Is Christian Evangelism a threat to our way of life?

[Pappa]

In the US a massive rise in Evangelism was achieved in just a couple of generations, thanks in no small part to the home schooling movement. Here in the UK, faith schools are able to pay lip service to educational requirements and are getting away with teaching ID in science lessons. It's not inconceivable that we could see a similar rise in fundamentalist belief because kids are passing through faith schools that indoctrinate fundamentalist beliefs. And there are more faith schools than ever before.

[MrJonno]

In the US a massive rise in Evangelism was achieved in just a couple of generations, thanks in no small part to the home schooling movement. Here in the UK, faith schools are able to pay lip service to educational requirements and are getting away with teaching ID in science lessons. It's not inconceivable that we could see a similar rise in fundamentalist belief because kids are passing through faith schools that indoctrinate fundamentalist beliefs. And there are more faith schools than ever before.

Wasn't the religion always there and the home schooling movement just took advantage of it. Religion in the UK has been on the decline now for a long time now every since the enlightenment?. I was surprised when I visited a musuem in Coventry UK regarding the bombings in WW2 and even then the C of E priests at the time was preaching forgiveness and all that liberal commie christian stuff than would be unrecognisable in the US version.

The chances of a serious religious revival in the UK (England /Wales at least) is close to zero, our religious problems are the integration of minorities groups but I would rather have the occassional islamic suicide bomber than a creationist as the Prime Minister/President

[Audley Strange]

I think your analysis suffers somewhat from the perception that human beings are conscious rational deciders. Think of it like you are a scientist studying the behaviors of a species. Ultimately our choices are determined by the brain and the evolved biological regulation that makes us what we are. We do what we feel like doing and the real causes are entirely unfathomable and not consciously ideological. Our best explanation is to understand the nature of societies from the point of view of the evolutionary mechanism; what are those behaviors doing to fulfill the life intentionality of the organism. The conscious rational thoughts are only the tool of the brain; patterns of neurons firing to sort out the rational relationships; the decision matrix. But the life response will always be felt and not logical. Projecting conscious human rationalizations as explanation is kind of futile.

For me the easiest way to generalize it is to think of the specific implicit biological motivations of the organism that express it's particular genetic life intentionality. To me societies are a balance between motivations of cooperation and motivations of dominance. Ideologies are just group markers. But the balance is always shifting with the fortunes of the society itself. The west is in a state of incipient decline and the motivations of dominance and conformity are gaining ground; the natural biological state of a society that is under economic pressure. "Evangelical" is just a label. The ultimate motivation lies in the assertion that this is the "right" way; not, I would opine, in any need for mindless comfort.

Nice response, other than that I think you've somehow managed to assume the exact opposite of what I meant with regards to motivation, perhaps I wasn't clear about that, if so my apologies but upon reading it back I added the last line precisely to show that I was not talking about rational choice.

If one was using ones reason one could clearly see that the powerful always use emotive "feeling" to promote their agenda as "right", whatever "way of life" they choose to promote and indoctrinate and that the very same groups who might look like they are offer alternative views are often allies who exploit people through whatever control mechanisms they use. I do not think that "mindless comfort" and the "right way" are mutually exclusive, both are nebulous ideas dependent on propaganda and indoctrination.

It seems to me that very often, these doctrines are designed to overwhelm ones capacity to rational thought, whether they be political or religious, in order for the powerful to remain so. The "right" narrative is a faith in the powerful to transform the life of the individual and group to something better. I merely think that when we have the situation as we currently do, that when any predominant narrative fails people move towards any alternative that seems to be beneficial, this does not necessitate them making any active concious choice, just that when one illusion fails another is there to take it's place so that the powerful retain power.

Otherwise people would be less passive and the powerful would likely lose their positions and most likely their lives.

[Pappa]

Wasn't the religion always there and the home schooling movement just took advantage of it.

