Has Christianity made people more civilized?

[Rue]

Kuwait Times

My question is broader. Has Christianity made our world more civilized? I think so.

Without Christianity, our world today would be nastier.

So how do you explain Paris Hilton?

[sharkman]

I think Nobel Prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg said it best: "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion."

I haven't seen anything, this included, that explains how it is that otherwise good people do evil, like for instance in Stalin's Russia, where over 30 million(40?) were murdered at the whim of the tyrant. Was every single person who took part in that effort a bad person? Weren't some good people there doing evil apart from religion? It's simply impossible for them all to have been bad people who, duped by a madman, willingly carried out his evil wishes. So to single out religion as the culprit is misguided.

And the other side of the equation is that bad people will never be able to stop this evil from the above quote. It takes good people, and the cause of Christ is to change people into better ones.

[WIP]

I haven't seen anything, this included, that explains how it is that otherwise good people do evil,

Two words: parochial altruism -- the capacity for people to confine their benevolent feelings to those who belong to the same group that they do, and show hostility to those on the outside. In most cases, it means that they are only interested in helping those who share their religion, nationality, political affiliation, race etc.. So Stephen Weinberg's quote may not be exactly right, since there are other social forces that divide populations and lead people to consider those outside of the group to be something less than human.

But one thing religious belief does that nationalism and racism cannot, is to provide divine sanction for war or committing atrocities like suicide bombings. You can bet that the 19 bombers on 9/11 did not think they were committing murder -- instead, they were fighting a holy cause and fighting for their people. The other dangerous incentive that religious belief can do, is to offer supernatural rewards for killing on behalf of God. Stalin couldn't play that card. The best he could offer was to place the fallen comrades portraits in the hall of the heroes of the revolution.....pales in comparison to 72 virgins for all of eternity!

[sharkman]

I agree with you that the beliefs of some religions do provide fertile grounds for suicide bombings, but we are talking about Christianity here, and the 9/11 terrorists were not Christians.

Stalin seemed to be pretty efficient at killing without God. Has any tyrant used religion to kill so many of his own citizens?

[Mr.Canada]

Christianity has made the world what it is today in many aspects it has civilized the many savage regions of t he world and shown them not to eat people etc as it's wrong. Christianity has done many great things indeed.

[GostHacked]

Christianity has made the world what it is today in many aspects it has civilized the many savage regions of t he world and shown them not to eat people etc as it's wrong. Christianity has done many great things indeed.

Things like the Crusades kind of taint that whole Christian Goodness. Many religions have done many great things as well as bad things.

Sharkman

Stalin seemed to be pretty efficient at killing without God. Has any tyrant used religion to kill so many of his own citizens?

Religion is used to kill the other guy's citizens.

[Mr.Canada]

Things like the Crusades kind of taint that whole Christian Goodness. Many religions have done many great things as well as bad things.

Back in those everyone was religious and afilliated to one religion to another. Non believers would have been killed as heretics by followers to any of the major religions of the day. Not just Christianity.

[WIP]

I agree with you that the beliefs of some religions do provide fertile grounds for suicide bombings, but we are talking about Christianity here, and the 9/11 terrorists were not Christians.

Even if we don't end up with a scenario of Christian zealots flying planes into buildings, there is still the problem of the Christian Nationalism theme that prevails in most of rightwing Christian writing about the War in Iraq -- presenting it as a clash of civilizations. There is a significant segment of U.S. fundamentalist leaders who rallied their flocks around George Bush and presented his War On Terror, as some sort of holy end time cause. Now that U.N. estimates approximately one million civilian casualties in Iraq and 5 million internal and external refugees, it's worth considering that Franklin Graham and Co. have done more to spread death and destruction than Al Qaeda ever could have in their wildest dreams.

Stalin seemed to be pretty efficient at killing without God. Has any tyrant used religion to kill so many of his own citizens?

If not, Hitler certainly was close! And since fascism (the joining together of religion and nationalism) is still with us, whereas Communism is not, it is time to focus more on present dangers, rather than those of the past.

The body count of which despot killed the most people has been skewed by technology in the modern era. There certainly were despots of the past who could have killed more if they had access to modern weapons and gas chambers; and I would still consider a religious fascist who is a fervent believer in either Christian or Islamic end time prophecy to be more dangerous than Stalin, if he had access to nuclear weapons. Joseph Stalin may have been a brutal, ruthless dictator, but he and the subsequent Soviet leaders also seemed to have a rational perspective of men who were not expecting supernatural help for victory over their adversaries.

forgot the links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/opinion/20marsh.html

http://newhumanist.org.uk/1681

Edited May 15, 2009 by WIP

[sharkman]

Things like the Crusades kind of taint that whole Christian Goodness. Many religions have done many great things as well as bad things.

