Influential Myths

How Do the Irreligious Fare as a Cause of Wars & Violence Pt 1

Would violence and war disappear if religion were eradicated? Sadly, I think a lot of people might answer "yes", or "most" if asked this question. But we don't have to speculate. Despite the fact that the history of the human race has been overwhelmingly religious, there are times when irreligion has gained enough power to show what it can do. And the results, especially recently, have not been encouraging to say the least!

How Do the Irreligious Fare as a Cause of Wars & Violence Pt 2 Atheism as a Cause

In this episode we follow up on the findings of the previous episode where we saw that among all the wars in human history, only 7% were caused by religion and roughly half of those by Islam, while 93% were caused by irreligion! So, not only does this destroy the myth that religion causes most wars, it raises concerns about the causal role of irreligious beliefs or "lack of beliefs" with respect to violence and wars.

The Myth of Religious Violence Pt 1

The Myth of Religious Violence Pt 1
After episodes looking at violent blemishes within Christian history, and more recently within Irreligious groups, we are led to another myth–The Myth of Religious Violence–that is a sub-myth of the overall myth we are analyzing–The Myth that Christianity is Harmful to Human Flourishing.
William T. Cavanaugh, in his book The Myth of Religious Violence, argues that there does seem to be an assumption within Western culture, that the religious are somehow more prone to violence and war than non-religious actors are. We’ve already seen in the previous two episodes that the historical evidence does not support that assumption, but Cavanaugh goes further and argues that this assumption of religious violence is actually a myth that the secular Enlightenment narrative has created in order marginalize religious groups like Christians in western culture and, more recently,  Muslims internationally.

The Myth of Religious Violence Pt 2

The Myth of Religious Violence Pt 2
Does just being religious make one more inherently violent? According to William Cavanaugh, in his excellent scholarly book The Myth of Religious Violence (Oxford University Press), this view has proved a useful tool to remove the influence of religion, especially Christianity, on public policy in western cultures, and religion, especially Islam in international affairs. Cavanaugh points out that the violence of religion is considered irrational, fanatical, and uncontrolled, while the violence of secular authorities is considered reasonable, controlled and often necessary to contain religious violence. 
The radical interpretation of the separation of church and state which claims that religious ideas must be kept out of the public square is justified by this secular assumption that only religious views are prone to violence while secular, liberal views are not. Thus, this assumption is clearly justifying discrimination by denying worldviews which contain a God access to the public square while allowing worldviews that do not contain a God complete access!
Cavanaugh concludes, “The myth of religious violence is false, and it has had a significant negative influence. The myth should be retired from respectable discourse. To do so would offer some important benefits.
“… it would free the valuable empirical work on violence … from being hobbled by the religious-secular distinction. Rather than attempt to come up with reasons that a universal and timeless feature of human society called religion has a peculiar tendency to promote violence, the question for researchers would be, ‘Under what circumstances do ideologies and practices of all kinds promote violence?’”

The Heart of the Problem

The Heart of the Problem
Historian John Dickson writing about the cause of violence in human history contends that “...the real problem is neither religion nor irreligion; the problem is the human heart in possession of a misdirected passion.” (Bullies & Saints p. 280)
You don’t need to be religious to have a dangerous inclination to want to bend others to your own views. It just so happens that most people throughout history have been religious, not atheist. Any ideology or worldview is capable of resorting to violence to promote or defend its position, because it is human beings who hold views and beliefs and positions, and humans seem to have a proclivity to self-centeredness and even violence. 
This is consistent with exactly what Christian teaching affirms–that humankind is fatally flawed. It is a human problem not a unique problem of religion, or Christianity. The problem is not religions but the human race.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn nailed it when he stated,
“If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.”

