As to the reasons for the economic health and other benefits to Western Civilization which in the past have been seeped in Judeo/Christian values, we shall have to agree to disagree. It is what it is and that was derived from what it has been, not what it’s becoming. Those nations being touted as “better than the U.S.” in so many respects which seemingly have “advanced” beyond the need for religion are currently in a serious decline from all of their socialist engineering. Unfortunately, this is the same direction the U.S. leadership seems intent upon following.
What we “have been” is horrible, though. Dark ages, witch hunts, pointless crusades, book burning, state assassination of scientists, hypocrisy, genocide, imperialism, racism, sexism, bigotry.. “judeo-christian” values did not magically avert all of these tragedies for the centuries prior to enlightenment ideals taking root. It could reasonably be argued to have caused many of them directly.
Wasn’t that “enlightened” France where the “poor” were most recently seen rioting and burning in the streets? Where will the mainstream backlash to such violence hit hardest? Just how “wishy-washy” have the British been in continuing to let Moslems take over their country and where do we suppose that will lead. How about the Dutch? No, it seems the “ideals” of Europe have a great many problems we are not talking about here.
So you’re saying everything good in Europe is thanks to religious tradition and everything bad is from Europes secularism-turn-hedonism at the same time? jeez, supremacist much? I’m not arguing who has a better or worse society, government or whatever. I am saying merely that the objective cause of religious decline is tied to economic conditions and not to any other. If you produce X,Y,Z economic conditions than religion will dry up and it doesn’t matter what the culture or longitude is (as Japan proves, for example).
Did being a secular state really help the USSR and Red China, etc. treat their own citizens with decency and respect, or were/are those human rights (and millions of lives) which were lost just part of a plan for the broader good? What is the difference in the mindset which makes Sweden, for example, a little better on human rights? Perhaps being part of the larger Porvoo Communion which also bears the representation of numerous other state churches in Europe might provide part of the answer? They all have a Christian heritage and their leaders still hold to that historical accountability whether or not the majority of citizens ever actually show up in church.
Neither the USSR nor Red China can be called secular in the sense that we are secular. We are humanists and with regard to government, democrats and that makes a big difference. Totalitarianism is bad, period. In China/USSR the state demanded fealty and faith, unquestioning support, thus it was a quasi-religion. No secularist would agree to unquestioning, blind following of any institution.. so secular USSR? hardly.
Christian heritage? The recent heritage of the country I live in is Naziism and genocide. Which was very much Christian, I agree. But I don’t think they’re paying much attention to it these days, not overtly or subliminally. One thing I love about the place.. they aren’t hard atheists like I am. They don’t have to be. To them, religion is just not in the picture.. its irrelevant and absent, not debated and fought over. They just don’t care, and not caring is perhaps one of life’s greatest luxuries. I envy them this social treasure the US is not rich enough to afford.
I am saying merely that the objective cause of religious decline is tied to economic conditions and not to any other.
I don’t want to sound like ensign Chekov on Star Trek who brings up Russia whenever he gets a chance, but I must, once again, bring up the fact that the highly secular Czech Republic is certainly not a result of any economic condition, as all the surrounding countries with similar standard of living (or even higher in some cases) show much higher percentage of believers. Economy can be one reason, I suppose, but it is clearly not the only one.
Being half Czech myself and trying to work on my ancestry, I can offer that the Czechs who came to the US in the late 1800’s and settled in somewhat homogeneous settlement areas of Czech/German Texas have a strong and proud Catholic heritage. My grandmother spoke Czech and knew people in the early part of the 20th century who still didn’t even know English because they spoke Czech often as not. The Czechs, apparently through the strength of their national character, managed to shine (both in human rights and economics) above the rest of the Soviet bloc even though the communists supressed religion, the results of which is still seen today.
So we have a chicken and egg kind of theory… can cycles of perceived economic wellbeing and degrees of active religious affiliations be graphed to show any kind of phase relationship? So, if we encounter a serious economic downturn (like now) does that mean that religious affiliations will naturally increase? Perhaps if I become a Moslem those oil-rich Arabs will send me some money? And how about the price of tea in China? I think these situations might have some relationships, but they are not what drives the various boats to where they ultimately go. World-wide demographics are becoming increasing complex and it is folly to compare the U.S. to Europe (or anywhere else) when seeking to analyze such complex problems as either has or will have, but the history of each still factors in heavily.
