You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Christianity’ tag.
There are places in the world where violence does not need religion.
And then there are places where religion makes it sharper.
Recent reports of attacks on Christian communities in parts of Africa—especially in Nigeria—have circulated widely. The language online is immediate and absolute: slaughter, persecution, genocide. Some of those claims oversimplify a complicated reality. The violence there is not one thing. It is insurgency, land conflict, criminality, and state weakness layered together in unstable ways.
But that is not the same as saying religion is irrelevant.
It is not.
In conflicts where identity is already strained, religion does something specific. It does not always cause the violence. It clarifies it. It names the sides. It tells participants who they are, who the enemy is, and—critically—why the conflict matters beyond survival or territory.
That shift matters.
A dispute over land can end in compromise. A struggle over resources can be negotiated, delayed, or abandoned. But when a conflict is framed in religious terms, it acquires a different gravity. The stakes move from material to moral. Victory is no longer just advantage. It becomes justification.
Religion does not create the blade. It tells you where to aim it.
This is why the same region can produce multiple kinds of violence at once. Armed groups with explicitly Islamist aims may target Christians as Christians. Local conflicts between herders and farmers may fall along religious lines and then harden under that framing. Criminal actors may adopt the language of faith because it organizes fear and loyalty more efficiently than profit alone.
The result is not a single, unified campaign. It is something less coherent and, in some ways, more dangerous: a landscape where violence can be justified in more than one register at once.
This is where outside observers often get it wrong.
To say “this is purely religious persecution” is to miss the structural drivers that sustain the conflict. To say “religion has nothing to do with it” is to ignore how meaning is assigned once violence begins. Both errors flatten the reality into something easier to argue about and harder to understand.
Religion, at its most potent, is a system for organizing meaning. In peaceful conditions, that can produce cohesion, charity, and restraint. In unstable conditions, it can do the opposite. It can elevate conflict, sanctify grievance, and make compromise feel like betrayal.
That is not unique to any one faith tradition. It is a property of belief when it becomes fused with identity under pressure.
The violence does not need religion to begin.
But once religion enters the frame, it changes what the violence is for.
And that is when it becomes harder to end.


And in those days the people took the Egg and lifted it up.
For they had inherited a story too severe for annual use. It spoke of sin, sacrifice, judgment, and the defeat of death. This was felt to be excessive. So the people, being practical, placed an Egg at the centre instead.
And the Egg was found to be most serviceable. It made no demands. It required no repentance. It offered renewal without cost, festivity without doctrine, and transcendence in colours suitable for children.
So the teachers taught the people, saying: “Behold, life emerges from the shell.”
And the merchants said: “Behold also the premium edition.”
And the people were pleased, for the new symbols were soft, and the old ones had been sharp.
Now there remained, in the background, certain older shapes: a cross, some blood, the memory of an execution, and the rumour that something more serious had once been meant here. But these were judged unhelpful to the season and were retained chiefly as atmosphere.
Thus the Bunny was appointed witness, being harmless and incapable of theology.
And every year thereafter the people gathered in bright garments and proclaimed the feast of renewal. They spoke warmly of spring, family, and hope. They hid eggs for the children. They exchanged sweets. And they congratulated themselves on having preserved the holiday while removing from it all that might interrupt digestion.
So the form remained, and the meaning was transferred.
And this was counted wisdom.
Yet some, looking upon the Egg lifted where once another figure had stood, felt a faint unease, as of men who have kept the ceremony and misplaced the object.
But the people called this nostalgia, and continued the celebration.
I am an atheist. I do not believe in God, miracles, or an afterlife. Yet I am convinced that without Christianity, the West as we know it would be in deep trouble. This is not a plea for conversion; it is a historical and institutional argument about causation, moral capital, and societal resilience. Christianity supplied the ethical vocabulary, the metaphysical glue, and the organizational scaffolding that transformed a patchwork of tribes into a civilization capable of self-correction and sustained progress. Remove it, and the structure does not stand neutral—it tends toward fragmentation and moral erosion.
Conceding the Objections
The historical record contains horrors: the Inquisition, the Crusades, witch-burnings, and biblical endorsements of slavery and stoning. The Spanish Inquisition executed 3,000–5,000 people over three and a half centuries (Henry Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition, 1997). The Crusades may have claimed 1–3 million lives across two centuries (Thomas Madden, The New Concise History of the Crusades, 2005). Leviticus prescribes death for adultery and homosexuality. These human costs cannot be denied.
Yet scale and context matter. The secular French Reign of Terror executed over 16,000 in a single year (1793–94). Twentieth-century atheist regimes accounted for roughly 100 million deaths in six decades (The Black Book of Communism, 1997). The same biblical canon that justified cruelty also contained the seeds of reform. Jesus’ “let him without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7) and Paul’s “the letter kills, but the spirit gives life” (2 Corinthians 3:6) inspired Christian abolitionists to resist literalist cruelty. Christianity, unlike pagan or purely rational codes, possesses an internal dialectic capable of moral self-correction.
The Pre-Christian Baseline
The world Christianity inherited was ethically limited. Rome was an administrative marvel but morally parochial: one in four newborns was exposed on hillsides (W. V. Harris, 1982), gladiatorial combat entertained hundreds of thousands, and slavery was normalized by Aristotle and unchallenged by Cicero. Pagan philanthropy existed—evergetism—but it was episodic, tied to civic prestige, not universal duty.
Christianity introduced a transformative idea: every human being, slave or emperor, bore the image of God (imago Dei). Gregory of Nyssa condemned slavery as theft from the Creator in 379 CE. Constantine’s successors banned infanticide by 361 CE (Codex Theodosianus 3.3.1). These were not Enlightenment innovations; they were theological imperatives that eventually rewrote law and custom.
Institutions That Outlived Their Creed
The West’s institutional DNA is stamped with Christian influence:
- Literacy and knowledge: Monastic scriptoria preserved Virgil alongside the Vulgate. Cathedral schools evolved into Bologna (1088) and Paris (1150)—the first universities, chartered to pursue truth as a reflection of divine order.
- Care systems: Basil of Caesarea built the basilias in the fourth century, a network of hospitals, orphanages, and poor relief. No pre-Christian society systematized charity on this scale.
- Rule of law: The Decalogue’s absolute prohibitions and the Sermon on the Mount’s inward ethic created trust horizons essential for complex societies. English common law, the Magna Carta (1215), and the U.S. Declaration’s “endowed by their Creator” trace their lineage to Christian natural-law theory.
Secular analogues arrived centuries later and proved fragile without transcendent accountability. The Soviet Union inherited Orthodox hospitals but could not sustain them after purging “idealism.”
The Borrowing Fallacy
Many modern atheists condemn Leviticus yet insist on universal dignity. That norm is not self-evident; it is a Christian export. Nietzsche saw this clearly: the “death of God” would undo slave morality and return society to master morality (Genealogy of Morals, 1887). When we demand compassion from power, we are smuggling Christian principles into a secular argument. Strip away the premise, and human relations default to “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must” (Thucydides).
Contemporary Evidence
Secularization correlates with institutional and social atrophy. Europe’s fertility rate hovers at 1.5, and marriage and volunteerism track church attendance downward. The World Values Survey shows that religious societies retain higher interpersonal trust. The West exports human rights grounded in Christian-derived universality; competitors offer efficiency without reciprocity.
Some argue secular humanism could replace Christianity. Yet historical experience shows moral innovation without transcendent accountability is fragile: Enlightenment ethics, while intellectually powerful, required centuries of reinforcement from religiously-informed social norms to take root widely.
A Charitable Conclusion
Christians must acknowledge their tradition’s abuses alongside its capacity for self-correction. Atheists should recognize that our moral vocabulary—equality, compassion, rights—was not discovered by reason alone but forged in a crucible we no longer actively tend. The West lives off borrowed moral capital. When the account empties, we will not revert to a benign pagan golden age; we will confront efficient barbarism dressed in bureaucratic language.
Christianity is not true, in my view. But it was necessary. And it may still be.

