Western culture is successful because of Greek foundations, not Christianity.

[QUOTE="danwallacefan"] Empiricism=BAD philosophy, much worse than Descartes Rationalism. Moving along, John Locke's philosophy of liberty played a major role in the formation of our republic. Further, I must remind you that scientific advance in the Islamic empire collapsed after the European dark ages.Welkabonz

[QUOTE="unholymight"][QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]

Actually the original slaves were Polytheists (Slavs)...so really it has nothing to do with it forming under "Christianity's watch"..because they were enslaved by the Muslims in the East as well..

Correction: The word "Slave" comes from "Slav"..but Romans also had slaves and they weren't necessarily Christian..

HomicidalCherry

Christianity did play a large role in the abolition of American slavery. Quakers, a sect of Christianity, were the loan standard-bearers of abolitionism for 50 years. They believed that slavery was against God. Christianity was not a universal cure that would immediately end slavery everywhere it spread, but it clearly had a great deal of influence over abolitionism in America. It served as a moral imeptus for many to fight against slavery.

I am a junior in high school for the record.;)

[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]

[QUOTE="Democratik"] "Columbus was a Christian, he discovered America as well. Christians played a MAjor role in the West as we know it. actually, there were a ton of visitors to the Americas prior to him, and really..... Columbus had no real influence on a cultural level. Western culture is not JUST AMERICA. Its ALL Western nations(European thought....). America was founded AFTER the renaissance, by people of EMPIRICAL philosophy

Democratik

"European nations came to the Americas to increase their wealth and broaden their influence over world affairs. The Spanish were among the first Europeans to explore the New World and the first to settle in what is now the United States"

Spain was Primarily Christian. Columbus specifically did not. But his discovery of America DID. And I know "Western Culture" is not just America. IT's also Western Europe. What relevance does "There were a ton of Visitors Prior to Columbus" serve? Some of the Founding Fathers were Christian. I've never read anywhere that the followed an "Empirical Philosophy".

"Inphilosophy,empiricismis a theory ofknowledgewhich asserts that knowledge arises from senseexperience."

54.7% Of the Founding Fathers were Episcopalian and 18.6% were Presbyterian.

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html

So, Because you've never heard of them the statistics are null? Aristotles teachings were preserved and protected by Christian Philosophers for decades.

How about Wikipedia?

"Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Some of the 1787 delegates had no affiliation. The others wereProtestantsexcept for threeRoman Catholics: C. Carroll, D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons. Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 wereChurch of England(Episcopalian, after theRevolutionary Warwas won), eight werePresbyterians, seven wereCongregationalists, two wereLutherans, two wereDutch Reformed, and two wereMethodists, the total number being 49"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States#Religion

"Locke rejected theTrinityandOriginal Sin, but held to many Christians beliefs"

"Locke has been called a Christian, Socinian, Unitarian, and a Deist."

"Locke was clearly a cultural Christian and a rationalist."

HE was not a Christian in Technical Terms, but he still held many Christian Beliefs.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/id2/locke_reason.htm

"The principalJohn Wilkinsonwas aPuritan, and he had some influence on Hobbes"

Hobbes essentially was an Anti-Catholic Atheist. HE still held some Puritan Beliefs though. His role was Political Philosophy.

[QUOTE="HomicidalCherry"]

[QUOTE="unholymight"] I was referring to the case of America, specifically. I believe you were trying to show that Christianity was a leading cause for the abolishment of slavery. Showing that slavery occurred in other places where Christianity was absent does not lend real support to your argument. If I may be priviledged to ask, are you a junior in high school?unholymight

Christianity did play a large role in the abolition of American slavery. Quakers, a sect of Christianity, were the lone standard-bearers of abolitionism for 50 years. They believed that slavery was against God. Christianity was not a universal cure that would immediately end slavery everywhere it spread, but it clearly had a great deal of influence over abolitionism in America. It served as a moral imeptus for many to fight against slavery.

I am a junior in high school for the record.;)

I dunno, I've never been to one. I'm agnostic. Many social reforms were brought about by Christians and this isn't ignored in secular schools.

I would very much doubt that Roman and Greek cultures were successful, especially for the proletariat.

[QUOTE="Democratik"]Its not self refuting.Democratik

absolutely. How can you prove empiricism empirically?

