Coronavirus and Christianity

Dr. Benedict Beckeld discusses how Christian attitudes have played a role in the political approaches to the lockdowns.
Facebook: / benedictbeckeld
Twitter: / benedictbeckeld
My website: www.benedictbeckeld.com
Image credits:
Alte Nationalgalerie / Public domain
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Euthman / CC BY-SA (creativecommons.org/licenses/b...)
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Aaron Bradford / CC BY (creativecommons.org/licenses/...)
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
John Collier / Public domain
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Berthold Werner / CC BY-SA (creativecommons.org/licenses/...)
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Amanda Mull, "Georgia's Experience in Human Sacrifice", The Atlantic, April 29, 2020
www.theatlantic.com/health/ar...
Capitoline Museums / Public domain
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Mosaic from the church St. Ambrogio in Milan. Source: de.wikipedia
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Gerard Seghers / Public domain
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Carlo Crivelli / Public domain
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Edit on December 27, 2021: City Journal just published an article of mine that is a shortened version of this presentation, available here: www.city-journal.org/covid-an...

[@lukeromanoff4371]

Well said and I believe you painted both sides fairly and unbiased. Appreciate it! You deserve more views

[@BenedictBeckeld]

Thank you, those words mean a lot to me! I do my best to be fair to my opponents.

[@solomontruthlover5308]

Interesting way of looking at it!

[@BenedictBeckeld]

Thanks!

[@augustwavra196]

Could you do a video on St. Augustine's just war? I have been reading about it, but I imagine that you could explain more clearly.

[@BenedictBeckeld]

Thank you for the suggestion; I always appreciate the offer of new ideas. I try, however, to present topics that not only touch upon contemporary issues but that also allow me to infuse my own viewpoint in some way, as opposed to simply discussing what some other philosopher thought about something; there are plenty of other philosophy channels for that. Perhaps you know the video already, but if not I'd recommend this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bXnOhIBjo7ispdU

[@SpaceProbeSeven]

Very well said, thank you for posting. Do you have any recommendations for further reading with regards to the "latent religiosity of the Left"? You explain the ethic very well with the example of the lockdown, but I'm curious about a more general explanation of that phenomenon. Thanks in advance!

[@BenedictBeckeld]

Thank you! I don't have any specific reading for the latent religiosity of the left (that's my own expression), but since you mention a more general explanation of the phenomenon, I'd mention the text that I included in my answer to another comment, namely Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morality. He covers the ground of how what is at its core Christian morality became acceptable to secularists and atheists as well. Kant is one of the culprits in that regard, but there are many others, before and after. If you haven't read it yet, it would probably answer a lot of questions.

[@BenedictBeckeld]

@BVale I think there's at least a psychological connection. People need something to struggle against. But I wouldn't say there's a deliberate philosophical borrowing.

[@andrewblocher9110]

I would like to hear your thoughts on climate change. Not on the fact that climate change is happening, but rather on the philosophical perspective of proposed remedies. Examples: Renewable energies that have a high failure rate but relatively low initial costs, failing infrastructure and the denial of maintaining or modifying it, the proposed bans on fossil fuels which would basically end the transportation industry single handedly.

[@BenedictBeckeld]

I'm no expert on ecology or such, of course, but my reasonably well-informed opinion is that we should focus on mitigating the results of, rather than halting, climate change, as the latter appears impossible (the Democrats' Green New Deal is an incredibly jejune idea that no adult should even deign to discuss). I don't subscribe in the slightest to the Malthusian doomsday scenarios coming from the left. I am certainly against any ban on fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and so on, partly because it probably won't help the climate very much, and partly for geopolitical reasons (mainly: we mustn't give the Chinese any additional advantage).

[@andrewblocher9110]

@@BenedictBeckeld What you just said right there sums up about 2 years worth of Environmental Science education, case studies and opinion articles I have personally read and criticized. I completely agree with your logic of course, my one addendum would be that geopolitics should be completely divorced from energy since in 2021 (and a great length before) energy/electricity is a humane necessity its not simply another mechanism of the economy. In developing countries quality of living grows by thousands of percent when electricity (and further affordable energy) is available.

[@BenedictBeckeld]

I'm applying geopolitics in the other direction: Precisely for geopolitical reasons (among others), energy/electricity should be encouraged, yes. As someone who has lived and worked in the developing world, I agree that energy and electricity are vital. I just meant that we mustn't allow China to get ahead of us, because that will cause much suffering in turn, which is why I'd call that consideration, too, a humanitarian necessity.

[@elijahnixey-paton925]

Do you think that the threat posed by meekness when adopted as state policy could be the reason for the original seperation between church and state? It seems that the language general discussed ( that it was "to protect the church from the state" ) seems to me to be dressing for an acknowledgement that intertwining even the most overt aspects of religion with the state causes pragmatically bad ( but maybe ethically good ) policy.

