How Christianity Gained Dominion - An Interview With Tom Holland
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 มิ.ย. 2024
- Glen Scrivener interviews Tom Holland about his new book; Dominion.
He did a follow up interview in October 2020 here: • Tom Holland | How Chri...
Subscribe to Speak Life and be the first to watch each video in the series RESET. We're talking to:
Douglas Murray
Katharine Birbalsingh
Tom Holland
Alastair Roberts
Miroslav Volf
John Behr
Wendy Alsup
Rachel Gilson
Rebecca McLaughlin
John Lennox
Rupert Sheldrake
Malcom Guite
Esther O'Reilly
Kristi Mair
Mike Reeves
Paul Vanderklay
Speak Life is a UK based charity that resources the church to reach the world.
Learn more about us here: speaklife.org.uk/
Join our internship programme here: speaklifefoundry.com/
Subscribe to Speak Life and get our regular videos: tiny.cc/ecjbgz
Social Media
speakLifeuk/
speaklifeuk/
speaklifeuk
I wish this interview was 2 hours longer. Tom is such an honest and fascinating guy. Love his books!
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
As Chesterton says, “But before we call either Culture or Humanism a substitute for religion, there is a very plain question that can be asked in a form of a very homely metaphor. Humanism may try to pick up the pieces; but can it stick them together? Where is the cement which made religion corporate and popular, which can prevent it falling to pieces in a debris of individualistic tastes and degrees? What is to prevent one Humanist wanting chastity without humility, and another humility without chastity, and another truth or beauty without either? The problem of an enduring ethic and culture consists in finding an arrangement of the pieces by which they remain related, as do the stones arranged in an arch. And I know of only one scheme that has thus proved its solidity, bestriding lands and ages with its gigantic arches, and carrying everywhere the high river of baptism upon an aqueduct of Rome.”
To the degree Christian influence diminishes in the West, reason, compassion, human rights and the mortar that keeps the bricks together all diminish as well.
The Marxism, Islam, and Anarchism rising against freedom in the US is a warning sign that the slow unraveling is speeding up.
Thank you, James. I wrote a thesis and subsequent songs, poems based on Austin Farrer's "tacking towards the truth."
I am truly happy to be alive in the same times as him, so I can tell my kids about him and let them read his work. Salute
I concur!!!
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
Brilliant conversation.
The concept of original sin, that we’re all sinners, it keeps us all honest ... and that without it you get a horrible hierarchy of virtue. -Tom Holland.
I routinely search “Tom Holland Historian” into TH-cam in search of new interviews and yet I just discovered this one
Try these
th-cam.com/video/nlf_ULB26cU/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/7eSyz3BaVK8/w-d-xo.html
He did the delingpod and the big conversation recently too
Leslie Cunliffe Wow thanks
johnny boy Thanks
In defense of Nietzsche’s he was only 44 when he collapsed and his genius was cut short. If he had gone on I would not conclude that his denial of Christianity would have continued. He very likely would have solved his dilemma in that regard and offered us all a brilliant path forward. Thank goodness people like Tom Holland are picking up where he left off and helping us understand the problem.
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
It's the triumphant twist in history, like the best of novels, no-one saw it coming except for the glimmer in a prophets eye. The explosion of love on the cross brought a symbol of hope and inner sanctity to disparate humanity. This is the greatest showcase of creative authorship set into play from the mind of The Great History Maker!
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
What are you talking about? Armies under the banner of the cross wrought havoc, death and despair everywhere they ventured.
@@stevepierce6467 I understand your concern. Still God is above all and his will prevails despite the darkness and depth of humanity. His ways are above and beyond our understanding. Who would God be if he couldn't influence the streams and tides of history? Don't you know that he will judge at the end of ages to his standard and his standard alone the attitudes and actions of every individual? There is hope in God to bring an account of all our wrong doing for we all are sinners, and yet he offers his service to restore a broken world in love through the power of Christ Jesus. You too can acknowledge there is only one Saviour.
@@PicoGirl How has god "influenced the streams and tides of history?" --- No, I don't know that god will judge anything or anyone, and neither do you. --- You are a sinner if you transgress against the religious rules of your sect. Not being an adherent of any religious sect, I am not a sinner, only a humble occasional lawbreaker or mild social irritant, for which civil penalties apply. --- He "offers his service"? What is he, an itinerant brush salesman? Sorry, meaningless abstractions do not convince any rational person. Just substitute any other fantasy figure in the place of "god" in your comment and you will see how absurd it sounds.
