The utter failure of Christian influence.

Maine Progressive · May 9, 2026

It is often argued that our secular society gives rise to more sinfulness and also argues that a greater Christian presence would reduce sinfulness. That said, here are the facts. 68% of the South Eastern U.S. are Christians. Far greater than any other region. Yet of all the areas of the United States the South East is highest in the following: divorce; teen pregnancy; obesity; homicide; poverty; smoking; infant mortality and also lowest in life expectancy. Is this not a clear cut failure of the claims about Christian influence?? (If you don't believe the statements, look them up yourself before responding.)
I am adding my thanks to all the Christians who have responded. I am grateful. I have learned a lot. I was asked, 'why does this matter?' I hope this answer will make it clear why it matters. If Christians believe that the only way to influence society is to have a majority presence then they will never actually do so. Instead they will invent all kinds of excuses for not attempting. Or, worse, they will come up with ideologies similar to Christian Nationalism. So, I have been trying to show, ‘A majority Christian influence in America will not produce a better nation…as demonstrated by the failure of the Southeast.’ If Christians would stop running down that rabbit hole, they might then turn to where they can do some good…namely citizenship. Citizenship is for people who are not afraid to link hands with all citizens in order to make their country better…not just Christians. The reason more secular regions of the country are more successful at reducing the eight harms I listed is not because Christians in that region are better. It’s because all citizens in those regions are more committed to make improvements. That can’t be done without a willingness to work with all ideologies. If working with non-Christians is defined as evil, then citizenship is weakened and poorer results will be likely. Benjamin Franklin, in his closing argument at the Constitutional Convention, defended the virtue of compromise. In it, he implored the delegates to rally behind an imperfect document as the best possible result. He also offered a warning. The new government “can only end in Despotism, as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other.” Compromise. Cooperation. Those are the only real paths to a better America.

2PhiloVoid · May 9, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
It is often argued that our secular society gives rise to more sinfulness and also argues that a greater Christian presence would reduce sinfulness. That said, here are the facts. 68% of the South Eastern U.S. are Christians. Far greater than any other region. Yet of all the areas of the United States the South East is highest in the following: divorce; teen pregnancy; obesity; homicide; poverty; smoking; infant mortality and also lowest in life expectancy. Is this not a clear cut failure of the claims about Christian influence?? (If you don't believe the statements, look them up yourself before responding.)

I sympathize with the recognition that Christians in the U.S. have failed to influence it significantly for the better, and I've noticed this essential truism ever since I was a kid. I'm not sure what there is to say about it or as to what should be said about it.

Richard T · May 9, 2026

A good topic for study so I asked google ai for peer review research on this topic. As to crime only, here is a meta-analysis that shows lower crime is associated with Christianity. However, this is for the entire USA. https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/...33&context=sociology_criminaljustice_fac_pubs

So what is it about the South or SE that sometimes links higher crimes to the area in spite of more Christians? Some call this the "Southern Paradox." Explanations vary but one is that the culture there suggests that one must defend their honor, so striking back is more common. Structural factors too make the South more prone to crime, with lower incomes and higher minority populations exhibiting some influence as well.

Fortunately, in a study of 2000 rural counties in the south, church attendance is associated with less crime.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2006.00309.x

Thus, the paradox is mostly from the cities at least when it comes to crime. Some of these same factors one might expect to be driving the other dependent variables you suggest like divorce, life expectancy etc. So while there is some association with higher problems for Christians in the SE, it likely is not causation but instead other variables that explain the higher number of issues, that Christians are supposed to avoid.

Lastly, if the SE is highly religious are the unbelievers under additional strain or judgment that leads them to commit more of these sins which bring the whole regions numbers up? Unless the study separates out believers vs unbelievers this too might influence the overall findings. In other words, if more demons show up when Jesus was around, does that mean he brings them? It just means the manifestations and spiritual warfare climate might be different in a highly Christianized area.

Lastly, there a many carnal Christians. If this is true in the South, then such carnality is going to show up just as it did in the Corinthian church. Hope this helps anyone studying this topic.

Leviathan-at-play · May 9, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
It is often argued that our secular society gives rise to more sinfulness and also argues that a greater Christian presence would reduce sinfulness. That said, here are the facts. 68% of the South Eastern U.S. are Christians. Far greater than any other region. Yet of all the areas of the United States the South East is highest in the following: divorce; teen pregnancy; obesity; homicide; poverty; smoking; infant mortality and also lowest in life expectancy. Is this not a clear cut failure of the claims about Christian influence?? (If you don't believe the statements, look them up yourself before responding.