References
- Harris, W. V. (1982). Ancient Literacy. Harvard University Press.
- Kamen, Henry. (1997). The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision. Yale University Press.
- Madden, Thomas F. (2005). The New Concise History of the Crusades. Rowman & Littlefield.
- Popper, Karl. (1972). The Open Society and Its Enemies. Princeton University Press.
- The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (1997). Stéphane Courtois et al. Harvard University Press.
- Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1887). On the Genealogy of Morals.
- Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War. Trans. Rex Warner. Penguin Classics, 1972.
- Codex Theodosianus. (438 CE). Codex of the Theodosian Code, Book 3, Title 3, Law 1.
- World Values Survey. (2017). “Wave 7 (2017–2020) Survey Data.” Retrieved from https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org.
Competing for the religion of ‘peace’ I see…

There was a time when religion commissioned great and wondrous art. Awe-inspiring cathedrals were built by the most grand and innovative architects. Beautiful music for masses were composed by the greatest musical minds in history. Religious paintings were created with skills and passion that have yet to be matched, even hundreds of years later. Art was the bright silver lining to the otherwise horrifying and cataclysmic storm cloud of religion. However, that was long ago and that silver lining has since been swallowed up by the black abyss. All that is left is a shit-storm of horribly lame, morally reprehensible, and just plain awful media that is christian pop culture.
The religious will rip off and bastardize anything in order to push their message, with no regard for or understanding of the source material. Whether it be a nauseatingly horrendous christian rock band or an offensively clueless rally video, only one thing is clear. There is no limit to how objectively bad something is, as long as a church can get behind the message.
For your consideration I present two new low points. Be warned. These are so very terrible that I was convinced they were fake at first. Please do not eat for 30 minutes before or after watching these. Your stomach may not be able to handle it.
First we have a trailer for an upcoming Romantic Comedy. The trailer shows neither comedy nor romance, instead it focuses on a cameo by Mike Huckabee talking about legislating anti-abortion laws. The Friendly Atheist has written up a few more details if you’re interested.
Just in case you still have your lunch down, I’ve saved the worst for last. Imagine the most awkward, desperate to be considered ‘cool’ by the kiddies, palm-through-the-face-into-the-back-of-your-skull bad PSA you’ve ever seen. Increase the uncomfortable embarrassment by a couple orders of magnitude. Multiply it by some unbelievable cultural insensitivity, then again by a massive helping of asinine theistic delusion. It should give you something wrong on so many levels, that it may have gone fractally wrong. Something like this:
I think the worst part is I want to have hope. I’d like to think that, given the right circumstances, people could see their religion for the hoax that it is. That their blinders could be removed and the atrocities in the name of religion would stop. But if they are so far gone as to think putrid ass gravy like this can pass as entertainment, I don’t think that hope has a chance.




Your opinions…