Yes, but the advantage they've taken pushed ID to centre stage. It's not inconceivable that something similar (if on a smaller scale) could happen in the UK too. There are kids being taught ID in faith schools here in the UK, and some/many of them will continue believing ID is a valid and/or true scientific theory. It's very difficult to know how widespread the practice on teaching ID is in faith schools, because they seem reluctant to open themselves to scrutiny. They have exemptions from national curriculum requirements on religious education, and some blend the teaching of religion and science in religious lessons.

Religion in the UK has been on the decline now for a long time now every since the enlightenment?

As I mentioned in the OP, religion has been in decline as a whole, but evangelical sects have seen a growth in numbers in recent years.

The chances of a serious religious revival in the UK (England /Wales at least) is close to zero, our religious problems are the integration of minorities groups but I would rather have the occassional islamic suicide bomber than a creationist as the Prime Minister/President

Instead of a serious religious revival, what if they just get strong enough to subvert the teaching of science in enough faith schools that hundreds or thousands of kids end up being taught (and perhaps believing) ID? That could have a significant effect on the country as a whole.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

What we have been seeing in the UK, in recent decades, is a decline in organised, state religion, not so much a decline in religion as a whole.

Mankind hates not being able to work out why things happen; it is what sets our species apart from every other on the planet. It is that that has led us to speculate and construct grand theories to explain the world around us. Sadly, while such urges have given us science and understanding, they have also led us into religion and superstition.

We, as a species, hate randomness. We resist it when we see it, coming up with one theory after another to make sense of the vagaries of chance - I see it every day in the casino where I work - the proliferation of lucky charms, superstitious "theories" and OCD behaviour is mind-boggling! A basic grounding in probability theory should be enough to convince anyone that the cards will fall in whatever order they fall - but that doesn't stop players: turning all of their chips the same way up, refusing to post their blinds before the first card is dealt, folding their cards without looking at them the first hand after a change of dealer, standing up and facing away from the table after going all-in, and any number of other similar bollocks.

It takes a lot to deny the little voice inside that says that there must be a reason for a run of bad luck (or good luck) and not to try to influence chance. The soundest tactic is to only bet when the odds are in your favour and to accept any bad beats as what they are - simple variance. But we are so programmed to look for ways of bucking the odds that we are easily fooled into forgetting that.

Religion is merely another expression of such thinking - just on a larger scale than in a card room. If it is so hard for educated poker players to accept that random chance occurs in what is, after all, a game of chance, then how much harder is it for the rest of us to accept that all of the misfortunes, illnesses and inequalities of life are no less random and not to look for "reasons" and "a plan" behind it all?

What has changed very recently, is that science has made such inroads into religious explanations of the world, that the dogmatic belief in scriptures that was seen as perfectly normal a few centuries ago, has become marginalised and... a little bit weird. Mainstream religion (and I am speaking from a UK perspective here) has accepted this and moved, grudgingly at times, to embrace new scientific discoveries - seeking to cling to the zeitgeist. It is not uncommon these days to find CofE priests that openly accept evolution, the big bang, relativity, etc. and that relegate the old-time surety of the biblical version of creation and the fall of man to mere allegory. But there are still those that want, nay demand, complete certainty in their religion and this is where the fundies and their ilk prosper.

But there is more to it than just a spreading of religion from a single, organised, state-sanctioned faith (with a few fringe groups) to a more varied palette of religious options. For many others, religion has been replaced, not by science, reason and an acceptance of the randomness of living, but by a bewildering, pick'n'mix array of woo! We have believers in: alien overlords; crystal healing; homeopathy; psychic phenomena; conspiracy theories; reds under the bed; mind-control through fluorine in the water; copper bracelets; astrology; and a million other shades of shite. There are even those that believe a Brit can win a Wimbledon singles title again! All of this bollocks comes from the same stock as religion and, until it too is in decline, I see no hope of the UK, or anywhere else, becoming a truly secular, rational society.

