What Would A World Without Christianity Look Like?

You think the Church suppressed concrete? Unlikely. It's also unlikely that Christians destroyed the Great Library at Alexandria. Some scholars blame Julius Caesar, some Caliph Omar--neither of whom was Christian. But destruction of other books was largely the result of invading barbarians, who thought of books as fuel and anyhow weren't much into copying manuscripts.. We owe preservation of the books that survived mainly to monks in monasteries. True, they gave priority to religious texts, but didn't suppress non-heretical material that had practical utility. In the field of agriculture, there were some practical advances: the horse collar and widespread use of horse shoes. The notion that the medieval church suppressed science in general is a myth given credence by the likes of Carl Sagan. (Even very smart people have their blind spots and biases.). The monks preserved the learning during the early middle ages, and then played a leading role in building new knowledge.

The 300 year period immediately after the fall of the western part of the Roman Empire to Charlamagne (474-769 CE) was admittedly a bleak period intellectually. But there were some bright spots.
6 Reasons the Dark Ages Weren’t So Dark. The ‘Dark Ages’ were a lot brighter than we give them credit for Archbishop Isidore of Seville in the 7th and 8th centuries,called "the last great scholar of the ancient world (Montalembert, 1860 , wrote his encyclopedic Etymologiae, a collection of extracts of many ancient books that otherwise would have been lost. Charlemagne brought about something of a brief renaissance in the eighth and ninth centuries., with the opening of schools and educational curricula. Saint Hildegard of Binghan, nun and abbess of the twelfth century, is considered by many to have been the founder of scientific natural history in Germany. Her nine-volume Physica describes the scientific and medicinal properties of plants, minerals, fish, reptiles, and animals. Her Causa et Curae discusses the natural causes and cures of various diseases. Oxford University was founded c.1096 CE, where natural philosophers began applying mathematics to the study of motion. The universities of Paris and Bologna soon followed. A short list of medieval scientific accomplishments would include von Freiberg’s discoveries about rainbows; Buridan’s work on projectile motion, free-fall acceleration, and celestial rotation; and William of Saint-Cloud’s study solar eclipses.The Crusades brought knew knowledge and forgotten old knowledge to the West, including Aristotle and the Muslim philosophers Ibn-Rushd (Averroes), Ibn Sina (Avicenna)--all of whom are quoted along with biblical authority in St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica, written in the 1270s--which is considered by the Catholic Church to be kickass Christian theology. BTW Aquinas "cited the roundness of the earth as an example of an accepted scientific truth.Were the ‘Dark Ages’ Really Dark? - Mark Durie Shortly afterwards, Roger Bacon, a Franciscan Friar, did his work on optics that "laid the foundation for the mathematical advances of Newton and Descartes." Were the ‘Dark Ages’ Really Dark? - Mark Durie

I think your knowledge of history may be a bit askew. Rome famously became Christian under Constantine in 312 CE. Constantine also relocated the capital of the Empire to Constantinople in 324-30 CE. The collapse of the Western Empire has been dated since Gibbon at 476, but he and other historians agree that it began earlier, as a result of barbarian invasions and internal corruption and neglect by politicians. Gibbon thinks Christianity played a part, but other historians dispute this. The Eastern Empire remained Christian an flourished for almost another millennium. The secular empire in the west became "unglued", but the Church in Rome stepped in to fill the vacuum and provide new glue. According to French historian Alban Gautier: “The Church in western Europe and all the regions north of the Mediterranean becomes the biggest element of stability,”https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/just-how-dark-were-the-dark-ages

It depends a lot on the version of Christianity we're talking about. Right wing Evangelicals have become the Trump base, and therefore are among the most dangerous people in the world. Conservative Catholics, as opposed to the Pope, are hung up on abortion. Of course, Biden is also a devout Catholic and Christian. My own Methodist church seems to be about to break up over the gay issue; Covid provided a distraction, but now they seem back on it. I take fellowship with a Sunday school of Progressive Christians, whom I'll follow if there is a split. I think, weighing pros and cons, religion plays a useful role in society, giving meaning to people's lives and encouraging altruism. A major problem with Christianity, especially the fundamentalist and dogmatic kind, is its exclusiveness--the notion that belief in Jesus is a prerequisite to salvation. Progressive Christians tend not to believe that, and even Catholics have considerably relaxed their traditional attitudes on the matter.

