fraytormenta

rosencrantz, I can't agree with you here - let's keep talking. (1) Saying that industrial revolution was due to high wages is getting it completely backwards. First, education lead to technological innovation which brought increase of wages due to introduction of labor-saving devices. Education that was advanced enough was the child of the Church (neither China nor Persia having better system for years were unable to capitalize on it). I'd say the "push" to mass steel production should be credited first of all to cistertian monks, which is also a prerequisite to steam engine/railroad. (2) While there was a councilliar movement in the RCC around the time of Aquinas as you have pointed out, it was too small and it got smashed. Protestant Christianity produced intellectuals that derived autonomy from private Bible reading in the vernacular without the help of the priest - that is the birth of libretarianism. You have provided a counter example, but it doesn't suffice as or amount to explanation - you have to trace it to 19th century and show who those people are and where they lived (non-catholics in mostly protestant countries). (3) Lutheran church is part of what is called "magesterial reformation," as Luther himself being as catholic as possible except for correcting the worst offenses of the RCC. Libraterianism comes from movement called "radical reformation" who criticized Luther and Lutheran church for stopping at just doctrinal reform without reaching for the social and political. The biggest group of those were anabaptists, but you also had dozens of smaller groups such baptists, quakers, hutterites, waldenses, etc. So you are right about the Lutheran church, but also wrong because it is not what I meant when I said "libretarianism came from protestant countries" - very few protestant countries are Lutheran.

rosencrantz, your survey of history seems selective to me. I don't see how things got worse for people in protestant countries - those became leading industrial nations that pioneered widely implementing concepts that we know today as libretarianism. The main protestant distinctive is belief in universal priesthood of every believer that in effect leveled the authority field.

Libertus, yes. What we see Stefan say in the video, however, is that the shift away in EU from theism is likely for the worse, at the very least in terms of how it affects public polity and the future of Western civilization. What I love about Christianity, or should I say what I love about Jesus Christ rather than the institutions of religions per se, is that he provides not only the path to best way to live but motivation to do it as service of gratitude for the benefits that he has already secured. Problem with an intelligent atheist is that, while knowing the right thing to do, has no rational reason to do that right thing in a moral pinch when self-interest is involved. It is just weighing of potential negative repercussions that becomes the measuring stick of morality in practice (not talking about theory). Let me give a practical real-life example. I am in Ukraine right now visiting family. Last 12 months all the buzz around the country is about new police reforms. Former USSR block has some of the worst police corruption in the world - a plague on the people. The plan for reform was drafted by Saakashvilli based on his incredible positive similar reforms in Georgia. Most of our friends here say the nicest things about the "new cops" - everybody is excited about it and share stories how much better things are becoming because of new cops. How is the reform set? City by city, old cops are fired and have to re-apply by competing on the job market and passing tests (physical, etc.). Linch-pin of this process? Basically, most of who was old enough to live under USSR atheistic indoctrination is purged. Most of the new hires are like 17-19 year olds. Are they smarter and better qualified? Hardly. But they are a lot more religious and open, and the country is better off from it.

neeel: perhaps it does not make sense to your because the main premise of your argument is false. the rest: information age has been great for Christianity. It has never spanned as far geographically or commanded as much influence on culture globally. In some areas there has been a decline of influence, but this is currently uncharacteristic of the global shifts. This is not just a sediment of stasis, it is a partial demonstration of its verity, value, and relevance.

I grew up in Moscow. Lessons from USSR: in order to push atheism on the rest of the population you have to mass murder priests, require atheism for gainful employment, teach atheism in schools from the youngest age, play constant propaganda against religion on all of state media, and ban religious books. When you do all that, only 50% of your population will secretly get baptized and only 70% will identify as religious when your thieving regime collapses. It really is a bad idea that, without physical coercion, stands little ground. Toss it. If an idea is tried and yielded disaster, toss it. If an idea has little utility, toss it. If you can't see benefit in your life from the idea or can't be sure that it makes a better world for your children, toss it. I am a former atheist, a convinced Christian. I registered on this forum, Stefan, to talk to you - I think some of my life experiences, a little bit of life wisdom, and reason in conversation can help you decide to become a Christian when you have found yourself at this crossroad. I am willing to call in.