A Buddhist Perspective

2015

Of course, there were other faiths which I didn’t encounter so much. I could spend 25 more years finding the views of so many other faiths. From animists to Mormons, I would be spending my life asking for new perspectives. It was confusing enough as it was. For example: ‘What is the view of those who are male family members of those who have spontaneously combusted before the age of 50?’ – a trite question like that illustrated the plethora and range of perspectives out there. Literally, every human being has an opinion on it – even if that opinion is ‘I don’t really think about it much.’

But there are other faiths which have significant memberships and which needed to be covered…

I asked a Buddhist what he thought about the subject… he was a convert and highly intelligent, particularly skilled in his knowledge of history.

James

“We don’t need a Christian revival... although you might. We need to work out where our future lies now that we are no longer the world’s pre-eminent power, and create a new social compact to replace the old one that broke down irretrievably in the 1960’s. The days of deference to the old class-based structure have gone, and with it came a challenge to all established authority such as the Church and crown. 

The task for all post-Christian nations is to work out a civil morality to replace a Christian one that most of the population no longer believe in. That is already happening, and Christian thinking will be a major part of it because it’s what we know. However, if the churches try to impose it then Christianity will be marginalised just as the old religions of Britain were when Christianity arrived on these shores.”

Do we need a revival? Or is it just a preference? There is a sense in which it is not absolutely necessary for some... but it is absolutely necessary for others. In some ways it can even be a life and death issue. There would still be bad news and awful things happening, but as very few of us have lived through a revival, it is hard to do more than speculate at this point. Perhaps a better question is 'Would it make things better for most of the people, or would it be better never to happen?'

But even those who are set against it might find some interest in the lively debates which would occur. At the moment, many of those debates (often online), tend to be grim, graceless flame-wars. Perhaps a revival would temper those wars and make them a little more enjoyable. Life, after all, would be hideous if it were not tempered by love.

Next week I will be changing the style of this blog and moving on to some wider unexplored issues.

The Economists' Perspective

 

2014

 

This is going to be a dry entry. Basically, we are talking money and law. Please feel free to stop now if you are not interested… I'm not going to be talking about World War III and weapons of mass destruction here...

I'm not sure how we can make something which is so intrinsically interesting, so boring, but somehow we manage it. For those who still remain, thank you. As far as I could see, I was the only one writing about the economic and social impact of a modern-day revival. I was also in the minority among revivalists in being a liberal Christian. Think about it – if there was to be a modern revival, there would be an impact on society, a knock-on effect on laws (even if the new Christians were simply petitioning and lobbying). There would also be an influence on the economy because the revival would probably be coming from a grass-roots level. The more people who became Christians, the more people would support charities. The fewer people would be involved in things like drugs. And what would be the influence on the alcohol and nicotine trade? Historically, people drink less during a revival. Christians still drink, but there is a knock-on effect on these trades.

It's a minefield. People feared what should happen, if they ever thought about it. They assumed it would be a little like the US where abortion was eventually discouraged. Would the pro-lifers here also gain support? Probably. But what about the pro-choice Christians? I will write about the LGBT+ community later on this blog.

In October 2014 I went to see Robert Peston speak on economics at the Cheltenham Literature festival. I found the lecture boring, full of significant, yet dry graphs showing how precarious the economy was after the collapse of 2008. Strangely, the only thing that really struck me were the words of the man who introduced Robert Peston. The compere said: “It’s Sunday morning and the local churches want to know where everyone is.” The hall was full of around 500 people. There were probably a lot more people at churches but there were also a lot of people shopping or simply in their homes. Why did people seem to be everywhere but in churches (or reading my blog)?

And that was the problem among economists. There was speculation of all kinds of financial situations. Recessions. Boom and bust. Various countries economies growing. The cost-of-living crisis.

But no-one really took account of the black swan theory. A black swan among economists is an unpredictable event that is beyond what is normally expected of a situation. It does not come up on financial forecasts for a company or a country, because no-one expects to see it. Just like a black swan. But black swans exist, though they are rare. In hindsight, people often say they were obvious all the time.

In this case, the black swan was a Christian revival. People simply didn’t expect it.

