Is ours a Christian civilization?

[Island Skeptic]

Just a quick drive-by note regarding the subject heading of this thread: aren't the words "Christian civilization" a contradictory of terms?

 

[Andrew Wiggin]

Just a quick drive-by note regarding the subject heading of this thread: aren't the words "Christian civilization" a contradictory of terms?

Once could certainly make a case. Lions and romans are in such short supply these days though. Now there was a civilization.

A

 

[laca]

Hey, who's up for some sinning? Anyone else feeling a strong impulse to go out and increase the amount of sin in the world? Anyone? Hands up if you want to sin with me!

Well... I wouldn't want to sin with you, but I'm in for sinning next to you or something

 

[Hux]

Of course ours is a Christian civilisation. Everything that was done was in nodding deference to it. That's just history.

 

[KarlG]

Sounds like you are losing heart hamelkim? Please do not limit the Holy Spirit's work in these end times, pray for revival! God's Word tells us he will pour out His Spirit on all flesh so keep praying for these lost souls that still need the true miracle of salvation. Never say die! We who know Christ are sure to live forever, but many people still need to know Jesus is the only way to the Father. The church still has much work to do to share the good news of the gospel message. It is our job as the church to let people know they must be born again to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Everyone listen up, you really can just die once to live twice! Accept Christ and live forever!!

P.S. As for the OP the U.S. was once a Christian nation, and I myself see how we truly need to be on our knees praying for God to forgive us and hope He will heal and restore us as a nation. If God's people will just pray and seek his face, he will answer!

I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees. *



* Quote source uncertain, i've seen it attributed to a number of different people so provide no source.

 

[Darth Rotor]

True, but then what aspect of christianity do you think is irreplacable?

ETA:
To stick to the organ analogy, is it not possible to have an organ that through change in environment becomes vestigal?

Good question. I'll take a rain check on that, it requires something better than a quick reply.

 

[TimCallahan]

I don't think that's accurate either. The two are a part of each other, intertwined, and nested in a dynamic feedback loop for some time.

@ Tim: Since I am not a disciple of D'Souza, I may not have much more to offer you on this topic, since you have chosen to reference his framework as a basis for you point.

DR

I agree that Christianity was "intertwined, and nested in a dynamic feedback loop" with the other ingredients of Western Civiization, Classical Civilization and the barbarian cultures.

Bringing this thread back to what I originally wanted to deal with, there are two questions we need to explore: Would Western Civilization have developed democracy, capitalism and science without Christianity? If these are deemed to be the result of Christian influence, is it necessary to revive and revitalize Christianity to keep our civilization vital, or can we keep the good effects of (westernized) Christianity without the religion?

The latter question tougches on what Daniel Dennet has referred to as the "belief in the belif of God." This is the conviction on the part of people who themselves may not be believers that religion s necessary to keep the masses from degenerating into lawlessness.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I agree that Christianity was "intertwined, and nested in a dynamic feedback loop" with the other ingredients of Western Civiization, Classical Civilization and the barbarian cultures.

Bringing this thread back to what I originally wanted to deal with, there are two questions we need to explore: Would Western Civilization have developed democracy, capitalism and science without Christianity?

ETA: I had to ETA to get the second part back to where it belongs, Tim's comment to me. Sorry to all for the confusion. Laca's response cued me to my goof up.

Maybe. IIRC, Hellenic and other older influences are also present in such things as democracy. Capitalism? No quick answer. Science? Was already a work in progress, then called philosophy, among the Greeks and Egyptians (and doubtless the Chinese and elsewhere) in some form or other. See also Mayans.

If these are deemed to be the result of Christian influence, is it necessary to revive and revitalize Christianity to keep our civilization vital, or can we keep the good effects of (westernized) Christianity without the religion?

If the assertion is "solely Christian Influence" then I ain't touchin' that with a ten foot pole. FFS, the Bible isn't an economics, nor an engineering, text book. Other than that, the whole dealing in counterfactuals is a chasing of the Wil O'Wisp, IMO, since we are often left with resort to post hoc reasoning. (If Hitler gets hit by a street car in 1926, does National Socialism develop, or not? )

DR

 

[laca]

Bringing this thread back to what I originally wanted to deal with, there are two questions we need to explore: Would Western Civilization have developed democracy, capitalism and science without Christianity?