Ill read into that. Theres no proof they would go away,Democratik

There is actually. Manuscripts are delicate and have to be carefully looked after and copied.

and theres no reason to think they wouldnt have kept it. Who kept records of preislamic culture in the mid east?Democratik

[QUOTE="unholymight"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Yeah, you really can't be black and white regarding this subject. There were other influences, but to say that

[quote="unholymight"]The fact that slavery arose on Christianity's watch would show that Christianity provided little, if any, effective resistance against slavery.HomicidalCherry

is absolutely ridiculous to anybody who knows anything about the subject. I named just a few influential Christians, but I could go on all day. John Brown is considered by many to be the abolishionist who STARTED the Civil War. To say that Christianity provided little resistance against slavery is just unreasonable. By your own admission, you have no education regarding the subject.

Later.

I don't see why you are so picky about my lack of education on the subject. If your logic was more sound my lack of knowledge would have posed a problem, but there was enough opportunities for me to simply rely on looking at your arguments.

Read two sentences of ANYTHING John Brown said and it will be completely apparent that he believed that he was on a mission from God. He viewed himself as a tool of God and that his sole purpose in life was destroy slavery as it was against God. Yes, he was referring to the Christian God, and yes he was a tad insane. John Brown was trying to do God's will. There is really no way around that. His motivations were obvious.

I see. However the motivation from the Christian aspect, the original poster's original statement referred to Christianity as the only cause for abolishment of slavery, which I find highly unlikely, given a list of obvious reasons why I would not like to see my neighbour nor an immigrant from a foreign place tied up in chains and all sad-looking with some obviously sad tales.

[QUOTE="Democratik"][QUOTE="Snipes_2"]

"European nations came to the Americas to increase their wealth and broaden their influence over world affairs. The Spanish were among the first Europeans to explore the New World and the first to settle in what is now the United States"

Spain was Primarily Christian. Columbus specifically did not. But his discovery of America DID. And I know "Western Culture" is not just America. IT's also Western Europe. What relevance does "There were a ton of Visitors Prior to Columbus" serve? Some of the Founding Fathers were Christian. I've never read anywhere that the followed an "Empirical Philosophy".

"Inphilosophy,empiricismis a theory ofknowledgewhich asserts that knowledge arises from senseexperience."

54.7% Of the Founding Fathers were Episcopalian and 18.6% were Presbyterian.

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html

Snipes_2

So, Because you've never heard of them the statistics are null? Aristotles teachings were preserved and protected by Christian Philosophers for decades.

How about Wikipedia?

"Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Some of the 1787 delegates had no affiliation. The others wereProtestantsexcept for threeRoman Catholics: C. Carroll, D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons. Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 wereChurch of England(Episcopalian, after theRevolutionary Warwas won), eight werePresbyterians, seven wereCongregationalists, two wereLutherans, two wereDutch Reformed, and two wereMethodists, the total number being 49"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States#Religion

"Locke rejected theTrinityandOriginal Sin, but held to many Christians beliefs"

"Locke has been called a Christian, Socinian, Unitarian, and a Deist."

"Locke was clearly a cultural Christian and a rationalist."

HE was not a Christian in Technical Terms, but he still held many Christian Beliefs.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/id2/locke_reason.htm

"The principalJohn Wilkinsonwas aPuritan, and he had some influence on Hobbes"

Hobbes essentially was an Anti-Catholic Atheist. HE still held some Puritan Beliefs though. His role was Political Philosophy.

[QUOTE="Democratik"]

I would very much doubt that Roman and Greek cultures were successful, especially for the proletariat.

[QUOTE="Democratik"]

absolutely. How can you prove empiricism empirically?

[QUOTE="Democratik"]Ill read into that. Theres no proof they would go away,danwallacefan

There is actually. Manuscripts are delicate and have to be carefully looked after and copied.

and theres no reason to think they wouldnt have kept it. Who kept records of preislamic culture in the mid east?Democratik

[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]

[QUOTE="Democratik"] it doesnt matter that they are christian. That misses the point. If you dont understand the historical significance of the renaissance and how aristotles teaching is the backbone of our culture, then we cant really discuss this. The point is "Despite christianity" They were inspired by guys like thomas Hobbes, John Locke etc. These are empiricist philosophers, its probably why most of the important founders were deist and not christian. ive never heard of adherents. Democratik

So, Because you've never heard of them the statistics are null? Aristotles teachings were preserved and protected by Christian Philosophers for decades.

How about Wikipedia?

"Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Some of the 1787 delegates had no affiliation. The others wereProtestantsexcept for threeRoman Catholics: C. Carroll, D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons. Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 wereChurch of England(Episcopalian, after theRevolutionary Warwas won), eight werePresbyterians, seven wereCongregationalists, two wereLutherans, two wereDutch Reformed, and two wereMethodists, the total number being 49"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States#Religion

"Locke rejected theTrinityandOriginal Sin, but held to many Christians beliefs"

"Locke has been called a Christian, Socinian, Unitarian, and a Deist."

"Locke was clearly a cultural Christian and a rationalist."

HE was not a Christian in Technical Terms, but he still held many Christian Beliefs.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/id2/locke_reason.htm

"The principalJohn Wilkinsonwas aPuritan, and he had some influence on Hobbes"

Hobbes essentially was an Anti-Catholic Atheist. HE still held some Puritan Beliefs though. His role was Political Philosophy.

What? You referenced to Hobbes and Locke. I just posted Statistics on the Founding Fathers. A Majority were some sect of Christianity. Who in your Opinion is the "Most Important"? And YOu said You've "Never heard of Adherents", the site I posted.

[QUOTE="HomicidalCherry"]

[QUOTE="unholymight"] You still haven't convinced me that all these people did this specifically because of their fear of Hell, not a philosophical belief that all humans should be free, or that they were simply sympathetic towards the slaves, or a plethora of other possible reasons.

I don't see why you are so picky about my lack of education on the subject. If your logic was more sound my lack of knowledge would have posed a problem, but there was enough opportunities for me to simply rely on looking at your arguments.

unholymight

Read two sentences of ANYTHING John Brown said and it will be completely apparent that he believed that he was on a mission from God. He viewed himself as a tool of God and that his sole purpose in life was destroy slavery as it was against God. Yes, he was referring to the Christian God, and yes he was a tad insane. John Brown was trying to do God's will. There is really no way around that. His motivations were obvious.

I see. However the motivation from the Christian aspect, the original poster's original statement referred to Christianity as the only cause for abolishment of slavery, which I find highly unlikely, given a list of obvious reasons why I would not like to see my neighbour nor an immigrant from a foreign place tied up in chains and all sad-looking with some obviously sad tales.

I would agree that that isn't true. Even in America, there were other groups and factors that contributed to abolition.

[QUOTE="unholymight"]

[QUOTE="HomicidalCherry"]

Read two sentences of ANYTHING John Brown said and it will be completely apparent that he believed that he was on a mission from God. He viewed himself as a tool of God and that his sole purpose in life was destroy slavery as it was against God. Yes, he was referring to the Christian God, and yes he was a tad insane. John Brown was trying to do God's will. There is really no way around that. His motivations were obvious.

HomicidalCherry

I see. However the motivation from the Christian aspect, the original poster's original statement referred to Christianity as the only cause for abolishment of slavery, which I find highly unlikely, given a list of obvious reasons why I would not like to see my neighbour nor an immigrant from a foreign place tied up in chains and all sad-looking with some obviously sad tales.

I would agree that that isn't true. Even in America, there were other groups and factors that contributed to abolition.

[QUOTE="Democratik"][QUOTE="Snipes_2"]

So, Because you've never heard of them the statistics are null? Aristotles teachings were preserved and protected by Christian Philosophers for decades.

How about Wikipedia?

"Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Some of the 1787 delegates had no affiliation. The others wereProtestantsexcept for threeRoman Catholics: C. Carroll, D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons. Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 wereChurch of England(Episcopalian, after theRevolutionary Warwas won), eight werePresbyterians, seven wereCongregationalists, two wereLutherans, two wereDutch Reformed, and two wereMethodists, the total number being 49"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States#Religion

"Locke rejected theTrinityandOriginal Sin, but held to many Christians beliefs"

"Locke has been called a Christian, Socinian, Unitarian, and a Deist."

"Locke was clearly a cultural Christian and a rationalist."

HE was not a Christian in Technical Terms, but he still held many Christian Beliefs.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/id2/locke_reason.htm

"The principalJohn Wilkinsonwas aPuritan, and he had some influence on Hobbes"

Hobbes essentially was an Anti-Catholic Atheist. HE still held some Puritan Beliefs though. His role was Political Philosophy.

Snipes_2

What? You referenced to Hobbes and Locke. I just posted Statistics on the Founding Fathers. A Majority were some sect of Christianity. Who in your Opinion is the "Most Important"? And YOu said You've "Never heard of Adherents", the site I posted.

"James Madison was an Episcopalian."

