Society Without God: A Book Review.

I was recently sent a copy of "Society Without God" by Phil Zuckerman to review. The author lived in Denmark and Sweden for 14 months and discovered through personal interviews with average Danes and Swedes that Scandinavia is quite Atheist/Agnostic.

It has been a falsehood heard in many religious circles (especially within the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions) for years that society can not succeed without a belief in a creator god. However, Zuckerman presents his thesis that despite their lack of belief Scandinavians are some of the most socially well adjusted and successful people on Earth.

Some give the examples of the former USSR, North Korea, Cuba and China to try and argue that nontheist societies breed oppression and are not good examples of healthy societal life. However, Zuckerman deftly responds saying that those were/are governments who force everyone to be Atheist/Agnostic:

In each case, religion wasn't abandoned by the people themselves in a natural process over several generations [James: Like Scandinavia]. Rather, the "abandonment" of religion was decreed by vicious dictators who imposed their faithlessness on an unwilling, decidedly un-free citizenry.

He gives several interesting reasons for why secular societies are so stable and successful one of which is education. He found that a high level of Scandinavians are educated and that the higher level of education one achieves the less one believes in a god. And while being an nontheist, Zuckerman makes sure to say that not everything about monotheism is negative. He does list positives of believing in a god/supernatualism. Overall though he paints a very convincing picture that belief in a creator god is not necessary to a moral and ethical society.

It is fascinating in that his argument is built directly from primary sources by interviewing average citizens. This strength, however, does become a bit of a weakness for this book because the interviews become too many and the answers become repetitive. That would be my one criticism of this book.

As a nontheist Buddhist I found myself agreeing quite often with the sentiments expressed by these Danes and Swedes. I have read many books on Atheist thinking and I find it noteworthy that most don't even mention/cover Buddhism in their critiques of religion. In my mind that is because Buddhism falls inbetween religion and Atheism. It's kind of in its own category that seems to have more in common with philosophy and psychology than with strict religious dogma.

~Peace to all beings~

Intolerant Christians.

I recently read another article (see the previous one here) on The Buddhist Channel about predatory practices and bullying by Christians in predominately Buddhist countries.

I don't have the slightest intention to put one religion above another, to praise one and to blame another. I'm here writing about the attitude I'm expecting from somebody claiming to be a religious person, especially if he has much power in voicing his ideas. Then I came across Mr. Lothe's article in the UB POST and I did some small research about what the head of Eagle TV is writing about religions, and how much he cares about truth and mutual understanding – and I felt disturbed to see how he is trying to boast about his religion as being superior. Is this a way to solve the problems humanity is facing?

Mr. Terry is living in a country with a long Buddhist history (Mongolia) and where a majority of the people consider themselves Buddhists. He wrote on March 10, 2008: "Certainly I'm no fan of Buddhism. The teachings of Buddhism cannot hold a candle to the life of Jesus Christ. As I've written previously, Christianity is superior to Buddhism ethically, historically, and factually." Where is the respect?

In a previous article about corruption he wrote: "Mongolian society has primarily been informed by the world views of Atheism and Buddhism; but they don't seem to be able to affect the kind of character in society that makes corruption a source of personal shame. If these world views actually had that ability, then one would expect with such a long history here that corruption's acceptability would not be on the rise. The same is true in other nations primarily informed by these world views." Mr. Terry, December 15 2006 Then he wrote: "…they (Atheism and Buddhism) don't seem to be able to affect the kind of character in society that makes corruption a source of personal shame."

Only one remark: It's true that no religion and philosophical system can prevent people from unethical behavior. Just think about all the Christian priests abusing young boys (this kind of behavior can be found in any religion, unfortunately). And think about all the corrupt and cruel dictators, presidents and prime ministers, claiming to be a follower of their religion – for example Mugabe, being a Catholic.

The attitude of Mr. Terry is getting again very clear when he writes: "If a Mongolian wants to be a Buddhist and openly express his Buddhism, let him." What does this mean if he also wrote: "Christianity is superior to Buddhism ethically, historically, and factually." and "As one former Mongolian Buddhist said to me about why he finally rejected Buddhism in favor of Christ, 'In Buddhism there is no love.' Comparatively speaking, he is correct."

James: To say that there is no love nor ethics in Buddhism is to betray either 1). An extreme ignorance and misunderstanding of Buddhism or 2). A blatant disregard for the truth to disparage a beautiful belief system to manipulate people into following your own twisted version of another belief system. Sure you might get some people to follow Jesus but at what cost? Your zealotry has blinded you to the point of losing your spiritual integrity just to add a few numbers to the ranks for your religion. You are so blinded by your lust to prove everyone else's religion wrong and "save" them that you're willing to go against nearly every major tenet of that very religion you claim is so wonderful. Is it really that worth it?

In the end, who are you really at war with, the Buddhists or your own fears Mr. Terry? Somehow he's threatened by Buddhism and I'm not sure why. Maybe you're threatened that Buddhism doesn't believe in a "God" and that Buddhists seem very happy despite that belief. So maybe that shakes your foundation and forces you to face a profoundly deep fear that maybe there really isn't a "God" and that if such is the case that you wouldn't be able to control your unbridled desires/thoughts? But I'm not a psychologist and I don't really want to rip you away from your beliefs. All I'm asking is to be respectful and let people decide what to believe for themselves. If they want to know more about Christianity then let the come to you, they will if they want to know but please don't tear their families and society apart just to mark another "believer" onto your list. These people aren't numbers, they're people that want and deserve the same kind of respect that you want and deserve yourself Mr. Terry.

When Mr. Terry writes "let him be a Buddhist" it means 'let him be a Buddhist, but let him know that he is not that good as a Christian, and that he's completely mistaken.' This attitude is dividing human beings into higher ones and lower ones, into good ones and wrong ones. I think Jesus would be sad to see what kind of game Mr. Terry is playing – playing the 'competition game' with religion.

James: So what is that makes often makes Christians bullies? I know that every religion has them but there seems to be so many amongst the monotheistic faiths. It seems that the majority of religious strife in the history of the world has been caused by the three main monotheistic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam). Again, Buddhism has had its problems with bullying too but for the purposes of this post I just want to understand why the monotheistic ones are so often the most militant. I have my own views besides the ones I mentioned in the post but I'd like to read your views. Any insights?

~Peace to all beings~