As a professional economist, I am dismayed that you have not properly explained why the entire original analysis was excised from this article. Your readers, and the readers of numerous web sites referring to the article, deserve better.

The original article simply misconstrued the rank correlations between corruption and belief in hell. In the corruption data published with the article, the highest rank of 1 was given to the most "corrupt" nation (Nigeria), while the highest hell-believing rank of 1 was given to the LEAST hell-believing nation (Latvia). The negative correlation between these two indicators actually implied a positive correlation between corruption and belief in hell (and therefore a negative correlation between religious belief and per-capita GDP). This is the exact opposite of the original claim made by your researchers, and STILL implied by the introduction to the revised article as well as its title. I have checked the original data, as well as larger data-sets across different time periods from the same sources.

The results are clear: ceteris paribus, fervent belief in hell and corruption go hand-in-hand. The USA and Ireland are outliers rather than typical hell-believing, wealthy nations as claimed in the article as first published.

Perhaps believers should consider how to stop wealth eroding spirituality rather than claiming spirituality brings material rewards. In any case, please do the right thing and set the record straight.

A professional economist should be aware of the difference between simple correlations and regression results. As stated in the editor's note accompanying the online version of the article, the original version of the article used simple correlations to illustrate serious regression results found in work by Barro and McCleary.

It turns out, however, that the simple correlations are not consistent with the regression results. This has absolutely no bearing on the validity of the regression results, however, which are the results to be taken seriously.

Revision number two of the article concludes: "In a paper last year, economists Robert Barro and Rachel McCleary provided evidence that church attendance and economic growth are negatively related, but a belief in hell—their measure of religious beliefs—was positively related to increased economic growth." So the article could have just as well been titled: Church Attendance Might Chill Economy. Seems like you were trying to dress this thing up a bit.

There are some glaring omissions and logical problems with the recent report written by Kevin Kliesen and Frank Schmid that explores the possibility that a nation's religion or belief in hell contributes to its per capita income. The most glaring omissions were puritan Islamic countries like Pakistan, Malaysia and Iran. I can imagine that the Pakistani income levels would not fit very neatly in the per capita progression illustrated at the top of the pyramid of true believers. In addition to the omission of Islamic countries who most assuredly believe in hell, where do countries who spend their GDP on religious wars fall into your charts and graphs?

I just spent 10 months fighting in Afghanistan, where I can assure you that the majority of the population believes in hell but also enjoys an unprecedented level of civil corruption and spends all of their spare cash on weapons (both on a personal level and governmental). While I will concede that Islamic countries may be the exception due to their prohibition of usury, you cannot deny that the cost of wars inspired by religion surely "cancel out" the per capita gains that you think come from fearing hell.

What an interesting article! Thank you for taking time to look at this "unconventional" approach to our nation’s economic condition. Can you separate God and economics? We try to. In fact, America has come a long way in separating God from most everything, including church! Does the secularization hypothesis make sense? Sure it does. As our wealth increases, we are becoming our own gods. Money has become our masters! (Sounds a lot like Matthew 6:24.) The smarter and wealthier we become, we tend to think there is no longer a need for a Deity in our lives we can’t see or touch. Here is an unconventional approach to our topic. Is our growing Godless society negatively impacting our current economic condition?

The answer is yes. What a concept that Adam Smith had by saying, “In societies where there is a widespread belief in God, the values of honesty and integrity are more prevalent.” How can we as a nation not see that, as we become more of a greedy, dishonest, self-serving, self-deity, Godless society, that our economic state is not deteriorating?