Fruit without the Root - The Myth of Enlightenment Humanism

Fruit without the Root - The Myth of Enlightenment Humanism
What if everything that we have said in previous episodes is true? What if it is true that despite Christians being far from perfect, the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament have been the source of the most positively transformational contributions to human flourishing that have occurred in human history? 
What if it is true that religion, and Christianity in particular, is not uniquely prone to violence in ways that secular or non-religious ideologies are not? 
What if it is true that war and violence is a human problem, not a uniquely religious problem, and removing God only makes things worse not better?
Recently many unbelievers are recognizing the positive contributions of Christianity to the best features of western culture and speaking out publicly about it. Humanist historian Tom Holland, psychologist Jordan Peterson, secular journalist Douglas Murray, humanist historian Niall Ferguson, politician, former Muslim & former atheist Ayaan Hirsi Ali, even outspoken biologist and atheist Richard Dawkins are all affirming that the fruit of Christianity is good for human flourishing, but they can also see that the fruit is disappearing or being twisted into something almost unrecognizable. 
That is, they are acknowledging that they want the fruit of Christianity even if they are still not so sure they want the root (the supernatural grounding that produces and nourishes the fruit.) 
This view that the fruit of Christianity can be had without the root of Christianity, that is, the existence of God and the supernatural, is what I am calling The Myth of Enlightenment Humanism – The Fruit without the Root!
The last 300 years has been a mix of functioning as though the Christian values are true and even self evident, and at the same time pushing back against the moorings and foundation of these values. But this is inherently unstable – apart from the root the fruit will not remain!
Enlightenment style humanists and atheists should revisit not only this myth that the fruit will be just fine without the root of Christianity, but especially their aggressive campaign to completely eliminate it from public influence.

Twisted Fruit without the Root Pt 1

Twisted Fruit without the Root Pt 1
In the previous episode we introduced and challenged “The Myth of Enlightenment Humanism”, the view that the fruit of important moral values like ‘all human beings intrinsically have equal value, worth and dignity’, even though rooted in the Judeo-Christian idea of the imago dei (all humans are created in the image of God), can flourish without belief in this doctrinal root.    
This Fruit without the Root myth seemed to produce initial benefits because it was living off of the accumulated cultural resources of the Christian root. But since Enlightenment thinkers have, for 250 years, continued to insist that the root is unnecessary, and even harmful, the Christian roots have been consistently marginalized and even banished from the public square as well as the culture as a whole.
This episode will show, in broad strokes, how this has happened, and will survey specific examples of how changes in cultural beliefs about the Christian roots have led to detrimental changes in the fruit.

Twisted Fruit without the Root Pt 2

Twisted Fruit without the Root Pt 2
This episode continues with more examples of “the old Christian virtues gone mad” – twisted fruit like:
Unconditional love becoming acceptance/celebration of anything someone believes or desires; 
The Golden Rule becoming treating others the way they want to be treated; 
Authenticity morphing into the demolition of Normal; 
Equality becoming equity based on forceful envy; 
Human Dignity/Exceptionalism morphing into dehumanization; 
Freedom TO twisting into Freedom FROM. 
We show how “our culture’s post-Christianity and its post-liberalism go hand in hand.” When the Christian roots of our western culture become twisted enough, we end up with a “Christian birthed humanism sufficiently weaned from the Christian root of love, forgiveness and redemption,” excessive and “extreme… unrestrained by the Christian insight into human imperfection.” Bonnie Kristian https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2023/november-web-only/john-gray-liberalism-new-leviathans.html?utm_source=CT%20Books%20Newsletter&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_term=216978&utm_content=14921&utm_campaign=email&vgo_ee=WX5hYv7Yo%2BGEEcm6ECvVfXZILnk95sbAhcQo0A75wZTyvUhcFhszj1c%3D%3AXatNzl525AWidN%2B590vnVU1S6cu4dsZU  
Pope John Paul II predicted “a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism.” https://www.firstthings.com/article/2023/12/the-new-agnosticism 
We raise the question of ‘What should we do?’ 
When we see that as the Christian roots are further and further cut out of our culture, that the good fruit that has made western liberal democratic culture, although far, far from perfect, still the best the human race has achieved, is being twisted even beyond recognition, how should we respond?

