Blog VIb: my thoughts on The Great Awakening: Roots of Evangelical Christianity in Colonial America (Chapter 12 - Chapter 15)

These chapters really summarized many of the reasons for both my dislike for Evangelical Christianity and my admiration. Evangelical Christianity generally has no respect for other cultures and religions. This is shown in the fact that they want to convert all who are different then they. They automatically assume that their belief system is completely correct and everyone else’s is useless gibber gabber. However they do make one assumption I admire them for, they assume that everyone can go to hell. Now this might sound strange but it is that assumption that lead to later rights movements. You see that assumption means that everyone has a soul and is equal in eyes of God. This means that if there are any God given (or natural) rights then everyone has them. I firmly believe in the value truly equal rights so I guess I should admire the basic philosophy of Evangelical Christians. Now I kind of want to rant… so the part in ** is the rant skip it if you so wish. **Ok so Evangelical Christians know next to nothing about the original formation of their own religion… Way back in Rome. If the know the story then good for you if you don’t then here are a few links: (http://www.tcr.org/tcr/essays/Web_Constantine.pdf) (http://www.gotquestions.org/Constantine-Bible.html) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea) … as you can see the bible, or rather the new Testament was not exactly written by God or even by the direct followers of Jesus. But it is Evangelical’s assumption that if you do not believe in the New Testament and the Trinity you are going to hell (a really bad place if you listen to Dante), that motivates them to convert others (and to devalue those who refuse to convert). In other word they believe that everyone’s souls are equal…. But then the go on to say that their view of the higher power and the afterlife is the only one that is correct and what’s more is that their view if so correct that if you question it then you are most likely going to hell. I really think that this rant is poorly worded and not very thought out… but it is a rant so I guess that is ok. This rant is also not done... but I did run out of steam so I guess it is good enough for now.** Have a good day :)

Blog VIb: Summary of The Great Awakening: Roots of Evangelical Christianity in Colonial America (Chapter 12 - Chapter 15)

Chapter 12: The First Great Awakening’s individualist take on religion led to divisions in opinion in how a church should be run. This caused people to want to start their own church where they can worship the way they wanted to. Today that would not be a problem in the U.S. however back in the 1700’s starting a new church was viewed a radical act that would jeopardize the Christian order of society (paraphrased). In some states, laws were made to prevent such divisions however even the government could not contain the passion of the “radical itinerants” as such new churches were formed. Many separatists felt that anyone who felt the calling should become a minister, no matter their social rank, race, gender or education. This was of course regarded as extremely radical behavior by orthodox leaders, and was heavily frowned upon. In the end the radicals got their way and the protestant church was divided into many different branches within the same geographical area. It should be noted that Kidd talks about specifics in his work, however in this summery they will not be covered. Chapter 13: The radical evangelists that fueled the Awakening needed legitimacy inside the colonies and Great Britain, converting Native Americans gave that too them. The Manifest Destiny feeling inside the Christian Religion at the time called for the world to become Christian, it was the Radials progression in this field that gave them their legitimacy. This is best seen in a quote in Eleazar Wheelock: “Nothing can be more Agreable to our Christian Character tha[an to] send the Gopel to the benighted Pagans”. It was the lack of emotional outpouring in traditional Protestantism that caused their attempts at converting the Eastern Seaboard Native Americans to fail. The Radials however were all about a person’s emotional connection to God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit Chapter 14: This section mainly dealt with the development of philosophical constructs and their inevitable implications. Ideas such as the equality of all peoples’ souls exemplify such constructs. For instance this particular idea eventually lead to this reasoning: “If all souls are equal then God given rights such as liberty are also equal.” And this reasoning lead to the rights movement and conflict. But before this ideology got to that point in its development it called for the proselytisation of Africa and everywhere else that had not yet heard the word of God and thus were doomed to eternal hellfire and damnation. Inroads into the African culture were difficult for traditional Evangelicals to make however, for the Revivalists this was relatively easy. Thus, the Revivalists capitalized on their ideological advantage and converted as many Africans as they were able both in the Americans and in Africa itself. Much like in Rome this massive intake of new people from different cultures changed the Revivalist movement’s ideals helping to draw the revivalist’s movement’s leaders center stage for the Civil Rights debate. Chapter 15: This chapter deals with the specific events and debates that defined the ideological beliefs in Virginia. The most important deviation in Virginia form the rest of the colonies was that their Awakening movement started late (1740s) other than that their ideological development matched that of the colonies a whole.

Blog Vb: my thoughts on The Great Awakening: A Brief History with Document: Part 1, introduction

I feel as though the revivalist movement took advantage of group dynamics, the link between emotion and God, and peer pressure to push a religious viewpoint. I am not sure what to think about that. I mean at first glance it is amoral but the leaders of the movement felt that the majority of the population at the time was going to go the hell if the message was not spread and the ideas of the movement may have lead both to the civil rights movement and to the USA being its own country. So do the ends justify the means? After reading about James Davenport I hope to never talk in front of a crowd while having a major infection… I like to keep my pants out of the fire. I think it is somewhat ironic that many hardcore southern republicans who feel as if slavery is justified are also members of church that is the product of the Great Awakening, I wonder if they even realize. I find it worrying that a large number of people listened to and obeyed whoever had the best story about talking to God. I know someone who thinks that God talks to them; I would never want them to lead a mob… ever. I do not really agree with Mr. Kidd’s views on the connection between the American Revolution and the Great Awaking, at least I think that the 2nd full paragraph on page 24 is circumstantial evidence at best and probably does not belong in the book. My overall feel of the passage is that Kidd tried to portray an objective viewpoint and did a really good job for the most part. End personal notes

Blog Va: Summary of The Great Awakening: A Brief History with Document: Part 1, introduction