[Pappa]

mind-control through fluorine in the water

But that is true though.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

mind-control through fluorine in the water

But that is true though.

You only think that because the chlorine in the water makes you think like that!

[Seth]

Maybe not so much a threat to my way of life, Seth. In fact, I'm not sure what "a threat to my way of life" means exactly That may be a little melodramatic. But the fact that so many members of my family are religious loonies, or otherwise loony, means I essentially have no family.

Melodramatic indeed. No, it means that you are an intolerant ass who cares more about your own bigoted ideological biases than you do your family.

I have, actually, fucked off and left them to their own devices.

How very selfish and self-centered of you.

They can certainly do as they wish, and have every right to do as they wish.

Thank God for that. But I note that many people here (and certainly at Ratskep) would enshrine anti-religious bigotry and oppression into law if given the chance to do so.

But my father is born-again, my twin sister is born-again, my step-sister is born-again, and my mother is insane, so far into the lobster trap of (in her case non-religious) woo that she'll never find a way out, and my little sister is brain damaged as the result of an accident. So for all intents and purpose I have no family. I suppose it's a threat to my way of life in that I no longer have a family life.

Hoist on your own petard, I'd say, if you'd give up all your family relations over such a petty thing as their harmless delusions.

All you have to do to have your family back is give up your intolerance and bigotry and accept that they are human beings who hold beliefs different from your own and allow them to live their lives in ways that make them happy without being an arrogant, judgmental, supercilious prick who thinks their own opinions and beliefs are perfection incarnate and is fearful that those beliefs are so very weak and insubstantial that even associating with family members who hold different opinions will tarnish and corrode that ignorant bigotry. You don't have to agree with them, all you have to do is tolerate their religious beliefs, and that's not really very hard at all. I do it every day.

Maybe they know something about happiness that you don't. After all, when 80 percent of the planet believes in "woo" and live happier lives as a result, perhaps it's you that's the errant fool, not them.

I don't understand the last line of your post.

Gay bashing and religious bashing come from exactly the same motivation: bigoted intolerance of those not like you. A bigot is a bigot, no matter who the target is. Cloaking it in self-righteous atheistic moralizing doesn't change the fact that you're an anti-religious bigot by your own admission.

By the way, how does it feel to be excoriated, attacked and reviled for your beliefs? Not very nice, is it? There's a lesson there for you if you have the wit to see it.



*** This post is currently under staff discussion. ***


*** Seth has been suspended for 24h. ***

[Seth]

Anyway, yes, they are a threat to my way of life. The fuckers are everywhere, even insidiously infiltrating my family.

And how, exactly, does this threaten your way of life? Are you being held as an involuntary captive in a religious cult?

I have a sweet younger sister who is quite intelligent and well educated. She was "saved" which resulted in her dumping her husband of the moment (since he was not "saved" with her), and in subsequently devoting her life to her small evangelical church in California. At first it was hard because you couldn't talk to her without her friend Jesus being injected into the conversation, but she has mellowed out over the years and we now get along quite well. The only thing that appalls me his her politics. It is very clear that her religious ideology trumps the constitution. To her way of thinking the only hope for the country is if everyone finds Jesus and gets close to God. To an evangelical it is crystal clear that the world is incredibly imperfect, and the mission is for everyone to be a Christian and live the Christian life. You really shouldn't delude yourself that this is a harmless non-threatening phenomenon. If the evangelicals gain political control (which they DO want), then you cherished delusions of individual freedom will be flushed down the toilet of religious conformity.

How is this any different than it's been since our nation was founded? Ever done any reading on the "cultism" of pre-revolutionary America? I don't see that we're in any real danger of being burdened with a theocracy, and should that become a genuine threat, I'd be as quick to exercise my right to keep and bear arms in defense of the Republic and the Constitution against Christian tyranny as against Marxist tyranny. I assume that would be the case for a good many others.

