The Decline of Religion in American Life

And that’s the fundamental point of contention. You treat atheism as something that can exist outside the mind, and thus continues to exist even if there is no concept for it. I argue that it exists entirely within the realm of ideas, and thus ceases to exist if the concept does not exist.

You define atheism as a lack of belief in gods. But the concept of lacking something can only exist if that something also exists as a concept. I can’t lack oqfkljadfs, because oqfkljadfs is not a concept. To lack a belief in god, the concept “belief in god” must exist. And for the concept “belief in god” to exist, the concept of “god” must exist.

The idea of the community who has never conceived of the concept of a god is instructive here. Yes, we can describe them as atheistic, as we have an idea of theism and therefore god. They, on the other hand, lack such a concept, and thus could never describe themselves as atheists. It isn’t merely the word that doesn’t exist to them, but the concept itself.

The thing is, our perspective is no more correct than their perspective in this. Unless there is some objective truth involved (like, say, the actual existence of God), we cannot argue that our perspective is objectively correct and their is objectively incorrect. Whether they are atheists or not depends entirely on who is saying it.

The hypothetical here was that the concept of god never arose at all*. No one believes in god. Thus no one has the concept of someone not believing in god. People don’t merely lack a word for atheism, but they the concept does not exist. Atheism has as much meaning as oqfkljadfs.

Though I continue to reiterate that this is a pointless philosophical diversion, in that it has no practical application. It isn’t special, it doesn’t show that theism (or atheism) is correct. It’s perfectly possible for someone else to have a different consistent philosophy where atheism does have some sort of objective truth, and it would change nothing about the world.

*And this is why I am able to argue from an atheistic perspective, as it is my belief as a theist that the concept of god arose due to god existing. So, in a universe where the concept of god did not arise, then God doesn’t exist in that universe. It’s a difficult universe to conceive of, as all our fictional universes have a god–the creator of said fictional universe–but it is possible.

I include this for clarification of those who might thing I’d become an atheist. I have made a decision that this will never happen. Going into it more would necessarily lead to witnessing, and I do not wish to engage in such outside of an audience who actually wants to be witnessed to.

I believe that the universe is bigger than I am. I believe, further, that this is utterly obvious.

For that matter, the planet is bigger than I am. The population of this country is bigger than I am. The population of this town (and it’s a small one) is bigger than I am. The population of my household is bigger than I am – it includes cats, mice, spiders, and undoubtedly masses of bacteria. And quite probably some critters who I don’t realize are here.

All of that strikes me as utterly obvious.

Quite a lot of religious beliefs (not all of them) seem to me to go in the other direction, and to try to persuade me that the universe-as-a-whole has some special interest in Me: which to me would imply that I’m a whole lot bigger than I actually am. I don’t think religion functions as a defense against over-maximizing oneself (though it may function as a defense against thinking one can do whatever one can in the short term get away with). I think it functions, very often, as a defense against realizing how tiny one is.

– plus what Czarcasm said; with the addition that a high percentage of those thousand letters also say ‘if you accept any of the other letters, you’ll go to Hell.’ (It would probably be a lower percentage, except that the religions which don’t think that way don’t send out anywhere near as many letters.)

I think at this point we’re arguing over the definition of the word ‘lack’. Of course you can lack oqfkljadfs, even if it doesn’t exist in your mindset. If you’d never heard of a tail, you’d still be lacking a tail (presuming that you’re shaped like the vast majority of humans.)

No, you’re not arguing from an atheistic perspective. You’re arguing from the perspective of someone who not only is a theist, but is having a huge amount of difficulty even conceiving of atheism. Which is probably why you’re getting it wrong.

Back to the OP, I think people are just busy in their lives and either dont want to take the time or dont want the burden of something else in their lives. Other than maybe once a year at Christmas.

There is still a strong belief though in God.

However many have followed the path of “the answer lies within yourself” or some similar message.

Yes, though there are, of course, a variety of ways in which this plays out.

You may find this report from the Pew Center interesting; it’s based on a survey they conducted among Americans last year. I think that this is related to the study on religious affiliation which was linked to earlier in this thread. Some of the key numbers:

  • 80% of Americans believe in God
    — 56% believe in God as described in the Bible
    — 23% believe in some other higher power or spiritual force

  • 19% of Americans say that they do not believe in God
    — But, 9% do believe in some higher power or spirtual force
    — 10% do not believe in any higher power or spirtual force

The reason why there are similar “some higher power” in both the “yeses” and the “nos” is that the question was asked in two parts: respondents were first asked a yes/no question: “Do you believe in God?” Then, based on their response to that, they were asked a follow-up question.

