thanks, there is no inherent conflict between science and theism. There is no inherent conflict between faith and reason.

The are conflict between religions including those elevating science to one.

Perhaps it's helpful to mention that Christianity is not exclusively about ideological assertions, as seems to so often be assumed on philosophy forums. Christianity is also about the act of surrender called love, an act whose value can be observed and validated in one's own experience without reference to any holy book, ideology, opinion, clerical structure etc.

If only that were all that Christians did...

Unsure as to what you are saying, because one loves it doesn't mean one is a good person, I'm sure that those who commit atrocities against their fellow human beings love someone. Many friends who are atheists have love and concern for humanity but many things they may practise is still unacceptable to God.

Banno may be saying that Christianity would be more appealing and impressive if the focus was kept on the experience of love instead of ideology. If that's his point, I agree.

Here's an example. Catholic Charities is the second leading provider of social services to the needy in the United States, topped only by the federal government. To me, that's impressive.

But I've spent years exploring the Catholic web and it's almost impossible to find discussion among Catholics of this amazing accomplishment. Everybody seems to want to discuss and debate ideology instead. Not such a good plan, in my view.

The only Christian I have found worth trying to understand in terms of their belief, and the substantiality of it, is William Blake... Who was by no means an orthodox Christian.

I have heard that Tolstoy's idea of Christianity is interesting, but I have not researched it very much.

99% of Christianity is brainwashing and delusion.

Here's an example. Catholic Charities is the second leading provider of social services to the needy in the United States, topped only by the federal government. To me, that's impressive.

But I've spent years exploring the Catholic web and it's almost impossible to find discussion among Catholics of this amazing accomplishment. — Jake

Probably because Catholic Charities is not funded by, or for the most part performed by individual Catholics. Large religious service organizations like Catholic Charities do not rely very much on direct individual donations; they rely on collective donations from the church, as well as fees for services and contracts. Take refugee settlement: Catholic Charities and Lutheran Social Services (in this part of the country) are the main contractors with the government for refugee settlement and other social services.

Large social service operations like shelters, medical facilities, housing, settlement programs, etc. have to have secure year-long or multi-year budgets to operate at all. Income dribbling in from individual donations isn't nearly reliable enough.

I'm certainly not claiming that there is no connection between the individual in the pew and Catholic Charities: donations are where the church's money to operate comes from. But funds are then aggregated and distributed to various and sundry programs--among them Catholic Charities. And as I mentioned, contracts with federal, state, and local governments provide big bundles of operating funds.

Most Protestants and Catholics are not reminded about Matthew 25:35-40 anywhere close to often enough.

35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ — Jesus

hope to chalk it up to that right hand left hand thing.

Catholic Charities is the second leading provider of social services to the needy in the United States, — Jake

Odd, then that Muslims 'Give Most To Charity', Ahead Of Christians, Jews And Atheists,

What to make of that?

Probably because Catholic Charities is not funded by, or for the most part performed by individual Catholics. — Bitter Crank

I'm certainly not claiming that there is no connection between the individual in the pew and Catholic Charities: donations are where the church's money to operate comes from. — Bitter Crank

Hmm....

Most Protestants and Catholics are not reminded about Matthew 25:35-40 anywhere close to often enough. — Bitter Crank

More precisely, most human beings are not reminded of this advice anywhere close to often enough, including yours truly.

What to make of it? 1) Given the low level of participation in Christian religious life the UK, it is hardly surprising that giving among Christians would be low. 2) Given the operation of a (formerly) robust welfare state in the UK, one would expect atheists to give less than committed religionists. 3) Given the tendency of committed religionists to give more than uncommitted and non-participating persons, it would make sense that Muslims would give more.

The average individual in the US whose income was $50,000 gave $2,868 to charity, or about 5.8% of income (according to the Internal Revenue Service).

Corporations and foundations (established by the uber rich) along with individuals donated about $420 billion dollars to charity last year. Some corporations, like Target, donate 5% of pretax profits to charity.

I would expect that people living in countries with fragmented and inadequate state welfare programs (like the United States) would see more visible need among their countrymen. It also seems to be the case that those with fewer financial resources tend to give a larger percentage of income to charity -- maybe because they can better identity with raw need.

However generous individuals are, a well-run social welfare state is a better solution to solving social equity problems than the best intentioned helter-skelter charity approach.