There is no "Religious Right" or "Dominion Christianity" organized in any way that poses a political threat today. Our religions are too fractured and powerless to have any substantive effect in creating a theocracy. That potential was destroyed with the decline of the Catholic church as government more than a thousand years ago.

There are simply too many different religious factions out there to allow such a thing to happen, and the fear of it on the part of atheists is its own form of paranoid mental illness. Are there religious zealots out there who wish to create a global theocracy and who might have a fair chance of succeeding? Yes, absolutely, but they are not Christians, they are Muslims. That's who you should be worried about.

[Seth]

In the US a massive rise in Evangelism was achieved in just a couple of generations, thanks in no small part to the home schooling movement. Here in the UK, faith schools are able to pay lip service to educational requirements and are getting away with teaching ID in science lessons. It's not inconceivable that we could see a similar rise in fundamentalist belief because kids are passing through faith schools that indoctrinate fundamentalist beliefs. And there are more faith schools than ever before.

Hm. Why is that, do you suppose? Why the resurgence in religious faith?

Perhaps it's because religion is an evolutionary adaptation that helps societies survive, and atheism is a nihilistic pathway to species extinction.

[Seth]

I think your analysis suffers somewhat from the perception that human beings are conscious rational deciders. Think of it like you are a scientist studying the behaviors of a species. Ultimately our choices are determined by the brain and the evolved biological regulation that makes us what we are. We do what we feel like doing and the real causes are entirely unfathomable and not consciously ideological. Our best explanation is to understand the nature of societies from the point of view of the evolutionary mechanism; what are those behaviors doing to fulfill the life intentionality of the organism. The conscious rational thoughts are only the tool of the brain; patterns of neurons firing to sort out the rational relationships; the decision matrix. But the life response will always be felt and not logical. Projecting conscious human rationalizations as explanation is kind of futile.

For me the easiest way to generalize it is to think of the specific implicit biological motivations of the organism that express it's particular genetic life intentionality. To me societies are a balance between motivations of cooperation and motivations of dominance. Ideologies are just group markers. But the balance is always shifting with the fortunes of the society itself. The west is in a state of incipient decline and the motivations of dominance and conformity are gaining ground; the natural biological state of a society that is under economic pressure. "Evangelical" is just a label. The ultimate motivation lies in the assertion that this is the "right" way; not, I would opine, in any need for mindless comfort.

Nice response, other than that I think you've somehow managed to assume the exact opposite of what I meant with regards to motivation, perhaps I wasn't clear about that, if so my apologies but upon reading it back I added the last line precisely to show that I was not talking about rational choice.

If one was using ones reason one could clearly see that the powerful always use emotive "feeling" to promote their agenda as "right", whatever "way of life" they choose to promote and indoctrinate and that the very same groups who might look like they are offer alternative views are often allies who exploit people through whatever control mechanisms they use. I do not think that "mindless comfort" and the "right way" are mutually exclusive, both are nebulous ideas dependent on propaganda and indoctrination.

It seems to me that very often, these doctrines are designed to overwhelm ones capacity to rational thought, whether they be political or religious, in order for the powerful to remain so. The "right" narrative is a faith in the powerful to transform the life of the individual and group to something better. I merely think that when we have the situation as we currently do, that when any predominant narrative fails people move towards any alternative that seems to be beneficial, this does not necessitate them making any active concious choice, just that when one illusion fails another is there to take it's place so that the powerful retain power.

Otherwise people would be less passive and the powerful would likely lose their positions and most likely their lives.

It appears, based on long-term human behavior, that "rational thought" may be overrated, and it may be that most people just want to make it through the day and have the larger decisions of society made for them by people they trust to look after their interests...and who better than a religious authority who espouses the same moral ideals that they have? If you believe in God, any god, then that commonality of belief, combined with the belief in the overarching and superior intellect and judgment of that god on the part of both the followers and the leaders, is a powerful force for social stability.

