General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Sky News Australia
comments

Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "Dominic Perrottet ‘targeted’ in media ‘largely on the basis of his Catholicism’: Kenny" video.

@wh5186 Could you give me an example of one of those Judeo-Christian values please.
3
Would that be the religious and moral history that relegated the indigenous population to sub human for the most part of our Judeo-Christian settlement?
3
Interestingly a considerable amount of criticism by the right wing of Julia Gillard was because she was a declared atheist. They never said it but was certainly implied.
3
@simplesimon182 And he has survived numerous rapture forecasts, he/she must be a tough buggar.
3
I would prefer a substantial intellect and a scientific approach to decisions rather than blind faith.
2
@maxstrength2963 This is an old one as easily debunked. The legislation introduced under the Gillard government the clean energy bill which temporarily placed a price on carbon and then evolved into a emissions trading scheme. Tony Abbott falsely labelled it a carbon tax and both Peta Credlin and Tony Abbott have admitted this on the public record. As well Gillard had always publicly campaigned for a carbon emissions scheme. You like many others were sold the lie easily, probablely because she was an atheist.
2
@mitchellcotton7346 Enjoying yourself?
2
@SuperEdge67 And there you have it. Too equate consensual sex between two adults with sexual abuse of children and defend that argument neatly sums up all that is foul with the Catholic Church. And K G can't even see it.
2
@playasurf1000 What you have said is a cheap shot at certain elements in society. No scientist has said men menstruate as women do. Sexual dysphoria is a real thing. Sexual function however is pretty fixed you can play around cosmetically with the organs but once your born a man you cannot be given a working set of ovaries. As well a woman may cosmetically be given a penis and testicles but they won't function to produce sperm, and a prostate is needed to produce seminal fluid, not now anyway, maybe in the future. I have no idea what this has to do with a scientific approach or method being applied to the running of government. The advances we have made and the comforts our society enjoy are almost entirely science based.
2
@PJRayment I have provided accurate references to slavery and subjugation of women your failure to understand the context they are written in is further proof you are not engaging in an open manner. You only reinforce my argument when you subjectively dismiss bible teachings as they don't apply to me. Which goes directly to my original point. You may not understand that but everyone else reading this will. In making a distinction between pre Christian and modern western world instruction you once again completely reinforce my point of subjective interpretations of bible. I assume nothing about bible teachings and you absolutely prove my argument again by stating an instruction once given can be reminded. Which clearly proves my comment about how the bible has been interpreted differently throughout its history. You really are making this wonderfully easy. So in conclusion you have on multiple occasions applied your subjective interpretation as have I as have numerous church theologians and there isn't even a general agreement on that hence over 50000 different Christian denominations. All there is, is just subjective interpretations that have changed with time as our own moral conscious has developed. You have managed to completely falsify your your original point of sensible Christians not changing church teachings by publicly stating in this discussion that's exactly what has happened throughout bible history. Game set and match over. That was fun.
1
@CA-cv7te Understanding sometimes get lost. I knew you were joking and was responding with a laugh out loud lol. I am with you Western civilisation is coping a bit of a caning at the moment and I am a big fan of modern western secular liberal social democracies like Australia, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, France, UK I just would never use the phrase Judeo-Christian to describe them as I believe it is just not even remotely accurate. It has been a good discussion though with you, respectful and polite. Thanks.
1
@Timbuctoo What I was emphasising was the clear fallacy in your argument, and in your reply you unknowingly doubled down on it. It is called a "no true Scotsman" and is a logical fallacy in argumentation that renders your statement fallacious and nonsensical. Penny Wong while not public about her faith very much impressed Greg Sheridan when he interviewed her for his book. He was taken by her deeply felt beliefs. Your fallacious statement is the reason why there are thousands of Christian denominations all claiming to be the correct one. Not only was your statement divisive it was worthless and fallacious as well.
