• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is most responsible for Christianity's failure in the West?

See above.

  • The conspiratorial view

    Votes: 2 7.7%

  • The progressive view

    Votes: 15 57.7%

  • The perspectivist view

    Votes: 8 30.8%

  • The economic view

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • Total voters
    26
Fisher said:
No they are true to most people ergo they cannot be attributed to Christianity as being the cause.
Click to expand...

False analogy. Other people are not Christian, and therefore under no obligation to follow the teachings of Christ. We, as "Christians" ARE!
Fisher said:
Let's see

"hatred, intolerance, vengeance, cruelty, greed, judgement, and pride" describes how atheists attack Christianity; democrats attack republicans; republicans attack democrats; Muslims view America; America views Muslims; the rich view the poor; the poor view the rich. None of that is unique to Christianity.

Now where is your proof that this is unique to Christianity and that "most people who claim to be Christian" are that way and are so because they are Christians?
Click to expand...

I never said it was "unique to Christianity," however empirical evidence supports my position that Christians fail to adhere to their own ideals.

I have met thousands of "fellow Christians" in my life, all over the USA and overseas. I have only met a few dozen at most who truly reflected the ideals of Christianity.

Acts of barbarity and sanctimony by so-called Christians under the cry "God Wills It!" are visible in every form of public media for all to see.

Beyond that, in this very forum, fellow Christians display few, if any, of those basic ideals.

I am still Christian, but I can understand why it is failing in the west.
 
Last edited:
Einzige said:
Where by "failure" I mean its gradual displacement from the center of the moral and intellectual life of they civilization.

To define these options bit:

Poll option one is the conservative answer. It holds that Christian belief would be as predominant today in the West as it was in 1913 if it were not for the conscious, deliberate machinations of a small group of secularizing elites promoting atheism and amorality.

My thoughts: This is the least tenable of the four options I've provided, in part because 'the elite' in the West has never been anti-Christian. To be sure, they are opposed to fundamentalism, but only because it is at odds with liberal-capitalist notions of 'progress'. The invocation of the defense of Occidental Christianity during the Cold War is proof-positive that Western elites want generally to employ Christianity to their own ends.

Poll option two is the liberal answer, the "secularization thesis". According to this theory, Christianity is doomed to deplacement, as are all religions eventually, by the gradual and wholly unconscious forces of mental and mechanical progress.

My thoughts: This is almost as problematic a solution to the question posed as the first answer. It assumes a great deal of the structure of Christian ideology - progress towards a "new Heaven and a new Earth", an eventual end to history, and so on - while draining it of its metaphysical content.

Option three is what I call the Nietzscheite option: Christianity has failed because it is inherently flawed. It can exist only among theoppressed, and as soon as a people become strong enough to shirk ofc a collective sense of inferiority it will abolish the correspondent notimon of individual existential guilt that informs Christianity.

My opinion: This is the view I hold closest to. Christianity, in a very real sense, requires weakness to thrive (it is little wonder that Christianity is ascendant today only in the impoverished Third World nations of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and the American South). A strong people wants a religion of strength and severity.

Option four: The Marxist solution. Christianity belongs at the historical latest to the age of feudalism; the rising capitalists of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries sought initially to do away with it altogether, as a reminder of the hated age of the nobility, and retain it only as a matter of practicalg politica expedience.

My opinion: This is superficially similar to the liberal answer, relying on notions of deterministic 'progress', but avoids some of its problems by acknowledging the fact of necessity and human action in historical processes, rather than ascribing all history to forces largely independent of men.
Click to expand...

The westward march of white Christianity and the wars it caused has presented an oxymoronic vision of Christianity and it is the cause of its own demise.
 
Captain Adverse said:
False analogy. Other people are not Christian, and therefore under no obligation to follow the teachings of Christ. We, as "Christians" ARE!



I never said it was "unique to Christianity," however empirical evidence supports my position that Christians fail to adhere to their own ideals.

I have met thousands of "fellow Christians" in my life, all over the USA and overseas. I have only met a few dozen at most who truly reflected the ideals of Christianity.

Acts of barbarity and sanctimony by so-called Christians under the cry "God Wills It!" are visible in every form of public media for all to see.

Beyond that, in this very forum, fellow Christians display few, if any, of those basic ideals.

I am still Christian, but I can understand why it is failing in the west.
Click to expand...

