Christians versus Buddhists

New Year's Day 2003

Dear Mike,

I think the bet we agreed on was which religion is the largest. I said Christianity and you said Buddhism.

Not only is Christianity in first place, it's way ahead of second place. And not only is Buddhism not in second place, it's way behind third.

You should feel free to do your own research, but here's what I found.

According to http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm:

	# of adherents	% of total
Christianity	2,015,000,000	33%
Islam	1,215,000,000	22%
Hinduism	768,000,000	13%
Buddhism	362,000,000	6%

According to http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html:

	# of adherents	% of total
Christianity	2,000,000,000	33%
Islam	1,300,000,000	22%
Hinduism	900,000,000	15%
Buddhism	360,000,000	6%

"Christianity: David B. Barrett's World Christian Encyclopedia (1994 update) gives an oft-cited figure of 1.9 billion Christians (or about 33% of the world population), and has projected that by the year 2000 there will be 2.1 billion Christians in the world. Regardless of the degree of accuracy of this figure, Christianity, if taken as a whole, is unarguably the largest world religion."

Now, earlier I had asserted that the Roman Catholic brand alone -- not all of Christianity -- was the largest religion, and I'm willing to amend the bet in your favor, Mike, to this: I'll bet you $5 there are more Catholics than Buddhists.

(Also, if I rememebr right, Diana asserted Islam is more popular than Catholicism, but she wisely didn't back up her words with a bet.)

Here's what I found:

According to http://www.webstationone.com/fecha/religion.htm:

	# of adherents
Catholic only	980,000,000
Islam	840,000,000
Hinduism	648,000,000
Buddhism	307,000,000

And, Mike, in case you thought we meant to bet on which religion is merely the most widespread, here's what I found:

According to a rough count from http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0855613.html,

	# of countries
All of Christianity	> 180
Catholic only	94
Islam and Muslim	85
Buddhism	22
Hinduism	21

If you agree I win, please add five bucks to your next charitable donation. If you don't agree, tell me whether you're willing to double the stakes.

--John

January 21, 2003
From: Thurlow
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 12:53 PM
To: johnnyg; Athelene Gieseman
Cc: Annette Shewmake Lavigne; James T. Gosnell
Subject: RE: New Year's Eve 2002 -- and a bet

John,

After my research, I submit the following items from two of our nations leading universities on religious studies for your review. According to Paul V. Flesher, the head of religious studies at The University of Wyoming, more people LIST Christianity as their religion than any other. Rutgers University department of religious studies submitted the following statement which is, in my humble opinion, more accurate, "the actual practice of a religion on a daily basis rather than the listing of a religious belief would change the numbers. The Islamic faith requires prayer 5 times a day and is an active part of each individuals daily life. An unknown number of people are listed as Christians that do not as a matter of fact PRACTICE their religion."

So back to the original bet, I believe that the possibility exists that we are both wrong. Islam may be the most practiced religion not just the most listed one as Christianity would be. I agree to pay the amount of $10 if after your consideration of the above stated point you still disagree that being listed doesn't necessarily mean practiced.

--Mike

January 28, 2003

Mike,

Although I don't have the luxury of seeing the actual quotes you mention and the context in which they appear, I'll try to respond to your acceptance of this debate.

(1) As to the first quote, in which Mr. Flesher says "more people LIST Christianity as their religion than any other," maybe I missed your point. If more people list Christianity, isn't that further evidence Christianity IS the most popular religion? In any case, I don't see how it rebuts the evidence I offered that Buddhism is not even close.

Now, as to the Rutgers quote and the argument and comments you make based on it.

(2) You say the Rutgers quote is "more accurate." Did you mean to say it is more to the point or more probative or some such thing? If not, exactly what is it more accurate than? I don't know how to assess the quote's accuracy because, unlike the facts-and-figures research I provided, it doesn't appear to contain any statements of fact that can be researched, that can be determined to be more or less accurate. If you disagree -- if you think the Rutgers quote contains any facts whose accuracy can be verified -- I'm sure you'll agree it is incumbent on you, not me, to exert that follow-up effort.

(3) Back to the original bet, you say it's possible we're both wrong. I do not see any evidence, either in the quotes you offer or in your own words, that Buddhism is the largest religion (whether listed or practiced). Do you agree that Buddhism is not, by any standard, more popular than Christianity or Islam? If so then there's no doubt you are wrong.

So, the only question is whether I am too.

Which brings us, finally, to the point you've been trying to make. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your argument is this:

Regardless of how many people merely list a particular religion, more Buddhists* practice their religion than do Christians practice theirs.

(4) In discussing the bet on New Year's Eve I never made any distinction between how many people list a particular religion and how many practice it. Perhaps I should have, but it never occurred to me.

Did it occur to you? If so, did you make that distinction and I just missed it? What did you think our bet was, exactly?

(5) Frequency. Trying to work with you here, let's say you thought my bet was this: "Mike, more Christians practice their religion than do Buddhists practice theirs."

If that's the proposition then you or someone has to distinguish between listing a religion and practicing it.

Imagine with me a really, really teeny country in which 4 of the residents list only Polarism as their religion and the remaining 20 residents list only Neopolarism.

Assume that Polarism requires its adherents to point their left elbows at the North Star 60 times per year and that all 4 of them do it, for a total of 240 annual pointings.
Assume that Neopolarism requires its adherents to point their left elbows at the South Star only 12 times per year and that all 20 of them do it, for a total of the same 240 annual pointings.

