I have been studying the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom recently and absolutely fell in love with the diverse mix of cultures, religions and peoples that coexisted harmoniously on that ancient Post-Alexandrian succesor state, one of the most fascinating aspects of it was how Buddhism, Zoroastrianism and the Greek religion blended together and the same temples worshipped Zeus-Ahura Mazda with statues of Herakles and Jason as bodhisattvas. Why are abrahamists so opposed to this? Seems like absolutely the formula for harmonious religious coexistence and building of a joint pan-religious identity, why have abrahamic faiths to be so dogmatic and impose themselves when pre abrahamic faiths can so seamlessly and harmoniously blend?
>>18012857Syncretism is a last resort for when the ruling class is too outnumbered by the locals. Abrahamic regions usually don't have that issue, although the Caliphates and Catholics displayed some semblance of it
Blame Abraham (if he existed) he ruined everything
>>18012857Because they centered their religion around a strict cannon and a set doctrine, an orthodoxy, with any deviation being labeled heresy
>>18012918That's so lame and close minded, I can understand why it appealed to the low IQ slaves and dregs, the human refuse of ancient society. >>18012873He did not, he was a mythical ancestor like many in other faiths. >>18012868Can be also a resort when you want to rule disparate nations and think genocide is stupid (sane, because it is.), itbcreates harmony and social cohesion, pre abrahamism all empires had it.
>>18012857>Why are abrahamic religions so deeply opposed to coexistence and Syncretism?Because they make an exclusive claim to the truth.>Not only are we correct, everybody else is wrong.This conviction has proven to be truly potent in history.
>>18012945Genocide is not the only alternative to syncretism. In fact, it was rare in the past.
>>18012995I still prefer a system that lets ideas, peoples and religions to coexist than one which imposes its own onto others.
>>18013461Ok cuck.