@@stevepierce6467 Sure I'll replace it. Evolution has influenced the streams and tides of history. It's a bland term that could mean anything because evolution is actually just a make believe term to try to describe the unknown and less logical than the fitting answer that God was before all things and brought them into existence. But maybe you would prefer the illogical theory of a multiverse that just keeps on giving.
What a wonderful interview! Thank you both
This was great ! Was searching for content on this topic and this really was informative.
Brilliant stuff - really enjoyed this candid conversation between Glen Scrivener and historian Tom Holland.
Wonderful interview! Loved it! Thanks, Tom and Glenn!
Yes Glenn did well.
Guilt forgiveness / honour shame Christianity gave us forgiveness and a new hope. Great video.
I've loved Tom's work for many years and feel I am very much on a similar journey (with him doing a lot of the heavy lifting, so thanks TOM ), I found his ending comments fascinating,
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
Wow, so much gold. I am halfway through the book. Loving it. and what a lovely honest and kind man and I absolutely loved the encouragement he gave that wonderful Anglican priest.
This was brilliant. Thanks for sharing.
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
Interesting insight on the hierarchy of virtue replacing original sin. Dawkins latest work on eradicating the notion of God for children is a case in point.
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
Thank you, I could listens to this stuff 24 hours a day
this is honestly one of the most interesting things i have ever heard, a man who has a command of the material explaining what he thinks about it.
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
Fantastic interview!!
Tom Holland come to my church! Surrey UK!!!!!!
Thank you for doing this interview, very engaging and a challenge to question more deeply/accurately how Western society has developed as it has. I’ve just ordered the book and will look forward to reading it. I’ve now added Tom to my prayer list to!👍
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
Greetings from Pakistan, Great conversation, I really loved it, God bless ✊❤️🙏
May be interested in this: th-cam.com/video/-AbYIj5TCuw/w-d-xo.html
Great interview!
Paul sent me. #PastorOfTheIDW
brilliant and beautiful interview
Wow. The strangeness of Christianity is serious. Fascinating.
6:40 Maintaining Christian values without acknowledging the importance of the bible or the church is akin to having a court without laws or a constitution. It relies entirely on precedent and in short order may find itself entirely contrary to its ethical origin.
Exactly! Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones said this already some time ago: ethics will stand for a little while, but separated from the biblical doctrine and believe in Christ later on everything will crumble... Let's urgently pray for the West!
@@theresepfister139 nonsense the Greeks did just fine before christianity!
@@deanodog3667 Compared to what. For the modern eye, it was not really that great. The Greeks tend to be romanticized quite a lot. Having said that, i also do not agree with the OP. I mean, I can acknowledge the importance of the Bible and the Church but that is more from a historical perspective. Can't really push the whole "Jesus died and rose from the dead to forgive the sins of humanity" bit, especially as being a historical episode. I can understand the metaphor of it to a certain extent. But you won't get too many people who will literally believe this anymore. It has to be approached differently. And I also have a hard time finding a way to get the anti-theist secular modern rational skeptical person to have the guts to look at Christianity in a different way then they were taught to.
@@Alnivol666 I meant Greek philosophy which was heavily borrowed from in the NT , incidentally the bible is supposed to be the literal inspired word of God hence it is not meant to be metaphorical!
@@deanodog3667 Well...in a way yes... there have been different ways to look at the words in the bible. If you dive into biblical hermeneutics you will see that almost from the start, the interpretation of biblical text is to be done in 4 ways: literal, moral ,allegorical and anagogical.
It was so common they even had a little Latin poem to help students remember it:
Litera gesta docet,
Quid credas allegoria,
Moralis quid agas,
Quo tendas anagogia.
Which translates as “The letter instructs about what things were done; Allegory teaches us what we should believe; the moral level shows what to do; the anagogical signals aspects of the (spiritual and future) realm toward which we are directed.” Any Biblical text had at least one of these meanings, but could have two, three or all four. And a verse that had been interpreted literally could be reinterpreted as having no literal meaning but having one or more of the other ones, which is how the texts that had been invoked in line with Ptolemaic (or, later, Tychonian) cosmology came to be reinterpreted once the scientific consensus on heliocentrism changed.
Church fathers understood that some stuff in the bible was not factual for a lot of things. They admitted this openly. And they knew that if they pushed on the literal interpretations of those things they would look like fools.
