I would be wary of discharging accusations of ignorance to others when you respond with an answer like that. First of all, our society, as imperfect as it still is, has borrowed influences from all sorts of society. Indeed, it's very core, democracy (utterly alien to Biblical nations) was taken from the pagan Greeks, along with our jury system via the equally pagan Vikings. I don't doubt for one moment that the Judeo-Christian influence is important and widespread, but it wasn't all good, as a thousand years of support for slavery will testify. Much of the reshaping has been done in direct opposition to the Christian orthodoxy of the time.
In any case, do you think that the great non-Christian civilizations were able to flourish absent the Golden Rule? Perhaps the ancient civilizations do not stand up to scrutiny by today's standards, but they would not have achieved all they did without some level of altruism between people and without groups of people working together for the common good.
As I said, it's been a long history of trial and error, with emphasis on the error.
Slavery was a remnant of pre-Christian times. There is absolutely no support for slavery in the New Testament. As with the other practices that we now consider to be human rights violations, it was the growth of Christian thought and principles that led to slavery's end in Christian lands. Opposed to that, I've conversed with atheists right here on FR that think slavery should be legal, as long as it is entered into voluntarily (such as settling a debt). As for Pagans creating worthy objects or processes, so what? Its hard to find a point in your assertion. I never said that all things non-Christian are bad. The Romans created fantastic architecture in which to spectate on the murder of thousands. The NAZIs gained advanced knowledge of human physiology by freezing Jews to death in cold water. The list goes on. What I said, and you did not answer to, was that you have chosen Christian values as the one true moral code and the falsely justified it as "just natural" with historical evolution, which is total nonsense and completely unsupported.
And a note on Greek democracy. It did not protect the rights of the minority. It simply placed total power with the majority. As a moral institution it simply replaced tribal rule based on blood, with tribal rule based on thought. It took Christian values to create modern democracy based on the Golden Rule.
In any case, do you think that the great non-Christian civilizations were able to flourish absent the Golden Rule?
Of course they grew. Christianity is no recipe for ruling the world, it is personal. If the only goal is to build an empire, the Golden Rule is a detriment. From the Roman Empire to the Aztec Empire, terror and brute force ruled the day. That you think they practiced the Golden Rule is hilarious. Altruism is doing something for others without reward, that did not exist as a concept. The great communal efforts were designed to achieve results. The most evil of human organizations practice communal cooperation to achieve greater strength, you have confused that with altruism.
Perhaps the ancient civilizations do not stand up to scrutiny by today's standards,
You mean Christian standards. Thanks for the reinforcement. They easily stand up to the standards of many of today's societies, just not ours.
but they would not have achieved all they did without some level of altruism between people and without groups of people working together for the common good.
You've confused the "common good" with the "common goal". Was crushing Jerusalem and using the plunder to build the Colosseum, so that greater joy could be achieved in watching men kill each other a "good"? Not by Christian standards.
But the Romans were logical and reasoned, and they did have a moral code of their own making. Just like you profess. But we've already agreed that simply professing something doesn't make it so. And you need to go back to whoever taught you the meaning of "good" and "altruism" and demand your money back.