Christianity is not about being perfect so much as it is being forgiven by God. Christianity is not failing in the west by any stretch of the imagination. Some Churches may be struggling, but it is because they are under increased competition. In the same way that the computer all but killed off the typewriter, mass communications and the internet allow people to be quiet Christians from the comfort of their own home without all the politics within and outside the 4 walls of a building.
 
Fisher said:
Christianity is not about being perfect so much as it is being forgiven by God. Christianity is not failing in the west by any stretch of the imagination. Some Churches may be struggling, but it is because they are under increased competition. In the same way that the computer all but killed off the typewriter, mass communications and the internet allow people to be quiet Christians from the comfort of their own home without all the politics within and outside the 4 walls of a building.
Click to expand...

Really? REALLY?!?!

So you can just go through life being a total A-hole...as long as you (scared of the consequences) "sincerely repent" on your deathbed?

Thank you for supplying an object example of why Christianity is "failing in the west."
 
Captain Adverse said:
Really? REALLY?!?!

So you can just go through life being a total A-hole...as long as you (scared of the consequences) "sincerely repent" on your deathbed?

Thank you for supplying an object example of why Christianity is "failing in the west."
Click to expand...

Since being a A-hole is not a sin, you can go through your whole life and not "sincerely repent" on your death bed and still do fine if you are a Christian.
 
Fisher said:
Since being a A-hole is not a sin, you can go through your whole life and not "sincerely repent" on your death bed and still do fine if you are a Christian.
Click to expand...
Christianity: the ability to do evil, unimaginable harm to everyone you meet ... just as long as you regret it ... eventually.
 
I'd say that the reason religion, not just Christianity, is failing in the western world is an increase in education, scientific discovery and the realization that people just don't need to be religious to be decent people. It's failing on all counts, that's why people are flooding away from the churches.
 
Captain Adverse said:
So you can just go through life being a total A-hole...as long as you (scared of the consequences) "sincerely repent" on your deathbed?
Click to expand...

That's exactly what the Bible teaches. Look at the thief on the cross. So long as you honestly ask to be forgiven for your sins, you get out of a lifetime of evil scot free.

It's amazing how many supposed Christians don't even know their own book.
 
Fisher said:
Since being a A-hole is not a sin, you can go through your whole life and not "sincerely repent" on your death bed and still do fine if you are a Christian.
Click to expand...

LOL You really are both "literal-minded" and severely uninformed about your own religion. Besides which, your response does not really answer the actual point being made. Figure it out for yourself because…

The purpose of this thread was to select one of the reasons the OP thought might be the cause of what he sees as Christianity's failure as a western ideology.

I provided a cause as I saw it, but found no poll response that met my position, although Option Three “the Nietzscheite option: Christianity has failed because it is inherently flawed,” came closest.

I rejected that poll option because I don’t believe it is “innately” flawed, just that most practitioners fail to actually adhere to its ideals. This provides such a poor example to outside observers that they are turning away from it for more Humanist/secular ideals.

If you want to debate the merits of your religious position, open a thread and posit a position and I may choose to participate. Until then I see no reason to engage in a side-track just to satisfy your needs.
 
Cephus said:
That's exactly what the Bible teaches. Look at the thief on the cross. So long as you honestly ask to be forgiven for your sins, you get out of a lifetime of evil scot free.

It's amazing how many supposed Christians don't even know their own book.
Click to expand...

Check again, Jesus responded to a last act of kindness on the part of that thief, which served to show he (the thief) was not a selfish man. The act also indicated while he may have commited a crime "Ceasar" thought merited death, his prior life held enough goodness to cause him to act with kindness and pity toward Jesus' plight on the cross.

Consider the strength of goodwill needed to overcome your own pain to defend and comfort a person sharing your pain?

In any case, I will be sticking to the threads purpose before making any further replies...but may be willing to engage in some religious thread on the topic as I mentioned to Fisher.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Check again, Jesus responded to a last act of kindness on the part of that thief, which served to show he (the thief) was not a selfish man. The act also indicated while he may have commited a crime "Ceasar" thought merited death, his prior life held enough goodness to cause him to act with kindness and pity toward Jesus' plight on the cross.

Consider the strength of goodwill needed to overcome your own pain to defend and comfort a person sharing your pain?

In any case, I will be sticking to the threads purpose before making any further replies...but may be willing to engage in some religious thread on the topic as I mentioned to Fisher.
Click to expand...