 

Imagine a world without religion.

 

Unfortunately one cannot put the clock back, but it would have been a far more peaceful world had there been no religion in the first instance.

 

I agree with you 110 percent!

 

Well. I dunno. Would that include secular religions like the French Revolutionaries, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism? In terms of body count, they way outdid the violence of theistic religions. And waddabout World War I, World War II, and the Vietnam War/ I musta missed the religious issues in those. I think people are just nasty.

 

Only way to find out is to go back to day 1. I feel people's attitudes has gotten worse.

 

There is a book called The Sleeping Army, by Francesca Simon. The whole book revolves around the question: What if Christianity never happened? It is set in modern day England, but people are still worshipping Norse Gods. It is a children's book for ages 10-12, but still a fascinating read.

 

Were they more peaceful from worshiping Norse gods? Didn't seem to work for the Vikings. There was a lot of war before Christianity--witness the Roman empire and the other ones before it. Most polytheistic peoples had deities who specialized in war. In fact, I think Yaweh was originally one of those.

 

Yeah, but the whole plot is that freya, the main character, goes across some rainbow bridge into like god world and meets people. there is one person called snot who is a good guy but is quite violent and likes war. hes the only person i can think of really. apart from loki whs the main bad guy but hes more cunning and cheeky than violent. the gods are a bit annoying but not really good or bad.

 

Good or bad isn't the point. The Norse gods reflected Norse values: violence, ardor, passion--fitting for warriors. Starting with their creation story, in which Odin murders Yemir and makes his body into the earth, his skull into the sky, and his blood into the waters.Starkad tricks Vikar into hanging and impaling himself. The Vanir behead Mimir and send his head to Odin, who keeps it to consult for advice. The dwarfs murder Kvasir and use his blood to brew the Mead of Poetry. And speaking of Loki, there was that unfortunate incident where he tricks poor Baldur into presenting himself for target practice and then uses a dart made of mistletoe to kill him, knowing that it was the one thing Baldur was vulenrable to. And the gods punished him by turning one of his sons into a wolf to eat the other son, and then using that son's entrails to bind Loki. We could find similar myths about the Olympian gods, who were caught in an on-going soap opera, or the Mesopotamian gods--Marduk's battle with Tiamat, etc.
Of course, Yahweh could be pretty violent, too. He was, after all, a god of battles. But unlike the pagan Gods, He was also a moralist, demanding a high level of ethical conduct from His followers--unlike the pagan gods, who were pretty open minded, as long as the prayers and sacrifices kept coming. So who knows?

 

Christianity and Islam are the two most modern of the popular religions still rapidly spreading today. Both incorporate Three Stooges logic, as does atheistic communism. Fundamentalism is actually the bastard redheaded step child of academia, and they would have to invent something like it if it didn't exist, because communism simply can't compete, and Islam is geared for developing world countries, with more tribal views, that are also less competitive.

 

Religion may be the invention of humans, but I'm not sure it was necessarily men rather than women who came up with it. In the absence of evidence, I'll give credit and/or blame to both sexes. Religion is pervasive enough that it must serve basic function(s). Durkheim emphasized the functions of reinforcing social solidarity and social control. Marx and Weber stressed the use by subgroups--political leaders, ruling elites, and priests or shamans--in legitimating their positions. And of course for individuals it serves important functions of cognitive mapping, meaning, and ego defense. The multi-functional character of religion helps to explain its durability, although group functions may compete with individual functions. Dawkins introduced the concept of memes as units of cultural evolution. A meme is a symbol, idea or behavior pattern that can be transmitted from one host to another by process of imitation. Dawkins compares it to a virus, suggesting that it's transmission may be good for the meme's survival and reproduction, but not always good for the host. We see this in the unfortunate examples of toxic faith syndrome, where individual members may be sacrificed for the advancement of the meme.

Women have been often more involved than men in religious development. In Latin and Mediterranean countries, they tend to be the regular churchgoers. There's a line of feminist thought that claims women and goddess religions were the norm in neolithic societies until those male pastoralists with their Sky God religions moved in and took over. In early Christianity, women were often the de facto leaders who bankrolled the operations and hosted services in their homes. They made the mistake of getting their husbands involved, and guess who took over.

