This probably doesn't follow exactly but I like it:

Moses, the Egyptian initiate and priest of Osiris, was indisputably the organizer of monotheism. Through him this principle, until then hidden beneath the threefold veil of the Mysteries, came out of the depths of the temple and entered the course of history. Moses had the courage to establish the highest principle of initiation as the sole dogma of a national religion, and the prudence to reveal its consequences to only a small number of initiates while imposing it upon the masses through fear. In so doing, the prophet of Sinai evidently had before him distant vistas which extended far beyond the destinies of his people. The establishment of the universal religion of mankind is the true mission of Israel, which few Jews other than its greatest prophets have understood. In order for this mission to be fulfilled, the swallowing up of the people who championed it was implied. The Jewish nation was dispersed and annihilated. The idea of Moses and the Prophets has lived and increased. Enlarged and transfigured by Christianity, taken up by Islam, although on a lower plane, it was to make inroads upon the barbaric West and was to influence Asia herself once again. Henceforth it would be useless for mankind to rebel and struggle against itself in convulsive efforts; mankind was to revolve around this major idea like the nebula around the sun which organizes it. This was the tremendous work of Moses.

The Enlightenment may not have happened without perhaps a dozen phrases attributed to Jesus

We have a long history of well preserved philosophical and daily writings. You can visit the towns and cities that become increasingly sophisticated through trials and tribulations, and see how central Christian principles were. You can sit in 100 cathedrals, and feel the ambience, read what they deify and respect, and contrast with Islam or Hinduism. You can look at the work ethic and philosohphies of protestants such as the Anabaptists and their derivatives, look at their philosophies of life, what they believe one should do and why they say one should do it - derived from very specific interpretations of the bible and the words of Jesus.

I don't think it is difficult to draw up a compelling picture of the influence of Christianity, specifically Christianity. Protestant denominations are living relics of how it all branched and why, and you can see their outputs.

The opposite is true. Islam has been civilized by Christianity to some extent. It was far worse before it was. Read about the Barbary Wars, for example, to gain a sense of the relative enlightenment of these two different cultures. Here's a choice quote from the time of the Barbary Wars, when the West tried to use reason and diplomacy to stop Muslims stealing their little girls to sell as sex slaves (they depopulated much of Southern Europe in the process):
Sound like ISIS? No, this was the top diplomat of a Muslim power 250 years ago.

I've spent the past couple of years living on the coasts where Muslims raided frequently, often taking entire towns in the raid. They would behead all the men and boys and old women, sometimes thousands in larger cities, and take the rest as sex slaves. The entire Muslims world did this, over centuries, to such an extent that they depopulated large parts of the Mediterranean European coasts. I bet you've never heard of it, or the extent. In fact I'm sure you haven't, by your comment above. In their own societies women were mostly treated as chattel, and practice which hasn't changed since the time of Muhammed.

I am not looking at today and extrapolating back; the Muslim word, despite its barbarity today, is kinder and closer to Christianity that it's ever been in history.

I'd encourage you to read the account of European travelers (or Asian for that matter) to the Muslim world.

That you see this as demagoguery (really, given the crowd here the demagoguery here is the view that Christianity is/was as bad as all other religions) is disappointing. It's nothing of the sort - it's an unvarnished look at history.

Perhaps I make the mistake of assuming that other people know the history of the Islamic world. If someone doesn't, I could certainly see how you find my words maligning to that culture.

No, that's what you say I said cuz that's how you roll. There is commentary, discussion, books coming from scholars active in Arab lands. It's a living body of thought and conversation because that's how knowledge is transmitted. And there's not one expanding caliphate. They do not even have nation states at this point. There are numerous city states and varied polities.

Seriously? This is Wil level of dumb. Christianity and Islam are Judaism. The same birds that flew through some different paint spray. You know, right, that Muslims pray to the Judaic god of Abraham, right? That Noah and Christ are both accepted as prophets delivering the word of God? That Muhammad's conscious program was bringing the monotheistic god of Abraham to pagan Arab tribes? I think you really didn't know that. I knew you were a dogmatist, but this is something altogether different.

No, slavery is in the fabric of a time and place, with a given religion being one of many historical factors in sustaining it. Slavery is woven into the fabric of Christianity in the American South as firmly as anywhere. More so, since it was industrial scale. You are not aware of the Bible quotes supporting slavery?

You make what's known in the trade as "monocausal" arguments. You simplistically explain an immense, old, varied, phenomenon like slavery with one factor -- religion. At least, that's what you do when talking about Islam. But Christianity and the west, that's complicated and multicausal.

This is interesting, while I'd disagree with a few, most seem reasonable. I'm trying to think of other areas as well. Certain narrow areas of philosophy, definitely. Complexity of writing systems. Best use of spices and complex flavors definitely (the Thais; the Chinese were terrible).

Man, you really do malign people who upset your sacred polite truths. I feel like an abolitionist at a Klan rally in this thread.

As for the bolded, I'm on record as posting exactly that. I'll get you the quotes if you want them; not that I expect an apology for your wrongheaded bigotry. I understand the Islamic world and particularly its history far better than you do; I'm certain I've heard more prayer calls out my window every morning than you ever have.

Yet there are only two religions where slavery has endured for 1000+ years and enjoyed widespread support and practice - Islam (including widespread socially endorsed child sexual slavery and women as chattel) and Hinduism, in a much milder, quasi-slavery form.
This straw manning of what I know and don't is absurd. I'm not Christian and have spent a lot of time attacking it and arguing it; I know all of its horrible passages. Unlike you, I know the ones in Islam as well.

