Thanks Daffy Duck, I was wondering when we would get to "what would Jesus do?"

>>How many continents and countries would Jesus have invaded?<<

Would Jesus have invaded Iraq?

How was it, then, that a Christian leader of a Christian country went right ahead and did just that? An oversight? Or - just perhaps - he was no more guided by Christian principles than Saddam Hussein.

Which takes us back to square one, insofar as the claims of Christianity to "added virtue" are concerned.

TurnLeftTurnRight,

Yep you've got it right.

I'd only add that if you excluded Religions but instead inserted the influence of Christs message then you'd have to alter your stance to say it wasn't the religions who got it mostly right but those secular ones over the centuries that inclded Christ's message into their laws and societies but who also ensured the separation of Church and state... and the resultant curbing of religious power within society.

Nowdays the influence of Christ's message is a far more powerful influence on the direction of our mostly temporal western society than are the religions ... all of then ... thank god.

Celsus, a Roman, had this to say, in the 2nd century

"Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain [magical] powers... He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god... It was by means of sorcery that He was able to accomplish the wonders which He performed... Let us believe that these cures, or the resurrection, or the feeding of a multitude with a few loaves... These are nothing more than the tricks of jugglers... It is by the names of certain demons, and by the use of incantations, that the Christians appear to be possessed of [miraculous] power..."

"Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her hands. His mother had been turned out by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a Roman soldier named Panthera]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, ..."

http://thedevineevidence.com/jesus_historicity_secular_commentary.html
.

As an atheist I neither accept nor comprehend the mentalities of those who, defying reason, profess a religious faith. But the same freedom that allows me to be an atheist allows others to believe as they will. Actually, Shelton’s article isn’t wholly unreasonable.

He points to a proud Christian record of defying tyrants, doing "good works" and promoting one of JC's core messages: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I don't care that JC was a Hebrew preacher (in my opinion) self-deluded into thinking he was divine: I accept the value of this core message, which would be just as valid coming from anyone else.

But Christianity and several other faiths also have a dark record of intolerance, violence, attempts to suppress inconvenient scientific ideas (eg, via bogus "intelligent design" psuedoscience), and efforts to force a religiously-based social and sexual morality on others. This is often capped by the atrocious betrayal of trust revealed by widespread abuses of vulnerable children in religious institutions, frequently condoned and covered up by various church authorities.

The "dark side" of religiosity so antagonised people like the late Christopher Hitchens and also Richard Dawkins that they sometimes reacted badly. Dawkin's otherwise excellent work "The God Delusion" has an intolerant tone that made my hackles rise, though I understand its causes.

It’s simplistic to characterise religion as the fount of everything good and wholesome in this world; equally so to claim it’s the root of all evil. In my experience believers, like atheists, come in all varieties, from good and decent people to some of the worst individuals ever to walk the earth. Example: one of the people personally known to me whom I most respect is a fundamentalist Christian who showcases all the positives of his faith; one of those I most despise is a self-seeking and utterly uncaring atheist heedless of the cost of his actions to anyone who gets in his way.

We are all individuals. Judging by group labels is the quick route to bigotry and intolerance, whatever you do or don't believe.

Pericles,
Bush Jr is about as much a Christian as you average Bolshevik, he's a Neo Con, an anti humanist, a Luciferian in other words.
The "religious right' are also about as far from Christianity as it's possible to be, the first post is correct, Christians don't need religion.
Why do the Satanic Nazis and the Satanic Stalinists have to be portrayed as anything other than what they are/were?
Scientific materialism is a continuation of the old Mystery religions, it's part of the Gnostic tradition, it seeks man's apotheosis, The Aryan Man, The Soviet Man, the Transhuman..call it what you will.

Where would xtians be without Wilberforce?

It seems he (almost a He) is their poker hand when it comes to 'proving' their religion is the only one of value.

They never delve too deep into the Wilberforce disregard for the workers in English factories though, do they?

Another form of slavery.

Anyway, the Wilberforce-set-them-free meme is not the complete story by any means and some modest reading on 'slavery' will show why.

And do the ACL believe that there is no more slavery in the Western Christian world?

Apparently so.

How wrong they are.

As for dumping all one's eggs into a Blainey basket, well, that would be like following Plimer into battle I think.

Clearly, with or without Blainey's book and Shelton's monocular view of life, it is doubtful that religion/Christianity is about to fade from view, even though the ACL and Shelton do their best to undermine the more intelligent Christians and their eforts to live a half decent life, as the rest of us do too.