Monotheism is not economically, or socially viable

[Dawnofhope]

They are not Christian. Few if any of those countries actually live up to the label of monotheist.

Christianity is a monotheistic religion.

13 of the 20 countries listed identify Christianity as the largest religion. 5 identify Islam as the largest religion. The other 2 have significant populations of monotheist religions.

For example #1 on the list Luxembourg;

Church in Clervaux, Luxembourg

As of 2018, 73.2% of Luxembourg's population adhere to forms of Christianity (63.8% are Catholics, 1.8% are Protestants, 3.0% are Orthodox Christians while 4.6% adhere to other Christian denominations). 2.6% of the population are Muslims and 0.6% are followers of other non-Christian religions. 23.4% of the population do not have a religion.[2][3][4]

Religion in Luxembourg - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I could go on but I don't think you are interested in examining the facts.

 

[ChieftheCef]

What evidence do you have that ancient Israel's economy was "kaput"?

They still used tents during the roman empire, predictably more per capita than empire.

Sorry, guys, this is a more finalized post.

Athens, Babylon, Rome, Egypt and others were all better off than ancient Israel, because they were open to the other: so, less people would be hurt, physically or mentally, for their life choices and so they became more efficient and economically productive benefiting everyone within and somewhat out of it's bounds by making new economic sectors because of this lack of worry thus benefitting more people economically and through trickle down economics makes everyone else richer thus there is more to invest in thus more technology gets made thus our lives improve thus more can be spent on researching ideas like wellbeing that benefit everyone, gradually. The more things to make money the more money there is the more all of this happens the more of all of this happens. The more money flows the more prices decrease the more people can afford them the more people can acquire them because of more money the cheaper they get so that more money can be made. The Ancient Israelites, were closed off from others, and so their economics went kaput.

 

[ChieftheCef]

It is a bold assertion with little or no evidence in support IMHO.

Countries with Christianity as the largest religion feature amongst the best performing economies today.

GDP per Capita - Worldometer

GDP per capita by country. List by GDP at PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) and by Nominal GDP. Ratio to World's average GDP per capita at PPP

www.worldometers.info

They are Christian (only currently) in population but they really aren't Christian. Muslim Nations speak for themselves. ISrael's secular. Dubai is that way sheerly because of resources. It's not because they're monotheist.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's the ancient mechanism by which Athens, Rome, Babylon and Egypt operated, openness to the other. It's a trait of polytheism.

Yeah, that's not always the case. All of those groups fought against eachother and others, we know inner-tribal warfare was at times endemic to polytheistic European tribes, and even in Asia where Buddhism is a common element along with religious ideas we'd call polytheistic, historically its no different with warfare and slaughtering each other.
There's not much noteworthy about it. Evem still today we're suspicious of outsiders, give favor and preferred treatment to our own and can still be prone to extreme violence. The interesting things are like how the Celts and Japanese Samurai would ritualistically collect the heads of those killed in battle. Different reasons and purposes, but those two people separated by time and miles had a similar post-war rituals.

 

[ChieftheCef]

Yeah, that's not always the case. All of those groups fought against eachother and others, we know inner-tribal warfare was at times endemic to polytheistic European tribes, and even in Asia where Buddhism is a common element along with religious ideas we'd call polytheistic, historically its no different with warfare and slaughtering each other.
There's not much noteworthy about it. Evem still today we're suspicious of outsiders, give favor and preferred treatment to our own and can still be prone to extreme violence. The interesting things are like how the Celts and Japanese Samurai would ritualistically collect the heads of those killed in battle. Different reasons and purposes, but those two people separated by time and miles had a similar post-war rituals.

So?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

They still used tents during the roman empire, predictably more per capita than empire.

Dear, during the Roman empire, Judeans lived in homes, not tents.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So?

The so is monotheism and polytheism had nothing to do with it.

 

[Rival]

Dear, during the Roman empire, Judeans lived in homes, not tents.

Even so, living in tents is hardly uncivilised or such.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Even so, living in tents is hardly uncivilised or such.

I totally agree. I was going to say something similar, but wanted to keep my answer succinct. It very much is ridiculous to say that a culture that is nomadic can't have a good economy. It's very bigoted.

 

[Dawnofhope]

They are Christian (only currently) in population but they really aren't Christian. Muslim Nations speak for themselves. ISrael's secular. Dubai is that way sheerly because of resources. It's not because they're monotheist.

