This is kind of the dirty secret of
any kind of programming, that it's very hard to make arguments that this or that technology leads to categorically better or different software. I mean, yes, there are specific domains, like trying to write webapps in C vs Ruby, but in general the programming languages well-suited for a task tend to be much, much more alike than different.
We love to hate on PHP but it basically runs a non-trivial proportion of the web, incl Facebook. Python and Ruby look different but they're not so different that we can say, on average, a programmer is X times more productive using language Y instead of Z.
That said I am kinda sorta sympathetic to the idea that people who veer off the beaten path of Java are self-selecting and may be open to more ideas, more adaptable, etc. But I'm leery of extending that to saying they're "better" in any measurable or definitive way.
The one thing I would say re: FP being "newer" is that while the ideas aren't newer, it's "newer" in the sense that it's not as battle-tested as Java or C. Although, then again, when you see Ruby (a friendlier, no parens Lisp-alike), JS, higher-order functions in C++, list comprehensions in Python, and so on, it stops looking quite so much like FP is really all that foreign. People are already using a lot of it. So perhaps I should be more specific and say that while the concepts aren't new, the implementations are new to industry or production systems.