Please quote where I have done that? Slavery in Islam has endured for 1000+ years and enjoyed wide social support in a diversity of communities. There is absolutely no parallel in Western society of what happened in Islam, because of Islam. Slavery within Christianity flourished in small areas and a fraction of Christian nations for a comparatively brief time (although involving huge numbers of people), as the west expanded into the new world and needed labor. It was horrific, but it was not a part of the fabric of their society and enjoyed no wide cultural support; in fact it was actively opposed.

Name a war fought by Muslims against Muslims to free non-Muslim slaves? It was Christians that ended the thriving practice of Muslim slavery, and they did it by force against the will of those nations.

Because it actually is. Slavery in Islam is simple - it's allowed, endorsed and encouraged. It's woven deeply into the fabric of their religion. In fact expected in some circumstances.

This is why I mention and contrast the world's largest religion with the world's second largest - to show you how Christianity was far more conducive to and aligned with enlightenment ideas than other religions were; some Enlightenment ideas go powerfully against the very core precepts of other religions and thus are far less likely to have occurred in those religions.

I see what you're saying but the Christ Impulse is not only a world Impulse but a Cosmic Impulse who speaks to the individual man, not the nation or race or tribe. This is why Toothsayer is spot on with his appreciation of the individuality(personality) of men which has come forth from the west , directly from this Christ Impulse.

The religion of the Crescent does not contain the Christ when its first came upon the world in the 6th century. This was a powerful force during the 600 years after Muhammad and we still feel its effects today. Islam is the Old Testament religion of the moon without the amelioration of the Christ Being.

Judaism is this very same Old Testament religion of Jahve (moon) which has transformed through the ameliorating effects of the Christ Impulse.

If one had a name for the Christ we speak to the "sun" religion of Christ.

Do not let these terms of "sun" and "moon" throw you for in this we speak of the same Being in the manner that the moonlight is the reflection of the sun , same light, same Being.

The paradox should be apparent as if the Christ Impulse is in all men why don't all religions display this including Islam ? I guess one can say that we are not all the same but moving toward the same destination.

And so Toothsayers characterization of Islam, to my eyes is spot on and I am thrilled as to his bringing the picture of the Christ Being into the development of the individual soul of the West. It is a powerful and gracious
read to which I am welled.

You can love your neighbor but be careful of the entity to which he is immersed for in there rides the beast.yada,yada,yada....

Abolitionist who diminished lynching and useed segregation and Klan arguments against black culture. Lol...hahaha....

Nice to see this as a new thread.
Yeah I think the Christ Impulse, as you put it, and the doctrine of an intensely personal, knowable relationship with God, was central to the development of Western individuality and thought, which to led to all manner of good things. It also wore down bigotry, xenophobia, racism - if we are all God's children, and not meant to judge one another too harshly, then it gives power to people who argue for tolerance in Christian communities. Contrast with Islam on that, where xenophobia and even violence toward outsiders is actively preached. The only other major religion that's similar to Jesus' teaching is Buddhism. And maybe Sikhism, though that only has 30 million adherents, so was never going to be a major force in shaping world affairs.

I also think a greater respect for women through Christ and the Madonna story - it's hard to be misogynist when much of your religious iconography and the person you can petition (the Mother) is maternal - helped the Enlightenment along as well.

I think there's a strong argument to made that the civilizing influence of women on men in society (both as participants and as rival idea givers) was a big part of bringing the Enlightenment. Civilized female ideas were softening to barbaric discourse, and allowed female sensibilities to enter the consciousness of the age.
Contrast this with Islam, where women are kept as de facto chattel and second class citizens, both in law and in practice. Women could never have existed or participated in court in that manner in an Islamic world.

So I think you can lay a lot of the factors for the Enlightenment at the feet of Christianity, both in what prescribed and what it didn't. People who go "lol Christianity" are a long way from the truth in this matter, imo.

Humanity progressed more in the 2,000 years since the rise of Christianity than in the prior 200,000 years. The whole of Western civilization, including its science, technology, ethics, and political systems, were built on the broad shoulders of Christianity. Meanwhile, atheism spent that same time frame committing atrocity after atrocity.

Modern atheists are standing on the shoulders of Christian giants of the past, leeching off of their discoveries, and their methods, while simultaneously showing them no respect. How disgusting!

Be wary of arbitrary correlations.

Why would you think it's an arbitrary correlation?

You don't think a new religion bringing a new philosophy and mindset to the world would affect how civilization behaves, and what it accomplishes?

The start date is arbitrary and the direct causality is tenuous at best.

The following statements are also true:

"Humanity progressed more in the 3,000 years since the rise of Judaism than in the prior 200,000 years."

"Humanity progressed more in the 1,400 years since the rise of Islam than in the prior 200,000 years."

"Humanity progressed more in the 700 years since the black plague than in the prior 200,000 years."

"Humanity progressed more in the 700 years since the black plague than in the prior 200,000 years."

"Humanity progressed more in the 600 years since the black plague than in the prior 200,000 years."

You can probably make statements like these all the way up to about the industrial revolution.

The event on Golgotha is the turning point and most significant event in earthly evolution. It is the hypomochlion of the earthly , or that to which all else is related; past and future.

This is a theological assertion, not a historical one.

Its both, unless the fact that the modern historian has had some trouble as to whether it actually happened then any statement of that type would be bogus.

The history of our times is better approached as a "fable convenue" , and so no argument here for there's no where to go. Peace.