1
@Timbuctoo I made no argument, all I showed publicly on this forum was the total fallacious nature of your statement. You dug a hole, then continued digging and with your last reply buried yourself under a pile of subjective opinion for which you have decided is the one truth. A classic appeal to impurity and utterly nonsensical. Your statement is just one long logical fallacy, but please continue to embarrass yourself publicly.
1
@Timbuctoo Just a minor point. Your bible clearly states the penalty for homosexuals is death by execution, by your own standard you aren't a Christian either, and don't get me wrong I am not encouraging you to, but you clearly are not faithful to the text either. Just another fallacy in your statement, or heaven forbid interpretating your bible by editing out all the bits you don't like and just subjectively keeping the good bits. But please continue.
1
@Timbuctoo No, nice try though, good deflection. Leviticus 20:13 It's disgusting for men to have sex with one another and those who do will be put to death, just as you deserve. I know you wouldn't do this as you are a good person and you will find a way to interpret this so as you not need to act in this way. Your argument will be well that's for Jews which is just a subjective opinion. I am not remotely concerned about what God decides only how humans behave in reality. Your bible has spread hate and division for close to 1800 years. Christians repeatedly reinterpret the writings to conform with the morals of the day as they evolve. You aren't a Christian either as you have modified and interpreted the bible to suit your own personal moral position, because you are a good person, in despite of your Christianity. Exodus 21 Leviticus 25:44-46 Ephesians 6:5-8 Timothy 6:1-2 Are all references to the bibles advocacy of slavery, which you and I both know is immoral. Neither of us practice this abhorrent practice yet your God says go ahead these are the rules. Your not a Christian just a good nice moral person who for whatever reason needs to cling to a text written and assembled 2000 years ago by persons we don't know in a ancient Greek language 100 years after the alleged life and death of a jesus character. I understand that is a quite a few points but my replies to you have been deleted by the moderater of this page for reasons I can't explain so I have put this all in one reply instead of several small one. My apologies.
1
@maxstrength2963 You haven't read or understand the legislation that was the clean energy bill or the difference between a price being the amount of money you pay for something and a tax which is a compulsory contribution to a government.
1
@PJRayment The same reasoned approach to homosexuality, women's rights, blasphemy laws. Modern science came out of the enlightenment 1700 years after the beginnings of Christianity. Christianity had nothing to do with it. Modern science evolved in spite of Christianity as it did in many other religious and non Christian cultures.
1
@KG-wd9rg You seem to have little understanding of science and its methods.
1
@maxstrength2963 You clearly have not read or understand the Clean energy bill. You can't point to a single fact that I have stated that is incorrect just a general I'm right and your wrong narrative that is fairly useless. State one fact I got wrong.
1
@PJRayment Science predates any Judeo-Christian influence by 500 years with the Ancient Greeks the individuals you take about are Renaissance scientists. Modern Western science didn't come about till the influence of secular philosophers during the enlightenment. This is really schoolboy stuff and is covered in the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Oh I agree Christian scholarship believes everything is based on a God without a shred of evidence. Rodney Stark is a respected academic but I can't take a apologist for creationism seriously. Using reason and logic to form an opinion is one thing, but taking the Ancient writings from a deeply flawed and contradictary text to believe there is god and what that God decides is moral, is dissolving one's personal responsibility.
1
@PJRayment The AMA are left wing? The AMA are one of the most conservative associations in the country. Two of their President's of recent have been Liberal politicians. It has a history of attempting to stem the tide of change in the health care system and fought voraciously against a universal health care system. To say it is left wing says more about where you sit on the political spectrum than anything else. Just guessing but would you be a neo-facist, alt-right, theocratic, ultranationalist kind a guy by any chance?
1
@maxstrength2963 No I fully understood the intention of the clean energy bill. So your criticism is incorrect. You have been completely unable to justify your original comment and I have disproved all your subsequent replies. I can only speculate but I'm betting it was not the perceived lie about carbon tax that really irked you but more the Gillard government success in lowering carbon emissions (2012-14 2% to a ten year low) that really galls you.
