The desire of the flesh - Christian religion from an evolutionary biological perspective

The Gospel Changes Society

Christ + Darwin = Evolutionary Biological Success Theological Society Analysis
(Pć Svenska)

Through evolutionary biology analysis, I have come to the conclusion that the Christian religion is God's gift to mankind that helped us to a better life. Through my belief in Darwin and Christ, I have come to the conclusion that the most important thing to achieve better living conditions is to counteract the violence that comes from God creating man through natural selection. Important means for this have been; Justice, Monetary, Democracy and Christian Religion. How we act against each other determines what type of society we get.

The evolutionary cause of violence

Paul writes in Galatians that one should not yield to the desires of the flesh and the Romans of sin that lies in the flesh of man. What is this desire of the flesh that wants us to commit evil deeds? To understand that, one can use Darwin's natural selection theory. Since man is created through biological evolution, where the struggle to survive is an important element, each individual strives to improve his own situation. If an individual, by using violence against others, which is an evil act, can promote his or her own survival and reproduction at the expense of his others, then the proportion of individuals with genes that give rise to a need to exert violence against others will increase with time until almost all individuals have these genes. Or in other words; the natural selection promotes genes that give rise to a need to use violence against others. The need to use violence against others is primarily seen in the fact that the males of many animal species fight with each other about who should be allowed to mate with the females. A male who feels the need to use violence against others can thus get more offspring than one who lacks this need and therefore withdraws. In addition, the females who mate with violent males can get sons who inherit the father's strength and aggressiveness and thus become more successful in the fight for the females. These females can thus get more grandchildren than other females, which gives rise to genes that make the females experience violent males as sexually attractive. The tendency for violence is for many species thus a male secondary sex character. The species in which violence is a male secondary sex character are characterized by the fact that the females through the sexual selection have bred males that are larger and stronger than females. That it is genes whose purpose is to enable males to take part in the fight for the females, who also lies behind human violence is evidenced by the fact that violence is mainly exercised by certain men of the age when they become sexually mature. The fact that violent criminals are courted by women shows that genes that make violent males attractive in females are also found in some females of the species human. Therefore, it is not enough to influence the men to be less violent through the influence of attitude, but one must also influence the women to reject violent men, so that the women do not through the sexual selection breed violent men. The sex is not a social construction but the result of sexual selection. The debate about the importance of biology for gender roles and the difference between the sexes is influenced by the belief that if the difference is due to biology, they are given by nature and therefore cannot be changed. If they do not depend on biology, however, one can change them through the influence of attitude. However, one has missed the sexual selection significance for biological gender differences. Male secondary sex characters are properties that make man attractive for women and are therefore typical of men. The men's choice of women determines what type of women we get and the women's choice of men what type of men we get. If the women become more aware of what type of men they choose, then through the sexual selection they can breed the type of men they want.

Counteracting violence gives better living conditions

The fact that one must resist the desire of the flesh to exercise violence is because the best living conditions for a species are obtained if all individuals are kind and helpful instead of using violence against each other. The development of society requires that human innate violence needs be counteracted. The need to exert violence against others leads to a violent society where people fight each other, leading to poverty and misery, except for a few who have defeated the others and live a life of luxury at the expense of the others. In a society where everyone is fighting each other, the strong does not need to work because he can take what he needs from someone weaker. For the weak, it is not worth working because what he accomplishes is taken away from him by someone stronger. If people serve each other instead of fighting each other, they will, through their work, create better living conditions for all people. However, this is not an "evolutionary stable strategy". The instability lies in the fact that if everyone else is kind, a wicked individual would live well on the other's expense, whereby the genes that give rise to nasty individuals will thus benefit from the natural selection. If everyone is nasty, however, the result is that everyone gets overall poorer living conditions. Human civilization has created a better living condition by counteracting the violence with various methods such as the judiciary, the money economy and the Christian religion. If you create conditions where those who use violence against others degrade their own reproduction and survival, those who use violence will have fewer children than those who refrain from violence. The proportion of individuals who feel the need to use violence will then decrease with time until almost all individuals lack the need to use force. Non-violence has then become an "evolutionary stable strategy", whereby the natural selection will counteract the genes that lead to a need to exert violence against others instead of promoting them.

Humans can, by talking to each other, which animal can not, agree to be kind to each other, and through the judiciary punish those who try to gain benefits by exercising violence against others. The significance of the penalty is that it makes crime an "evolutionarily unstable strategy". Monetary economy means that an individual gets money by performing services for other individuals, after which he can use the money to make others perform services for him, which benefits the individuals to perform services for others. Legislation and money economy mean that for human it is a more "evolutionary stable strategy" to be kind to each other than to other animal species.