 

The economy is complex and influenced by all kinds of factors, property, unemployment, tax, etc, etc, etc. I’m not financially illiterate but I was bored senseless by most of it. Presumably a revival would be good for the economy too as God blessed the nation? You would think so. But in the cost-of-living crisis which began proper in 2022, hot on the heals of a pandemic, almost everybody was having to cut back on luxuries. And once again, it was the poor who lost out the most. How were they supposed to weather the storm? Revival is good news for the poor, to put it simply, because people help each other more during one and have more concern for them. It’s not necessarily that people work harder and that there is a knock-on effect on the economy. Some people can’t do that. It is because there is more compassion within society and people help each other out. There is much historical evidence for this. And as a result, though shares may not rise and the country may still be in debt, individuals get help with their personal debts and their personal affairs. Sometimes the church helps, through organisations such as Christians Against Poverty. Or food banks. And then the emergency measures become measures to tackle the root causes of the problems – some of which stem from a lack of meaning among the general population. When meaning is found, even if that meaning is simply the compensation of eternal life and a better life this side of eternity, people start to feel more motivated in whatever they choose to do?

As I say, a dry post. It’s only money.

 

 

 

Some Atheist Points of View

 

2008

Concerned that I had maybe written off atheists, I joined a debating group on Facebook and asked: ‘Am I being prejudiced by not liking atheists?’

The consensus in response was that, yes, I was being prejudiced in not liking them. Never happy with personal prejudices I adjusted my perspective and considered that maybe, in person, atheists were just as likeable as you and I and were acting out of conviction.

But I struggled with this one. I was told, repeatedly, in between being laughed at, that atheism is a spectrum and that few atheists are totally convinced of their position. They were also very chagrined to be repeatedly told that they were going to hell or that they were ‘fools’ by believers. Atheist/Christian relationships remained strained with excesses on both sides.

Usually the atheists are scripturally literate, much to the annoyance of many Christians. But often debates are around a kind of caricatured Old Testament God which only the atheists recognise. ‘Your God destroyed millions in the flood did he? How is he good and loving then?’ And every single verse in the Bible picked up and analysed for further evidence that the Christian God is a complete tyrant and monster.

Sometimes they will have a point. For example, their emphasis on the question of suffering (which can never be answered satisfactorily this side of eternity), is the evidence which they keep bringing to the table that a good God does not exist. It is compelling evidence too. Because what it shows is that God either doesn’t exist, or that he is neglectful or that he has other reasons for not righting wrongs or alleviating suffering. If the good news is that God is love - then the atheists want more evidence than the cross.

But your friendly atheist is not always friendly online. Sometimes he, or she, is brutally nasty. The atheist response is that they are only responding in kind to some of the things they have to put up with (the being called ‘fools’ and the hell threats).

Over the years I have asked some of them what they thought about Christian revival... so their responses here are usually about the UK around 2008...

Stephen said: “71% of the country say they are Christians. The Prime Minister is a Christian. The previous Prime Minister is a Christian. Atheists are a very tiny minority.”

Carl said:

“I think we should get rid of all the religion and the theists from our country. Christianity has had 1700 years to get its act together and look at the state of the country.

We have a Christian Monarch, A Christian Prime Minister with two previous Christian Prime Ministers, We live in a Christian state with a Christian Legislature. We've had dozens of Christian rulers imposing Christian values on us and the country is now completely broken. Christianity has ruined our country.

Look at the USA. North American Indians inhabited America for thousands of years. They lived in harmony with nature. When the Christians arrived, America was completely unspoiled. Thousands of years of living in harmony with nature was wiped out in a mere 300 years. Because that's how long it took Christianity to turn it into a sh*thole of crime, bigotry, war-mongering, gun-loving, drug-infested, immorality.

Christianity has had its chance. It's time to move over and let Secular Humanism fix the damage caused by Christianity. We could once again be a green and pleasant land.”

In the end I became persuaded that yes, I was being prejudiced against a community and that the OT perspective of God as a monster was not entirely without some evidence. In fact the God presented in the OT seemed to be a completely different character to the God of the NT. I concluded that the 'good news' or gospel had to be that God is, in fact, love - or else there is very little good news to be found. The evidence for that, when there is so much suffering for so many of us is hard to find. Perhaps the only real evidence believers have are the accounts of Calvary. And ice cream of course.

But surely some kind of revival might help persuade us that God is not this angry, monstrous character so many of us still fear could exist?