again, you so badly misread and misunderstand what i say that i see no point to responding.
And, yet, here you are responding. So clearly you do see a point in it. Funny old world, isn't it?
Moreover, you're confused by the distiction between Christianity the faith and Christianity the civilization, which only became principally secular in the past generation or two
Uh-huh. So, you're proposing a "secular Christian civilization"? That would seem to be an inherent contradiction in terms.
You think becauswe you can point out to inventions of others, that disproves that the Christian world has invented far, far more, and its arts have so much evolved beyonf others.
And you seem to think that, because you assert something, we should all believe it. What's your evidence that Christian art is more evolved? Show me your data. What measurements did you take on the evolution of the art of these respective cultures? What was your methodology?
You're asserting as settled fact something that you must know, as a humanities student, is and always will be an open question - is
this work better than
that one? Who is the superior poet - Voltaire or Dickinson? Or Takamura? Or Li Po? Who is the superior playwright - Shakespeare or Marlowe? Or Monzaemon? Or Euripides? Who is the superior painter? Rembrant or Picasso? Or Yoshitoshi?
Any argument resting on the premise that these questions are settled fact - much less objectively answerable in the first place - can be rejected out of hand. It's ludicrous. It betrays the very nature of art in the first place.
You think because some religious people, and certainly the RC, opposed democracy that proves that christian civilization was not a factor in its development.
Now who is mistating who? Did I say that Christianity was not a factor? I didn't, and I challenge you to quote otherwise. (You know, actually quoting the statements that you're replying to would help you avoid such mistakes.) Just as Osama bin Laden's attack on America was a factor in the Iraq war, Christianity was a factor in the development of the modern liberal democracy.
How small is your comprehension. How limited is your vision.
I'll remind you once that the forum guidelines specifically disallow personal attacks against your opponent. The fact that your only recourse to my rebuttals is to attack me personally amply demonstrates the lack of merit in your arguments.
But I also recognize facts for what they are, and the facts are these: only Christian civilization arose from barbarity and mass injustice, to bring democracy, rights and freedoms to the world.
Uh-huh. And the Greeks, who had functional democracy for over 400 years? Almost twice as long as it's existed in the world, since? How do they fit into your little argument?
™ Version 4.2