All of your criteria here are implicitly Christian values. Outside of Christians in the Ancient World none of these are too problematic, including killing your own slave as desired. So all you’re pointing at is a particular pocket of “bad Christians”.

Considering too large-scale global migration patterns, everybody wants to move to a predominantly Christian country. Migration the other direction is far lower, perhaps 1/5 or lower.

Maine Progressive · May 9, 2026

Leviathan-at-play said:
All of your criteria here are implicitly Christian values. Outside of Christians in the Ancient World none of these are too problematic, including killing your own slave as desired. So all you’re pointing at is a particular pocket of “bad Christians”.

Considering too large-scale global migration patterns, everybody wants to move to a predominantly Christian country. Migration the other direction is far lower, perhaps 1/5 or lower.

Seriously, I am not pointing out a pocket of 'bad' Christians. I don't think Christians in Southeastern U.S. are any worse than Christians throughout the U.S. I am only pointing out that they have better numbers in the South East states and yet they perform worse than the rest of the U.S. Hence, obviously, they have failed to influence their surrounding population away from sin and have failed worse than the more secular regions of the U.S. For the sake of discussion let's say you are right. Let's say the things listed are less 'problematic' for secular types. But even if they care less about those things than Christians, yet they are doing a better job of reducing them. If Christians living in the greatest concentration do worse than secular regions, I would call that a failure of influence.

Maine Progressive · May 9, 2026

Richard T said:
A good topic for study so I asked google ai for peer review research on this topic. As to crime only, here is a meta-analysis that shows lower crime is associated with Christianity. However, this is for the entire USA. https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/cgi/...33&context=sociology_criminaljustice_fac_pubs

So what is it about the South or SE that sometimes links higher crimes to the area in spite of more Christians? Some call this the "Southern Paradox." Explanations vary but one is that the culture there suggests that one must defend their honor, so striking back is more common. Structural factors too make the South more prone to crime, with lower incomes and higher minority populations exhibiting some influence as well.

Fortunately, in a study of 2000 rural counties in the south, church attendance is associated with less crime.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2006.00309.x

Thus, the paradox is mostly from the cities at least when it comes to crime. Some of these same factors one might expect to be driving the other dependent variables you suggest like divorce, life expectancy etc. So while there is some association with higher problems for Christians in the SE, it likely is not causation but instead other variables that explain the higher number of issues, that Christians are supposed to avoid.

Lastly, if the SE is highly religious are the unbelievers under additional strain or judgment that leads them to commit more of these sins which bring the whole regions numbers up? Unless the study separates out believers vs unbelievers this too might influence the overall findings. In other words, if more demons show up when Jesus was around, does that mean he brings them? It just means the manifestations and spiritual warfare climate might be different in a highly Christianized area.

Lastly, there a many carnal Christians. If this is true in the South, then such carnality is going to show up just as it did in the Corinthian church. Hope this helps anyone studying this topic.

Quite an amusing bit of sophistry. I would just ask you to just step back and look at the overall picture. Christians in the South East, by the numbers, are better situated to influence society away from the sins listed. They don't. They do worse than more secular regions. The numbers don't lie. That part is black and white. The following items are only my opinions. I don't claim to be always right. This is just where I disagree with your statements. 1) If Christian defense of honor increases violent crime, I wouldn't regard that as a good influence. 2) Lower income that generates crime (theft) has a name. It is called poverty. Poverty is a sin of the population that allows it. Christians more than secular society are commanded by God to address poverty. Yet the Southeast fails to reduce poverty worse than the rest of the less Christian U.S. 3) Higher minority populations cause greater sin. You said it. Not me. Don't get me started. 4) The paradox coming from cities. That is indeed a paradox since the Southeast has far fewer populated cities than the rest of the United States. 5) "Issues that Christians are supposed to avoid". No, Christians are supposed to influence their society away from sin, not bury their heads in the sand. Southeastern Christians do a worse job than the more secular remainder of the U.S.