"James Madison attended St. John's Episcopal Church while he was President. Some sources classify Madison was a deist."

http://www.adherents.com/people/pm/James_Madison.html

"Benjamin Franklin was raised as an Episcopalian but was a Deist as an adult."

http://www.adherents.com/people/pf/Benjamin_Franklin.html

"Jefferson was born into an Anglican family and was raised as an Aglican. He would later be considered an Episcopalian, after the Episcopal Church was officially founded as a separate province within Anglicanism in 1789 (after the Revolution and independence from England)."

"Later in his adult life Jefferson did not consider himself an Episcopalian, or a member of any other specific denomination. Later in life Jefferson held many clearly Christian, Deist, and Unitarian beliefs, but was not a member of any congregation or denomination. Today, many Unitarians sincerely believe that Jefferson should be "counted as" a Unitarian, just as many Christians point to Jefferson as a Christian, and many of the small number of Americans who identify themselves as Deists believe Jefferson should be classified a Deist."

http://www.adherents.com/people/pj/Thomas_Jefferson.html

"Washington regularly attended Sunday services and purchased a family pew at several churches. Rev. Lee Massey, his pastor in Mt Vernon, wrote "I never knew so constant an attendant in church as Washington."[8]

Whether Washington partook of communion is a question of tremendous controversy. In 1833, Nelly Custis-Lewis, Washington's adopted daughter, wrote about her mother, Eleanor Calvert-Lewis, who lived at Mount Vernon for two years: "I have heard her say that General Washington always received the sacrament with my grandmother before the revolution."[9]

Major William Popham, one of General Washington's aides during the Revolution wrote, "the President [Washington] had more than once—I believe I say often—attended the sacramental table, at which I had the privilege and happiness to kneel with him."[10]"

"As an adult, Washington served as a member of thevestry(lay council) for his local parish. Office-holding qualifications at all levels—including theHouse of Burgesses, to which Washington was elected in 1758"

"Washington was buried according to the rite of theEpiscopal Church, with the Rev. Thomas Davis, rector of Christ Church, Alexandria, officiating.["

"No one in church attended to the services with more reverential respect." She adds: "I should have thought it the greatest heresy to doubt his firm belief in Christianity. His life, his writings, prove that he was a Christian. He was not one of those who act or pray, that they may be seen of men."[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_and_religion

Only Benjamin Franklin was a Deist.

StuffSnipes_2

Not true. Madisons religion is unknown, Jefferson is a famous Deist. Remember, this conversation is about "Despite christianity" it always has been, and thats sort of what im trying to tell you this whole time. but you keep bringing it back to irrelevant things.

Called the father of the Constitution, Madison had no conventional sense of Christianity. In 1785, Madison wrote in his Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments:

About james madison:http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Madison

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." "What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."

Maybe your source is bad.

Jefferson was definitely a Deist or potentially an Atheist with statements like:Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.

Avery Dulles, a leading Catholic theologian reports, "In his college years at William and Mary, [Jefferson] came to admire Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, and John Locke as three great paragons of wisdom. Under the influence of several professors, he converted to the deist philosophy."[6] Dulles concludes: Though he had a lifelong esteem for Jesus' moral teachings, Jefferson did not believe in miracles, nor in the divinity of Jesus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_religion#Jefferson_as_Deist

if you dont believe jesus is divine, theres NO WAY you can be a christian. Remember 'Despite christianity"

Disagree. Western culture is successful because of Rambo. Seriously, he took out some pretty bad guys.GettingTired

[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]

I wonder why Christianity is hated by so many people and why people are always trying to belittle it..:|..why not pick on the Ottomans?..

poptart

Its quite en vogue to pick on Christianity out of all mainstream religions, partially because it's the closest to home in the Western world and wields the greatest power and influence.

The Greeks killed Socrates for teaching philosophy. Good luck with that argument.

The Greeks killed Socrates for teaching philosophy. Good luck with that argument.

Mark_the_Lie

[QUOTE="Mark_the_Lie"]

The Greeks killed Socrates for teaching philosophy. Good luck with that argument.

Teenaged

Let me rephrase.

The Greeks killed Socrates for speaking words. What a great foundation for a modern nation-state...killing people for speaking controversial words.

Contemporary American policy debates have nothing at all to do with empiricism. There are many non-Christians who espouse the same political views most Christians do for completely different reasons. This thread is largely irrelevant.

I believe Christianity did hold back science and learning for many years but it slowly started to pick back up because of Christianity too. The Crusades pretty much forced movement and exploring to happen and many cultures began mingling again as well in a time when the average person didn't travel more than 20 miles from their home town. You can't really attribute the success of Western Culture to one aspect of history because there are so many factors.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Mark_the_Lie"]

The Greeks killed Socrates for teaching philosophy. Good luck with that argument.