Correcting Enlightenment Myths about Christianity Will Preserve the Good in Western Culture

Correcting Enlightenment Myths about Christianity Will Preserve the Good in Western Culture
This final episode in the series Is Christianity Harmful for Human Flourishing? builds on what we have learned in the preceding episodes:
i. The historical evidence shows that Christianity, despite being far from perfect, has been the most positively transformational worldview for human flourishing in the history of the human race.
ii. Setting the record straight about a number of influential cultural myths about Christianity like the myth of the Dark Ages, the exaggerations in the narratives about the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Galileo affair, witch trials, and maybe most significantly the myth of religious violence in contrast to non-religious violence, provides good reasons for rejecting the overarching influential myth that Christianity is harmful. 
iii. The evidence is that the features of western culture that many people consider positive and beneficial to human flourishing, and continue to attract millions of people to immigrate to western liberal democracies, owe their existence to the Christian worldview and enough Christians living out the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament.
iv. Once this overarching myth “that Christianity is harmful,” is no longer seen as adequately supported by the evidence, the influential myth of Enlightenment Humanism that the values of Christianity can and must be adopted by a culture without being rooted in the foundational doctrines of Christianity ought to be abandoned.
v. Moreover, the evidence of the last 300 years shows that the more the roots are cut, the more the fruit gets twisted. That is, the fruit (the features of western culture that most people consider good for human flourishing compared to most of the history of the human race) that grew out of the resources of the Christian worldview and the behaviour of enough Christians authentically living out the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament, gradually, but still all too quickly, become twisted into something quite different, some becoming unrecognizable or even the opposite of the original values. 
What should we do? Even though western culture is far from perfect, it is the best we’ve been able to do so far, and it shouldn’t be demolished too quickly under the naive assumption that we can easily do this again, much less be able to build back better!
When unbelievers are able to agree with the 5 points above, it is my appeal that they would be willing to do renovations on their worldview. 
I am especially referring to the myth of Christian violence, that Christianity is somehow more prone to violence and war than non-religious ideologies are. We have seen in earlier episodes that the historical evidence does not support that position. This assumption has played an appreciable role in the Enlightenment project to have the fruit without the root of Christianity  and especially in the radical version of the separation of church and state where all religious ideas should be kept out of the public square. Please stop destroying the root that provides the needed resources for the fruit that most people recognize as remarkable for human flourishing that has appeared in western culture. To switch the metaphor slightly, please stop sawing off the branch where the fruit grows and upon which we are all sitting! 
I know that one can’t just make oneself believe in the Christian roots if one is not persuaded of their veracity. But you can choose to stop fighting against its influence in culture! Look for common ground with Christian believers to work together for human flourishing within an environment of tolerant pluralism (without relativism), and rather than dogmatic secularism. 
My appeal to Christian believers would be to have hope and courage, and continue to be salt and light while obeying God’s two commissions – the Great Commission by Jesus in Matthew 28:18-20, and the Cultural Commission given by God in Genesis 1: 26-28. Chuck Colson said: “The Great Commission, to make disciples of all nations is only properly understood in light of the Cultural Commission, which describes the original purpose and plan God had for His image bearers.... We’re to sustain and renew His creation, defend the created institutions of family and society, and critique false worldviews.”
Contribute positively to the culture and world you are in by preventing decay as salt does, and dispelling the darkness as light does. Find common ground with unbelievers who agree about the goodness of the fruit, even if they do not yet accept the root from which it sprung. And work towards persuading, not imposing policies based on the desirability of the fruit for human flourishing. Do this within the ethical boundaries of Jesus and New Testament teaching.
“Work for the peace and prosperity of the city where I sent you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, for its welfare will determine your welfare.” Jeremiah 29:7