It can been argued that man is more violent than other animals, since war and genocide are something unique to man and that does not occur at other animal species. How can the tendency of violence in humans depend on genes that have arisen in animals. The propensity for individual individuals to exercise violence should be much greater for animal species where males must exert force to be able to mate and have offspring than in humans where many men have children without having to be violent. However, even if the propensity to exercise violence is less in man, the consequences of human violence are more extensive than in other animals. When a multitude of individuals interact, which is possible through the human language, and exploits the resources that human civilization has accomplished, the result of the violence becomes much worse than of the unorganized violence which is exercised on an individual basis in other species. In order for civilization to develop, it is necessary to counteract human innate violence. However, the resources that are created can, however, be taken over and used by individuals who are inclined to violence. Examples of this are Germany, where the Nazis took over power and exploited the resources of Christian civilization to start war and exterminate Jews, as well as Russia, where atheist communists in the slave camps in Gulag killed more millions of people than the Nazis.

Christianity as a measure against violence

In the Christian Gospel there is an order that one should help other people even if one does not earn anything on it, which further stimulates people to help each other. The reward is obtained in life after death when one gets to God in heaven. In the world where you praised rulers who won their power by victory on the battlefields and killing other people, it was a radical and absurd idea to pay tribute to someone who was killed nailed to a cross. An idea that has helped to change the world for the better. Some of these rulers accepted the idea and promoted it while others opposed it. Thus, the positive development that the idea gave rise mainly to happen in those parts of the world that were ruled by rulers who promoted it. Jesus showed with his death on the cross that it is not through violence to defeat his enemies as one creates a better society. For Lenin, the Christian religion was an "opium for the people". Thus, he meant that the promise of a heavenly paradise in the afterlife, prevented the people from making revolution and realizing the earthly paradise. But when the revolutionaries try to create the earthly paradise through armed struggle, the intended paradise turns into a hell. Communist rulers such as Lenin, Stalin (Stalin terror), Mao (Cultural Revolution) and Pol Pot killed from their atheistic ideology millions of people in their quest to create a new society. Whether we get an earthly paradise or not, depends on how we all behave toward each other by following the Christian gospel and loving one another. The earthly paradise is therefore best achieved through, if one causes people to believe that God exists, and that he rewards them with a heavenly paradise, if they are kind to each other in mortality. Jesus showed with his death on the cross that it is not by defeating his enemies as one creates a better society. Therefore, with his teaching, he has made a positive contribution to creating a better society on earth, as opposed to Lenin, whose efforts were destructive. The Communists' thesis that the rulers in the past chose Christianity because it was a means of controlling the population with is wrong. The reason was quite different. The main problem of the rulers in pesent time was the threat that their kingdoms could be conquered and looted by other rulers. The kingdoms where the ruler introduced Christianity gave the new religion a development of society which also gave a technological development. This made the warriors of the Christian rulers to be better equipped than those rulers who had not chosed Christianity. Examples of this are when the Christian Germans in the Battle of Lech 955 defeated a numerically superior army by pagan Hungarians who were on a looting in Bavaria. After that defeat, Hungary's rulers were forced to introduce Christianity also in Hungary. Over time, developments in the Christian part of the world went so far that the Christian rulers of Europe could conquer empires that stretched all over the world, of which the British was the largest. What prevented the population from sitting up against the government was mainly that rebellions were usually brutally beaten. The rulers and their warriors were better equipped and more practiced for war than rebellious peasants. Although an uprising succeeded, it usually led to a new ruler who turned out to be as horrible as the one they got rid of. An example of this is that Gustav Vasa, who succeeded in getting the Swedes to rebell against King Kristian of Denmark then brutally struck down all rebellions against King Gustav Vasa's regime.

Comparison between Christianity and Islam

The fact that Christian civilization has been more successful than the Muslim is because Christianity is a more effective religion than Islam to counteract human innate violence. Those who believe that the way to God is a ruler who has conquered a kingdom through victories in war has a different attitude to violence than those who believe that the way to God is one who died on a cross for our sins. Although there were pre-Christian religions that were more violent, it is Islam that historically was the alternative to Christianity. The failure of Islam is that the Prophet Muhammad was not only a prophet but also a war fighting ruler. Earlier when we lived in a world where one became ruler and created the kingdoms through victories on the battlefields, many believed that it was God who determined who would prevail and that a victorious ruler was thus chosen by God. When one of God through victories in war selected rulers received revelations, there were many who believed that the revelations were messages from God. After Muhammad had revealed the Qur'an from the Archangel Gabriel, he tried to persuade the townspeople of Mecca to join the new religion. However, he was driven from the city and came to Medina where he succeeded better. Then he gathered an army whose help he in 630 conquered Mecca. At that time, before democracy was invented, no general election was announced when one had conquered power, so he became a totalitarian ruler. Many Muslims today even dream of new Muhammad in the form of a strong totalitarian ruler who will unite the Muslim world into a Kalifat and give Islam world domination.

