God is back

There is a new book out that I’m looking forward to reading – God Is Back. I found an interview in World magazine with its two authors, both connected with The Economist, a news magazine. Many of the points they discuss are extremely interesting.

For one thing, they wanted to explore the idea that the more modern the world gets, the more secular it would become. They found this was not the case. Even in a place like Europe, religion is on the front burner, thanks especially to the interaction between their Western cultures and Islam. They note that the United Nations was created by secularists who were hoping they could squeeze religion out of any prominence it had, but now this body addresses all sorts of religious issues.

They see America as having a key role in the rise of religious fervor around the world. For one thing, our nation obviously supplies missionaries, Bibles, and books. However, indirectly it contributes to a global revival of religion because it exports capitalism, which is a chaotic process that causes many people to turn to religion for help in dealing with the new economics. A third way America encourages religion is its exportation of Hollywood “morality” (or lack thereof) that many cultures find offensive, with the result that they focus more on religious values.

When they compare Islam to Christianity, the authors see distinct advantages for the latter. Islam, unlike Christianity, has not had to deal with competition within and modernity’s attacks. They see a severe period of testing ahead for Islam, and there is a question whether it can survive. Islam needs its own reformation – will it deal with it well and come out the other side in good shape? The authors seriously doubt this outcome will be positive for this religion.

When asked about recent bestsellers by atheists, they had an interesting reaction. “You do not suddenly wake up in a panic about God being bad or terrible if you think you’ve already won the argument.” They say these new atheists talk down to religious people. In addition, those who have a religious faith are not supposed to bring their beliefs to the argument even though the other side is allowed to bring their most profound moral beliefs to the same argument. Quite a double standard exists.

Finally, United States foreign policy is dramatically affected by its leaders’ lack of religious faith. This statement made me think of the comment I read elsewhere—“If Sweden is the most secular country and India is the most religious, the United States is made up of Indians who are governed by Swedes.” The authors claim that the elite who run the foreign policy in this country are clueless when it comes to religious values. They failed to understand the power of Islam in the Middle East, for example.

Thoughts such as these make me want to get started on their book. I’ll let you know what I encounter.