Are religious countries more 'Christian'?

GT WT

1,000+ Posts
What is the correlation between the prevalence of religion in a country and its commitment to ‘Christian’ goodness? Dr. Phil Zuckerman of Pitzer College says that more secular countries (e.g., Denmark & Sweden) are more likely to provide care for the sick, old, and downtrodden.

In reply to:


 
images



Sweden. Notice the Christian cross in its flag? The Swedish 12th century king Eric the Holy saw a yellow cross in the sky as he landed in Finland during the First Swedish Crusade in 1157. Seeing this as a sign from God he adopted the yellow cross against a blue background as his banner. Think maybe Sweden's long history of being Christian has anything to do with its morals, even if most today have given up the religion?
 
images


Denmark. Seeing a trend? If he wanted a truly atheist country without Christian roots, why not North Korea? How well do they take care of their sick, old and downtrodden?
 
This is a complex task that the author has undertaken, but I also find it a bit misguided. He seems to be equating 'good' with "Christian." It is good to take care of the poor and the elderly and the sick, etc. But there are probably 1,000 variables or more that one could examine just as 'the good.'
Christianity, however, is not primarily concerned with being 'good.' In fact, I would say that Christianity is almost quite the opposite. Christianity holds as a basic tenent that humanity is sinful. This is generally expressed, among Protestants anyway, as the 'total depravity of man.' Jesus did not come to make bad people good, He came to make dead people live. Christianity is more concerned with 'life' than with 'good.' By life I am saying spiritual life, or more exactingly, a relationship with God through what Jesus has done to atone for our alienation from God.
 
And do you agree with Jesus' response when he was asked which was the greatest commandment?
 
GT WT,
I can guarantee you that Jesus does not approve of your disbelief regarding his deity and the miraculous works he performed while on earth.

In fact, there were many people who followed Jesus because of some of teachings that later tried to kill him when He presented Himself as God. Plus the reliance on good works to find acceptability is exactly what the Pharisees were all about. He didn't like them too much.

From my understanding of Jesus' ministry, you would approximate either one of those groups more closely.

With that said, that is not unique about you. That is 100% of the human population who have not been regenerated by the Holy Spirit myself included.

As far as the relationship, between good works and being "Christian", God forgiving your sins is a motivation to obey Him. He does say to help others, especially the helpless. I know I am more obedient to His commands now compared to before I was saved. I think that is a representative experience to other Christians. There could still be people who are not Christian who do more "good works" than me. However, I am certain I am doing much more because of His work in Me.
 
Yes, I can actually. Bank on it.

What does capitalism/socialism have to do with prostitutes and murderers? Plus to Jesus we are all prostitutes and murderers any way. I can guarantee that too, by His own words. I know in my heart I am just about all of it.
 
So if we're going to pick and choose which of Jesus' teachings we're going to believe or disbelieve, then aren't we, in effect, saying that Jesus is wise when he agrees with us, but he's a fool when he disagrees with us?

Jesus the wise teacher = Jesus agreeing with GTWT

Jesus the fool = Jesus disagreeing with GTWT
 
Monarhorns, Thank you for your response. I appreciate the sincerity of your beliefs. My beliefs, too, are sincere. Jesus, if he livged, was a man, just like you and me. Some of the teachings attributed to Jesus are worth following. I try to do so.

In reply to:


 
GT WT,
You statement about Jesus sounds so unsure. He did live on the earth. There are multiple accounts Biblical and extra-Biblical for anyone honestly considering evidence that point should be firm. So sources have been called into question, but I think they stand against the criticism well. The hyper-skepticism displayed by the dissenting scholars from my reading of their stance is irrational and defeatist, which renders them unreliable.

Jesus is a man like you and me. We agree on that point. The other side of the coin is that He is God at the same time. I have already given you one example of Jesus stating this in a way that was understood by His contemporaries and another based on one of the titles by which He referred to Himself.

You ask if Jesus makes the same claim in Mark. I think it is a curious question. I wish you would explain where it came from.

Jesus does not make the same exact claim in Mark. There are other examples of Jesus revealing Himself to be God within Mark. Read Mark 2:1-12. Jesus does something that only God can do, forgive sins. Those who knew the Law well understood that for a mere man to act like he can forgive sins is blasphemy. So either Jesus is a blasphemer of God or God. Then he shows all of us which one right after, He heals a paralyzed man miraculously. I don't think anyone can reasonably claim that Jesus did not think He is God and make those claims.

The only basis for doing so is starting with the false assumption that there is no God or no supernatural aspect to reality. Then you can remove whatever part of scripture that is in violation of that assumption. That is biased reading. Read it as it was written without prejudice. Then, look into how reliable these accounts are on a historical, grammatical, literary basis. I have done so and they are reliable. That should in turn inform your assumptions.

If you are have trouble with the variation between the gospel accounts, we can discuss that too. It is a subject that interests me. I have studied some of it in great detail and the reliability of the accounts only strengthen.
 

Recent Threads

Back
Top