Given these facts, I assume you agree that in that country Neopolarism is the "largest" religion. I assume you agree that, as between the two religions, Neopolarism is "in first place." I assume you agree that Neopolarism has more "adherents." I assume you agree Neopolarism is the more "popular." I assume you agree that if my bet had been, "Mike, more people practice Neopolarism than any other in that country," you would agree you lost that exact bet.

(If you disagree with any of the assumptions I made in the paragraph above then it's important you stop right now and explain why, because the rest of what I have to say depends on your agreeing with all of them.)

But now let's change the facts in your favor. Let's assume the Neopolarists aren't all that serious about following their religion's edicts. The Polarists are all always staunchly faithful, but the Neopolarists aren't. Specifically, let's assume these data:

Four of the Neopolarists don't point even 1 time a year,
not even one Neopolarist points the required 12 times a year,
and the rest point anywhere from only 1 to 4 times a year.

Let's say the table for Neopolarists looks like this:

Annual
Frequency
of Pointings Number
of
Neopolarists

0   4

1   10

2   3

3   2

4   1

12   0

20

We can see that one Neopolarist points 4 times a year instead of the required 12, or only 33% as often as he's supposed to. Do you argue, Mike, that he does not practice his religion? He might not meet every single requirement of Neopolarism all the time, but don't you agree he should be counted as someone who not only lists but actually practices his religion?

Where do you draw the line? Exactly what frequency, relative to the demands of one's particular religion, is acceptable to you before it counts?

What about the 3 Neopolarists who point only twice a year? Do they count? Or, for that matter, what about the 10 Neopolarists who point only once a year? At what point do you say a person who lists a particular religion doesn't practice it at all?

Would you refuse to count a Polarist who misses all but 5 of his 60 required elbow-pointings? If so, what about one who misses all but 10, or 20, or 59? Do you think all Buddhists follow all of their religion's edicts all of the time?

(I'm sure that by now you realize I did not just make up the numbers 4 and 20 for Polarists and Neopolarists respectively. Although I had to round a bit in your favor to get the numbers to come out pretty, according to the sources I showed above 400 million people at least list Buddhism as their religion, whereas 2 billion, or a whopping five times more, list Christianity.)

(6) Overt acts. And as to those four Neopolarists who never point, would you refuse to count them if you knew they said silent prayers a few times a year to the South Star? I disagree that the number of overt physical acts such as pointing one's elbow is the only measure of the frequency of one's practice of one's religion. What do you think the author of the Rutgers quote would say?

(7) Duration. In addition to the frequency of overt acts required by a particular religion we must also consider the duration of those acts. If Polarism requires a full minute of elbow-pointing each time but Neopolarism requires only the briefest moment, would you say that any Neopolarists who do indeed follow the pointing rules perfectly are not really practicing their religion?

(8) Fervor. And finally I think we can consider the degree of one's religiosity. If Polarism requires the utmost in fervor -- a full-on blast of utter concentration and mindless acquiescence, a thoroughgoing abandonment of one's own mind and heart and soul to his god -- whereas Neopolarism requires less, do you argue that any Neopolarists who follow their religion's's rules perfectly are not actually practicing their religion?

As I see it, you simply cannot apply the stricter standards of Polarism to Neopolarists, as the author of the Rutgers quote implies.

Furthermore, in my opinion, the Neopolarist who never points at the South Star and who says a silent prayer only once a year and who doesn't spend more than a few seconds doing it and is half-hearted about it at that -- he too practices his religion and must be counted. If you disagree, then you must state at what precise point the frequency or the duration or the fervor of his religiosity rules him out.

As I see it with respect to the bet we made and the cudgel you took up, you can't validly measure frequency or duration or fervor, you can count only people. And you have to count even those people who aren't perfect.

(9) To answer your question, of course I agree that "being listed doesn't necessarily mean practiced," so you do not owe me $10 on that account. But I believe the number of people who list a particular religion but never practice it is insignificant.

Still, let's assume that all of the 400 million people (rounded up 10% from 362 million to be conservative) who list Buddhism as their religion practice it. In order for there to be a mere tie between Christianity and Buddhism you would have to assume that 1.6 billion people who list Christianity -- a full 80% -- do not practice it. What this means is that if I line up 5 randomly chosen people who list Christianity as their religion, you'd have to prove -- even if only to your own satisfaction -- that at least 4 of them don't practice it.

In my mind, Mike, my original bet was this: There are more Christians than Buddhists. I'm certainly willing to amend that particular bet to this: More Christians practice their religion than do Buddhists merely list theirs. Is this OK with you? If so, I'm willing to raise the stakes to $20.

Well, it doesn't matter, because I'll make you a better offer. I'm willing to amend the bet, my claim, to this: More Catholics practice their religion than do Buddhists merely list theirs. Is this OK with you? If so, I'm willing to raise the stakes to $20.

Well, that doesn't matter either, because I'll make you an even better offer. I'm willing to amend my claim to this: More people practice Christianity than any other religion. Is this OK with you? If so, I'm willing to raise the stakes to $20. Deal?

I've asked you a lot of questions, Mike, and I hope you find the time to respond to them.

And at this point I invite the other witnesses (Diana included) to feel free to jump in at any time.

--John