I didn’t know the Nazis where so big on Christianity in that Jesus himself was not keen on burning and gassing Jews. This article might be enlightening as to what happens when a mad-man effectively declares himself “God”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany
from which we get things like this:
“Hitler and other Nazi leaders clearly made use of both Christian symbolism combined with indigenous Germanic pagan imagery mixed with ancient Roman symbolism and emotion in propaganda for the German public and this worried Protestants.[43] Many Nazi leaders subscribed either to a mixture of then modern scientific theories (especially Social Darwinism),[44] as Hitler himself did,[45] or to mysticism and occultism, which was especially strong in the SS. Central to both groupings was the belief in Germanic (white Northern-European) racial superiority. The existence of a Ministry of Church Affairs, instituted in 1935 and headed by Hanns Kerrl, was hardly recognized by ideologists such as Alfred Rosenberg or by other political decision-makers.
Despite Germany’s long history as the seat of the Holy Roman Empire and the birthplace of the Reformation, Christianity was in a decline during the rise of the Nazi Party. Some of the factors leading to this decline were the after effects of World War I which challenged “traditional” European viewpoints.[citation needed]”
The observed cycles? Economic downturn after WWI ushers in the rise of Hitler and Nazism with corresponding (leading or following?) decline in traditional religious affiliations in favor of newly invented religions designed to justify certain idealisms. I think this represents a dangerous glitch we should watch out for…
I am saying merely that the objective cause of religious decline is tied to economic conditions and not to any other.
I don’t want to sound like ensign Chekov on Star Trek who brings up Russia whenever he gets a chance, but I must, once again, bring up the fact that the highly secular Czech Republic is certainly not a result of any economic condition, as all the surrounding countries with similar standard of living (or even higher in some cases) show much higher percentage of believers. Economy can be one reason, I suppose, but it is clearly not the only one.
I am not competent to fully defend the thesis as I do not know the detail histories of each of these nations. I would submit however, that the “much higher” percentage of believers in nearby nations may be illusory. Poland is one of those nations and on that the authors wrote,
...Even in Poland, the one eastern bloc nation in which religion played an important role in overturning atheistic communism, just one third consider religion to be very important in their lives, and faith is declining towards the old European norm. It turns out that the “new” Europe is not turning out particularly godly.
I would add that it wouldn’t be particularly surprising for the stalwartly independent-minded Czech’s who repelled communism that surrounded them would then be much more apt to discard old “heritage” nationalism/religion more easily than other “go with the flow” nations.. but the outcome seems to be about the same, over time.
And I ask you this.. if the Czech republic had not become a developed nation, a NATO and EU member and fell into third world economic status.. would it remain so staunchly secular? If it did it would be the only one.
So we have a chicken and egg kind of theory… can cycles of perceived economic wellbeing and degrees of active religious affiliations be graphed to show any kind of phase relationship? So, if we encounter a serious economic downturn (like now) does that mean that religious affiliations will naturally increase?
Increases in religious affiliation are in fact predicted regarding the economic downturn. The CNN article I linked the other day includes such predictions. That said, the US would have to fall very far economically to see any lasting result in increased religiosity because we’re a very rich nation. What makes us religious as a nation is the disparity, not the standard of living. At least so goes the idea.
World-wide demographics are becoming increasing complex and it is folly to compare the U.S. to Europe (or anywhere else) when seeking to analyze such complex problems as either has or will have, but the history of each still factors in heavily.
and yet certain patterns are hard to miss. Name me one nation in this complex “incomparable” world that breaks the rule or bucks the trend? What first-world nation with a large middle class is also overwhelmingly religious? What super-poor economically stratified nation is atheistic?
I didn’t know the Nazis where so big on Christianity in that Jesus himself was not keen on burning and gassing Jews. This article might be enlightening as to what happens when a mad-man effectively declares himself “God”:
They certainly got along fine. The Pope never condemned Hitler. To this day relations with Jews are strained for the complicity of the Catholic and other churches. Yes I know about the occultism and twisted social darwinism.. but simply being a highly Christian nation changed nothing about the progression to evil and genocide. What might have stopped the madness? Reliance on reason instead of ideology. Free inquiry instead of blind obedience. In other words, everything religion stands against.
I would submit however, that the “much higher” percentage of believers in nearby nations may be illusory.
In that case I would ask why the Czech Republic also doesn’t show higher illusory numbers. BTW, most of the Poles I have met are religious — I have never met a religious Czech, including old people or those with a minimum level of education.
sate - 12 March 2009 08:42 AM
And I ask you this.. if the Czech republic had not become a developed nation, a NATO and EU member and fell into third world economic status.. would it remain so staunchly secular? If it did it would be the only one.