Democracy? The Church is not great in that area.
Capitalism? You might have a point there. The Church is quite possibly the longest running and most prolific business around.
Science? Without Christianity? Are you kidding? We'd be saying "beam me up Scotty" by now...

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Hmm... Capitalism is an awfully broad and fuzzy topic, so I think a better question is: exactly which aspects of capitalism do you think are derived from Christianity?

It seems to me like trade cultures have existed long before, and/or in different areas than Christianity.

E.g., would the Phoenicians, traders extraordinaire of the Mediteranean, count as having at least some of the elements? What about China's craftsmen and its taking such a hands-off approach to even fiscal policy, that everyone was free to mint their own bronze coins even in ancient times? Etc.

Exactly which part of that mix is Christian and could have developed only in a Christian country?

It seems to me like Capitalism happened mostly _in_ _spite_ of Christianity. Half the stuff in Adam Smith -- we can probably agree that he formulated a coherent theory of it first -- went squarely against the religious way of thinking. The traditional Christian religious way of thinking dictated for example certain price scales, and that merchants don't ask more than what was considered the "right" price for their wares. The idea to stop thinking in terms of charity and just do whatever brings the most profit, is as foreign as it gets to the traditional Christian values.

 

[Aepervius]

Both authors have a point in that capitalism and the free market did come from western and central European civilization, as did modern science, and this culture was, up until the twentieth century, basically Christian. However, I think that contingency, such as the effects of geography, played a far greater part in the development of Western Civilization. I can link two of the supposed Christian heritages to such contingencies.

As far as I can tell it was forbidden by christian hierarchy to do "loaning" with interrest. There are a few other taboo which i think also goes against industrialisation. One could argue that industrialisation and capitalism would have come EARLIER if not for those taboo. IOW it is fully coincidental that the western civilisation allowed capitalism, (did not some of the asian civilisation have the same anyway?), coincidental to a few people having a few good idea in a certain country. That could have happened in otehr countries.

it is more like the chrsitian "value" could not stop progress strongly enough like some other religion did.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Democracy? The Church is not great in that area.
Capitalism? You might have a point there. The Church is quite possibly the longest running and most prolific business around.
Science? Without Christianity? Are you kidding? We'd be saying "beam me up Scotty" by now...

What you responded to were actually Tim's comments that I failed to correctly get into the quotes brackets correctly, sorry about that, I gooned that one up.

 

[Darth Rotor]

As far as I can tell it was forbidden by christian hierarchy to do "loaning" with interrest. There are a few other taboo which i think also goes against industrialisation. One could argue that industrialisation and capitalism would have come EARLIER if not for those taboo. IOW it is fully coincidental that the western civilisation allowed capitalism, (did not some of the asian civilisation have the same anyway?), coincidental to a few people having a few good idea in a certain country. That could have happened in otehr countries.

Sigh. Theory vs practice.

Those taboos (usury) didn't stop the Fugger and MEdici bankers, among others, from setting up an international fianancial network. Heck, a Medici became Pope.

DR

 

[Darth Rotor]

Hmm... Capitalism is an awfully broad and fuzzy topic,

Yes, and you might want to address the two authors whom Tim cited in the OP, as that is not my position you are responding to but rather a screw up with quote marks that took one of Tim's comments and make it look like mine.

My error.

Exactly which part of that mix is Christian and could have developed only in a Christian country?

A counterfactual question with no answer, as commerce tends to occur in any country, religion notwithstanding.

"Fat Fingers" Darth

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

I was in fact answering to Tim's question. Maybe I should just quote next time so it's clearer who I'm answering to. Sorry.

 

[Autumnman]

Christian influence

Darth Rotor

“Would Western Civilization have developed democracy, capitalism and science without Christianity?”

Once the Romans conquered Europe and introduced their language and Christian superstition to the peoples they vanquished, Western Civilization and Christian influence have been intrinsically linked. As far as I know, no one can say with any certainty what Western Civilization would or would not have developed in the absence of Roman-Christian influence.