The idea that the Bible should only or primarily be interpreted literally is a modern, most Protestant and largely American evangelical affair, though many atheists don’t understand this and so project it onto “Christianity” generally and project it back into the medieval and Late Roman past. This is often done by American atheists, who often grew up in or around fundamentalist churches which teach Biblical literalism, but we can also see atheists like Dawkins assuming literalism because their main exposure to Christianity has been through fighting Creationism, which is founded on this modern American literalism. This means many atheists not only assume literalism as Christianity’s default setting, but also think any non-literal interpretations of the Bible are very recent and are merely a face-saving reaction to modern science and therefore represent a retreat from and dilution of “real” Christianity.
Holland makes a significant point here, (about 36 minutes in). He suggests that the decline in Christianity since the 1960s can be attributed to a hegemonic acceptance that the ‘devil’ is encapsulated by a combination of racism and fascism (Naziism). There’s been no need for the Gospel, as it has been universally accepted in the West, that being ‘against’ racism and Naziism, is sufficient. But, “What resources then do you have [to defend morality] beyond kind of screaming racist?” Holland asks.
Opposition to racism has strongly contributed to a strong reluctance to discover what is (and was, especially in pre-colonial times) happening in sub-Saharan Africa. This has helped to occlude what would have been a further angle of research into many of the issues raised by Holland. As someone who has lived in Africa since 1988, I can very much verify the spirit of the message being brought to us by Holland. This is demonstrated by the phenomenal growth of the church in Africa today, that Holland also alludes to (Dominion, under subheading 'Long Walk to Freedom').
Contrary to Grayling’s assertion, communities such as those found in traditional Africa, do not find their way to ‘civilisation’, as it was once known, through reason and human sensibility. It is the Gospel that can make, and makes, a phenomenal difference. (Of which reason, etc., of course is and comes to be a part.) I am constantly seeing this happening to ‘indigenous communities’. So, I find Grayling to be wrong. His misguided approach that stokes anti-racism as if such can be ‘the solution’ for mankind, is narrowing options for us here in Africa to: copy the White man (he’s the only one who is ‘correct’) or be a nobody.
My reference to Grayling is from here: th-cam.com/video/7eSyz3BaVK8/w-d-xo.html
Holland makes a significant point, and I will not argue that it is totally wrong, but I think he should reflect also on the fact that this trend has been continuous since the beginning of the industrial revolution, which co-occurred with the enlightenment. Although the enlightenment is in one sense the most immediate source of anti-Christian ideology in the modern west, it is unclear that there would have been an ideological movement like the enlightenment without the social disruption created by the industrial revolution. It may well have been the decay of kinship and village social ties as a result of economic upheaval that led directly to the decay of organized religion, followed by a growing receptivity to an ideology that would justify the apostasy. With so many western intellectuals having already abandoned the faith before WW2, it was easy for Hitler to fill the role of the devil in their minds, and secular cosmopolitan ideologies such as democracy, Marxism, and "human rights" to replace the dogmas of the church.
Brilliant!
Intriguing!
This coming from a Hindu from India.
you just have to love Tom Holland! Absolutely honest guy
Original sin as a kind of safety feature is also figured into the U.S. Constitution. Great to hear two Commonwealthians giving a nod, albeit unconsciously to another great historical-cultural document, which translates biblical wisdom into political reality. The liberal narrative wants to do away with the constitution out of motivation coming from a simplification: it's old and outmoded; therefore, it has to be done away. Thanks for the great dialogue!
Tom Holland has a great line in the book... ""That all men had been created equal, and endowed with an inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were not remotely self-evident truths. That most Americans believed they were owed less to philosophy than the Bible"
many of the US-founders views were reasoned as logical conclusions from concepts found in the Bible, That may well be what made the views self-evident in their eyes. Jefferson, for instance, is always referred to in literature/history classes as a deist, but he funded a bible publication that, far from being an attempt to make biblical concepts theologically neutral (whatever that means) attempted to shorten narrative and concentrate on Christ's teachings.