I don’t know. Would you, would I, would any one of us on these forums ask God for food if we were starving? I guess it’s like asking Dawkins if he thinks he will “repent” when he is dying.
In that case I would ask why the Czech Republic also doesn’t show higher illusory numbers. BTW, most of the Poles I have met are religious — I have never met a religious Czech, including old people or those with a minimum level of education.
Perhaps the Poles are still proud of their own Pope John Paul II? Most catholics I know are not overtly religious but do enjoy their social connections. Proselytism is apparently not a big issue among Catholics unless marriage with a non-Catholic comes into the picture. I suspect they might be embarassed to ask anyone who’s not already a Catholic to consider joining for fear the Priest/child molesters thing might come up.
I don’t know. Would you, would I, would any one of us on these forums ask God for food if we were starving? I guess it’s like asking Dawkins if he thinks he will “repent” when he is dying.
The famous “There’s no athiests in a lifeboat” saying comes to mind. I’ve also heard that some people have an increased level of religiosity following their having a “near death experience”. I don’t know if this sort of thing has happened with a well recognized, formerly “devout” atheist, but it might be interesting to know if such perceptions change given the proper “experience”.
The story that John Loftus has given us impressed me as his having lost faith in his people from whom he expected a better “Christian love” (a common mistake) at least as much as having lost faith in his God to whom he had dedicated so much of his life. Sex scandals are a big bear trap which has caught many “godly men”. Ironic that ministers will preach that “God forgives” when they know full well that their own church will not. If a Southern Baptist minister suffers a divorce, there also goes his career regardless of the circumstances. In recognition of this vulnerability, there is a rule that ministers should never expose themselves to such game opportunity or false witness either one by visiting alone with a woman. Come to think of it, Jesus told his own disciples to go out by two’s. Good advice!
The famous “There’s no athiests in a lifeboat” saying comes to mind. I’ve also heard that some people have an increased level of religiosity following their having a “near death experience”. I don’t know if this sort of thing has happened with a well recognized, formerly “devout” atheist, but it might be interesting to know if such perceptions change given the proper “experience”.
My uncle crashed in an airplane into the lake Ontario in 1976 and was “dead” for quite some time—IIRC, it was somewhere around twenty minutes and supposedly a world record at that time in the sense that he “came back” normal, or in other words, not as a “vegetable.” He “saw” the usual thing: the tunnel, the light, his dead father, and a friend who died when my uncle was a kid. I asked him what he thought of it, and he said that it felt like a dream. That’s it. He didn’t see Jesus or any other deity and remains an atheist to these days. What did change for my uncle was his hobby. He sold his airplanes and built a yacht. I think my aunt would have probably preferred if he turned to religion instead, as the yacht took him ten years to build.
I don’t know. My uncle said that the girl he “saw” in his NDE (near-death experience) died when he was a child, and in reality they were not much of friends — she was a kid from his neighborhood. I have heard a few explanations for the tunnel and light. Carl Sagan, for example, speculated it might have something to do with our birth, where we enter the world through the birth canal towards the light. Hmm, maybe. Many people who experienced NDE say they see their whole life being played in retrospect in front of them—almost as if watching a movie—followed by the tunnel and the light, so it would make sense for the “movie” to culminate in our first experience, our birth.
Whatever it is, though, it certainly isn’t what many wish it to be. Many have said to watch their bodies (and the doctors in the case when people are being operated on) from the ceiling. They tested it: a big number was placed on top of the operating light, visible only from the perspective of the ceiling. None of the NDEers was ever able to confirm what the number was. Plus, people experience similar feelings (out of body, light, etc.) when they take some drugs.
Whatever the NDEs are, at least they are supposedly pleasant. My uncle said that even though it felt like a dream it was a quite enjoyable and a very calming experience. Well, thank Zeus for that, as those will be the last seconds of our life.
This sounds very joe-nickellish: “And the life review results from the dying oxygen-starved brain stimulating cells in the temporal lobe and thus arousing memories.” No footnote, no reference of any kind.
I tried googling it, but all I could find was the lack of oxygen actually causing a memory loss. I am not sure where Nickell got this information from.
Also check out the Skepdic article on NDEs—particularly the part about Dr. Jansen and his experiments with ketamine. The claim that we only or usually see dead people in an NDE may simply be a version of selective memory (or faulty fact-checking) and be part of the general hallucinative state.
(I don’t like Lou Dobbs and I hate egg white.)