Of course they are Christian. Their respective countries are influenced by religious beliefs and values, regardless of whether its explicit or more subtle.

The strength of monotheistic religions is they are people of the book. Whether the Tanakh, New Testament or Quran there is guidance to deal with diverse experiences. That guidance is from the One God, whether it Yahweh, the Heavenly Father or Allah. Judaism, Islam and Christianity have contributed to Civilisation over millennia and withstood the test of time.

Roman-Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian and Persian culture has been influential and incorporated into Western, Jewish and Islamic civilization along with anything else of enduring value.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Athens, Babylon, Rome, Egypt and others were all better than ancient israel, because they were open to the other: so, and this is really a long list, less people would be hurt, physically or mentally, for their life choices and so they became more efficient and economically productive benefiting everyone within and somewhat out of it's bounds. The Ancient Israelites, and Persians, and other stubborn people were closed off from others, and so their economics went kaput.

If not said already - I'm not really qualified to comment as to what various religious beliefs might affect a country economically, but I would think that the effects of patriarchy might be one major factor as to why some economies succeed when others don't (hobbling about 50% of the likely workforce is not good for such) - apart from unexpected bonuses, like oil - and where perhaps some religious beliefs are more prone to this than others. Such being inbuilt within any doctrines. Guess which?

 

[ChieftheCef]

Even so, living in tents is hardly uncivilised or such.

It is rather funny that the only and best of the gods can come up with only that as if someone was lying, at least during that era. I'd live in Israel if it weren't for the current war etc

 

[ChieftheCef]

I totally agree. I was going to say something similar, but wanted to keep my answer succinct. It very much is ridiculous to say that a culture that is nomadic can't have a good economy. It's very bigoted.

They can't compete they move everywhere. They don't have time to hunker down and make money, they have no permanence which h is required to drive up economic prosperity like a civilization with freedom can allow. It's just not feasible, sheerly.

 

[ChieftheCef]

Of course they are Christian. Their respective countries are influenced by religious beliefs and values, regardless of whether its explicit or more subtle.

Again, no. Freedom (including the idea that you didn't deserve to die for sheerly being gay) is what is responsible for getting Athens, Egypt, Babylon, Rome and even the United States to the top, or at least as top as there is in that time which they reside in.

The strength of monotheistic religions is they are people of the book.

Actually that is the weakness of monotheism. Abrahamic religions entirely misses the point, if you swim against the river of life you will drown, if you tread it's waters you can begin to swim. It's a literal principle that plays out in everything. Take for instance if you were addicted to a drug. Your "instinct" to bully yourself about how bad you are only makes it harder to quit your addiction. There's also the taking of larping too seriously. From financial threats, pain of death, and others people have been misguided enough by their religion so much so that if a god exists, which may be true, he would hate it.

Whether the Tanakh, New Testament or Quran there is guidance to deal with diverse experiences.

Yeah, like pluck out your eyes if you see boobs or eat the fly that lands in your drink or don't wear two different kinds of fabric

That guidance is from the One God, whether it Yahweh, the Heavenly Father or Allah. Judaism, Islam and Christianity have contributed to Civilisation over millennia and withstood the test of time.

Like what? And why is this grouping of civilizations I have mentioned the ones who created more and most of what we use? We even use Babylonian time.

Roman-Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian and Persian culture has been influential and incorporated into Western, Jewish and Islamic civilization along with anything else of enduring value.

Like where?

 

[ChieftheCef]

If not said already - I'm not really qualified to comment as to what various religious beliefs might affect a country economically, but I would think that the effects of patriarchy might be one major factor as to why some economies succeed when others don't (hobbling about 50% of the likely workforce is not good for such) - apart from unexpected bonuses, like oil - and where perhaps some religious beliefs are more prone to this than others. Such being inbuilt within any doctrines. Guess which?

Isn't it funny? It's just their big lie, they say it over and over again until people try to discover with preconceived notions in mind already about what is right.

 

[ChieftheCef]

It is rather funny that the only and best of the gods can come up with only that as if someone was lying, at least during that era. I'd live in Israel if it weren't for the current war etc

Now I'm not saying you can't live in tents it's just rather funny that those who worship the highest highest and yet don't have the economics to back it up.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

They can't compete they move everywhere. They don't have time to hunker down and make money, they have no permanence which h is required to drive up economic prosperity like a civilization with freedom can allow. It's just not feasible, sheerly.