I don't see why you'd be surprised, the American Constitution and Declaration of Independence are both thoroughly soaked in English liberalism, it's one of the greatest monuments of the English tradition. It does have a smattering of the French tradition, especially with the concept of the separation of powers from Rousseau, but it's nonetheless very English in nature
And I agree, the documents are predicated on the assumption of a deeply Christian society, I'm not entirely sure if it could last America becoming uprooted and secularised
@@ColaDose52 But the Jefferson Bible engaged in a theological project of it's own, that of de-mythologization. It truly did become a Bible _for_ Deists: God exists, He created the universe, but He doesn't directly get involved in the world (Clock Maker) and thus miracles and revelation and the incarnation of God in Christ are rejected as irrational and preposterous. God is out there somewhere but Christ is no more than a great moral teacher, not the Messiah, and far less God in the flesh (as Christianity teaches).
read Tom`s book a while back, it was interesting, worth a read.
This is legit. Phenomenal.
47 mins Keep the prayers coming!
Tom Holland is brilliant here. The precipice of the 60s - debatable but brilliant idea of Nazis taking over the Western imagination from the Church. Liberal vortex - another brilliant gem of the ideology sucking in religion. His critique of the church is so dead-on, it's about capturing imagination, it's about bringing back the cosmic, mythological dimension of Christianity and not the boring charities
And no wonder we have the great awokeing,people are bored out of their tiny little minds after being emersed in this tepid bath for decades......
I agree that the ideas and wisdom we’ve inherited from Christianity are still reflected in the ways many of us behave and showing deference to its contribution and contributors still today has merit. I don’t know what the future affect of increasing rejection of the core claims, not just about Jesus’ divinity, but also the existence of a heaven and hell, will have on the way the humans who exist in this inherited culture will behave. I do think if we leave it to chance the likelihood it will go pear shaped is not trivial. Re Toms musings about the 60’s, I think a lot of women fear being transported back to the realities of what life was like for them before they secured their freedom to control their reproduction and to divorce horrible husbands.
Just got the book. Great read. Do something about that chair.
Where can I get that bust? Thank you.
Tom, you need to talk to Hugh Ross about the dinosaurs.
By ❤️ which can't be corrupted
The believing brethren were infiltrated before the last apostle was dead. John was kept from visiting the assembly were Diotrephes was leader. Can you imagine keeping out the Messiah's beloved apostle from coming to share his experiences and wisdom? But that's what happened. Paul also forecast that wolves were entering in. And that heresy continued until it was formalized in the 4th century as Christianity. What Christians don't see when they peer into their New Testament is they themselves are 'the great falling away" and their guy is their own Anti-Christ.
Could you be so kind as to flesh out the alternative to the NT to which you seem to be alluding? The reference to Diotrephes shouldn't be extrapolated into some takeover theory which successfully transplanted what we received as the NT for what was true. What basis in history do you have for making such claims?
@@ColaDose52 Nicaea-where only 200 assemblies known to be Rome-friendly were invited. Constantine was as much a Christian as my dog--and the resulting "Christianity" threw away everything that made the faith what it was. Christians don't SEE that the early Jerusalem council settled the Galatian question by deciding that new believers 1) give up their pagan ways (and what does Christianity do??? Bring in pagan worship by the BAG FULL) and 2) attend the synagogues on the actual SABBATH to learn the Torah. (Acts 15:20-21 in YOUR New Testament--something you've never once heard a sermon preached on because it blows a giant hole into the very premise of Christianity itself--the abrogation of the Torah). Mr. Holland's book only proves one thing: That the winners get to write the history.
Jenna Caruthers Jesus appointed the apostles to preach and teach, and they built the church under the watchful hand of the Holy Spirit. That’s what the sources say.
@@jenna2431 What pagan ways are you referring to? I’m just curious.
21:16
Someone get Tom Holland Hugh Ross' books
Basically christianity gained dominion once the emperor converted and to curry favour with the emperor you too had to convert , hence christianity only reached the realms of Roman empire and never penetrated sub saharan Africa or China etc !
@borrowed tomb correct!
If someone screams racist at me because I want controlled immigration I know they've already lost the argument and its just a mindless insult with no meaning or power behind it. Overuse of the word racist has lessened its impact dramatically, the same with the word far right.
I liked the interview. I would put far more weight on Jesus words than Pauls though. Also, the tremendous contribution by the rest of the Apostles and the Church fathers cannot be overlooked. I often hear these days, Paul being quoted at the expense and in contradiction to Jesus, which is sad. Paul himself would not be amused! The Church worked as one body back then, everybody had a part to play with many martyrs! Without the Church, there was no possibility of a Paul! As a devout Catholic, I believe that we are all not long for this world and would encourage people to acknowledge that and take note of the mysterious beginnings to our Universe, of life and of Christianity. Please try to live the Holy life as prescribed by the ancient Catholic Church, even if only for a few days. What have you to lose?
