I can't see how you can assume to contrary, Now let see what you have said:
*So you are saying that those God Less societies in the world have been there since the existence of historical figures? And they have not seen any religion, and thus what ever moral or ethical ideas they have developed are THEIR own?
Please name JUST ONE.*
Here you are asking the name of one God-Less society which have not seen the religion, your claim is that ethics, that these societies have is because of religion, that had influence some time in history.
Now Look at my response earlier: * The significance of religion is not just in its mere presence, but believing in it. If mere presence of religion in the history of man kind is enough, than i guess what you are suggesting is that, its not necessary to believe in religion to be moral, since there were religions in all the cultures.
*What I'm saying that mere presence of religion in that societies in their history is not enough, for God-less societies to be moral, they shall not be God-less but believers. So by saying that i should give you the name of one God-less society that is morally good and there was no religion in there history, you are saying what i had asked you below.
**What are you trying to suggest that its not necessary to believe in religion to be moral?
**Since God-less are not believing in religion yet they are morally good.
Please explain how my interpretation is wrong.
Fellow, the background on which you asked the name of one society was faulty, for that you have to clear what i had written above.
Further what Arabs got was not in a vacuum, it was just a little polished version of there own culture, because when presented to them they could recognize it as good. (please give a little thought to this point, that's why i maintain that the morality that religion provides is the just a step in the process of cultural growth, there are no big jumps, nothing out of the way of culture.)
And further "take yourself as an example" was just a witty humor, but if you don't want it you won't get it, no problem..
Again, refer to your earlier post for reference. I don't know why u are mingling everything up.
And then what Arabs got was not a vacuum, but just a little polished version of their own culture!!!
I am sorry but, please have a look at a dictionary, or wiki, of what culture really means then please come back to my original statement. I guess you'll see that my words will start making sense to you. Because to you culture is set a part from religion as far as i can extract... which is ridiculously insane.
And then you for some reason keep insisting that
"religion just provides a step in the process of cultural growth, there are no big jumps, nothing out of he way of culture"
Well helloowww. What are you saying that Islam just stepped up what cultural values Arabs had at those times....? Gimme a break will ya....
I still don't know how u keep loyal to ur words and deny the very obvious facts. Islam was everything... out of the way of Arab's old ideologies. Again, reiterate to the obvious facts. And i am stating yet again, Islam just didn't jumped up... it was the giant leap any society has ever seen in history. Islam just made Arabs from some nomads and desert dwellers to A FORCE to reckon with. Please have a look at the time lines... and again, i am just stating the obvious facts.
Thanks.