Mark_the_Lie

Let me rephrase.

The Greeks killed Socrates for speaking words. What a great foundation for a modern nation-state...killing people for speaking controversial words.

Contemporary American policy debates have nothing at all to do with empiricism. There are many non-Christians who espouse the same political views most Christians do for completely different reasons. This thread is largely irrelevant.

Merely about values and ideals recorded back then which are still very useful today and have been very useful for Christianity as well. Invoking the argument of the imperfection of the ancient political systems which didnt seem to be practicing those ideals to a satisfactory level says nothing about the ideal themselves, not only because it is irrelevant but because you cant seriously expect new found ideas to be practiced the moment they are expressed. As with everything time is required and patience for "practice" to catch up with the "theory".

Your comment is largely irrelevant.

[QUOTE="Mark_the_Lie"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]The Greeks killed Socrates because he was very honest when expressing his opinions about other people (he, for many dignified people of his time, expressed the view that they are not worthy of their fame and the title they have been attributed (politician, poet, artist) was not indicative of their abilities/intellect etc). His supposedly heretic philosophy was just the excuse to condemn him to death in court.

Teenaged

Let me rephrase.

The Greeks killed Socrates for speaking words. What a great foundation for a modern nation-state...killing people for speaking controversial words.

Contemporary American policy debates have nothing at all to do with empiricism. There are many non-Christians who espouse the same political views most Christians do for completely different reasons. This thread is largely irrelevant.

Merely about values and ideals recorded back then which are still very useful today and have been very useful for Christianity as well. Invoking the argument of the imperfection of the ancient political systems which didnt seem to be practicing those ideals to a satisfactory level says nothing about the ideal themselves, not only because it is irrelevant but because you cant seriously expect new found ideas to be practiced the moment they are expressed. As with everything time is required and patience for "practice" to catch up with the "theory".

Your comment is largely irrelevant.

My comment is completely relevant, because we all know this thread is taking a shot at conservatives who claim Christianity is the foundation of American society. "Conservative" and "Christian" are not synonymous. There are non-Christian rationalizations, in fact Greek-rooted rationalizations, for every single conservative stance. That's the bottom line.

[QUOTE="poptart"]

[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]

I wonder why Christianity is hated by so many people and why people are always trying to belittle it..:|..why not pick on the Ottomans?..

Teenaged

Its quite en vogue to pick on Christianity out of all mainstream religions, partially because it's the closest to home in the Western world and wields the greatest power and influence.

With popularity comes power, and its influence is visible in our government, our education system and affects our daily lives. As you say its the one you're most familiar with, as with myself and the majority of people in Western culture - its logical to pick on the one which is visible and closest to home. That's not to say that's the only reason, e.g. I think some people (myself included) find certain other mainstream religions as a little intimidating when compared to the relitively passive nature of Christianity.

EDIT: Just an afterthought - maybe the liberal nature of Western/Christian states allow a greater degree of free thought as well - maybe those born into Christan societies are allowed more freedom to depart from their religious roots in comparison to other more mainstream religions. The reformed religious are probably not unlike the reformed smoker - they are the most virulent attackers of their former 'habit'. Just a passing thought anyway...

I think people are always overestimating the effect of religions. The christian community pretty much follows the same morals as the rest of the world, with some slight differences. So when the worlds population was advanced enough to wish for the abolition of slavery, so did the christian community. You can bend and shape your sermons any way you want it, and pick the parts of the bible you like most. Proof of that is evangelical christians in the US being supporters of wars. Even though jesus was probably the most pacifist person in the history of mankind.

Religions don't shape communites, communities shape the religions.

The Greeks killed Socrates for teaching philosophy. Good luck with that argument.

Mark_the_Lie

[QUOTE="Mark_the_Lie"]

The Greeks killed Socrates for teaching philosophy. Good luck with that argument.

Democratik

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Mark_the_Lie"]

Let me rephrase.

The Greeks killed Socrates for speaking words. What a great foundation for a modern nation-state...killing people for speaking controversial words.

Contemporary American policy debates have nothing at all to do with empiricism. There are many non-Christians who espouse the same political views most Christians do for completely different reasons. This thread is largely irrelevant.

Mark_the_Lie

Merely about values and ideals recorded back then which are still very useful today and have been very useful for Christianity as well. Invoking the argument of the imperfection of the ancient political systems which didnt seem to be practicing those ideals to a satisfactory level says nothing about the ideal themselves, not only because it is irrelevant but because you cant seriously expect new found ideas to be practiced the moment they are expressed. As with everything time is required and patience for "practice" to catch up with the "theory".