Sharkman

Religion is used to kill the other guy's citizens.

Yes, I agree with your comments.

However, if you've been following along, my point that you responded to was responding to the idea that only religion can make good people do bad things. I don't agree with that and used Stalin as an example. Hitler is another one who did his evil apart from religion. At any rate, there is plenty of blame to go around.

[BubberMiley]

Hitler is another one who did his evil apart from religion.

I think the Catholic church is happy you believe that.

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

[sharkman]

Obviously you don't see the christian contradiction in that quote. I suspect it's one that those who don't understand Christianity or Hitler use to prove to themselves that he was a Christian. At least in 1922.

[WIP]

Obviously you don't see the christian contradiction in that quote. I suspect it's one that those who don't understand Christianity or Hitler use to prove to themselves that he was a Christian. At least in 1922.

He may not have been a typical Catholic, since he was trying to force the Catholic and Lutheran churches into becoming a united German Church; and he was fond of Germantic and Norse Mythology, but the fact still remains that he considered himself to be a Christian, so what authority do present-day Christians have to disown him, since they maintain that no one has the right to judge another person's profession of faith?

No surprise that the Church distanced itself from Hitler after the War, and neither Catholic or Lutherans have dealt with the fact that he invoked historic Christian accusations of Jews being "Christ-killers" and made heavy reference to Martin Luther's book: "On the Jews And Their Lies," to justify a goal of driving the Jews out of Germany. Whatever Hitler's personal religious beliefs were (it's hard to determine during WWII since he was in advanced stage of dementia caused by syphilis), Hitler did not create antisemitism. It already existed and was promulgated as a doctrine right inside European churches. Hitler just used their animosity towards the Jews to focus the blame on a common enemy.

On April 25, thousands of Catholic priests across Germany became part of an anti-Semitic attestation bureaucracy, supplying details of blood purity through marriage and baptism registries in accordance with the Nazi Nuremberg laws which distinguished Jews from non-Jews. Catholic clerical compliance in the process would continue throughout the period of the Nazi regime. [Cornwell, pp.154] Any claimed saving of all-too-few Jewish lives by a few brave Catholics must stand against the millions who died in the death camps as an indirect result of the official workings of the Catholic body.

After Kristallnacht (where Nazis broke Jewish store windows and had synagogues burned) there issued not a single word of condemnation from the Vatican, the German Church hierarchy, or from Pacelli. Yet in an encyclical on anti-Semitism, titled Humani generis unitas (The Unity of the Human Race) by Pope Pius XI, a section claims that the Jews were responsible for their own fate. God had chosen them to make way for Christ's redemption but they denied him and killed him. And now, "Blinded by their dream of worldly gain and material success," they had deserved the "worldly and spiritual ruin" that they had brought down upon themselves. [Cornwell, p. 191] Cardinal Theodor Innitzer, archbishop of Vienna warmly received Hitler in Vienna after his triumphal march through the capital where he expressed public satisfaction with Hitler's regime. [Cornwell, p. 201] Meanwhile, Cardinal Bertram sent Hitler an effusive telegram, published on October 2 in the Nazi newspaper Volkischer Beobachter, "The great deed of safeguarding peace among the nations moves the German episcopate acting in the name of the Catholics of all the German dioceses, respectfully to extend congratulations and thanks and to order a festive ringing of bells on Sunday." [Cornwell, p. 202]

http://www.nobeliefs.com/ChurchesWWII.htm#anchor2a

No wonder the Catholic and Lutheran churches had a collective case of amnesia after the War!

[ToadBrother]

Christianity has made the world what it is today in many aspects it has civilized the many savage regions of t he world and shown them not to eat people etc as it's wrong. Christianity has done many great things indeed.

And it's done many bad things. Religions are just another social construct, and generally, in and of themselves, somewhat neutral. It's what people do with them that counts.

And Christian Missionaries weren't just sent to the very few places on the planet that practiced any sort of cannibalism (very rare). They were also sent to areas where civilization, in fact, predated Christianity; like India and China. I fail to see how you could call the Chinese or Indians "savages" when, while our ancestors were still living in stockades and huts, they were creating art, literature, mastered architecture and engineering, and so forth.

It reminds of one of Gandhi's greatest witticisms, "Western civilization, that would be a good idea."

[Oleg Bach]

And it's done many bad things. Religions are just another social construct, and generally, in and of themselves, somewhat neutral. It's what people do with them that counts.