Amazing that you can get all of that out of 4 short verses:

Like 23:40-43 "But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? "And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!" And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

And it doesn't say anything that you said. I guess you think you get to just make stuff up to justify your beliefs.
 
brothern said:
Christianity: the ability to do evil, unimaginable harm to everyone you meet ... just as long as you regret it ... eventually.
Click to expand...

As opposed to Muslims doing harm or atheists doing harm--no difference. Has nothing to do with Christianity.
 
Cephus said:
Amazing that you can get all of that out of 4 short verses:

Like 23:40-43 "But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? "And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!" And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

And it doesn't say anything that you said. I guess you think you get to just make stuff up to justify your beliefs.
Click to expand...

If you can read that passage and NOT see what I stated....you provide another object lesson as to why people are turning away from Christianity in the west. :confused:

There really isn't much more that I can say. :peace
 
Captain Adverse said:
LOL You really are both "literal-minded" and severely uninformed about your own religion. Besides which, your response does not really answer the actual point being made. Figure it out for yourself because…

The purpose of this thread was to select one of the reasons the OP thought might be the cause of what he sees as Christianity's failure as a western ideology.

I provided a cause as I saw it, but found no poll response that met my position, although Option Three “the Nietzscheite option: Christianity has failed because it is inherently flawed,” came closest.

I rejected that poll option because I don’t believe it is “innately” flawed, just that most practitioners fail to actually adhere to its ideals. This provides such a poor example to outside observers that they are turning away from it for more Humanist/secular ideals.

If you want to debate the merits of your religious position, open a thread and posit a position and I may choose to participate. Until then I see no reason to engage in a side-track just to satisfy your needs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just as I thought, another "Whoops I am wrong so let me play the it's off-topic card to see if I can save some face". What's next, the "Anybody who doesn't agree with me is off-topic" card?

The original poll begs the question by presuming that Christianity has failed. It has not, ergo the whole poll is subject to challenge. That being an A-hole is a sin in your mind makes it pretty clear I am not the one who is uninformed about Christianity.
 
Fisher said:
Christianity: the ability to do evil, unimaginable harm to everyone you meet ... just as long as you regret it ... eventually.
Click to expand...
As opposed to Muslims doing harm or atheists doing harm--no difference. Has nothing to do with Christianity.
Click to expand...
Hehe. I don't think I've ever heard the counter argument before that since Christianity is superfluous, it's a valid theology. Gold star.
 
Fisher said:
Yeah, just as I thought, another "Whoops I am wrong so let me play the it's off-topic card to see if I can save some face". What's next, the "Anybody who doesn't agree with me is off-topic" card?

...That being an A-hole is a sin in your mind makes it pretty clear I am not the one who is uninformed about Christianity.
Click to expand...

LOL Okay, okay, ONE final response since you don't understand my "literal-minded" comment in reference to your inability to interpret the meaning of the term: "A-hole."

In the context of this discussion, A-hole clearly means "hateful, intolerant, unforgiving, judgmental, greedy, unkind, cruel, etc. etc. etc.,” in your treatment of others, while maintaining the attitudes of a Pharisee: self-righteous, hypocritical, and sanctimonious.

All terms used in my original post, and having the effect of defining my use of the word “A-hole” in response to your comment.

Now I am sorry but any further comments of this nature in this thread from other members will only be met with silence. There is no need for me to say any more in here about this, my position is fairly clear.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
If you can read that passage and NOT see what I stated....you provide another object lesson as to why people are turning away from Christianity in the west. :confused:

There really isn't much more that I can say. :peace
Click to expand...

I'm reading the words on the page, you are reading things into the words on the page that don't actually exist. I think that says a lot.
 
None of the answers, I think it is a bit of everything mixed together. The vatican has damaged Roman Christianity like almost nothing else in the history of religion. The protestant church is extremely divided in a lot of small churches ranging from almost liberal to extreme fundamentalist protestantism.

And then we are not talking about how education and enlightenment have made people aware and wise up to the extremely reactive and backward views of religions.

Marx has a bit of an issue too, when people who have no hope look to religion for some hope of a better future (even if it is in the afterlife).

Fact is people have grown away from religion for a whole list of reasons and I doubt they will turn back to religion any time soon. That does not mean that they do not live perfectly wholesome lives but that they do not have a religion thinking for them and deciding how they should vote or how other people should live their lives.
 
RGacky3 said:
I would argue the complete opposite.