Religious believers trust their religious leaders precisely because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that those leaders are themselves subject to the higher divine jurisdiction of God and therefore are trustworthy because a religious leader who wields that authority wrongfully will, like any apostate, be punished by God in the end (or immediately, depending on the particular religion). It is the belief in a higher power with the moral authority and divine ability to render perfect judgment and punishment that is beyond the cupidity and corruption of mankind that makes religion work in the first place.

And the reality is that's not such a bad thing, as religion has been a powerful positive motivator towards social stability and advancement for many thousands of years, while nihilistic self-absorption and hedonistic dissipation one characteristically sees in atheistic social culture creates social strife, discord and many other associated ills and wrongs, including disease and disorder. This has been true for many thousands of years. The Bible, if we are to believe it even as a historical document, demonstrates how debased and corrupt society becomes when there is no belief in ultimate judgment and punishment for wrongdoing and hedonism and self-satisfaction are the order of the day.

Therefore, religion is entirely rational as a method of societal control, however false the actual claims of religion might be, which is precisely why it's endured as the most powerful moderator of human behavior and foundation of peaceful human society that has ever existed. It's evolution in action.

[Seth]

Wasn't the religion always there and the home schooling movement just took advantage of it.

Yes, but the advantage they've taken pushed ID to centre stage. It's not inconceivable that something similar (if on a smaller scale) could happen in the UK too. There are kids being taught ID in faith schools here in the UK, and some/many of them will continue believing ID is a valid and/or true scientific theory. It's very difficult to know how widespread the practice on teaching ID is in faith schools, because they seem reluctant to open themselves to scrutiny. They have exemptions from national curriculum requirements on religious education, and some blend the teaching of religion and science in religious lessons.

Religion in the UK has been on the decline now for a long time now every since the enlightenment?

As I mentioned in the OP, religion has been in decline as a whole, but evangelical sects have seen a growth in numbers in recent years.

The chances of a serious religious revival in the UK (England /Wales at least) is close to zero, our religious problems are the integration of minorities groups but I would rather have the occassional islamic suicide bomber than a creationist as the Prime Minister/President

Instead of a serious religious revival, what if they just get strong enough to subvert the teaching of science in enough faith schools that hundreds or thousands of kids end up being taught (and perhaps believing) ID? That could have a significant effect on the country as a whole.

What, exactly do you believe will be the "significant effect" of teaching (or believing) in ID? Do keep in mind that "evolution" is the newcomer on the block, and "ID" has been the prevailing belief for some tens of thousands of years, and yet the world has managed to keep right on spinning and human beings have kept right on building societies and advancing science even so.

Aside from your distaste at the notion that people might not believe what science has to say about something science really does not understand well enough to comment upon, what exactly will the severe social repercussions of people believing in ID be that makes it imperative that we crush all religious belief under the boot-heel of fascistic atheistic political tyranny?

[Pappa]

In the US a massive rise in Evangelism was achieved in just a couple of generations, thanks in no small part to the home schooling movement. Here in the UK, faith schools are able to pay lip service to educational requirements and are getting away with teaching ID in science lessons. It's not inconceivable that we could see a similar rise in fundamentalist belief because kids are passing through faith schools that indoctrinate fundamentalist beliefs. And there are more faith schools than ever before.

Hm. Why is that, do you suppose? Why the resurgence in religious faith?

Perhaps it's because religion is an evolutionary adaptation that helps societies survive, and atheism is a nihilistic pathway to species extinction.

Hmmm.... that's an incredibly presumptuous thing to say Seth.

Besides, I wasn't talking about a rise in religious faith (as there's been an overall fall) but a rise in evangelical sects and fundamentalism.

[Seth]

What we have been seeing in the UK, in recent decades, is a decline in organised, state religion, not so much a decline in religion as a whole.

