>>22721519>not to any and all earthly authorities that try to exert power over themAnd yet they still do, the practicality of the religion is the only thing that matters, and Christianity promotes weakness.
>Christian communities have always been hierarchical to some degree rather than egalitarian>Leaders emerged regardlessOnce again, and please do read this time. Christianity leaves itself open to people who fundamentally do not embody the virtues inherent in scripture, those preclude leadership qualities of any kind. It's leaders are explicitly subversive and appropriate the faith as a vehicle for their own agendas. You can look at Christianity today, any denomination, and this is still the case as it was in medieval ages where the zealots were butchering half of Europe to establish the supremacy of the church.
Because actual adherents embody submission, they make for ready pawns for such people, they cannot protect themselves from manipulation without violating the virtues of the faith, which, again, are submission and humility.
>Question: do you think Europeans are better off now than in the last ~1,000 years?No, and you should not take my critique of Christianity as argument for Athiesm as a replacement. Religion is a useful tool, it can serve a valuable function that Athiesm cannot, as its raw and perhaps cynical logic does not nurture the spirit. Whether you believe in it as a metaphysical concept or as a philosophical metaphor for the emotive aspects of man's psyche is largely inconsquential IF the goal is for the religion's precepts to serve the health of the society in as many aspects as possible.
Christianity simply has glaring flaws that leave it open to subversive elements, it has no immune system to psycopathy and suppresses certain beneficial elements of the human noosphere, when channeled properly, as sinful.
>Christianity didn't program Europeans to be agreeable and cooperative within their communitiesThat is not at all what I stated.
