As long as the fruit isn’t an apple.
I would not say that religion will always dominate most of the world, but I think there will always be at least pockets of it. When some people don’t understand something, they assign it to the realm of religion. I think even if science determined the, well science, behind everything, there would still be people who think certain events are fueled by a deity, or deities.
Additionally, there is the anthropocentric aspect. Many, though possibly not all, people stop believing the physical universe revolves around the Earth, however there is still a large number of people who, on some level, believe that humans are the hottest ticket in the universe.
Sooner or later, the psychopaths would turn on each other.
I am not one of those people.
Religion addresses the WHY questions. Science tackles the HOW questions. That’s how they work. Together.
That may be how they work, but I don’t see the “togetherness” aspect of it. Rather, science is utterly indifferent to religion and as science expands, it leaves less of the universe unexplained, gradually driving religion out of its favourite environments - doubts, fear and gullibility.
Not just religion, of course. Science hasn’t been all that kind to ghosts and ESP, either.
Or into supermen! Or into a Master Race!!! 
Nonsense. Religion doesn’t “tackle” any questions, it makes up falsehoods and demands they be treated as truth. And they don’t “work together”, religion and science are poison to each other.
Do you not know the difference between making up an answer and finding out an answer?
Once again, religion doesn’t always equal Christianity! That’s a major problem I see in debates around here – talking equating all religion with Christianity.
Largely because that’s the only religion the vast majority of people here genuinely care about. After all, that’s pretty obviously why the people arguing against atheism always use the Christan term “God” even while they pretend to be defending the possibility of some generic deity. They talk about a male, capital -G “God” and not neuter, female or multiple gods because ultimately, it’s the Judeo-Christian god they so desperately want to exist.
Geez, ego much? What Parable described were tenets of Judaism 1000 years before some schmo got himself born in Bethlehem. Christianity is the Muzak of religions - taking the creativity of others and dumbing it down for mass consumption. If it happens to be a pervasive and popular flavour, well… so is McDonald’s.
When theists square off against atheists, they paper over all the differences among denominations and present the entire issue as a yes/no question. If atheism is wrong and science can be made out to be wrong about some things, then “religion” must be right–any religion, but that usually means the dominant one in a society.
But increasing religious diversity sort of plays into the hands of a movement towards atheism since it means that differences among religions are more visible. If one man’s saint is another man’s infidel, then there must be something wrong with the whole approach. They can’t all be right, so there’s a lot of wrongness in there.
The truth becomes like a pea in a shell game. It’s not under most of them–it might not be under any of them, but we’re expected to assume it’s under any given one of them.
I see it more like bogus religion and bogus science on one side (even tho they consider each other to be the enemy), and authentic religion and authentic science on the other. Yes heads will explode with delight here upon reading that, but you haven’t exhausted religion once you’ve demolished mythic religion, in the same way that art isn’t demolished after you critique a hack’s (or child’s) painting.
What would you describe as non-mythic religion then?
Were already there, it’s just that most atheists are liars for social advantage in societies(most of them) where there are plenty of advantages to being part of one purple-people-eater club or another.
Huh? Please explain this.
2030* - there will be no room for theism after the Machine God rises!
- or whenever Vinge and Kurtzweill are saying the Singularity is going to happen - that shit’s like workable fusion power.
a large proportion of people saying they believe in any particular religion don’t, but it’s convenient for them to say they do.
In the US there are plenty of obvious examples of people who’s claim to a religious affiliation are not at all trustworthy:
Politicians: You want to get elected in the US you better not be an open atheist.
Business executives: You want to be in the boys club you have to join a God club.
Married to a woman who you could not have as an atheist: plenty of dynamics to this from psychotic parents to psychotic woman.
Buddhism. Oh, it has its myths, but at some point you are expected to move beyond them.