You are so ethnocentric that it's not funny. Not every culture is competitive, and nomadic people can be very economically successful.

From ChatGPT

One example of a historically wealthy nomadic group is the Mongol Empire, particularly during the reign of Genghis Khan and his successors in the 13th and 14th centuries. The Mongols were renowned for their nomadic lifestyle, moving across vast steppes of Central Asia. Despite their nomadic lifestyle, they amassed considerable wealth through conquest and trade, controlling a vast empire that stretched from Eastern Europe to Asia. They gained immense riches through their control of the Silk Road, facilitating trade between Europe and Asia. Additionally, their conquests brought them control over valuable resources and tribute from conquered territories, further adding to their wealth.

Another example would be the Tuareg people of the Sahara Desert in North Africa. Traditionally nomadic pastoralists, the Tuareg have historically moved with their herds of camels, goats, and sheep across the desert in search of water and pasture. Despite their nomadic lifestyle, the Tuareg have long been involved in trade across the Sahara, particularly in salt, gold, and other valuable commodities. Their strategic location along trade routes has allowed them to accumulate wealth through trade and commerce, often serving as intermediaries between North and West Africa. Additionally, the Tuareg have been involved in various industries such as mining and have adapted to modern economic activities while still maintaining aspects of their nomadic lifestyle.

 

[ChieftheCef]

You are so ethnocentric that it's not funny. Not every culture is competitive, and nomadic people can be very economically successful.

From ChatGPT

One example of a historically wealthy nomadic group is the Mongol Empire, particularly during the reign of Genghis Khan and his successors in the 13th and 14th centuries. The Mongols were renowned for their nomadic lifestyle, moving across vast steppes of Central Asia. Despite their nomadic lifestyle, they amassed considerable wealth through conquest and trade, controlling a vast empire that stretched from Eastern Europe to Asia. They gained immense riches through their control of the Silk Road, facilitating trade between Europe and Asia. Additionally, their conquests brought them control over valuable resources and tribute from conquered territories, further adding to their wealth.

Another example would be the Tuareg people of the Sahara Desert in North Africa. Traditionally nomadic pastoralists, the Tuareg have historically moved with their herds of camels, goats, and sheep across the desert in search of water and pasture. Despite their nomadic lifestyle, the Tuareg have long been involved in trade across the Sahara, particularly in salt, gold, and other valuable commodities. Their strategic location along trade routes has allowed them to accumulate wealth through trade and commerce, often serving as intermediaries between North and West Africa. Additionally, the Tuareg have been involved in various industries such as mining and have adapted to modern economic activities while still maintaining aspects of their nomadic lifestyle.

Yes and Ghenghis weighs very heavily in the free side. For instance he was one of the first to allow people 5o choose their religion. He also let governates rule themselves. He is a great example of my over all point.

 

[ChieftheCef]

You are so ethnocentric that it's not funny. Not every culture is competitive, and nomadic people can be very economically successful.

From ChatGPT

One example of a historically wealthy nomadic group is the Mongol Empire, particularly during the reign of Genghis Khan and his successors in the 13th and 14th centuries. The Mongols were renowned for their nomadic lifestyle, moving across vast steppes of Central Asia. Despite their nomadic lifestyle, they amassed considerable wealth through conquest and trade, controlling a vast empire that stretched from Eastern Europe to Asia. They gained immense riches through their control of the Silk Road, facilitating trade between Europe and Asia. Additionally, their conquests brought them control over valuable resources and tribute from conquered territories, further adding to their wealth.

Another example would be the Tuareg people of the Sahara Desert in North Africa. Traditionally nomadic pastoralists, the Tuareg have historically moved with their herds of camels, goats, and sheep across the desert in search of water and pasture. Despite their nomadic lifestyle, the Tuareg have long been involved in trade across the Sahara, particularly in salt, gold, and other valuable commodities. Their strategic location along trade routes has allowed them to accumulate wealth through trade and commerce, often serving as intermediaries between North and West Africa. Additionally, the Tuareg have been involved in various industries such as mining and have adapted to modern economic activities while still maintaining aspects of their nomadic lifestyle.

The Taureg just had resources and you can make a bustling economy with resources. But you exacerbate that by freedom.

 

[ChieftheCef]

The Taureg just had resources and you can make a bustling economy with resources. But you exacerbate that by freedom.

It's part of the reason why the golden age of islam happened. It allowed thinkers to think and then, because of islam, destroyed its own chances. And then they fell by the wayside.