Talk:Christianized sites

This page needs rewriting. At the moment it is stuffed full of POV stuff which is simply not true, and which quite a lot of people know is not true. I have made some minor deletions of crassly mistaken material, but it still needs a complete rewrite. A genuine page on churches built on the sites of temples would be most interesting, of course. What we do not need, surely is a piece asserting "Christianity=paganism" and decorated with a few bits of hearsay. This is what we have at the moment. Take the assertion out, I suggest, and put more facts and references in.

I have deleted the assertion about Origen and Contra Celsum -- it contains no such passage.

Material about the supposed Mithraeum on Vatican hill has been examined lately in [Internet Infidels] and shown to be bogus -- no Mithraeum was ever built there -- and arising from confusion with the adjacent Phyrgianum.

There is a picture of Helios (NOT Mithras!) in one of the tombs, which needs to be retained. But it can't be Sol Invictus -- the tomb dates to 250-ish, and Sol Invictus was only created in 274. I'm not sure how to rewrite this text to conform to reality, so have left it alone.

Roger Pearse 15:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The Vatican section... Come again?

The section on the Vatican reads like it came from the POV pen of Loraine Boettner himself. I don't know how much fact there is behind this, but I do know that it's an ineffective way to attack Catholicism -- there's no tradition that I (a pretty well-educated cradle Catholic) know of that links the legitimacy of the Catholic Faith to the presence of St. Peter's bones under the Vatican, though I seem to remember hearing that Boettner tries to make some hay on the subject. This section needs a rewrite by someone who has an axe to grind with neither Catholicism nor Mithraism, and the original author seems to have had a vendetta against both. (As to Sol Invictus, he's an interesting subject but a rather flimsy stick to bash much of anything with: first appearing around 200 as the borderline-self-deification of the Romans' Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and generally closer to Mithraism and Christianity than to ancient Rome in 'tone' -- not a god Gibbon would have approved of, I think. Halos, by the way, are hardly unique to the West.)

I don't imagine anyone is seriously watching and looking to argue about this page, so I'll see about researching and rewriting it further (I've already done some copy-editing); this is certainly a subject worthy of effective coverage... ExOttoyuhr (talk) 21:13, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

summit cross

Christianizing the site is the essential point of the erection of a summit cross, which has no other purpose. However, User:Bermicourt, the owner of that article, has done me the discourtesy of reverting my edit, mentioning Christianizing the site. --Wetman (talk) 08:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Merged content from Conversion of non-Christian places of worship into churches. Mannanan51 (talk) 16:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Christianized sites. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:27, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the title Christianized sites?

Other articles about the conversion of notable places of worship from one religion into another follow a consistent format. I found articles on Conversion of non-Islamic places of worship into mosques and Conversion of non-Hindu places of worship into temples, yet this article is titled Christianized sites. Why isn't this article titled Conversion of non-Christian places of worship into churches?