Unlike Muhammad, Jesus lacked both political power and military merits. He was tried by the temptation that he would receive political power if he worshiped the devil. When he was asked by Pilate if he was the King of the Jews, he replied that his kingdom was not of this world. In addition, he was executed by crucifixion by the political rulers. The personal cult of the war fighting totalitarian ruler Muhammad implies that Muslims have a more positive attitude towards the use of violence and warlike non-elected rulers than in Christianity. This is something that current dictators in the Muslim world are gratefully using to justify the oppression and preserve their power, thus many Muslim regimes have the death penalty for those who convert from Islam.

If Jesus had did as Muhammad and instead of ascending to heaven after the resurrection went to Rome and did what Constantine did 300 years later; gathered an army, won on the battlefields and as ruler of the Roman Empire created the first Christian society. Then Christianity had the same problem as Islam, namely that the believers had a war fighting dictator as the highest moral model. But since it was Constantine who created the first Christian nation by winning on the battlefields and as a Roman ruler introducing a society based on the Christian doctrine, then the development potential of the Christian community became larger as the believers did not have Constantine but Jesus who was not one war fighting ruler as the highest moral model. One can publish how many caricatures most of the war fighting ruler Constantine who won on the battlefields and created the first Christian kingdom but no Christian would care. But if you publish caricatures of the war fighting ruler Muhammad who won the battlefields and created the first Muslim kingdom, it will be riots in the Muslim world and you have to live with police protection for the rest of your life so that you are not killed by any militant Islamist.

Christianity was introduced into the Roman Empire by Emperor Constantine and before the advent of Islam, all countries around the Mediterranean were Christians. The Muslim armies managed to conquer the former Christian countries of the Middle East, North Africa, Spain, and penetrate France, where they were, however, stopped in the Battle of Poitiers in 732. Over time, a border emerged between Islam and Christianity, where the dry, hot and poor countries of the south became Muslim while the cooler and forest-rich countries in the north remained Christians. The forest saved Christianity. This is because war is not only won by brave and aggressive warriors who perform heroic warfare on the battlefield but also by hardworking workers who manufacture weapons, and for workers who manufacture weapons, forest was an important asset. Before the 19th century, when developing methods for producing iron with coal, charcoal made from forest was an important prerequisite for iron production. It required large amounts of charcoal to make iron and most of the workforce required for iron production worked in the forests to produce charcoal. With large forests one could make a lot of charcoal and produce more iron, whereby more warriors could be equipped not only with weapons but also with armor. More iron is required if you are to equip a weapon with both arms and armor. Thanks to the armor, the Christian warriors became more invulnerable and could defeat the Muslim invaders. One can say that the Christians, through hard work on charcoal production in the forests, defeated the brave Muslim warriors. Access to forest promoted a religion such as Christianity that was better at getting people to cooperate and help each other and thereby work and manufacture weapons while lack of forest promoted religions that could bring forth strong and aggressive warriors who could perform heroic warfare on the battlefields.

Christianity cannot eliminate violence only to counteract it, which is why there are also Christians who have fought and committed acts of violence. A prerequisite for a religion to be established is that there are rulers who believe in it and in the past it was the battlefields that decided who became ruler. If Christianity had eliminated violence, Christian civilization had not existed and Christianity existed as a minor sect. Any attempt to create a Christian civilization in any country had then been thwarted by believers  to a doctrine prepared to practice violence had conquered the country. Before Constantine, the Christians were a small minority. It was Constantine who, by winning the battlefields and conquering power as a Roman ruler, could create a society based on the Christian doctrine where Christianity dominated. Many became Christians because one of God, through victories in war selected rulers, advocated the new religion. The strength of the doctrine of violence is that they can inspire the followers of the heroic deeds on the battlefields required to conquer and defend the kingdoms and so that religion / ideology can thus become state-bearing. Examples of this are communism which, through the belief that the violence in the form of armed revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat through war in a short time, managed to create a great empire in Eastern Europe and northern Asia. Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe because more and more people realized that violence teaches poverty and misery, and the group needed to preserve the regimes became too small. The strength of a non-violence religion such as Christianity is that it can make people cooperate and help each other instead of fighting each other, which means that through their work they create better living conditions.

Holiday for thanksgiving over our Christian ancestors who in the Middle Ages abolished slavery.