Post 1970s the west has become MUCH more hedonistic, selfish, egostistical and competative, I think that comes out of neo-liberal capitalism, neo-liberal capitalist celebrates the "self-made-man" myth of the rich, it celebrates hedonism (maximizing personal pleasure), egotism (gotta get mine), competativeness and so on, Christianity at its core, once you get behind the institutionalized church, is an egalitarianism anti-ego faith of self sacrifice and absolute love, that sort of ethic just doesn't give with Capitalism.

I think Ayn rand was right, capitalism is the anthithesis of christianity.

That's one thing.

Another thing is the clear and blatent corruption of the church.

I don't think it's scienice or anything like that, given that scientific revolutions happened way before secularization, secularization essencially came along with the neo-liberal revolution.
Click to expand...

I would suggest you are thinking too short term

The Welfare state really did not start to take effect in the west until the 1960s. Certain aspects were around before that I believe in various countries, but the most significant additions I am sure started in the 60s. Religion is something that people tend to adopt from their parents, and potentially drop when they are in their late teens and early 20s. The baby boomers would be the first generation of in NA that would have grown up in a true welfare state, and I expect they have a lower religious participation then their parents, and Gen X even lower then the baby boomers.

The US has become economically harder for people then 30 years ago, but they still have it better when it comes to welfare, healthcare should a problem arise. They do not have to look for charity from the church as they did 60 years ago, instead they get it from the state. They don't have to go to church to ensure the community will assist them if required.

I am of course not talking about religion for the hardened capitalists, but more typical people who wish to provide for themselves and family rather then being the selfish capitalist as typified by Ayn Rands writing, which generally typifies a smaller portion of the population
 
Rising general education levels doomed it in the mid 19th century. One of the first acts of the Christians when they first took over our civilization was to close all the pagan schools because people who can think don't think about "Jesus"...................
 
The answer is E) Lack of Resolve.
 
I liked James Turner's thought on the matter. His thesis in Without God, Without Creed was that for a small number of people in America, unbelief was caused through tensions in the theology once the religious themselves adopted "reason" as a means to evaluate belief and its relationship with the known world. Slowly, but surely, one could claim that you needn't have belief to be moral or helpful to mankind. Religious progressives of the mid to late 19th century continued to believe that they could improve the lives of people, but some among them were not convinced of the morality or the truth of the brand of Christianity they had previously subscribed to. Some embraced different forms of Christianity or spirituality, while others started having no belief at all. Having no belief, while retaining the Social Gospel message felt a relief. He was still able to admit that while this development had occurred, those who had subscribed to the Second Great Awakening of Christianity increased dramatically and would continue to influence progressives long afterward.
 
99percenter said:
Religion is a form of oppression. People in power want to keep people below them stupid and religion is the easiest way to do that. Religion is also a tool to incite violence. Bad people become hero's because they are doing god's work.
Click to expand...

I never felt oppressed by religion, though I've never been a bug rule follower either.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
I would suggest you are thinking too short term

The Welfare state really did not start to take effect in the west until the 1960s. Certain aspects were around before that I believe in various countries, but the most significant additions I am sure started in the 60s. Religion is something that people tend to adopt from their parents, and potentially drop when they are in their late teens and early 20s. The baby boomers would be the first generation of in NA that would have grown up in a true welfare state, and I expect they have a lower religious participation then their parents, and Gen X even lower then the baby boomers.

The US has become economically harder for people then 30 years ago, but they still have it better when it comes to welfare, healthcare should a problem arise. They do not have to look for charity from the church as they did 60 years ago, instead they get it from the state. They don't have to go to church to ensure the community will assist them if required.

I am of course not talking about religion for the hardened capitalists, but more typical people who wish to provide for themselves and family rather then being the selfish capitalist as typified by Ayn Rands writing, which generally typifies a smaller portion of the population
Click to expand...

That isn't exactly true, the social democratic movement happened right after WW2, and prior to that the socialist culture was extremely strong.

The baby boomers grew up in the 50s and 60s, but were adults in the 1970s, they got into the economy, the late 1970s was the begining of the neo-liberal revolution, and I would argue that that is the time when securalism started to grow.

You have to look at this as "the western world" not just the US, it includes europe. I would say you're religious background is something you adopt from your parents, but your religious identity is formed around the teens and 20s.

I don't think you can simply look at it from a standpoint of "welfare" vrs "church charity" you have to look at the whole of society, for example, before the university wasn't to make professionals, it was more authentically a place for just higher learning, back then buisinesses were seen as servants of society, nowerdays it's almost the other way around, even though there wasn't an advanced welfare system, there was the real concept of "the commons" that existed and was stripped away with teh neo-liberal revolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom