I don't get it...

"History is but a myth, agreed upon"
Some Dude

 

...and knowledge is like the pollen of the flower, from it the bee makes it's honey and the spider it's poison". ~(unknown)

 

I'm a Christian and take my faith seriously. Much of it is founded on historical claims: Is it likely that the patriarchs were real? Did Exodus really happen? Did Jesus exist, and if so, did He do and say all the things attributed to Him? Did Paul invent Christianity? What about the Essenes, the Ebionites, and the Gnostics? Are the Gospels reliable? What about non-canonicalsources? How did the doctrines we recite in our creeds come to be? And what about the religions of other civilizations? None of this can be proven, and the methods of history are a far cry from rocket science. But if we do a lot of digging, we can make some informed bets. Or we can just take on "faith" what the Bible says, or what preacher Bob says it says. But can we really understand what the Bible is saying without knowing the historical context?

 

Yes history may help us understand why a good portion of the world subscribes to Christ over say the worship of Serapis and a Hellenistic Graeco-judean religious fusion over a Hellenistic Graeco-Egyptian one.

 

It isn't just religions that can only be understood if one has some knowledge of historical context. Everything has an historical context.

It's difficult at times to arrive at a satisfactory understanding of the world we live in with it's complex political, corporate, financial, religious, scientific and military powers. To have any chance at all in gaining any understanding you have to know some at least of the history of how all this has developed over time.

For the kind of person who just accepts culture in a passive way, it might not be of much use. But for anyone who has moved beyond the parameters of a more or less unconscious acceptance of things and wants to think for themself, even to see how their own attitudes have been formed, history is very useful.
All of the attitudes and beliefs and cultural norms that are put into us as children arose in a particular historical context. All these political, financial, philosophical structures we inhabit, as well as the actual places we live are the formations of layer upon layer of history. We are all products of our own epoch, but that epoch is itself the result of all that has gone before.
So I think you neglect history at your own peril.

 

It seems in your question you have provided the answer "if history repeats itself why can't we learn it when it repeats" = Obviously we don't learn, and the facts (or variation of such) require repetition!
In addition:
New is not always better the case - the foundation of which we live today is strong because of the sacrifices of those doing deeds in the past which should receive rightful acknowledgement
= methinks

 

That one's fairly clear ... the creeds are a collection of specific refutations of individual, identifiable heresies.

Trace the history of heresy, and offer it up against the development of the creeds, and you'll soon see a picture emerging :mickey:

 

we have to be taught lies about the past, so that people today can use them as excuses for repeating the really stupid shit that anyone with common sense would know better if they weren't being brainwashed by.

 

To know the past (as far as we can know it, that's why it is useful to continually reflect and review history and not assume it is a static thing just because it is 'done and over with') is to understand the present. If it doesn't interest you, fine. But that doesn't make it unimportant or useless for others or society in general.

 

History has always been interesting to me but I never fully understood its relevance until a European history course in college - the professor really focused on the historical significance of history. The tests consisted of explaining how a historical event or person shaped the world we live in today.

we don't learn history merely because it repeats itself, but because something that happened 1000 years ago can very well be the reason why the world is the way it is today. How can we understand anything going on today if we don't understand the historical relevance?

 

If nobody had any notice of history maybe we all would think Oscar4u makes sense.

 

Oscar4u made sense to me; even more sense that the history of recent times is not materially noted, and if it is ideally noted it is so because children died through their own choice much like dolphins beached themselves in New Zealand a decade ago. Such evocation appears as not mine but the worlds. I'm not being a positivist that this world is knowable, but I am being in a historical situation based on some vain ideal of the next generation's livelihoods.

 

No more delusions of post-modernism in the expectation of ethics of the consequence of uncontrolled growth.

 

but it is over rated what is expected of it. and it really is the reverse of the reason for forcing it down people's throats.

 

All history? And overrated expectations by who? It is good to point out that you're generalizing.

 

George Santayana said" Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it." Henry Ford said: "History is bunk." Who was right? Both. Who was wrong? Both. Let me start with a few examples of how history can have some practical use. i'm a Christian. My religion is important to me, and it's supposed to have an historical foundation. The Old Testament is the history and teachings of the Jews. The New Testament is the history and teachings of the early Christians. Did any of it happen? An easy way to solve the problem is to say "I believe!" Easy, but kinda dumb. I could get by with it. It's a free country, and lots of folks in it are taking that approach. But I keep running into these atheists and agnostics who keep telling me that it's all a bunch of hooey. The Jews "stole" the Old Testament from the pagans, the Christians "stole" the New Testament from the pagans, Jesus wasn't a real person, and the Christians started all or most wars (except for those started by the Jews or Muslims), etc. To make matters worse, the politicians have gotten into the act. Some tell me the United States was founded as a "Christian Nation", and non-Christians don't really belong here. Others tell me that all the founding fathers were secuar humanists or "deists", and wrote our Constitution accordingly. Any easy out would be not to give a rats ass, but these dudes are persistent. And then there are those characters on the "History" Channel, like the wierdo smiling at us in posts #53 and #54, who tell us that our civilization resulted from early contacts and settlement by aliens from outer space. He looks like he should know, since he's obviously not of this world. But there are others, many with Ph.Ds who insist it's all bunk. And there are still others who disagree which group of aliens it was. Was it the Anunaki from the planet Miburu who came to enslave our prehistoric ancestors to work in the gold mines. Or was it the Galactic overlord Xenu who brought beings from outer space here and blew them up, so that their spirits (thetans) now infest us and we have to shell out gobs of money to Scientologists to get rid of them? That could be important! So here I am, reading up on history and trying my best to figure out which historians are right--no easy task! But I find it all intriguing--more interesting than watching soap operas or reality shows on the boob tube.

 

And we have to actually work and study to be able to recognize that they are lies, and to figure out what the truth is. "Common sense" is an oxymoron.

 

this is absolutely true, and you and asmo are both completely right about it. if the things that happened to ordinary people, and cultures that were working just fine, or at least reasonably well, until some war came along and screwed them up, were actually taught, that they were actually given credit for studying, well that's one point. my other, is that when history is repeated, it is more often deliberatly by the myopically self serving, then through ignorance alone.