//But its there in plain view for those that don't have an agenda.//

Yes, of course. This enlightened prophet can see clearer than us mere mortals because he is unburdened by an agenda. If anybody can't perceive the same problems he does, why, it must be their fault - if only they didn't have an agenda, they'd be able to see it too. Seems awfully convenient.

I can't help but be reminded of the 'tailors' in 'The Emperor's New Clothes' telling everyone that if they couldn't see the 'clothes', it must be their problem. And of course, there was never anything to see in the first place.

//Its passing will be a disaster for humankind//

Where do you imagine it is going to go? Dissapearing in a puff of consumerist decadence? Falling victim to socialist revolution and reverting to agrarian collectivism? Skynet going online and hunting us all down with Terminators?

I can't see Western civilisation going anywhere fast, unless we fall victim to some massive natural disaster (big meteorite, super-volcanic eruption, gamma-ray burst, unlikely stuff like that) in which case pretty much everybody is f%&ked. But other than something drastic like that, or some retard pressing the big red button, I reckon Western civilisation will probably be all right. It will change and develop, as it has been doing for the last few thousand years (I understand the thought of things changing is deeply concerning to Tories, but I'm not sure there's much you can do to prevent it). But I can't see it disappearing any time soon.

Well, until that meteor hits us, that is.

well the reasons for Christians supporting Israel are somewhat plain. The reasons for such hatred by the god deniers are not quite as simple. The same mob claim they are in favour of homosexuality, freedom of speach, freedom of religion and yet they defend Hamas and other terrorist groups. Their hatred certainly wins the hypocrisy medal. Really it is Truth Personified that they hate so much. And on earth here He was a Jew.

Not_Now.Soon

I actually know several Christians and even lived with a couple of born-again Baptists for a while and they insist that according to the New Testament, only Christians will be raptured and survive the Apocalypse.
Then again all religions have their own versions of eschatology - especially the Christians who disagree on many things.

You can always buy some survival buckets of food from end-times profiteer Pastor Jim Bakker, and he's really raking in the dollars from the gullible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al4Qr9MlDWo

As for the Jews being God's chosen people, it's convenient that that notion plus their real estate claim comes from the book they wrote in the first place and was filled with archaelogical fallacies and proven untruths. Funny that.

Dinosaurs? Here's an overview of a (failing) theme park by an expatriat Australian cashing in on common delusional beliefs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ark_Encounter

To see how crazy and politically influential Evangelicals are you only need to look at Trump's power base at http://www.rightwingwatch.org/ each day - even for just a few laughs.

For an example of their self-professed compassion, here's the result of a survey that shows them to be the least likely to be supportive of refugees and most forgiving of immorality by public officials.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/05/24/the-group-least-likely-to-think-the-u-s-has-a-responsibility-to-accept-refugees-evangelicals/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.433b6cd2c00e

So much for their self-righteousness and another example of religious hypocrisy.

"And yet you still don’t go into specifics."

In a previous thread you demanded that I go into specifics which I eventually did in a series of long posts. Thereupon you announced that you really weren't interested in discussing the issue any longer, which I took to mean that you had no way to refute my points. Same here. What you want is a list of details which you will parse in the hope of finding something to misinterpret and fake refute.

No thanks.
___________________________________________________

"This enlightened prophet can see clearer than us mere mortals"

Well no. There are many who can see it and if there are many then they aren't really enlightened, n'est pas?

"'The Emperor's New Clothes"

But the point was that everyone could see there were no clothes but were too scared to say it for fear of being ridiculed. There's a lot of that around today with people muzzled for fear of being called racist, Islamophobic, transphobic etc etc etc. And not just fear of ridicule but fear of the weight of state power descending on their unwelcome views.

"I can't see Western civilisation going anywhere fast"

Hemingway, when asked about how one goes bankrupt, once replied slowly then quickly.
The decline of civilisations is like that. The fall of the Roman Republic took over a century but when it came it came quickly. Athens likewise.

There are two ways western civilisation will pass into history (if it does). A cataclysmic defeat in battle where its ability to defend itself is forever lost. Many civilisations go that way, from Pharaonic Egypt to the Aztecs. Alternatively it can be a slow decline where no one can quite put their finger on when it disappeared.

/cont

/cont

My own guess is that the west, having lost its vitality by losing the core foundation of the civilisation will simply slip into irrelevance. And all those things that the west offered the world will be circumvented by the next hegemon, to the detriment of progress and liberty. Many of the structures of the civilisation will remain but will be merely paid lip service. There will still be an England that professes to respect freedom of speech, but it will be a pale imitatin of the once vital nation. The US also where the efforts of the deep state to circumvent democracy will eventually succeed. Long after the Roman Republic ceased to exist in any meaningful sense, there was still a Senate and still tribunes of the people who still had theoretic power. But it was a mirage. The west's foundations are increasingly becoming a mirage.

AJP mentioned Murray. I've just read his book "The Strange Death of Europe". (Elsewhere he's called it a suicide. He describes a slow and painful passing of a once great civilisation.

The end is not yet set in concrete but all the ingredients are in place.

I have never once demanded anything from anyone on OLO, mhaze.

<<In a previous thread you demanded that I go into specifics …>>

Nice touch there with the dramatic wording, though. It really paints me in a negative light.

This isn’t the first time you’ve pulled this kind of trick though, is it? There was that time (two times, actually) where, just to make me look pathetic, you tried to write off a link I provided you with as a mere advertisement when it was in fact a listing of my source on an online bookstore.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7734#238213
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7880#243964

Anyway, here was my dreadful “demand”:

“Could you specify to which Christian values you refer, and how exactly they were necessary?” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106#252021)

<<…which I eventually did in a series of long posts.>>

Yeah, all two of them.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106#252109
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106#252110

They were mostly just fallacious appeals to ignorance, and dubious assertions that Christianity was necessary. The two good points you had were neither new to me, nor did they tell the whole story, so I moved on. What did you expect from me?

<<Thereupon you announced that you really weren't interested in discussing the issue any longer…>>

(Doesn’t really have the same effect after I’ve shown that no demands were made, does it?)

No, that was long after we’d moved on:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106#252806

<<…which I took to mean that you had no way to refute my points.>>

And which I have since demonstrated that you were wrong about.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19729#349416
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8106#252806

<<What you want is a list of details which you will parse in the hope of finding something to misinterpret and fake refute.>>

You mean, like all those other times I didn’t do that? You don’t exactly have many examples of such behaviour to go by now, do you mhaze?

In fact, you don’t have any.

Try pointing to one instance of me deliberately misinterpreting you or “fake-refuting” something you've said (whatever that means)?