 

There are only two matriarchal cultures in the world, and the only reason they are matriarchal is because it benefits both sexes. Taoism is widely considered to be, by far, the most feminine of the leading world religions, and is perhaps the seventh most popular religion, but is declining. In China today, Christianity is rapidly growing, and the idea that organized religions are not about money is a joke in bad taste, just as the idea of a religious academia competing with a secular one is a joke in bad taste. The two require each other, and hate each other, which is why US politics are a disaster. Religion is associated with crime and dysfunctional societies, while atheism is associated with both communism and the rich and famous, with neither one supporting salt of the earth democratic values or human rights, much less, women's rights. They rely on money to do all the driving and, around the world, women's heals get higher the closer you get to any urban area, suggesting money is what the women want.

That's not to suggest women are shallow, because money is less important in rural areas. Its simply modern culture, which is killing itself. Modern societies have human rights and women's rights, not because they support salt of the earth values, but because they would have a rebellion on their hands if they didn't, and bargaining is what capitalistic democracies are all about.

 

"Imagine". John Lennon wrote a song about that, featuring a world without religion, heaven; and no possessions, and no countries. And we're led to believe it would be wonderful: happy, shiny people holding hands. Problem is, it's someone's fantasy. It won't happen, but if it's held forward as an ideal, someone might try to implement it. How would that be done? Would there be resistance? I for one wouldn't go quietly, since I consider God and religion to be the most important things in my life. Before I got married, my wife to be told me that I needed to understand that God was the most important thing in her life, and that nothing could come between her and the Lord. That was music to my ears, since God is always the most important thing, by definition. God functions in my life as ultimate meaning, the source of my morals and ethics, and my principal social network. I have a friend who came to Jesus through recovery groups, using Twelve Step programs as his lifeline from serious drug and alcohol addictions. He thinks without it he would resort to the "ornery MF" he was before. I'll accept his self-assessment on that. Lots of people are living on the edge and turn to religion as a way of dealing with life's setbacks, uncertainties, and tragedies.Atheists and agnostics may have other ways of dealing with those things, but some folks think religion works best for them.

In Western Europe, particularly Scandanavia, most folks seem to have given up religion and seem to get along alright. One of my support groups, apart from my Sunday school and Bible study groups, is a freethinkers group consisting of atheists and agnostics. I eat regularly with them and attend discussion sessions with them. They seem like good people, indistinguishable from the church goers in my other groups, so I figure they must have other routes to meaning and morality. To each his own. Most Christians in the U.S., I think, are brought up that way, being taught ("brainwashed"?) from an early age to believe in the Bible. Many, I suspect, accept Christian beliefs, as they do political beliefs, out of what economists call "rational ignorance"--the decision not to invest much time in a given topic because of other priorities, but instead to rely on trusted experts to figure it out for them. I suspect that's the way it worked even in prehistoric times, when people turned to the shaman to figure out the spiritual stuff so the ordinary folks could give their attention to hunting and gathering.

Anyhow, rather than engage in a futile quest to deconvert all the religious folks, I find it more productive to join with those who share my values, like the ones in my Progressive Christian Sunday school class, in hopes that our ideas and example might catch on with others and maybe filter down to the traditional fundamentalists in the Sunday school the next floor down. I believe in miracles!

 

i disagree. i extremely disagree. what is ur evidence for miracles? take the feeding 5 thousand story. u believe that? u honestly believe that? the bible was written 'ages and ages hence by dusty desert dwelling gents squatting in their dusty tents.' i ask u now: isnt this enough? just this world? just this beautiful complex wonderfully unfathomable natural world? how does it so fail to hold our attention that we have to diminish it with the invention of cheap manmade myths and monsters? and to come back to the miracle point, 'throughout history every mystery ever solved has turned out to be not magic. does the idea that therevmight be knowledge frighten you? does the idea that one afternoon one wikifuckingpedia might enlighten you frighten you? does the notion that there might not be a supernatural so blow ur hippy noodle that u have to stand in the fog of ur inability to google?

 

It has certainly become a lucrative hustle.

 

I was talking about the fundamentalist Sunday school class that meets at the same time as mine, one floor don, embracing some progressive ideas. That would be a miracle, and I think it could happen about the time Hell freezes over.