Leviathan-at-play · May 9, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
Seriously, I am not pointing out a pocket of 'bad' Christians. I don't think Christians in Southeastern U.S. are any worse than Christians throughout the U.S. I am only pointing out that they have better numbers in the South East states and yet they perform worse than the rest of the U.S. Hence, obviously, they have failed to influence their surrounding population away from sin and have failed worse than the more secular regions of the U.S. For the sake of discussion let's say you are right. Let's say the things listed are less 'problematic' for secular types. But even if they care less about those things than Christians, yet they are doing a better job of reducing them. If Christians living in the greatest concentration do worse than secular regions, I would call that a failure of influence.

I’m not making any claim that the other non-Christian citizens have any different ethical system. I’m sure they are vastly Christian in behavior.

If you have two data points, by region: % Christian and crime rate, it’s a huge leap to make assumptions about “influence”, whatever you actually mean by the term, or to even connect the first with the second in the first place. There can be a hundred different factors why crime might be higher independent of religion.

timf · May 10, 2026

CINOs (Christians in name only) can make it confusing to gauge "Christian" impact. Additionally Christians stuck in the flesh (immaturity) also make it difficult to measure Christian impact.

However, perhaps the larger question is should Christians make an impact. The world is set in it's course by Satan (Eph 2:2). Friendship with the world is to be an enemy of God (James 4:4).

The reason people are turning away from God may have more to do with the Industrial Revolution. Life was made much more difficult after the flood. As a result, people needed each other and even occasionally had an interest in God. Now that our technology is mitigating many of the post-flood difficulties, we are using our relative comfort and prosperity to return to the natural human state before the flood.

Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

2PhiloVoid · May 10, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
Seriously, I am not pointing out a pocket of 'bad' Christians. I don't think Christians in Southeastern U.S. are any worse than Christians throughout the U.S. I am only pointing out that they have better numbers in the South East states and yet they perform worse than the rest of the U.S. Hence, obviously, they have failed to influence their surrounding population away from sin and have failed worse than the more secular regions of the U.S. For the sake of discussion let's say you are right. Let's say the things listed are less 'problematic' for secular types. But even if they care less about those things than Christians, yet they are doing a better job of reducing them. If Christians living in the greatest concentration do worse than secular regions, I would call that a failure of influence.

I think we can all agree that we who are "Christian" in the U.S. aren't doing as much of what we should ideally be doing. But when I look at the history of the U.S., at least since the post-Civil War era of Reconstruction, and we take into account so many diverse factors one can look at through the whole of the Social Sciences, I think the essence of the problem can be boiled down to the fact that in some ways, we in the U.S. aren't much different than those who used to live in any of the cities that Paul the Apostle visited and in which he attempted to spread the Gospel.

Think Ephesus or Corinth, among other similar examples.

Belk · May 10, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
It is often argued that our secular society gives rise to more sinfulness and also argues that a greater Christian presence would reduce sinfulness. That said, here are the facts. 68% of the South Eastern U.S. are Christians. Far greater than any other region. Yet of all the areas of the United States the South East is highest in the following: divorce; teen pregnancy; obesity; homicide; poverty; smoking; infant mortality and also lowest in life expectancy. Is this not a clear cut failure of the claims about Christian influence?? (If you don't believe the statements, look them up yourself before responding.)

While I do not think Christians have any greater morality then other populations (we are all human after all) I would guess that these symptoms have a greater correlation with poverty then any sort of religiosity.

Maine Progressive · May 10, 2026

timf said:
CINOs (Christians in name only) can make it confusing to gauge "Christian" impact. Additionally Christians stuck in the flesh (immaturity) also make it difficult to measure Christian impact.

However, perhaps the larger question is should Christians make an impact. The world is set in it's course by Satan (Eph 2:2). Friendship with the world is to be an enemy of God (James 4:4).

The reason people are turning away from God may have more to do with the Industrial Revolution. Life was made much more difficult after the flood. As a result, people needed each other and even occasionally had an interest in God. Now that our technology is mitigating many of the post-flood difficulties, we are using our relative comfort and prosperity to return to the natural human state before the flood.

Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Perhaps what you say is true. But your point does not account for the disparity between the southeast and the rest of the United States. That's my point. Even if there is something generating higher levels of the listed sins in the SouthEast, it still does not explain the failure of Southeastern Christians to have a greater influence to reduce those sins than the influence of the more secular regions of the United States who do a better job of reducing those very same sins. It makes no sense that God produces greater evil in the more Christian regions. Nor does it make sense that God allows evil to have greater reign in the Southeast just to push sinners to listen to their Southeastern Christians. If so, it certainly isn't working. And finally, if the ease of greater technology allows people to drift into sin with less bad consequences, my point remains even stronger because the South is less technologically advanced than the rest of the U.S. So there should be less of the listed sins. Instead there's more.
Then your point. James 4:4. Yikes. What a reversal of the message. The real message of James is wisdom from above. Be peaceable, gentle, full of mercy, open to reason, (see that word.."open"), good fruits (see that word..."fruits"), make peace (see that word..."make"). And the sharpest criticism given by James is: "You have laid up treasure for the last days". Exactly. Lock up all your assets. Stick your head in the sand and wait for the Second Coming. Maranatha. Your point then is that evil surrounds southeastern Christians more than the rest of the U.S. because Satan is allowed to flourish as the Second Coming approaches and Satan will expend his greatest efforts against the Christian southeast. Thus sin is more prevalent in the southeast. I'm sorry. But that just seems like rubbish.

Maine Progressive · May 10, 2026

Belk said:
While I do not think Christians have any greater morality then other populations (we are all human after all) I would guess that these symptoms have a greater correlation with poverty then any sort of religiosity.

The error is to regard poverty as independent of morality. It is by far one of the worst sins committed by humanity. It is also one of the most heavily emphasized by Christ. The failure to influence society to relieve poverty is a monumental sin. And, by measured facts, it is more prominent in the Southeast. A testament to the utter failure of Christian influence.

Maine Progressive · May 10, 2026

2PhiloVoid said:
I think we can all agree that we who are "Christian" in the U.S. aren't doing as much of what we should ideally be doing. But when I look at the history of the U.S., at least since the post-Civil War era of Reconstruction, and we take into account so many diverse factors one can look at through the whole of the Social Sciences, I think the essence of the problem can be boiled down to the fact that in some ways, we in the U.S. aren't much different than those who used to live in any of the cities that Paul the Apostle visited and in which he attempted to spread the Gospel.

Think Ephesus or Corinth, among other similar examples.

I completely agree with every thing you say here. And I hope my response does not minimize it. (I especially agree with your observation of Paul's frustration with the Ephesians and Corinthians. 'Come on! You can do better.' I suspect there were times he muttered that over and over .) I just observe that there are greater numbers of Christians living in the Southeast, so it seems reasonable that they would be able to exert enough influence to generally exceed the performance of more secular regions. At least by some observable margin however small. We are all human, so certainly eliminating the listed sins would be a Herculean task. Highly unlikely. But it would seem reasonable that they could shift the needle somewhat in a positive direction instead of always performing less than the more secular regions. Further, while economic conditions are different in the Southeast, the predominance of poverty in the Southeast is not a necessary condition of the Southeastern economy. The more secular regions of the U.S. also have deep pockets of poverty. Yet overall they perform better. As for the other sins listed, I don't see how the Southeast might be more sociologically disadvantaged. But I'll be the first to acknowledge there may be many factors that I am not aware of.

timf · May 10, 2026

But your point does not account for the disparity between the southeast and the rest of the United States.

Your method of measuring sin is interesting. Unfortunately your statistics fall short in measuring greed as I would expect the Northeast to excel.

Belk · May 10, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
The error is to regard poverty as independent of morality. It is by far one of the worst sins committed by humanity. It is also one of the most heavily emphasized by Christ. The failure to influence society to relieve poverty is a monumental sin. And, by measured facts, it is more prominent in the Southeast. A testament to the utter failure of Christian influence.

Not being a Christian I can not speak to sin one way or another. I will note that poverty is av ery hard problem to solve. As we have progressed as a society it has certainly reduced but it takes a long time and fundamental shifts in how we structure our ideology and interactions.

That said I do agree we could be doing more and accelerating the timeframe if we actually focused on it as an issue.

Maine Progressive · May 10, 2026

Belk said:
Not being a Christian I can not speak to sin one way or another. I will note that poverty is av ery hard problem to solve. As we have progressed as a society it has certainly reduced but it takes a long time and fundamental shifts in how we structure our ideology and interactions.

That said I do agree we could be doing more and accelerating the timeframe if we actually focused on it as an issue.

