I don’t see how He could stop it.
Even those religions that don’t include a God. Funny, that.
I’m curious: is it part of your thesis that religion will be replaced by a more respectable analogue?
What I mean is, in earlier years, alchemy was a forerunner of legitimate chemistry; and astrology was, if not a forerunner of, then at least closely connected with, the legitimate science of astrology. So, religion is to ________ as alchemy is to chemisty or as astrology is to astronomy—what do you propose to put in the blank?
Per the OP:
Voodoo is a religion, and as such no more “true” or “false” than any other religion.
Religions are not just about conveying truth for people too stupid to understand science, you know. They contain philosophy, mythology, and perform social and communal functions. They can be very useful systems, and I speak as a person who does belong to a religious community.
That’s not denying, of course, that they do promote acceptance of the supernatural and, like any institution, the leaders gather power to themselves and often abuse it.
BTW, as Dr. Drake said, Voodoo is a religion. One that the dominant culture and the dominant religions disparage and discredit and have done so for a long time, but a religion nonetheless. So it also serves as an example of how the socially dominant group can compartmentalize and say “those old ways were ignorant superstition, but these old ways are our traditional core values and we’re sticking with them!”
Also as Half Man Half Wit points out so well, out here in the “developed” world during the last couple of “centuries of progress” we have had a huge influx of NewAgey Woo and pseudoscience. These include both the harmless-waste-of-time (Bigfoot) and of the dangerous-to-public-safety (anti-vaxx) kinds. Within some of the largest religions we have had the rise of politicised radical fundamentalism. I recall reading a book from the 1950s that pretty much concluded Christianity in general in the US was going to go liberal and drift into the sort of “background music” low relevancy as in some European societies, only a generation or two behind Europe. Well, sure, that happened… to the old “historic Protestant” churches. Meanwhile the Evangelicals boomed.
. . . a person who does NOT belong to a religious community.
Left out a crucial word there!
Uh, you do know that Voodoo is a legitimate religious belief system held by many, right?
“Free will! No, really!”
Nothing? There’s nothing good that religion does that can’t be done better already by something else less destructive. How do you think atheists function?
In the 18th century, they said the Enlightenment would crush religion. In the 19th century, they said industrialisation would crush religion. In the 20th century, they said education would crush religion.
von Stuckrad:
Never say never, of course, but I’d say the destruction of religion as outlined in the OP is about as likely to happen as the dictatorship of the proletariat, the restitution of the Bourbon monarchy, or the independence of the Confederate States of America.
By whom?
It’s certain there will be some who think this way. It’s absurd to believe there’s any chance everyone will.
The world certainly hasn’t been any less religious than it is now, so these futurists were at least partially right.
There are non-religious people who join an organized religion, but that’s fairly rare, while many of those brought up with an organized religion leave or take the whole thing a lot less seriously than the previous generation.
I think religion and belief will still be around, and strong, in a 100 years. I don’t know in what form.
I now think it will stay, because never in my younger years, did I imagine that in the year 2014 we’d be seeing a world wide holy war, in the rise of extremist Islamist beliefs and actions. I thought by the year 2000, along with the flying cars and pills that make you thin and beautiful, we’d all be rational atheists. I was really wrong.
There’s a chance that 100 years from now, religion will be different. It could be that some current religious practices will be seen as mere superstition and dismissed by most people.
We’ve seen these kinds of differences at numerous times in the past. For example, virtually no one is still sacrificing animals, a religious practice that was once universal. Virtually no one is doing elaborate burials with the belief that you’ll take it into the afterlife. I’m sure that someone from 2000 BC would be shocked at our total disregard for religious matters.
And Protestants really shook things up with the idea that priests were not nearly so important as a conduit between people and God. A revolutionary idea in the scheme of things, but Protestants are no less religious than Catholics. Just different.
Maybe we’ll see more psuedo-science invading religion. You know, the way the “Law of Attraction” hauls out quantum physics concepts like entanglement to justify the assertion that your feelings and expectations can actually alter reality. This belief isn’t any less religious just because it throws in some scientific terms. Even if such beliefs reduce attendance at any kind of church service, you’d still have to call these people religious in some sense.
But the one thing I absolutely guarantee is that most people will believe something that will fit the definition of religion. I don’t care how far into the future we project this. You might as well suggest that someday men will stop being interested in looking at naked women. It’s part of who we are. Getting rid of it would require some kind of genetic overhaul.
The UU is not exactly atheist. A friend of mine who is a member says they believe in at most one god. Anyway, much as I would like to see it come to pass, I strongly disagree that it will. I expect that there will be another “great awakening” in the US this century.
Point: while there is a rise in non-belief in god(s), there is also apparently a rise in pseudo-scientific bullshit. Anti-vaxxers, magical healing, climate change deniers, etc.
Religion kills people and should be banned. Through all of human history, wars have been fought over religious differences. Religion is also the motivation for most terrorism and genocide.
Nation states should be banned. Governments should be banned (by whom, I couldn’t tell you). Most wars have been waged over who should be ruling what piece of territory. Cultures should be banned - same reason. People go to war over other people living differently to how they do/
You should read about this little religion called Islam.
People who’ve tried to ban religion don’t have all that good a record.
If we’re going to ban something, how about banning hostility toward religion (including that of some religions against others). Heck, why don’t we just ban hostility? A ban on war, terrorism, and genocide would be more to the point (and just as realistic) as a ban on religion.
Let’s say that within the next 100 years, we find an immortality drug and we cure all cancers and neurodegenerative disorders (like Alzheimers). Death will cease to have the grip on us that it does now.
If people aren’t as religious today as they used to be, I’m gonna guess it has something to do with modern-day improvements in quality and quantity of life. Thinking about the afterlife makes sense when your life is full of absolute misery and suffering, and death is a frequent visitor. I’d be praying to Jesus too if every single infection or injury was a potential death sentence.
Also within the next 100 years, we could make contact with alien life. If they make contact with us, that means they would have to have superior technology. A whole lotta folks would suddenly come to the realization that humans aren’t the pinnacle of God’s creation. We can expect a whole heap of humans to adopt whatever religion the aliens have (if they are the proselytizing type). A whole bunch of other people will create new religions (Praise be to Lizard Jesus!)
Barring alien invasion, I think agnostism/atheism will continue to grow. The religious will always be with us, but I think as long as the current trend continues, increasingly more people will continue to “come out” as non-believers. Eventually there will be such a critical mass of non-believers that it will be the religious who will feel pressured to keep their true identities secret.
Yeah, just ask Stalin. Oh wait.