Your comment is largely irrelevant.

My comment is completely relevant, because we all know this thread is taking a shot at conservatives who claim Christianity is the foundation of American society. "Conservative" and "Christian" are not synonymous. There are non-Christian rationalizations, in fact Greek-rooted rationalizations, for every single conservative stance. That's the bottom line.

And your above comment does not fit in any way with your comment about Socrates and how he was convicted. Was that comment of yours, your own shot at those arguing that Christianity was influenced by Ancient Greek philosophy, by making a statement about the political system of the then era? If is then the statement is not helping you form any sort of shot at it; its not effective and thats because its irrelevant. I already explained how you actually have no point when referring to how Socrates was convicted.

No. The only shot the OP could take would be on Christians in general. Not only the conservative ones. And no, the thread is not about America in specific. I dont know how you derive that. The topic is about Christianity in general. Therefore seeing the issue in the specific frame of the United States, where the "clash" of conservatism and liberalism are quite intense these days, is quite presumptuous.And your above comment does not fit in any way with your comment about Socrates and how he was convicted. Was that comment of yours, your own sho at those arguing that Christianity was influenced by Ancient Greek philosophy, by making a statement about the political system of the then era? If is then the statement is not helping you form any sort of shot at it; its not effective and thats because its irrelevant. I already explained how you actually have no point when referring to how Socrates was convicted.Teenaged

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="poptart"]

Its quite en vogue to pick on Christianity out of all mainstream religions, partially because it's the closest to home in the Western world and wields the greatest power and influence.

poptart

With popularity comes power, and its influence is visible in our government, our education system and affects our daily lives. As you say its the one you're most familiar with, as with myself and the majority of people in Western culture - its logical to pick on the one which is visible and closest to home. That's not to say that's the only reason, e.g. I think some people (myself included) find certain other mainstream religions as a little intimidating when compared to the relitively passive nature of Christianity.

EDIT: Just an afterthought - maybe the liberal nature of Western/Christian states allow a greater degree of free thought as well - maybe those born into Christan societies are allowed more freedom to depart from their religious roots in comparison to other more mainstream religions. The reformed religious are probably not unlike the reformed smoker - they are the most virulent attackers of their former 'habit'. Just a passing thought anyway...

And here is where I realise I kinda misread your post. =/

And I agree with this. I can see it in myself as well.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]No. The only shot the OP could take would be on Christians in general. Not only the conservative ones. And no, the thread is not about America in specific. I dont know how you derive that. The topic is about Christianity in general. Therefore seeing the issue in the specific frame of the United States, where the "clash" of conservatism and liberalism are quite intense these days, is quite presumptuous.And your above comment does not fit in any way with your comment about Socrates and how he was convicted. Was that comment of yours, your own sho at those arguing that Christianity was influenced by Ancient Greek philosophy, by making a statement about the political system of the then era? If is then the statement is not helping you form any sort of shot at it; its not effective and thats because its irrelevant. I already explained how you actually have no point when referring to how Socrates was convicted.Vandalvideo

Well anyway I am not as educated as I would like to be on the influence of ancient greek philosophy on Christianity. This very semester is History of Philosophy we started "delving" into the Middle Ages and later on the Enlightment and how Aristotle's and Plato's works (especially Plato's) were vastly used by theologians in order to support Christian dogmas.

Well anyway I am not as educated as I would like to be on the influence of ancient greek philosophy on Christianity. This very semester is History of Philosophy we started "delving" into the Middle Ages and later on the Enlightment and how Aristotle's and Plato's works (especially Plato's) were vastly used by theologians in order to support Christian dogmas.Teenaged

History indicates that science took a major hit when roman society fell, not when christianity took hold. Roman culture and society was the epitome of science in the classical age, but when rome was destroyed by barbarians most of that information was lost.

Aristotle became a massive influence in Christianity -- to the point where contradicting him was considered heresy.

History isn't as black and white as "Christians ruined everything until the humanists came along."

[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]StuffDemocratik

if you dont believe jesus is divine, theres NO WAY you can be a christian. Remember 'Despite christianity"

Wikipedia is a bad Source? I posted quotes from Wikipedia and Adherents. They all state that their Religion was either Unknown , Christian Beliefs, or Deist.

Christians obviously were not the ONLY influence in the West. They played a LArge Role in the Formation of it though. IS that what you're trying to say?