if the gains from owning the “relic” were funding welfare programs/charity more than they were funding the excessive lifestyle of the clergy, but that’s not something Catholics are particularly known for living up to, responsible usage of tithes and actually following the precepts of ascetism in the clergy.