And Christian Missionaries weren't just sent to the very few places on the planet that practiced any sort of cannibalism (very rare). They were also sent to areas where civilization, in fact, predated Christianity; like India and China. I fail to see how you could call the Chinese or Indians "savages" when, while our ancestors were still living in stockades and huts, they were creating art, literature, mastered architecture and engineering, and so forth.

It reminds of one of Gandhi's greatest witticisms, "Western civilization, that would be a good idea."

Christianity has not done anything bad - relgion and it's cohorts have behaved poorly...Christianity is not a religion - t is a state of mind. The state of mind that is real and true Christianity - created the comforts that is the modern world - look at all other nations including todays secularist nations...they do not fair well - the best parts of secularism are concepts taken directly from Christianity ---- I am getting tired of people who say Christianity caused all the wars and so on and so on - The teachings of Christ..in it's pure form brought peace and properity - religion on the other hand was used to dupe crazy and stupid people into killing for God ----and any fool knows God does not need our help in those regards..Religion is a fraud.

[WIP]

And it's done many bad things. Religions are just another social construct, and generally, in and of themselves, somewhat neutral. It's what people do with them that counts.

Actually, I think the most dangerous aspect is how the supernatural belief in a soul can be used to offer imaginary rewards for soldiers marching off to war, and suicide bombers promised virgins in heaven, for blowing themselves up and killing others in the process.

And Christian Missionaries weren't just sent to the very few places on the planet that practiced any sort of cannibalism (very rare). They were also sent to areas where civilization, in fact, predated Christianity; like India and China. I fail to see how you could call the Chinese or Indians "savages" when, while our ancestors were still living in stockades and huts, they were creating art, literature, mastered architecture and engineering, and so forth.

It reminds of one of Gandhi's greatest witticisms, "Western civilization, that would be a good idea."

Even some of these "primitive" religions can provide an interesting insight into how others understand the world. The beliefs of the Australian Aborigines for example, were only considered worth learning about by anthropologists within the last 20 years or so -- a time when it is almost too late, since their beliefs, myths and histories were handed down generation after generation by oral tradition. Now that most of those who are old enough to have learned the languages and been taught the traditions are almost gone, most of their teachings and wisdom that enabled them to survive in the Outback for up to 40,000 years, are likely lost forever, just like the books in the Library at Alexandria.

But the worst aspect of Christian missionaries was that they also carried the assumptions of cultural and racial superiority that denigrated and tried to eradicate local cultures and replace them completely with the European model.

[ToadBrother]

Christianity has not done anything bad - relgion and it's cohorts have behaved poorly...Christianity is not a religion - t is a state of mind. The state of mind that is real and true Christianity - created the comforts that is the modern world - look at all other nations including todays secularist nations...they do not fair well - the best parts of secularism are concepts taken directly from Christianity ---- I am getting tired of people who say Christianity caused all the wars and so on and so on - The teachings of Christ..in it's pure form brought peace and properity - religion on the other hand was used to dupe crazy and stupid people into killing for God ----and any fool knows God does not need our help in those regards..Religion is a fraud.

This is a rather classic example of the No True Scotsman Fallacy http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mat...ogic.html#scots

Christianity long ago ceased to be just the words of Jesus (and was it ever, really, certainly a good chunk of even the early corpus was the Old Testament). Considering the number of sects, the explosion since the Reformation of theologies and dogmas, to say "Oh, those guys weren't true Christians because they did x" seems a rather futile kind of debate. To my mind, if the people in question believed they were Christians, then I'll accept the claim.

As to whether teachings or beliefs are properly "Christian", well, that's all over the place, isn't it? Look at the Baptists in the US prior to the Civil War. In the North, Baptists were decidedly abolitionist, while in the South, they were very much pro-slavery. The Southern Baptist Convention was formed specifically because Southern Baptists refused to adopt the anti-slavery sentiments of their Northern brethren. So were Southern Baptists Christians or not?

[sharkman]

Uh, so which brand of Baptist was it among the two that was committing suicide bombings in the name of God? Neither.

There have been errors in theology or misunderstandings of scripture, even in bible times people were bought and sold, and of course disagreements in theology. One's opinion on slavery back then doesn't preclude one from being a Christian, only in error on a given issue.

[WIP]

As to whether teachings or beliefs are properly "Christian", well, that's all over the place, isn't it? Look at the Baptists in the US prior to the Civil War. In the North, Baptists were decidedly abolitionist, while in the South, they were very much pro-slavery. The Southern Baptist Convention was formed specifically because Southern Baptists refused to adopt the anti-slavery sentiments of their Northern brethren. So were Southern Baptists Christians or not?