Our society is built on Christian ethics. However, the myths of the identity liberals that it is intolerant to consider that non-Christians do not have the same ethics as Christians and that the success of Western civilization is due to slavery and colonialism, means that many do not see Christian values ​​as particularly valuable. However, without Christianity, Western civilization had not become so successful and created the society with better living conditions that we have today. The identity liberals claim of slavery and colonialism as the basis for our prosperity is wrong. By portraying Christian Western Europe as an exceptionally evil civilization, they creates an image of Christianity as an evil religion. It was the abolition of slavery that was the basis of the success of Western civilization, a succes that also created colonialism. Slavery and slave trade were banned in Sweden in 1335. In Europe, Christian values ​​meant that slavery was abolished in the Middle Ages, the age when the Christian church had the greatest influence. This gave rise to technological development and created conditions for today's society with better living conditions and a higher standard of living. Before Sweden was Christianized, a large part of the income from the Vikings' ravages was to take prisoners to be sold as slaves. These incomes and the merit of forcing slaves to work were abstained. By replacing the slave market with the labor market, the person who performs the work gets paid to work instead of being forced to work. By developing their professional skills, new production methods, etc. the worker can give a greater value of his work and thus the opportunity to get more paid for it. This creates a development of working methods and technology in order to maximize results, which creates a technical and economic development. However, after the Middle Ages, the power of the church decreased and the royal power was strengthened. The need for cheap labor to the colonies in America led to European kingdom begin to buy slaves from the slave-exporting rulers in Africa who have long been exporting slaves to North Africa and the Middle East. However, slavery in Europe was not reintroduced, which would have been devastating for the development of society in Europe. The fact that African rulers exported slaves was due to the fact that in Africa it was impossible to tax agriculture in the same way as in Europe. The lack of growing seasons meant that the food was produced at the same rate as they were consumed, so that there was no surplus that a ruler could collect from as tax. However, rulers could gain incomes by imprisoning people and exporting them as slaves. The incoms were used to support the army needed to create the kingdoms and capture prisoners for slave exports. That other parts of the world did not receive a corresponding development which in Europe can be due to the fact that in many parts of the world there is a slave owner as a prophet and the highest moral model and therefore did not see slavery as something negative that must be abolished and thus missed the social development that we got in our part of the world. Slavery existed in the Muslim world long into the nineteenth century and in 1801 Sweden, in alliance with the United States, went to war against the Barbarian States in North Africa as we did not want to accept that Swedes were sold as slaves in their slave markets.

Colonialism, that European rulers managed to conquer empires that stretched all over the world is due to the technological advances in Europe giving them access to better weapons. All rulers of the past not only our westerns attempted to conquer as large kingdoms as possible. The Macedonian King Alexander was greatly admired because he succeeded in conquering a kingdom stretching from Greece to Pakistan in the 300s before Christ. Muslim rulers conquered former Christian territories in the Middle East and North Africa and created a caliphate extending from Spain to Pakistan, but failed to conquer Europe and creted a Kalift that stretrched from Spain to Pakistan. That colonialism was exceptionally evil is contradicted, for example by the fact that many millions there killed and taken as slaves when the Muslims from the 7th century onwards conquered India (Youtube video). In the 18th century, the British took with Indian soldiers equipped with British weapons India from the Muslims without a similar carnage. It was the war against slavery that created the British Empire (Youtube video, & Youtube video). The North American War of Independence of 1775–1783, through which the United States became independent, led the British to lose most of its American slave colonies. Thus, the British had no greater interest in slavery, but could instead strengthen their power by becoming a moral great power and fighting against slavery. Slavery in England and the British Isles had ceased since the Middle Ages when Wilhelm the Conqueror in the 11th century had banned slave trade. Slave owners in Jamaica who were reimbursed to release the slaves, but had left the US southern states in the empire had the cost of replacing slave slaves for free slaves to be much larger. Those who were hit hardest by British warships hunting slave ships were the slave-exporting rulers of Africa who lost their export earnings and thus could not maintain the armies they needed to defend their kingdoms, which led Europeans to conquer and divide Africa.

In order to manifest Christianity's greatest contribution to the development of society, the abolition of slavery, the Church of Sweden should set up a holiday for thanksgiving over our far-sighted Christian ancestors who already abolished slavery in the Middle Ages. When it was done in the Middle Ages when Sweden was part of the Catholic Church, it can be done ecumenically in collaboration with the Catholic. To celebrate the abolition of slavery in the Middle Ages and its importance in creating the society that we have today is therefore important for getting people to understand that left myths are wrong and thus creating a picture of Christianity as a good religion. Gratitude to our ancestors as a result of Christian faith discontinued slavery has provided better living conditions for anyone living in Sweden regardless of membership in the Swedish Church, which is why this should be a matter for everyone.

Erik Levlin 2018-12-26
Docent, PhD
www.levlin.se

More readings:
Sexual selection controls biology
What which is an evolutionarily stable strategy depends on living conditions.