As a historian, he was using Paul as the earliest available source. Of course believers will go with the Gospels and indeed all of Scripture.
@@yidiandianpangThanks, Paul was a follower of Jesus, who promoted his life and his death. The follower should not be considered greater and having more influence than the main character. Albert Einstein was not superceded by a follower but his name might have been enhanced by those who follow him.
When religion has absolute power it can be brutal and violent to gain 'dominion'
Thank goodness few listen to priests babble any longer.
Glen you are not helping this man - preach the Gospel to him. You know that you have to be more than culturally influenced by Christianity. You have to be born again.
Remember Jesus Nailed By The State, Jewish Superman, said My sheep hear My voice & render to Caesar.
We know nothing fails like prayer in a children's hospital, we know them by their works; those suggesting prayer.
Those advocating are the same; authorized by themselves to weigh-in as if Earth had gravity-free zones & magic.
They mock themselves for lack of quality-control.
Theologians grant doctorates missing the certification of a deity, the imagined, unable to be acknowledged by everyone.
The Christians stuck their books on to some Jewish books, the Mormons attached to them both, because the standard is not set high or low, but lacks existence.
If the cross is a cure for Roman decease of cruelty, it might nevertheless be also an exageration of tendencies of elements of the jewish Religion that started to attract Roman intellectuals. Christianity however wiped out this success of jewishness in non-jewish society. Might be that the noahide tora beliefers would have found a more clear and balanced relationship to God in terms of faith and deads.
Most folk have not been Christian and most are still not.
Paul expresses his own contemplation of doubt about the resurrection of Christ in 1 Cor 15 where he also addresses the claims of some of the readers that Christ has not been raised. So I don't think it was as certain as you say. Paul also has an almost gnostic separation between flesh and spirit. He talks of being raised into a "spiritual body", which suggests it may not actually be material. In general he seems to despise the body, e.g. in Romans 7 where he blames his flesh for his sinful nature. Paul may not have believed that Jesus's body resurrected literally but rather that, after death, Jesus became a spiritual being in his resurrection (departing his corpse). And Paul had a vision of Christ, presumably a spiritual vision, on the Road to Damascus, long after the resurrected Jesus had ascended into heaven, according to the later gospel accounts; and these gospels are of course filled with all manner of fraudulent myth-making material, including Jesus's miracles to assist the poor, sick, and wineless.
We really should address the social acceptance of large numbers of people speaking a fantasyland vocabulary & openly indulging in the deceit of religious belief as a tool of fascism.
These are the wolves in sheep's clothing, we know them by their works:
A wicked generation seeking signs when Jesus The Nailed says faith is worthless if you can't move mountains by issuing verbal orders to one.
Freud wrote the antidote to Christianity is literacy.
The Christians slapped their books on the Old Testament, & the Mormons glued theirs on to them both, thus proving Christians lack quality-control.
Look at the verbose podium jockey speaking of faith & prayer as if we all should have a preference for travel with one foot in fantasyland.
Nothing fails like prayer in a children's hospital, & there is talk as if God does not have a perfect record of doing nothing, as if we had no reason for the saying: God helps those helping themselves.
A house divided cannot stand.
We vote because Christians have no quality-controls, & we desire those governing not making suggestions travel is best done with one foot in someone's fantasyland.
'Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.''
It was secular law & order ending the inquisitions & witch-killings.
One might expect a deity to make itself known to everyone without work performed in interpretations of old literature by guys like our verbose podium jockey.
Theologians acquire grand titles without certification from a deity, & project certainty using fantasyland vocabulary in an academic setting to compensate for lack of reason.
@@Stupidityindex I agree with you that religious belief should not be socially acceptable. There are two types of people who identify with religion: genuine simpletons, and con artists. Either way they will voice support for various false and evil teachings of the religion.
My book has basic Christian theory and how it applies to government and why Christianity is a revolution rather than evolution from other religions. I do not know why this isn't being taught in universities and churches. "Assholes and Bullshit: A Language Problem" www.smashwords.com/books/view/1031535
Ironic how honest atheists are leading Christians back to the truth.
43:30 - Woke people believe in original sin - there are certain people who are born inherently bad and can only get absolution by strict renouncement of their default identity. The only difference is they don't apply it to themselves....
The fall of christianity from temporal power is a good message for hope that torturers don’t always win.
By the way, Augustine believed in the Greek and Roman gods. He just thought that they were demons. But he was not superstitious hahaha. In the City do who’s, he explains that a number of Roman women who were raped by the Goths had it coming and that their rape was god’s punishment or a teaching moment. That was their human right I suppose. He was such a humanist.
Frankly, efforts to justify horrible doctrines 1:13:10 such as the original sin are equivalent to abject zttempts by Christians to justify the Shoah. by God´s provifence.
i would suggest that what we have kept from christianity is its universal elements, zfter hzving shed all the superstition.
It gained dominion because it’s true , basic stuff this
@Jonathan Archer Actually that's Godless Communism/Socialism as history actually shows it was Christianity that brought us western civilization and the technology you are using to argue your absurd indoctrinations.
That doesn’t explain how 80% of Western Europe still lives by these values while not believing it’s true.
@@Uppernorwood976 if 2+2 =4 you don't have to believe in it, it simply is true, using math to get ahead is the same as using Christian values to get ahead , again basic stuff this,
@@gorryman you spectacularly misunderstand Tom Holland's argument completely. He himself doesnt believe it's true. It's almost certainly not true. But it doesnt need to be true to have effect it does. Repeating "this is is basic stuff" makes you sound a bit dumb, I have to say, I'm afraid.
@@Uppernorwood976 You Spectacularly misunderstand my statement, I didn't bother to watch the video I just made a statement based on the title of the video. Go outside and look around and deny God all you want be a freshman for the rest of your life I don't know you nor do I care.
I know there is christianity but where is your god?
I love Tom,,,, but!! As A historian you should never hedge your bet, and Tom does that to every page of every single book he wrote except for herodotus!!
And this is what all modern historian fall into.
Julius Caesar? Compassion and mercy? The Gauls do not agree.
I, as an atheist, think that Tom Holland is absolutely correct in his linking of Christianity to the advancement in Western morality. But just as Christianity served to improve on Judaism and where their morality fell short of progression, I believe humanism serves to improve on religions as a whole and improve upon where they fall short. Humanism is basically taking the concept of cultural evolution and adapting a foundation of morality that can be applied to the scientific method, largely based on the trials and errors of governments, religions, and laws of the past. Its why we no longer kill homosexuals or burn witches or enforce patriarchy or annoint Kings with divine rulership, etc. We take the ideas of the past and build upon them or reject them. Ideas can survive through natural selection much in the same manner that species do. Now, as an atheist I have to acknowledge that many if not most other secularists wish to do away with religion entirely. I have to stand against that idea as an acknowledgement to the notion that our civilizations revolve around it. In practically every society, religion is the powerhouse that drives culture and governance and provides a safety net for those in need. It provides moral and existential foundations that I just don't believe humanism has the power to replace. Religions are the unifying fabrics of civilizations across time and until secularism can mutate a meme (memes are abstract concepts that act as if they were genes being transfered from generation to generation. Memes can succumb to or overcome natural selection much in the same way that genes can) that can compensate for it's weaknesses, religion will be a necessary safety net for our civilizations.
I agree entirely.
Very well observed, though you miss out a fundamental element that, as an atheist, you might under-appreciate: spirituality. A sense of spirituality - of meaning in the world beyond the material - is completely fundamental to all human societies since the dawn of our species. Not even a hundred years of totalitarian militancy against religion (under communist regimes in Russia and China) were capable of even getting near to ending religion in their societies. Secularism could create a belief system that uses all the elements of successful religion except spirituality, and it would fail against another identical system that includes spirituality.
Whether the importance of spirituality is wise or not is secondary - regardless, it is a fact of human nature. Religion will only ever adapt, as it always has, to societies through time, no matter how much our technological and scientific understanding progresses. Specific organised religions may decline and waver, but spirituality - the root of religion - is an immortal element of humanity.