As a matter of fact, I'm skeptical of claims to miracles myself, if we define miracles as claims of extraordinary happenings, since I agree with Hume that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, which is usually lacking for such claims. I assume the miracle stories of the Bible--the loaves and fishes, walking on water, virgin birth, turning wine into water, etc., are tall tales. NI wouldn't rule out the healings and exorcisms Jesus had a reputation for performing. Those phenomena could be attributed to psychosomatic and/or hysteric causes. But like you, I find the universe we live in to be absolutely beautiful, complex and wonderfully unfathomable"--downright miraculous! And that's enough to make me a believer. I think nothing is certain, not even that. For all I know, I could be a brain in a jar in some science lab, and my perceptions could be Matrix-style computer simulations. I rely on what Santayana calls "animal faith" to make some sense of it all, but life is a gamble. I like to make educated bets on the basis of reason, available evidence, experience and intuition, and hope for the best. I find progressive Christianity, specifically Borg theology, to be the best fit for my beliefs and values. The Borg here is not the sinister bunch of cyborgs from Star Trek out to assimilate everybody, but the late Marcus Borg who expounded a brand of Christianity which is very different from traditional views closer to what you seem to be trying to attack. Seems to work for me.

 

Does that apply to liberals and Democrats, too? What about people who call themselves "Hispanic", "African-American", "Women", Asian-Americans, etc ? I'm afraid I disagree. Labels can be useful markers of identity. When I call myself a Progressive Christian, I'm giving information about myself that I consider important--my identity, basic beliefs and values. In the real world, failure to have an identity leaves the field open to some very nasty folks who aren't likewise inhibited. Krishnamurti was entitled to his beliefs in Radical Oneness, but his reluctance to use the label didn't give him the right to erase mine. Krishnamurti, the anti-guru guru, didn't exactly practice what he preached.
Geoffrey Falk, Stripping the Gurus, chp. 5 Stripping the Gurus
https://www.quora.com/What-do-conte...think-about-Jiddu-Krishnamurti-and-his-ideas;
Peter Eastman, Krishnamurti explained: a critical study - PhilPapers
The ideas quoted by Krishnamurti , like those in Lennon's "Imagine", may sound good at first, especially after smoking several joints, but how do we get there? The devil's in the details. In politics and religion, it's important to work for policies and principles that are beneficial to humanity, but to do that we need to organize, and that requires labeling, e.g., "Never Trump!" (And Vlad, if we go the non-identity route, there would be no Marxism-Leninism, no revolution, no class warfare! . Nothing to talk about on HF. To get to the classless society, we first of all have to have the dictatorship of the proletariat and liquidate the capitalists--and that never seems to come, like the Second Coming for traditional Christians.)

I think it's particularly important to claim my identity as a Christian and an American at time when others are trying to steal and appropriate those labels for their own exclusive use. We've seen self-proclaimed "Patriots" storm our Congress to disrupt the democratic process and others of their ilk pass legislation to steal elections in the guise of preventing voter fraud. They carry big flags, but I'd call them un-American. Something similar has happened to my religion: Trump with his upside down Bible, using a church as backdrop for launching his "law and order" schtick ; Latter Day Pharisees with big crosses calling themselves Evangelicals and true Christians while giving the Donald cultlike support in the name of JEEZ-US, etc. Time to take my country and my faith back! God isn't a Republican, nor even an Evangelical Christian!

 

I agree in part and disagree in another part. Where I live in the Mid-West they often tell me that I shouldn't call myself a Muslim America; and, that I should say I am American or go back to where I had come from. My mother ask for French bread at the A&P grocery more than 50 years ago and was told if she wanted to eat their food she should go and live with them. I live in America, a racist shithole. I have been called a hyphenated American, because I have ethnic pride. However, in the case of Krishnamurti I will say that I like him and agree with most of his thinking, because its foundation is in equality. To me equality means everyone should be treated with equality by the government, the courts, and the employers. I do not stand for the diminishing of ethnic values or traditions of anyone by people in power. Islam is the most growing religion in America but the Christians remain the most oppressive. I have many times been told that Jesus is the only way, the truth, and the life, and no one cometh unto the lord except by Jesus. I disagree. I've been told that at work, in school, and on the CB Radio, and still disagree.