I think your text is on target. It is the primary issue regardless of region. However, there is, I believe, an obvious secondary factor. And that is the clear absence of beneficial Christian influence. Can united Christians make a big change to the American economy? Maybe, but that's a very big stretch. I don't expect it. Can the Southeast portion of the U.S. make a significant difference in the level of poverty? Still up against tough odds, so probably not. But at least a little? Why not? Why not at least equal? The secular regions are doing a much better job of reducing it. If secular regions are doing better while the Southeast worse, I cannot help but conclude that Christians have utterly failed. They don't even have sufficient influence to bring their dominated region up to the national level. So all this talk about how much better the U.S. would be if it was influenced more by Christianity sounds increasingly shallow. If Christians, who have the majority in the Southeast, do worse than the secular regions, why should anyone take them seriously?

Matt5 · May 10, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
It is often argued that our secular society gives rise to more sinfulness and also argues that a greater Christian presence would reduce sinfulness. That said, here are the facts. 68% of the South Eastern U.S. are Christians. Far greater than any other region. Yet of all the areas of the United States the South East is highest in the following: divorce; teen pregnancy; obesity; homicide; poverty; smoking; infant mortality and also lowest in life expectancy. Is this not a clear cut failure of the claims about Christian influence?? (If you don't believe the statements, look them up yourself before responding.)

That just suggests they are Christian in name only. The religion of equality is undermining Christianity from the inside out.

The religion of equality is where atheists like to hang out.

Maine Progressive · May 10, 2026

timf said:
But your point does not account for the disparity between the southeast and the rest of the United States.

Your method of measuring sin is interesting. Unfortunately your statistics fall short in measuring greed as I would expect the Northeast to excel.

Now that is amusing. So the southeast exceeds in these many sins, but at least they aren't as greedy as the north, thus their Christian influence is demonstrated....despite the secular regions doing much better in all other regards. I don't know about you, but I still consider that to be utter failure. How odd, that the Southeast, not greedy, still can't find the will to share enough of their assets to bring down the poverty level to at least the national level...so how is that not greed?

Maine Progressive · May 10, 2026

Matt5 said:
That just suggests they are Christian in name only. The religion of equality is undermining Christianity from the inside out.

The religion of equality is where atheists like to hang out.

I'm with you. I oppose the religion of equality. I'm with Jesus. The religion of generosity.
Lukde 27ff: But I say to you that hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,
[28] bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.
[29] To him who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from him who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt.
[30] Give to every one who begs from you; and of him who takes away your goods do not ask them again.
[31] And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them.
[32] "If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.
[33] And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.
[34] And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
[35] But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the selfish.
[36] Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.
So, as you can see, Jesus expects us to do better than the secular regions. That's not happening in the Southeast where Christians predominate.
So, you'll forgive me if I find it stunning that many Christians consider themselves to be in the 'I've got mine', camp. And ignore the rest.

Belk · May 10, 2026

Maine Progressive said:
I think your text is on target. It is the primary issue regardless of region. However, there is, I believe, an obvious secondary factor. And that is the clear absence of beneficial Christian influence. Can united Christians make a big change to the American economy? Maybe, but that's a very big stretch. I don't expect it. Can the Southeast portion of the U.S. make a significant difference in the level of poverty? Still up against tough odds, so probably not. But at least a little? Why not? Why not at least equal? The secular regions are doing a much better job of reducing it. If secular regions are doing better while the Southeast worse, I cannot help but conclude that Christians have utterly failed. They don't even have sufficient influence to bring their dominated region up to the national level. So all this talk about how much better the U.S. would be if it was influenced more by Christianity sounds increasingly shallow. If Christians, who have the majority in the Southeast, do worse than the secular regions, why should anyone take them seriously?

It's a fair point. The thought that occurs to me that if Christians were to bans together on a political front, something like the "moral majority" of the 80s, they could affect fiscal policy through legislation. There does not seem to be any will in that direction though.

And just a note as a bit of a word geek, secular religion is an oxymoron. Makes me shudder every time I read it.

The utter failure of Christian influence.

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

'Cuz Mary Shelley was right !!

Well-Known Member

Psalm 104:26

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

Psalm 104:26

Regular Member

'Cuz Mary Shelley was right !!

Senior Member

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

Regular Member

Senior Member

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

Well-Known Member

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

Senior Member

Similar threads