According to a report published by Theos (the self proclaimed theology think tank) today, 34% of people believe that the statement “Jesus was born to a virgin called Mary” to be historically accurate, and 52% believe that the birth of Jesus is significant to them.
Theos are, of course, delighting in these figures, using them as a counterblast against the notion that Britain is a secular society succumbing to atheism or indifference. As I read the figures I was reminded of a true event that happened to me when I used to teach secondary school children. It has helped me keep the public’s claims about history in perspective.
It involved an encounter with a history teacher almost in tears in a staff room one lunch time. It was the end of the academic year and he had spent a whole term teaching the English Civil war to a group of 14-year-olds. One question on the end of year examination had been: ‘Name three battles in the English Civil War’. Remember that this topic had taken up a whole term’s worth of lessons. One student had answered: ‘First World War, Second World War, Waterloo.’
The statement about historical accuracy had two parts - virgin birth, and Mary. As the name Mary was the last thing to be heard, it is quite possible that some people agreed that Jesus was born to Mary, but were uncertain, unhappy, unclear about the virgin part, but gave assent to the Mary part. It is the virgin part that is most contentious. It should have had a separate question. Theos would be wrong to attach to much significance to the answers to a question about belief in supernatural theology from a piece of badly designed research.
The claim that 52% of people believe the birth of Jesus to be significant to them is also so vague as to be virtually meaningless. The key questions about what kind of significance were never asked. Any evangelical will tell you that even the devil believes in Jesus (and that Jesus is therefore significant to her/him/it.) Many people would claim that Jesus is significant to them, but it makes no practical difference to their lives. As an atheist, I would say that the birth of Jesus is significant to me for cultural reasons (I enjoy some Christian art and music) and for social reasons (I enjoy celebrating Christmas), but that doesn’t mean that I buy the whole supernatural package anymore about him.
Theos will make more of these results than they deserve. They add very little to the debate. They fail to even cover up the real cracks in the crumbling citadel of belief, let alone fill them in.
I’m NOT an atheist. In fact, I’m an ordained minister. However, I found your reasoning regarding the findings of Theos to be simple and concise. Yes, you are right to question the results and the implications of those results. As a Christian, your blog reminds me to present my belief in Jesus as more than a theory, more than an enjoyment of the season; but to allow my faith to have an impact upon my life and the way I treat others. As a friend once said, “Belief without action is only an opinion.”
it’s nice to see someone in education to have a sceptical approach to the treatment of religion in learning. i was myself pretty impressed by religion statistics in the US a few months back, feel free to read…
http://ligress.wordpress.com/?s=it%27s+evolution%2C+baby
anyway, keep thinking, good work!
Jim
Thanks for dropping by. What I am looking for is not a theory, nor even a theory that has an impact on the lives of people (lots of theories can motivate individuals to do that) - but what I want is credible evidence that Christianity is more than a delusion. Having been an evangelical believer, preacher, author, leader, counsellor for over 30 years I know Christianity, churches, the bible, and Christians very well from the inside. However, having stepped outside the box, I can see now that the box that I thought was once so stong is a a pack of cards built on sand. And even statistics (reliable or unreliable) about the extent of belief do very little to convince me of the reality of the basis for faith.
ligress
I agree, the figures you quote are alarming. I think we are both agreed that a percentage of a population who believe or who fail to believe something is no argument in support of the validity of the thing in question. 90% of people either believing or disbelieving in god doesn’t prove divine existence - merely that 90% of people may be right or wrong.
You pointed out very nicely just a couple of examples of how poorly constructed questions can be spun to say whatever the poller wanted to say in the first place. That’s why I give very little credence to survey reports. Unless I can see the actual questions asked, I could care less about someone’s spin on the matter.
Yes, indeed a very poorly constructed survey. You can get people to appear to say anything with a survey of this nature.
I am sure Jesus is significant to everyone in some way, it does not mean we believe he ever existed or that he is important to our lives in a good way. People who live close to a Red Light District would say that prostitutes were significant to their lives but it wouldn’t mean they had ever or intended to use one - just that they are about and have an impact. It is the same with Jesus - it’s hard to get away from religion even if we try to do so.
I just wish people would stop worrying about whether more or less people believe or not. It’s not a competition. If they believe and it makes them happy then surely that should be enough for them?
I really like the picture you chose for this post. Does it have a title and author? Can it be found online in larger form? Reminds me of a digital painting I put together about a decade ago called “Feticide”.
slaveofone
Thanks for your interest. I have sent details via email.