Probably the most influential idea is the premise of the monotheistic God.

Yet for all the discussions, pro and con, it seems the basic logical inconsistancy at its core has been overlooked.

Necessarily a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which life rises, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which it fell.

More the light shining through the film, than the images on it. Consciousness seeking knowledge, than any form or brand of it.

Several thousand years ago, this concept of a father figure lawgiver, as the core of reality, was a useful narrative device for instilling cultural rules into an ever changing population. As we all realize, the assumptions we accept as children are the most influential.

Yet an ideal is not an absolute. One is aspirational, while the other is elemental.

Consider the implications of the fact that at the core of Western Civilization is the premise that our aspirations are absolute.

With the fading of literal monotheism, many ideologies have risen to try and replace it and they all make that implicit assumption; That the ideals they espouse are ultimate and absolute.

Consider all the various ideologies of the last 250 years, from the Terrors of the French Revolution, through Stalinist purges, to the Capitalism assumption of the bottom line as the only arbiter of society, to even the current woke cancel culture.

The aspirations cannot be questioned and debated. Nuance is illegitimized.

Where were the people supposedly debating such questions? The philosophers, public intellectuals, etc.

Nitpicking the details and ignoring the big picture.