@@EdricoftheWeald I agree. I would say spiritualism, or the idea of finding meaning or achieving purpose, is one of those pillars of religion that secular society must adapt in order for it to be the stronger competitor. Religion provides meaning for their believers and it isn't something they must necessarily discover on their own. As a deconverted from christianity, I was too young and naive and it led me down a path of existential query and nihilism and ultimately about 4 years of depression all so I could figure out how to fill a void that the removal of religion left in me. I would say that the ability for a religion to provide meaning through spirituality is one of it's most unifying factors, most of which secularism lacks entirely
@Jonathan Archer Christianity is the forefront of the memetic adaptations regarding morality, spiritualism, and existentialism in Western civilizations. You're just not speaking in terms of memetics and cultural evolution which ultimately hinders your perspective from a scientific viewpoint. "Different" is not necessarily what secularism strives to be. It strives to be "better". For example, we can strive to be better than religion, but without morality our societies would be unable to coherently function. Humans, as a social species, require an ability to successfully interact with one another lest we struggle to survive rather than thrive to generate progress. Morality becomes institutionalized through law and culture and is a necessary component of any civilization, society, culture, etc. To do away with religion and the foundation it provides in morality would be one of the easier gaps that secularism can fill because we can define morality and apply it to the scientific method. We can and have come up with better moral foundations and it's why much of the Bible is interpreted to be immoral, despite the fact that the immoralities stem from gods commandments. We beat god at this. Existentialism and spiritualism, however, are not so easily adapted by secularism as they are both at the frontiers of science and Philosophy as we have yet to fully understand either and they often apply themselves differently at the individual levels. Religion provides a blanket solution by providing the population with an all encompassing answer, that God created us in his image to be with him. This necessarily eliminates existential crisis as well as providing a unifying fabric amongst believers that tethers them to each other. Again, something that I'm not even sure a secular culture could provide, yet it has enormous value to any culture. Societies that have weak religions and no unification fall apart almost immediately and never make it as stable civilizations.
@Jonathan Archer so you do not believe that there are actions that can either harm or benefit human well being in a society?
It seems that we are slowly emerging from the shadow of the Nuremberg show trials.
as someone who really dove into philosophy, science, and scriptures, i found this to be quite shallow. Tom Holland is trying to straddle both sides of the fence, he wants to maintain his appearance in the secular community while virtue signaling to the Christian community. There is more than enough evidence for Christ, and not a spec for any secular paradigm. He never actually answers any questions, he is like a buddhist who says nothing but is received as wise and deep of understanding.
The bible says now is the day for repentance not tomorrow not next week. Tjis guy is actually a bit of a clown. As i said before he never actually answers a question he is trying to sell a book, and that is all. He is not interested in Christianity being true, just being culturally convenient.
@@markwisborg1923 oh dear. Look up Peter S William talks on faith and its biblical meaning. It has nothing to do with believing in things blindly lol. Faith in short is belief in a future promise based on the proof and the certainty of past fulfillments. The faith comes into play not for belief IN but rather belief THAT. The cross is irrefutable, the faith comes in not with the events that took place, but rather with the future promises that have not YET taken place. Think about it, the disciples had faith, while also seeing with their own eyes the fulfillment and the rising again. Paul had faith AFTER having seen and witnessed the power of Christ before his very eyes. Faith has nothing to do with " hmmmm i sure hope this thing i am basing my life on is true..." it has to do with the acceptance of future not yet fulfilled promises based on PAST CONFIRMED TRUTHS.
Of the 39 rungs perhaps he is on #9. Doesn’t mean he isn’t honestly on his way up. 😉
@@JoshuaHults " He is not interested in Christianity being true," - because it is not true. He is a agnostic historian. He analyzes. He presents his findings without preaching his opinion. You seem to not understand what his job is and chastise him for not being who you expect him to be. Quite ridiculous. The discussion was about history most of the time, not faith.
👍
Protestanism is that terrible thing that happened to Christianity. I think that was what Tom was careful not to tell this preacher. Protestanism is uno enemy of the Church and the mother of all modern heresies.
Remember Jesus Nailed By The State, Jewish Superman, said My sheep hear My voice & render to Caesar.
We know nothing fails like prayer in a children's hospital, we know them by their works; those suggesting prayer.
Those advocating are the same; authorized by themselves to weigh-in as if Earth had gravity-free zones & magic.
They mock themselves for lack of quality-control.
Theologians grant doctorates missing the certification of a deity, the imagined, unable to be acknowledged by everyone.
The Christians stuck their books on to some Jewish books, the Mormons attached to them both, because the standard is not set high or low, but lacks existence.