1
@DD-bx8rb Considering that a full third of all fertilised eggs are flushed out in the menstral cycle before reaching the Fallopian tubes it's a bit rich to describe abortion as ripping out a child with a beating heart when your god has destroyed a third of humanity before it even got a chance to have a heart beat.
1
@DD-bx8rb No I was very careful in quoting the science. I said a fertilised egg which is a zygote and the beginning of human life and this fertilisation takes place in the Fallopian tube, the zygote then has to move down the tube and bury itself in the uterus. During this process throughout human history something like over 250000 years a full third of human life has been washed out in the menstrual cycle. I can't imagine how many billions of humans have died this way but If that your Gods idea of a good reproduction system then it has no claim on perfection, and you certainly have no right to criticise a woman who seeks an abortion. And as usual when faced with the truth a good Christian always turns to personal abuse.
1
@DD-bx8rb Why would I suggest it is a giraffe a zygote is a human life, and your argument is your god can abort and murder billions of human lives, slaughtered unnecessarily, and yet you are passing judgement on a single woman who for whatever reason decides not to carry a child to full term. Total and utter hypocrisy of the highest order and completely contemptible, shameful and without any moral standing whatsoever.
1
That's all sensible Christians have been doing for 2000 years. Do we force nuns back into full habit with just the outline of their face and hands visible as the Ursuline nuns dressed when they taught me back in the 60s? Do we go back and only have priests say the mass in Latin? Do you restart gaoling people for blasphemy or worse? Let's go back a 1000 years, when there was no such thing as democracy only church approved Theocracies is that your prefered system of government. The only thing that has saved Christianity has been its ability to adapt and modify its teachings to modern society. You may wish to modify your clearly uneducated history of Christianity and Catholicism
1
@PJRayment You are just denying reality and picking up on a minor technical point. Your merely interpreting the bible to suit your own morality. The bible has specific laws on blasphemy and dress, the mixing of certain fabrics is outlawed and women should only pray with a veil, so don't be so disingenuous that only your interpretation of the bible is the right one or other interpretations haven't been Christian or church teachings.
1
@PJRayment So slavery is back in then, because there are very specific laws that advocate slavery. What about eating camel, prawns, lobster, mussels are they all out again or were they ever in? Out goes Democracy and back comes Theocracy which the bible strongly advocates for which is where priests rule in the name of God. As the papel states in Italy 756-1870 CE. The early days of Mormonism or Tibet while not a Christian Theocracy was ruled by Buddhist monks in the 13th Century CE. It that the path you want to go down? I'm sure you would prefer the teachings of the bible about women taking part in church. Oh that's right there not allowed. Generally women and children are treated as property with few rights. Now I know this is all ridiculous and you do to, and it has been a gradually increasing secular society that has meant progressive Christians have had to adapt their religion to maintain relevance.
1
@PJRayment There are specific laws in Leviticus that give the death penalty to whoever curses God. It is disingenuous to suggest that they don't exist. Is that a law that should be reinstated?
1
@KG-wd9rg And that is fine for any religion to do, just don't expect it to be respected or have any influence by mainstream society.
1
@KG-wd9rg I'm not sure what you mean, but please enlighten me with your prefered system of government.
1
@PJRayment You have reached the height of absolute wilfull ignorance by selectively quoting from a bible you clearly have not read. I won't bother quoting numerous verses as it would be pointless you need to read your bible in full not listen to whatever preacher or pastor is feeding you lies. Or you are being deliberately disingenuous as you have realised your argument is so pathetically weak. I will assume it is the former. Who decides what is an instruction to be followed and what is merely a guide. Go read these verses. Ephesians 5:22-24 1Timothy 2:11-15 1Corinthians 14: 33-35 Colossians 3:18 Peter 3:1-6
1
@PJRayment I'll take my definition of Theocracy from the Oxford dictionary not your interpretation.