So were the Methodists and likely some other, smaller churches, divided by the dispute over slavery into separate churches. The fact that slavery is now "unchristian" makes the claim of transcendent, timeless moral values a fraud -- since Christians have changed their beliefs over the ages, just like everyone else.

[ToadBrother]

Uh, so which brand of Baptist was it among the two that was committing suicide bombings in the name of God? Neither.

No, but a good many slave owners were Southern Baptists, and they were responsible for keeping, selling, abusing and even murdering slaves. I'll wager there were more slaves in the American South prior to the conclusion of hte Civil War than all the casualties from Islamist suicide bombings combined.

There have been errors in theology or misunderstandings of scripture, even in bible times people were bought and sold, and of course disagreements in theology. One's opinion on slavery back then doesn't preclude one from being a Christian, only in error on a given issue.

Well, one man's error is another man's dogma. In fact, I'm not saying Southern Baptists for much of those churches' history weren't Christians, they clearly were. They also believed for a good chunk of their existence (long past the end of the Civil War) that the black man was inferior. In fact, eugenics became very popular in the American South, in part because of a hysterical fear of the mixing of the races.

[sharkman]

Eugenics became very popular among the elite the world over. Odd that the backward simpleton south would be in lockstep with intellectuals in the major American universities of the time. Now those same intellectuals have found a new lover, and the implications of bioethicism make me shudder. Abnormally formed babies are not the equal of healthy ones, and care should be given based on that and not need if doctor shortages occur. It reminds me of eugenics.

Yes, what people believe can really impact a society, but usually it can only be wholly analyzed through the lens of history. I believe that slavery and the beliefs that blacks were inferior has been like a curse on that particular race in America.

Another belief I am concerned about is the benefits of abortion. How has North American society changed due to the millions of aborted fetuses. I think the lens of history will not be kind.

[WIP]

Another belief I am concerned about is the benefits of abortion. How has North American society changed due to the millions of aborted fetuses. I think the lens of history will not be kind.

Well, the honest truth is that many, if not most, are aborted before they get to the fetus stage, and long before the third trimester -- so those propaganda movies with plastic dolls representing a dead baby holocaust are just that -- propaganda!

The other side of the issue is that re-criminalizing abortion would mean increased birth rates and many more children growing up in poverty -- which would not give us a better world! Also worth considering is the fact that illegal does not mean nonexistent - as we have seen on drug, prostitution and gambling issues; so just making abortion a crime, would not be an end to abortions. They would just move back to the blackmarket.

[GostHacked]

Well, the honest truth is that many, if not most, are aborted before they get to the fetus stage, and long before the third trimester -- so those propaganda movies with plastic dolls representing a dead baby holocaust are just that -- propaganda!

The other side of the issue is that re-criminalizing abortion would mean increased birth rates and many more children growing up in poverty -- which would not give us a better world! Also worth considering is the fact that illegal does not mean nonexistent - as we have seen on drug, prostitution and gambling issues; so just making abortion a crime, would not be an end to abortions. They would just move back to the blackmarket.

That is one good reason why it is legal in many places. Women were dying in these blackmarket abortion shops.

[M.Dancer]

. Women were dying in these blackmarket abortion shops.

A good slogan but fails the acid test. Try finding a reputable source that gives a stat on how many, how often etc etc ...

[sharkman]

Wow, I make one throw away neutral comment on abortion after comparing bioethicism to eugenics, and I get grief on the abortion comment?

At any rate, we are beginning to repeat the shame and horror of eugenics upon our societies with bioethics. Abortion was actually the thin end of the wedge, and now that everyone thinks it's the best thing since peanut butter, other much more troubling trends only seem slightly uncomfortable to us, so we prefer not to think about them.(No doubt the abortion-mongers are now recoiling in horror and shall be all over me for my thought crime)

[GostHacked]

A good slogan but fails the acid test. Try finding a reputable source that gives a stat on how many, how often etc etc ...

You really expect to see numbers of deaths/abortions from illegal abortions? How do you start to get the numbers?

http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/economics.html

Mind you with a name like National Abortion Federation, it's strange saying it.

Before and After Roe v. Wade

When abortion was illegal in the U.S., desperate women often paid high fees to obtain abortions, even from unlicensed, untrained practitioners working in frightening, non-sterile conditions. Dangerous medical complications were likely to follow these illegal abortions, resulting in lengthy hospital stays, increased financial and health costs, and a serious drain on hospital maternity resources. Complications from black market abortions were a leading cause of maternal death when abortion was legally prohibited, exacting a huge price from American families.