So, it essentially means that there’s three broad groupings among Americans:

  • 56% believe in the Biblical God (which likely includes Jews, and, I’d suspect, Muslims, as well as Christians)
  • 32% believe in some higher power or spiritual force, but not in the Biblical God
  • 10% don’t believe in any higher power or God at all

In addition:

  • Among Americans who do not have any religious affiliation, 72% believe in God or some higher power

  • 48% believe that God (or some higher power) directly determines what happens in their lives “all the time” or “most of the time”

  • 77% believe that God or some higher power has protected them at some point

  • 61% believe that God or some higher power will judge all people based on what they’ve done

  • 75% say that they “talk to God” or some higher power (such as through prayer), but only 28% believe that God or some higher power replies to them

But the existence of a fictional character called Batman preceded your use of the term abatmanist.

I’ve known plenty of self-centered believers, and humble non-believers.

I think people look at religion like other things like retirement or insurance or politics. They just dont want to be bothered but hope its there when they need it. They have other things they are focused on in their lives. People want to live for the moment and not be bothered by another thing that would influence their lives. Sunday is the time to work on the house or catch up on sleep or watch the game or something. if they ignore something long enough it sort of goes away.

Then things happen like children or deaths in the family or personal tragedy and they are reminded of God.

I’m thinking like my inlaws who knowing our side of the family is religious, expressed interest in getting involved in a church but then when confronted by several issues including their personal lives, decided not to go there.

And then look at our lives as we have moved further away from the land. Part of the reason my grandparents were religious is they were farmers and whether they lived or starved depended on if the rains came and the cows gave milk.

They really dont. I’ve only seen our pastor mention it one time when he discussed sin and he said it was wrong that gays were singled out as some sort of ultimate sin or something when in fact, all sin is the same. Jesus said in John 8:7 to the people who were about to stone the woman caught in adultery “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” and later in Matthew 7:5 he told people that before they can remove the sliver in the eye of another, they should remove the log in theirs.

Our church tells people to first, accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior. Second, go to the word and pray and ask God what are the sins in your life. God will reveal what you need to change or what you need to deal with.

Saying that their “sin” is no greater or lesser than any other “sin” is just another way to hide the fact that your church teaches that homosexuality is sinful, and in a world where records are kept and words never go away the actuality of what is being taught is exposed for all to see.

There are plenty of ways to interpret the bible that don’t necessarily condemn homosexuality, and many faithful Christians who adhere to these interpretations. IIRC, Jesus doesn’t have a single negative word to say about homosexuality, and the New Testament expressly sweeps away Leviticus laws restricting eating pork or shellfish (and much more), as well as, according to these non-bigoted Christians, restrictions on homosexual behavior. And not even Leviticus has a thing to say about homosexuality among women.

So this is a choice many Christians are making, and I urge them to make a different choice.

Maybe for some people, but false as a general rule. Like the “no atheists in foxholes” meme, it’s just a lack of imagination about what other people’s beliefs might be.

But what does the cows giving milk have to do with religion? Do you mean superstition?

Sounds like his grandparents simply didn’t want to take responsibility for their poor planning.

I do feel like America is finally losing its religion, it’s long overdue, and still well behind Europe, but the rate has been accelerating since the nineties. I think a large part of it is mostly due to the explosion of the internet. I did a thread on this some years back. Josh McDowell thinks the internet is the biggest threat to Christianity.

Even among Evangelical churches, what they think the “word” is, varies, along with acceptance and tolerance. So I’m not sure how each can claim to strictly follow it when they are reading from the same source. Some just put more emphasis on one set of scriptures vs another set that can easily say the opposite thing.

Considering what the Bible actually says on certain matters, it’s a good thing they don’t follow the word as they often claim.

The New Testament itself has various words against homosexuality. (That, however, might be suited for some other thread, so as to not turn this into some Biblical exegesis thread)

But not from Jesus.

Not that this is my reasoning – to me, the Bible is just another book written by humans, with human reasons and human concerns.

Europe might be turning its back on Christianity but instead of some new age of enlightenment or something, it looks like Islam is replacing it.

Will that be better?

Are you claiming that Christianity is the lesser of two evils?

Does your pastor support SSM? Or is he too chicken to have an opinion which might offend much of the congregation?
Since I assume he has no problem with divorced adulterers being married.