1
@PJRayment So it is mixture of willfufull ignorance and deliberate disingenuousness you have opted for. If you know your bible so well it would be you quoting the verse references about slavery, blasphemy, clothing restrictions back at me. Please deny there isn't. What the is a strawman question? You stated not everything in the bible is an instruction and I ask and who decides that? No strawman there I was merely seeking clarification. Please deny there is not a verse telling people not to eat shellfish. Exodus 21 1-10 Leviticus 25: 44-46 Leviticus 11: 9-10. Your bible is either the inerrant word of God that is not to be interpreted but adhered to or it isn't and we interprete it with all our human failings and just take the good bits out and modify and adapt it as we evolve our moral sense. You may have a other options, but my second option is obviously the reality
1
@PJRayment The five references were all to the subjugation of women not to all the various laws. It's your bible you should know it better than me. How could you possibly misinterprete 1 Timothy 2:11-15 Women who claim to love god should do helpful things for others and they should learn by being quiet and paying attention. They should be silent and not allowed to teach or tell men what to do. And you just dismissed that be saying nothing here but a stretched reference to learning. At this point you are either and I suspect not remotely genuine or so blinded by a faith in a God as to make any further discussion pointless. You would really need to pull something from somewhere to make me believe you have really been discussing in good faith/trust.
1
@maxstrength2963 It is you who took the Abbott lie of a carbon tax hook line and sinker, and you call me naive.
1
@PJRayment This is fantastic every time you reply with your subjective opinion you expose the vacuousness of your position. Go back and read my comments I gave you multiple references to laws advocating slavery in the bible you just conveniently glossed over them. Every other person reading this exchange can easily see when you are stuck and realise you are wrong you just claim and objective fact. Which is just so beautifully rich after you commented how could you possibly misinterprete 1 Timothy 2:11-15 with I guess what you says goes. Are you even reading what you write? All you have done is emphasise the contradictions in all your previous comments. I can't help you twisting your argument around to support my original point you did that yourself, but please keep agreeing with me and supporting my argument.
1
@PJRayment Multiple references to the subjugation of women and slavery have been ignored as you claim with total obliviousness the total objectivity of your opinion which simply bears no concept to the reality of Christian history. Your wilful ignorance and sheer arrogance in your standard response to references that expose the hypocrisy of your statements/comments "I reject that" is childlike in its simplicity. Restating comments that I have shown to be false again is childlike in manner. I have contradicted nothing, and I'll tell you what I find highly offensive is blatant wilful ignorance to a deeply flawed document, full of abhorrent practices, that however does have some redeeming teachings/values, and the idea that you are the sole arbiter is reprehensible. Ephesians 6:5-8 Colossians 3:22-24 Colossians 4:1 1 Timothy 6:1-2 All are New testament examples of how slaves and slave masters are to behave. None of them clearly condemn the practice. Personally if I was whipping up some commandments I would have dumped any of the first four and chucked in, Don't own people as property under any circumstances. Don't rape anybody under any circumstances. Those two modifications immediately qualify me as morally superior to any God in the bible.
1
@PJRayment And there you have it. When two people of faith disagree how do you decide which is right? You have one warped sense of history. It was the rejection of church teachings by secular philosophers 3500 years after Judaism and 1800 years after Christianity that allowed laws against slavery. Your bible was used explicitly as a tool by slave owning Christians to allow the practice. There is absolutely no need for a God. I think Therefore I am. I exist. That's all you need. No requirement for any sort of God. Morality flows from there. You do exactly the same you just chuck in a superfluous thing.
1
@PJRayment Clear specific laws advocating for slavery and regarding slave behaviour, but I'm sure it's all just a misunderstanding. Exodus 21:1-10 Leviticus 25:39-46 Ephesians 6:5-8 These two old testament references you just rejected away in wilful ignorance despite a 1800 year history of Christians following them to the letter. So we have laws on how to get slaves and laws on how to be a slave.