I must ask about evolution...isn't humanity the very most unlikely species to survive? We have no hair on our bodies to keep us warm. Our nails aren't really claws...they break if we try to use them in any kind of physical defense. Our eyesight is weak compared to other species; it is very weak. So is our hearing & sense of smell. We can't jump high, run fast (compared to other predators, being also prey animals), or hide ourselves very well. We have big reasoning brains, but that is all. Other species that went extinct had that. Other species today have big reasoning brains, yet they are endangered. Opposable thumbs are helpful, but other primates & raccoons, have that, yet we dominate and hold them in captivity. In defense of Eden, it appears that humans were designed to live in luxury & comfort. No warming fur, no real claws or sharp teeth. No speed or agility like other animals. Let's admit it; we are not alone among other animals with regard to our ability to reason, or even create art (elephants, dolphins, octopi, beavers).. Very little running or jumping or climbing to help us. We have only our minds and sentience, which other species have had, and those species are endangered, or have died already. If God hasn't preserved us, then what other explanation is there except that we have been made in His image & He considers us His children? Darwinism says we should be extinct by now; yet, we are not. We know that the most intelligent species do not necessarily survive. Earthworms have proved that, as they are evident every day on our sidewalks.
It's the brains, ours gave us enough advantage
@@yidiandianpang No, other species have big brains and higher reasoning powers. It's not that.
@BANASTRE TARLETON Uh, not entirely true. Only small populations of humans were ever cannibalistic. Modern humans arose about 235,000 years ago, and were pretty much identical to us. As I said, no fur, no sharp claws or teeth...in fact, our teeth aren't strong, either. We can't jump high. We can't run as fast as other predators that should have wiped us out. I contend that human beings are made for the lap o' luxury...Eden. The fact that we have survived in the most rugged of environments is proof of God's existence and care for us. According to Darwin, we should be extinct...period.
Liberal, secular agnosticism ... Okay, but this is still your presupposition when you put Christianity under the microscope. You barely challenge the things you can't live without. Instead, you do the "C.S.Lewis thing" and call them poetry and "true myths," which teach us how we want to be better. But how do we know these are better, unless we actually do believe in God, and Jesus as his representative? Isn't there really something objective about moral progress, and the philosophy that defines an ideal, and idealistic humanity?
Even if it all just boils down to God saying, "Be like Me," it has to mean that we were not created to suffer and be slaves... and not just to worship either. There must be something more, which maybe we don't see yet, but God does know why. We are here, for the long run, on into eternity. God is not merely an egotistical artist, demanding love and worship. There's a bigger plan.
And until another revelation comes along, to give us a wider vision, and a better, more moral meaning for being human, in society and nature, then we should stick to Christianity. And we owe it our allegiance, even if we feel we must demythologize it, or call it "true myth."
Nothing that Paul said according to scripture is actually according to any Hebrew scripture.
If god had himself crucified to himself to save the world 2.000 years ago He did a rubbish job No woman would do such a bad job
What an unintelligent comment!
He gave his life to save those who believe and repent, not to "save the world."
Christinity is on the wane .,_ decline ,
Modern people are literalists, and poor ones at that. Modern people can't seem to wrap their heads around the symbolic power of, for example, the resurrection story. "It couldn't have happened" misses the point. Of course it didn't really happen-- the early church fathers never intended any of these stories to be taken literally. They were symbolic myths created for our benefit, a bedrock for a magnificent edifice of Christendom to be built upon, created by men who witnessed a dehumanizing classical order (as Tom Holland describes) and foresaw a new, kinder order. We take our heritage for granted like children with no knowledge of whence it came.
Well said Kyle. The Middle Ages had many problems, but at least they could still understand allegory. That appears to be as difficult as understanding quantum theory these days.
You need to read N.T. Wright’s work and see how early Christians and 2nd Temple Jews had a “historical consciousness” (Tom Holland even admits this. Did you watch the video?) and did not merely see their Scriptures as a storehouse for symbols.
It would help to start by recognising that - unlike the Koran - the Bible is a COLLECTION of scriptures, collected over almost four thousand years. It would also help if extreme fundamentalists stopped pretending that the Bible is the 'Word of God'. It was not the Bible which was nailed to the Cross on Golgotha! According to orthodox Christianity, the 'Word of God' was incarnate in a single human being, at a moment in time: although the 'Word of God' had been present at the moment the 'decision' was taken to express divine love in the Act of Creation: when, even, TIME, itself, came into being. Just finished Alister McGrath's, INVENTING THE UNIVERSE; and would recommend it as a supplement to DOMINION. An expression I particularly enjoyed was McGrath's discovery of "the intellectual capaciousness of Christianity" (p 181).
Paul sent me. #PastorOfTheIDW
Sun Fitness LOVE PVK!