Mankind hates not being able to work out why things happen; it is what sets our species apart from every other on the planet. It is that that has led us to speculate and construct grand theories to explain the world around us. Sadly, while such urges have given us science and understanding, they have also led us into religion and superstition.

We, as a species, hate randomness. We resist it when we see it, coming up with one theory after another to make sense of the vagaries of chance - I see it every day in the casino where I work - the proliferation of lucky charms, superstitious "theories" and OCD behaviour is mind-boggling! A basic grounding in probability theory should be enough to convince anyone that the cards will fall in whatever order they fall - but that doesn't stop players: turning all of their chips the same way up, refusing to post their blinds before the first card is dealt, folding their cards without looking at them the first hand after a change of dealer, standing up and facing away from the table after going all-in, and any number of other similar bollocks.

It takes a lot to deny the little voice inside that says that there must be a reason for a run of bad luck (or good luck) and not to try to influence chance. The soundest tactic is to only bet when the odds are in your favour and to accept any bad beats as what they are - simple variance. But we are so programmed to look for ways of bucking the odds that we are easily fooled into forgetting that.

Religion is merely another expression of such thinking - just on a larger scale than in a card room. If it is so hard for educated poker players to accept that random chance occurs in what is, after all, a game of chance, then how much harder is it for the rest of us to accept that all of the misfortunes, illnesses and inequalities of life are no less random and not to look for "reasons" and "a plan" behind it all?

What has changed very recently, is that science has made such inroads into religious explanations of the world, that the dogmatic belief in scriptures that was seen as perfectly normal a few centuries ago, has become marginalised and... a little bit weird. Mainstream religion (and I am speaking from a UK perspective here) has accepted this and moved, grudgingly at times, to embrace new scientific discoveries - seeking to cling to the zeitgeist. It is not uncommon these days to find CofE priests that openly accept evolution, the big bang, relativity, etc. and that relegate the old-time surety of the biblical version of creation and the fall of man to mere allegory. But there are still those that want, nay demand, complete certainty in their religion and this is where the fundies and their ilk prosper.

But there is more to it than just a spreading of religion from a single, organised, state-sanctioned faith (with a few fringe groups) to a more varied palette of religious options. For many others, religion has been replaced, not by science, reason and an acceptance of the randomness of living, but by a bewildering, pick'n'mix array of woo! We have believers in: alien overlords; crystal healing; homeopathy; psychic phenomena; conspiracy theories; reds under the bed; mind-control through fluorine in the water; copper bracelets; astrology; and a million other shades of shite. There are even those that believe a Brit can win a Wimbledon singles title again! All of this bollocks comes from the same stock as religion and, until it too is in decline, I see no hope of the UK, or anywhere else, becoming a truly secular, rational society.

I agree. What's more, I'll be very glad not to see such a society come into being, because secularism and rationality are not axiomatically congruent or concurrent mental states. History shows us that secularism is more often closely aligned with despotism, destruction and murder on an enormous scale. Indeed, secularism has deliberately and intentionally killed more people in the last 100 years than religion ever has in all of recorded history.

Religion is the evolutionary glue that holds human societies together, like it or not, and it's not nice to fuck with Mother Nature in that regard without being absolutely certain that what you are replacing it with is better than what you began with. As I said, history shows us that secularism is NOT a suitable replacement for religion. It's a valuable adjunct to some degree in government, but it's not a substitute for the powerful forces of religious belief towards social harmony and order.

Even Islam, with its awful beliefs in religious intolerance and oppression against outsiders, is, internally, a very peaceful and stable society in which to live. It's ordered and controlled and those who accept it enjoy substantial benefits from that order and control.

Atheism is not a pathway to a stable, ordered and peaceful society I'm afraid. The "herding cats" nature of Atheists alone proves this beyond any doubt.

[Tero]

But we can just profit from all that superstition. People are willing to freely pay for the stupidity tax: lottery tickets.