1
@PJRayment What a wonderful example of cognitive dissonance. First you deny any mention of slavery in the bible, then when this is proved wrong, you deny it and interprete precise and clear instructions of subjugation, slavery, and, sexual violence as benign and then finally you describe what in Exodus and Leviticus that are clear and precise instructions and described exactly as laws as regulations which is just straight out dishonest. They are prefaced by the Lord says these are the laws for the people and the Lord says. I can't in any possible way insult you with a hide as thick as that. When I describe your behaviour as ignorant, wilful, or dishonest all I'm doing is describing reality. I actually initially thought you were just a benign misguided but essentially harmless Christian with a sense of morality but you have proved to be a thoughtless ideologue of an ancient religion that has no relevance in a modern western liberal democracy.
1
@az-yq3rk who knows, with 45000 recognised Christian denominations worldwide how could anyone decipher their gibberish.
1
@maxstrength2963 If you had read and understood the Clean energy bill 2011 it was not a carbon tax. It was a carbon pollution reduction scheme. You are either are unable or unwilling to accept fact. The Gillard government had many flaws but clearly her Atheism was her downfall not the clean energy bill.
1
@KG-wd9rg Tony was taking the piss, and mocking religious belief in general. Religiosity does imply a certain lack of skepticism which might be healthy when running a state government, not essential but healthy.
1
@maxstrength2963 You always know in a discussion when the personal abuse is directed at you whoever you are interacting with has got nothing left of value to contribute. You made a factually incorrect statement that I corrected, and you got upset and resorted to calling me a spin doctor, that hurt. Bullshit artist........yeah I can live with that. At least I have a vocabulary.
1
Yes I remember well the hatred and vitriol directed at Julia Gillard by the right wing ideology of the conservatives just because she was female, in a unwed relationship, and a declared atheist. I too was appalled.
1
Yep that's right all those conservative family men empathiseing with the Biloela family brings a tear to your heart.
1
Would they be the nonexistent freedom of speech laws as provided by the blasphemy laws in the Christian bible? Or the freedom to chose the life partner of your choice without fear of execution for homosexuality as advocated for in the Christian bible. Or no rights to vote whatsoever as under a Theocracy as advocated for in the bible a King or priests run the show. No judging of faith here either.
1
Yes I'd like to know exactly what Evangelical Christian values the PM brings to the table.
1
@gilbertcolacicco1655 All words are made up they are descriptive. Let's go off the Britannica dictionary which describes Atheism as the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God. I would not go that far and merely describe myself as some one who just lacks belief due to insufficient evidence. It would help if you remained respectful in any discussion .
1
@CA-cv7te laws on murder, assault and property rights come out of ancient Mesopotamia written on existing tablets that predate Judaism by 600 years. So wrong. Humans had been exhibiting moral behaviours for thousands of years prior to Christianity. What else have you got?
1
@CA-cv7te We are talking specific Judea Christian values and the value you highlighted is not even remotely unique to Christianity as I proved. I asked for a specific Judeo-Christian value. That is unique to Christianity.
1
@CA-cv7te All I did was accidentally drop the Judeo from Judeo Christian value and you are off on a technical point. Once again provide a Judeo- Christian value that is unique.
1
@wh5186 So the first three bear absolutely no relation to a modern secular society. Laws on murder and stealing come out of Mesopotamia and predate Judaism by 600 years. The rest of the commandments are behaviours humans had been exhibiting for thousands of years in numerous cultures long before the first copies of the bible popped in in the 4th century CE. Your bible means nothing to an atheist.
1
@wh5186 I am not questioning your bible I was asking for a single unique Judeo-Christian value. Though shall not steal or murder is not uniquely a Judeo Christian value as I proved to you these laws existed before your bible existed by at least 600 years. So please give me a uniquely Judeo- Christian value we use today in modern NSW.