[@BenedictBeckeld]

That's an interesting point of view, but I doubt, at least historically speaking, that that's how it happened. I think the openly stated reasons, which you mention, were the actual ones, at least by and large: the protection of the church, and the protection of individual conscience. E.g. Jefferson was strongly in favor of the church-state separation, but it might still be fair to say that he advocated for "meekness" as a matter of state policy, by reducing our military strength, for example (in spite of the fact that one of the first things he had to do as president was to send the navy into battle), and desiring a society of yeomen who stay clear of foreign entanglements.

[@elijahnixey-paton925]

@@BenedictBeckeld that's an interesting argument. My skepticism is only because the argument that the seperation of the church will prevent the church from being corrupted seems to me to be a comparatively weak argument. This isn't to say that the state wouldn't corrupt the church, only that the mere presence of humanity would corrupt the church in the Christian view. That said I could very easily be missing something important and my assumption is that the Founders thought about it more carefully than I have.

[@BenedictBeckeld]

I don't think the main purpose of the separation was to protect the church from corruption, so it makes sense that this would appear like a weak argument to you. I think that in this context - which I probably should have specified in my last reply - we should lay the emphasis on protecting individual conscience. Unless I'm completely misinformed, I believe that was the main motivation.

[@elijahnixey-paton925]

@@BenedictBeckeld okay that makes more sense than protecting the church from corruption. It was understood by the Founders that the Church could engage in horrific abuses of justice, so it would make sense that they'd want to build individual right to objections of conscience into law.

[@obrotherwhereartliam]

This implicit Christianity I think you find in Hegel, who coined the concept of the "equality of all men." Although Hegel was somewhat more explicit in his formulation, it would be taken up by Marx, and the rest is history.

[@BenedictBeckeld]

Indeed, I'd even say that the Christianity in Hegel is more than implicit at times.

[@Daniel_Abraham1099]

Very interesting. In no world would I think christianity and the left could be found in the same place. However christianity is such a broad term. Would it be more accurate to say that the protestant/"freedom of a christian" types would be more inline with the individualist mindset. While the catholic/orthodox types who promoted the unity of church and state with Constantine and just war would be of the more collectivist mindset?

[@BenedictBeckeld]

Thanks for your comment! Yes, I think it's true as a general matter that Protestantism (in particular Lutheranism) is more individualist while Catholicism is more collectivist. The Church Fathers, of course, worked at a time when Christian philosophy was still being formed. Whereas Christianity had begun as a rather individualistic breakaway from prevailing norms and religion, by the time of the 4th-century Fathers it had been so successful that it necessarily had to take on a more collectivist dimension. For Christianity more generally as a sort of baseline moral mindset, Nietzsche also has some good material on its influence on modern-day secular attitudes, in particular in his Genealogy of Morality.

[@JCLW1027_2_]

What an incredibly interesting view. I love what you're doing here even though i disagree. 😅 I think you're conflating morality and Christianity. I only say this because there is a ton of immortality that happens in the Bible, and it is justified because God allowed it or instructed for it to take place. Slavery was A okay depending on who you are, yet we all generally agree that there is no moral argument for slavery. Christians employed slave labor for hundreds of years. I say this as a Christian who is indeed pro choice on the simple basis that I strongly believe the quality of one's life is just as, if not more important than just being alive. I do love your argument for how the right can be christian and have its views and the left be non-religious and have its views Even though i disagree on that critical point of your argument, i think the work you're doing here is valuable and can help push people in a positive direction. 👏👍

[@BenedictBeckeld]

Thank you for these very kind words! I appreciate your positivity especially since you display it in spite of disagreeing. I'd never deny, of course, that many Christians over the years have behaved very badly and that there are questionable actions in the Bible, and it's certainly true that the term "Christian" can contain a whole slew of different moral precepts. This is why I make sure to point out early in the video that when I use that term here, I simply refer to the basic attitudes of the Sermon on the Mount and such.

[@JCLW1027_2_]

@@BenedictBeckeld you did make that point! 😅 I definitely forgot! Carry on good sir! 👏👏

[@BenedictBeckeld]

No problem, and thank you!

[@jesuschrististheonetruegod1335]

Slavery in the Bible was more like servitude. “And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.” ‭‭Exodus‬ ‭21:16‬ ‭KJV‬‬ As you can see from this verse this was not the kidnapping slave boat whipping and beating slavery. Look at this verse ... “And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake.” ‭‭Exodus‬ ‭21:27‬ ‭KJV‬‬ “If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.” ‭‭Exodus‬ ‭21:4-6‬ ‭KJV‬‬ Clearly you can see from these Bible verses this is not the slavery We saw in America. That Bible verse in the New Testament that says slaves be obedient to your masters is taken out of context . It simply means who ever is in authority over you like a supervisor or some one your serving or working for keep your integrity and serve them well so they can see your goodness and glorify God. God is not happy with these people who have corrupted His word God is gonna deal with them