All the claims against Christ posted here are done in ignorance; as Christ never taught or practised of the things many accuse. He espoused the basis of how humanity was intended to cooperate. Those principle are eternal in the nature of God, as Christ expressed.

People have always been basically selfish and intolerant of others, and capable of murder from the time of Cain and Able. Bad behaviour is not a recent event and a culture that is called Christian does not mean all follow the teachings and behaviour of Christ. Many cultures after Christ adopted the Roman syncretised view of the Roman State culture and practise.

However in the background the Christ conscience and attitude is the epitime of any good society; where love, generosity, forgivness, acceptance etc is found. Christ accepted adulterers who quit their sin and they became loyal friends, as he does repentant murderers, and those who practise sexual perversions. God's kingdom does not allow these sins, but fallen humanity are prone to all of these sins.

The true enlightenment is founded on God conscience - how man and society was best to function and that principle of conscience was intended from the time of Adam. That Adam coverted fruit that was not his, that he tried to deceive to save face and blame someone else for the problem is typical of fallen man. There is only one faith that is relative and that was intended present from the first intelligent human and that is relationship intended by our creator God.

Chrys Stevenson

You have written what I have been thinking and clearly bears repeating:

>> To say that other faiths have not contributed to Australia's history shows a woeful ignorance of Australian history. What about Aboriginal spirituality? What about the thousands of Chinese Buddhists who flocked to the goldfields? In 19th century Sydney, freethought and spiritualist meetings regularly attracted crowds of up to 3000 people. Indeed, one of our founding fathers and Australia's second prime minister, Alfred Deakin was a spiritualist.

Enforced sterilization, mind control experiments, and the development of the atomic bomb? The common denominator is America, the west's most religious nation. The people behind these projects were, generally speaking, good Christians just like you and Mr Wallace. America's sterilization program was widely supported by mainstream Presbyterian clergy...<<

The arrogance that a single religion among the plethora and varitaion of religious thought should be the single influence on a nation's values leaves me speechless.

We are the product of a multitude of beliefs, philosophies, cultures and that mix is what makes us thrive. A monotheistic culture is sterile - like a garden without the variety of plants, animals, bacteria, fertiliser it dies.

Of course, those who believe their religion is the only right and proper one are incapable of looking any further than that, I feel sorry for them, however when they impose their beliefs on me I reject them, I would rather reach out to them, but their religion is an impenetrable wall.

“All the claims against Christ posted here are done in ignorance”. So that settles that, then. Well done Philo.

Later on you speak of Adam as if he and Eve were real. Given that just about all the world’s scientists who work in relevant fields, and the three major Christian religions, now accept that biological evolution is a fact, there can’t have been single pair of first parents who, from the moment of their birth (or creation), looked and reasoned like you and we do. So who do you mean by Adam?

And if, as you probably do, you believe that humans have souls but lesser creatures don’t, then what can you tell us about the first person in the evolving chain from lower forms to humans to have been equipped with one? It’s hard to get your head around the thought that there was a first person— a woman, presumably, though woman haters will no doubt dispute that—to have been assigned both a soul and a prospect (sentence?) of eternal life while her parents, playmates and, maybe, even siblings had neither. And did this first recipient of a soul know that she had one, and that thereafter the rules of the game of life would be dramatically different for her and her children? If not, might it have been a touch draconian to have punished her for breaking them?

Look, it really is easier and less complicated just to deny evolution, and other inconvenient facts, and go with Genesis. Eventually, that path even makes it possible for you to assert that all the claims against Christ posted are done in ignorance.

Like the gw alarmist GlenC now insists that evolution is fact. It is true that all who want funding or position must follow this totally illogical unproven dogma. No wonder secularist come up with such perverted morals and use 'science'to justify their actions. Baby killing is one such example. There are are however millions of scientist who know the evolution fantasy can't be proved and is fantasy. In fact all intelligent honest scientist reject the fairytale of evolution.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/22722

Oh hullo, Mr Poirot.

You have just made a racist statement which accuses white western people of being warmongers who run around stealing other people's resources. It just goes to show that you are just as big a racist as I am.

I agree with George Orwell when he said that lefties can not even see the contradictions in their own arguments.

As for the idea that people rsent being liberated from tyrants, I note that you have a French avatar. Since 100,000 French civilians died under allied bombing, or during the military operations to eject the Nazi's, do you think it was preferable that France should have remained occupied by Germany rather than have civilian casualties?

On the subject of killing ones own, there are plenty of animals who do that. Newly minted alpha lions and gorrillas kill the recently born offspring of their defeated rivals, while chimpanzee troops engage with warfare against neighbouring troops to gain territory and young females.

What are our values? Lexi posted a list, which is a good starting place, but those are the values our government WANTS us to have - not necessarily those values that are dear to our hearts. How many Australians really exhibit all of these values? How many would like to think they [we] do, but don't really? Some of them are expressed in Christian writings - for example, St Thomas More's 'Utopia' - but do not necessarily have their roots in Christianity. To say that the Enlightenment is a product of Christianity, for example, is about the same as saying that the theory of relativity is a product of Judaism. It's the attribution of false causes - he was a Christian, he had a good idea, therefore his Christianity caused the good idea. It just doesn't wash.

When you look at the first whitefellas who came to Australia, were they really the archetypal 'good Christians'? Criminals and soldiers: I have my doubts. While the sense of social justice and egalitarianism that may be found in 21st Century Christianity may be reflected in these people, where do the irreverence, stoicism and suspicion of authority we like to think is 'Australian' come from? Not the church, that's for sure.

I'm a happy Catholic, and believe strongly in my religion. I'm also Australian, and believe strongly that Australia is a great place to live and stands for something great. That doesn't mean that I believe the two are connected, or that the Catholic Church should have any influence over Australia as a secular society. Let Christianity influence Christians, and let the interests of broader society influence broader society.