1
@wh5186 You commented that Judeo-Christian values are being cancelled. I simply asked you for just one example of a Judeo-Christian value let alone one that has been cancelled. I can just straight off the bat think of atleast three or four that have been cancelled, but I wanted to know what values you thought have been cancelled and you couldn't even come up with one just one Judeo-Christian value. Have a read of your bible think on it and try again.
1
@CA-cv7te WH commented that Judeo-Christian values are being cancelled. I asked him to provide an example of a Judeo-Christian value. A simple question. Neither WH or yourself have so far been able to provide an example. I can whip off a dozen in a minute, but I wanted to know what WH thinks is a Judeo-Christian value. I have already proven that laws on stealing and murder are not Judeo-Christian values as these laws came out of Mesopotamia 600 years before any Judeo writings. Once I had established just one Judeo-Christian value my next question would be and which specific Judeo-Christian values does he think are being cancelled. As I told WH I can think of four or five very quickly but I wanted to know what Judeo-Christian values WH thinks are being cancelled. I'm not questioning the bible only what WH thinks Judeo-Christian values are.
1
@maxstrength2963 You simply didn't understand my reply. So just to be clear both Tony Abbott and Peta Credlin have publicly admitted they lied when describing the legislation passed by Gillard as a carbon tax. It was a political ploy to get people like you confused as well appeal to all those atheist haters, and it worked perfectly as you show.
1
@CA-cv7te I didn't reject it. I proved it false. I will be very specific here, provide a single Judeo-Christian value. What you provided is a behaviour that is exhibited in multiple non Judeo-Christian religions and cultures all over the world. It is a great value to have, but Buddhist teachings have pretty much the same saying "If we fail to look after others when they need help, who will look after us?" and originated in India some 600 years before the Jesus of the bible was born. We can both agree it is good thing however it is not a just a Judeo-Christian value. Once again as I simply asked WH do you have a Judeo-Christian value?
1
@CA-cv7te We live in a secular liberal social democracy that has developed throughout history with many and varied inputs, Judeo-Christian values have certainly contributed but they have not been as nearly as significant as you think and I can easily prove this. The idea that modern western culture is based on Judeo-Christian values is just a myth and can be quickly debunked.
1
@CA-cv7te So my point is proven, you can't identify a single Judeo-Christian value that a Christian can bring to a discussion about Modern Western culture. Which is fine I wouldn't dare either. There were successful societies that existed long before Judaism and Christianity and many successful non Christian societies existing today. You quoted a preaching of Jesus that I proved was not original or particularly profound and you want to claim it a legacy of Christianity and a reflection of our society well we don't live in a vacuum but that is a pretty vacuous value, to stack your argument on.
1
@KG-wd9rg secular in that a significant percentage of the population about 30% are non religious and its growing. The Australian constitution explicitly states laws shall not be made for establishing any religion, it does however grant the right of freedom of religion. Liberal in the classical sense where we as a people are willing to accept and respect behaviour and opinions different from your own. Social as in we form organisations and gather to make stuff better and finally Democratic I don't know about you but I vote for my local council, and then my state member, and then my federal member and each time I have multiple choices. So what did I get wrong?
1
@KG-wd9rg Please give me one Judeo-Christian value you think is represented in Modern Western culture or contributed to it in a positive manner. Ofc it is a buzzword and that is what I can easily show but both WH and CA are incapable of providing an example. The one they did provide and put there bet on I completely falsified as a Judeo-Christian value. I did not argue Christianity or religion in general has not had in influence if not a significant influence on western history, I asked specifically what Judeo-Christian values are present in modern Australia. That's it and CA and WH have completely failed to show me one.