Humans appear to live in relative accord with the sacred and/or aged stories embraced by their various cultures. Inasmuch as language is the medium by which these stories are passed from one generation to the next, these stories tend to influence the evolution of the language as well. Regardless of how empirically absurd a particular “sacred story” may be, eventually the language of its transmission will be infused and altered by that “sacred story’s” influence. For example: the English term “semantics” is related to the term “Semitic” which is in reference to Shem who was the first son of Noah, the very Noah who built the Ark that supposedly saved humanity and the land-based animals (two by two) from the biblical flood described in the King James Bible, Genesis 7 thru 9. Therefore, regardless of how empirically absurd the biblical story of Noah’s Ark is, the English term “semantics” appears to be dependent upon the existence of that absurd biblical narrative.

The English term “Alphabet” is not only derived from the names of first two letters of the Greek writing system, it is also derived from the Canaanite-Hebrew names of the first two letters of the Phoenician writing system: ’aleph beyth. Our English language appears to have many of its roots firmly planted in the Middle East and the Old Sacred Stories of the Holy Land.

The very same language employed in the scientific pursuits of facts and knowledge has been informed, influenced, and tainted by its use in the transmission of the biblical narratives. For the most part, an individual’s worldview is dependent upon the language of his or her culture.

Language is the sea and our minds are the fish.

Autumnman

 

[Darth Rotor]

Darth Rotor

“Would Western Civilization have developed democracy, capitalism and science without Christianity?”

Once the Romans conquered Europe and introduced their language and Christian superstition to the peoples they vanquished, Western Civilization and Christian influence have been intrinsically linked. As far as I know, no one can say with any certainty what Western Civilization would or would not have developed in the absence of Roman-Christian influence.

Humans appear to live in relative accord with the sacred and/or aged stories embraced by their various cultures. Inasmuch as language is the medium by which these stories are passed from one generation to the next, these stories tend to influence the evolution of the language as well. Regardless of how empirically absurd a particular “sacred story” may be, eventually the language of its transmission will be infused and altered by that “sacred story’s” influence. For example: the English term “semantics” is related to the term “Semitic” which is in reference to Shem who was the first son of Noah, the very Noah who built the Ark that supposedly saved humanity and the land-based animals (two by two) from the biblical flood described in the King James Bible, Genesis 7 thru 9. Therefore, regardless of how empirically absurd the biblical story of Noah’s Ark is, the English term “semantics” appears to be dependent upon the existence of that absurd biblical narrative.

The English term “Alphabet” is not only derived from the names of first two letters of the Greek writing system, it is also derived from the Canaanite-Hebrew names of the first two letters of the Phoenician writing system: ’aleph beyth. Our English language appears to have many of its roots firmly planted in the Middle East and the Old Sacred Stories of the Holy Land.

The very same language employed in the scientific pursuits of facts and knowledge has been informed, influenced, and tainted by its use in the transmission of the biblical narratives. For the most part, an individual’s worldview is dependent upon the language of his or her culture.

Language is the sea and our minds are the fish.

Autumnman

Again, please note that this is a response is to Tim, his question, and I gooned up the quote function. Sorry, again.

Nice post, glad to have you on the board.

DR

 

[Autumnman]

Thanks, DR.
It's going to take me a while to figure out how to employ this forum. I look forward to chatting with everyone.

Autumnman

 

[TimCallahan]

Sigh. Theory vs practice.

Those taboos (usury) didn't stop the Fugger and MEdici bankers, among others, from setting up an international fianancial network. Heck, a Medici became Pope.

DR

I believe the Knights Templar got around it by charging some kind of fee for services that wasn't officially interest.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Sigh. Theory vs practice.

Those taboos (usury) didn't stop the Fugger and MEdici bankers, among others, from setting up an international fianancial network. Heck, a Medici became Pope.

DR

"Theory vs practice" indeed. If those bankers were in fact acting against the religious dogma, it really doesn't support the appologists' claims that somehow Christianity _caused_ it. More like it happened in _spite_ of Christianity.