Thomas Kidd describes three keystone camps of the first Great Awakening: the “radicals” or revivalists, the moderates, and the anti-revivalists. Kidd brings to light several unsung social groups that influenced and participated in the Great Awaking including women, African Americans, and even Native Americans. He talks about the high and low points of James Davenport’s life as a religious leader. Draws the distinction between the first and second Great Awakenings (I did not know there were 2 before this reading). Kidd said the revivalist movement started in the 1720s with the call for more of the “Holy Spirit” in the protestant movement. Revivals were all about 2 things, religious fervor (Spirit) and the number of conversions. Detractors claimed that revivalists caused/had “overheated emotions” and that that would cause excess, chaos and heresy. Proponents or revivalism claimed that traditional preaching methods were “dull [and], uninspired” and thus just were not saving the people from hell. Both sides were for the most part very steadfast in their beliefs, this caused a division among the protestants of the day. Radical evangelicals believed in modern miracles and divine interventions widening the divide. This division lead to having different churches in the same geographical area, this put the government of that area in a compromising position. You see back then it was in many cases illegal to no go to and believe the doctrine of the officially indorsed church. In many cases, this conflict was resolved by running the new preacher out of the colony or town, but over time, this (and other things) lead to the legal separation of church and state. It should also be mentioned: The majority of revivalists did not really care about your race or sex, everyone was the same under the eyes of God. This idea lead to African American, and female religious leaders and possibly, many years later, the civil rights movement.

Blog IV part II

Really, nothing I did not know… Except I never thought about how the Americas caused so much inflation back in Europe. I mean it makes perfect sense. But I should get of the topic of Inflation I might start to rage about our current economy. I think it was nice that the book mentioned Leif Ericson, he is not mentioned enough. I thought what the Pope did was outrageous, and stupid to boot. Makes me wonder when the Church officially accepted the round earth theory. Wow, I guess I picked a boring topic this time… (Refer to my earlier post for some excitement)… I do not think that the Europeans were justified in their method of taking over; honestly, I do not know if I ever will. Sorry about my short part II hopefully my long part I helps (and maybe I will add to this post if my perspective ever changes). Off topic but worthy of adding, The Nun wars http://lmgtfy.com/?q=The+Nun+wars (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Nun_Wars)

blog IV part I

Author: Kevin M. Schultz Source: Hist2 Pages: 22-28 (my summary was too long so I had to cut it short) European expansion and exploitation by sea really started with Portugal’s Prince Henry the Navigator search for a ship passable way to India (A.K.A. The Orient). Vasco da Gama demonstrated the European view that God made the rest of the world for European’s pleasure when he said, “You owe great thanks to God, for having brought you to a country holding such riches!” By the 1500s the Portuguese had already started growing sugarcane in São Tomé setting up the world’s first recorded economy dependent on using African slaves as human harvesters. European nations, being the economically aware neighbors they were at the time, saw Portugal’s growing economic gains from using a mandate from heaven as an excuse to exploit tribal peoples and thought(after some prodding from Christopher Columbus), why don't we cash in on that too? So those countries politically and financially stable enough at the time, I mean that country (i.e. Spain), decided now was the time to find some relatively easily exploitable people or maybe even a new way to the Orient. Thus, Spain sent Columbus and his crazy ideas about the earth being round to sea with three ships, and on October 12th 1492 the islands now known as the Bahamas. Columbus of course thought he had made it to some odd part of India or at least Asia. Side note: Leif Ericson and bunch of Scandinavian explorers beat him to North America by about 500 years. Columbus eager to tell the world that he was not crazy and the world was actually round grabbed some local inhabitants, saying, “They ought to be good servants”, and some other “treasures” and headed back. Word of the western passage spread fast and soon every sailor was trying to get the cash together for a voyage. The first person to call the place a “new world” was Amerigo Vespucci, and that is how the Americas got their name (I do not know about you, but I think it is somewhat anti-climatic). Anyway there were so many people tossing their explore hats the metaphorical ring that historians call this period “the ‘Age of Exploration.’” After Columbus’ trip Spain, predictably, claimed all of North America and Portugal, predictably, said “No Way!” It almost came to blows, which might have saved the Americas from conquest for a bit longer, when the all-knowing Pope Alexander VI drew a North-South line on a map and said “Portugal you get all the stuff on the right Spain the stuff on the left.” I am guessing he was still struggling with the whole “the Earth is round” concept. This furthered the European idea that god was on their side and that the indigenous people were just sort of holding the land for them. Subsequently, Spain set out to found some colonies in North America, partially for the fortunes it should amass them and partially to say they did it before Portugal. This “began one of the bloodiest chapters in the world’s history”, the Spanish apparently brought some smallpox (and other things) to the New World party. The disease sharing that took place during that period of exportation, along with some warfare, killed as much as 20% of the world’s human population at the time. However, given that one of their settlements, Hispaniola, was producing $1 million worth of gold alone every year, we can safely say that Spain really did not care about the sudden decrease in population. With the triple threat of Guns, Germs and Steel, European nations encountered very few real military challenges in the warmer America’s (southern Colorado and south). Except, that is, when they decided to duke it out with other European nations (France V. Spain for Florida). Spain’s new found wealth caused quite a bit of inflation back home, this caused poor people to get poorer. Really poor people chose to move to the Americas for a better life (causing the cycle to repeat). Anyway, time for a vocab. word: The Columbian Exchange was the swapping of biological things of all sorts from Europe to Africa the Americas in trade. This included but was not limited by: Microbes, plants, bugs, viruses, people, pets etc. which of course killed more people and made more slaves. However, it can also be blamed for coffee and chocolate, so don't hate on it too much.