1
@KG-wd9rg I'm not sure you have an understanding of Christianity. Christianity explicitly denies a natural law and all laws and morality are given by a God. Are you even reading the theme of this discussion. I didn't raise Judeo-Christian values WH did I merely asked him to provide one. Not unreasonable on my behalf I think.
1
@KG-wd9rg So secularism as a term is fairly recent but Atheism has existed right throughout human history and development. From the very beginning of human development we have displayed social behaviours in that we formed groups of large families and progressed to the massive cities we have today. Democracy as a concept was discussed and written about by the Ancient Greeks some 3000 years ago approx. Pre-dating any Judaism writings by 500 years. Your right true democracy was only something that came out out of the enlightenment some 1800 years after Christianity and 2500 years after Judaism.
1
@CA-cv7te If by Cristian abolitionist you mean slavery, laws against slavery came into force in the later part of the 19th century 3500 years after Judaism and 1900 years after Christianity and the laws were instituted by the values of the enlightenment and in spite of Judeo-Christianity. The bible advocates for and has very specific laws on slavery with particular attention given how they are to be treated. The Judeo-Christian texts have specific laws that call for the execution of homosexuals. No sanctity of life there. No freedom of speech in the Judeo-Christian texts or individual rights as there are specific blasphemy laws that call for the execution for anyone taking the lords name in vain. Laws calling for Free speech , democracy, and individual rights all came out of Ancient Greece and predate Judeo-Christian by 500 years. That is where Western civilisation values are based. Ancient Greece. Judeo-Christianity merely copied and pasted the teachings and beliefs of numerous previous cultures. Nothing remotely unique about it.
1
@CA-cv7te Yes I understand the descriptor Judeo-Christian and my apologies if I inadvertently used it incorrectly it is a recent term used by Christian apologists to describe a set of values they claim falsely are the values behind modern western culture. With regards to slavery absolutely Ancient Greece had slaves as did just about every culture and is 100% a value or elucidation of the Judeo-Christian ethic. As I pointed out it was only the secular influence of the enlightenment and some generous re-interpretation of the bible by some Christians that allowed laws against slavery to be passed. Slavery is still a thing and there are an estimated 40 million people in slavery today. It still remains a perfectly OK practice in the bible. It is simply ignored by decent Christians. 2500 years ago an earthquakes were blamed on God in blind faith, now days through the use of science we know exactly what causes earthquakes. This is an axample of how as we are evolving and learning more. The faith part of Western civilisation is being reduced continuely and the reason component just keeps getting bigger and bigger. I agree Modern Western Civilisation is the best, but it is in despite of religion, not because of it, as explained previously through the philosophy of Ancient Greece some of which was secular in nature not the teachings of the bible. Interestingly you mention the Taliban and Theocracies, right throughout the bible it generally advocates for theocracy and at the height of Christianity's powers in the Middle Ages that's exactly the type of systems that were in power. Democracy as a concept again came out of Ancient Greek philosophy, 500 years before Judaism and wasn't really put into practice till the late 18th century CE, 1800 years after the establishment of Christianity.
1
@CA-cv7te Yes it is not a term I would use at all and it was my questioning of it that has started this dialogue. I totally agree with you the enlightenment was full of devout Christian philosophers, there were also many that hid there Atheism for fear of punishment due to blasphemy laws. There were also secular philosophers it is the latter two that contributed significantly to the enlightenment. Sorry i didn't mean to imply Ancient Greece was secular it most certainly wasn't only that there was some secular philosophy. Ancient Greeks using maths worked out the earth is a globe and even measured its circumference in there observations of lunar eclipses. They were already into science it's nothing Christians taught the west.
1
@CA-cv7te I'm a big fan of Orwell, and won't hear a bad word about him. LOL.
1
@mitchellcotton7346 How did you score it?
1
Fair point, but does that mean they have to execute her? What about the of mixing cloth or the eating of shellfish. Are you implying that any Christian who has worn a garment with mixed linen and cloth or had a prawn at Xmas is not a Christian?
1