There are some countries in Europe experiencing many Muslims migrating to their country, but it’s not replacing many of the non-religious minds of citizens that are already there.
Even though Jesus never said it, and it’s not in the older surviving manuscripts, it’s still a good story, and kind of enjoyed that one. Better than his eternal fiery damnation for those not believing he is the chosen one.
They argue that limits to growth are inevitable due to diminishing returns and environmental damage.
There are details here:
As the effects of a resource crunch combined with environmental damage take place, then economic growth is curtailed. This, in turn, leads to increasing poverty, and from there higher infant mortality rates negating high birth rates as well as higher death rates due to lack of medicine, medical services, etc. Given that, population growth may become limited, if not reverse.
With that, more people may return to religion, which is what has been taking place in poor countries.
Finally, these crises may be reversed if countries work with each other and people limit resource use, but governments, economies, and people don’t work that way. Instead, they operate in terms of competition. Hence, increasing arms production, deployment, and the drive to maximize profits, earnings, ROIs, etc.
Show me the part where religion is mentioned in that article, please.
I think this is a good question–one that the SDMB actually talked about several years ago.
“Pentecostalism is the last step before no religion”: True? If so, why?
My hypothesis: Evangelical churches are great at luring in backsliders and people who feel “meh” about church but feel guilty about it. Politics aside, the worship service at an evangelical church is more exciting and engaging than other Protestant churches. If you are waiving in your faith, you might think a super injection of religion–one that makes you scream, dance, and speak in tongues–is what you need to get “unwaivered”. Evangelical churches also put a big emphasis on praise, which can make you feel good even if your faith is shaky. Like, I’ve been an agnostic for over ten years now, but I still sing along to gospel music because it feels good. It feels good to dance. Evangelical church encourage people to express all those good feelings in a myriad of ways.
But as was discussed in the aforementioned thread, I believe the same aspects that bring people to evangelical churches are the same ones that convince people that religion is for deluded brainless sheeple. If your faith isn’t that strong to begin with, it won’t take long for the novelty of exuberant praise and worship to wear off and for the more comical and crazy features to become more apparent. And evangelicals aren’t great at handling critical questions, IMHO. As much as it would pain my parents to know this, I really do blame the Pentecostal church I was brought up in for my disaffection with religion. I got too many ridiculous answers to my questions in Sunday School for me to view church as anything but a place where you’re supposed to leave your brain at the door. I know there are churches where inquiry is encouraged, but it’s too late for me. Maybe if I had been brought up in a Methodist or Lutheran church, I wouldn’t have such a negative view of Christianity.
Wow, that is very good. I will keep that in mind.
This, as mentioned, is one of the biggest reasons for young Americans ditching the church. Around 70-80% of the time, I’d say, when someone has a tough and pressing/important question to ask - be it the age-old “why does God allow evil to happen” or some other question - the church often gives a cliche, unsatisfying or deflecting answer.
It isn’t that god lets evil happen he created evil, Isaiah 45:7. This supposed god of love created evil and you are correct about religion’s answer. It is always “god works in mysterious ways” which is code speak for I don’t have an answer and I don’t want to think about it.
Personally, it wasn’t just that the answers I got were unsatisfying. I also got the feeling that it was wrong to even ask questions…that having questions meant Satan had gotten to me. For a scientist, this was intolerable.
Like, I would have been OK with an answer like “That is a good question. I just don’t know how to answer it.” It would have been unsatisfying, but at least it would have been a validating response. Instead what I got was hostility and defensiveness.
Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
Although God *does *work in mysterious ways, I agree this is often used as a get-out-of-jail-free card by some Christians to dodge tough questions.
People like to read motives into things. If you question some tenet of Christianity (or anything else about an ideology or religion,) they think you’re not just asking about it, you must be trying to *undermine *it.
That’s my contribution. I think religious activity declines as industrialization increases. That might explain why, for example, Church attendance is lower in richer countries than in poorer ones. The same goes for birth rate.
The problem is that continued industrialization on a global scale requires more energy and resources, and there are limits to such, not to mention consequences such as environmental damage.
Given such, if the U.S. military, multinational banks and insurers, and other groups are right, then at some point those limits will become more pronounced, leading to shortages in goods and services, which in turn will strongly affect prosperity, and unintentionally reverse the decline in religion.
It could be as simple as Americans, particularly the yute, not finding religion very interesting any more. And they’re able to separate their values and their treatment of their fellow man from anything as tenuous as spirituality.
Do a Google image search for terms like “rise of nones” (religious unaffiliated). There appears to be a huge surge correlating with online services (like AOL) and the internet starting in the 1990’s.
Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk
Late to the thread, but I wanted to address this sub-thread:
Most Christians consider this passage to lift the restrictions Leviticus placed on diet. I can’t explain the beard thing though.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, most Christian theologians who set the doctrine of their denominations (the rank and file planting their asses in the pews on Sundays may not (and almost always don’t) know this) point to the Council of Jerusalem, described in Acts 15, specifically, verse 20 (or 28-29, which restates the same thing because it’s the wording of letter they actually sent):
[QUOTE=Acts 15:28-29]
28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled* and from unchastity. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”
[ed: *There is some doubt about this underlined bit being in the original, but I take no position on that argument.]
[/QUOTE]
… to justify why most of the stuff in Leviticus does not apply to Gentile (ie Non-Jew) Christians. It’s not a new thing. It goes back to only a few years after the sonovabitch got himself crucified. And the decision was that Gentiles don’t have to follow the Mosaic law (all of the ‘Old Testament’). They pretty much just have to abstain from the kinds of sex that people, then, found icky. No male=male sex, but that’s about it. You people have NOT found a ‘Gotcha’.
[responding to the post I started this reply to…]
Sorry, but you missed your attempt at a ‘gotcha’, there. See above.
I grew up in a religious family, although I am not religious, but I have been fascinated by it and studied it from a psychological aspect.
People are “abandoning” religion, because they see it for what it really is, a criminal organization. There’s more than enough hate, lies, deceit, murder, apathy, racism, torture, and crime in the world to worry about, than to have to submit to the hypocrisy and deceptions of it practiced by the religious sects of this planet who preach one thing and live the exact opposite.
That’s it? Christians can have open (het) relationships? Adultery is OK? Along with everything else in the Ten [del]Commandments[/del] Suggestions?
Basically, yeah. Non-Jews have to follow the Seven Laws of Noah, and that’s it. Everything else is optional, which is why you get such a wide range in doctrine from one denomination to the next. Other than the Noachide Laws, they can pick and choose what they want to follow and what they don’t, and only their own denomination’s doctrine on who has the authority to say so determines whether or not something is allowed. Note, most denominations reserve to some authority the right to say whether something is allowed or not, but there’s nothing stopping anyone from shopping for a denomination with rules they like, or even starting their own if they can’t find a good one. There’s plenty of room for self-serving interpretation in there, and in case you haven’t noticed, many Christians take full advantage of that fact.
I’m a Gen X, and no one my age, family or friends, are religious. No one attends, and no one ever talks about it. If anything, there’s a lot of anti-religion talk around here, but I don’t even bother. Just the same way I wouldn’t go on and on about the existence of Santa Claus.
Though, that Wikipedia link you share says that Law #5 is:
“Not to commit adultery, bestiality, or sexual immorality”
So, in answer to F.U. Shakespeare, it’s actually “basically, no.”
An assortment of recently-developed Great Causes (Climate Change; Ecology; Super Good Health; Dissuading Republicans…) have supplanted religion as a Great Cause.
These newer sorts of Great Causes have the added benefit of not requiring defense or “interpretation” of, or adherence to, outdated manuscripts.
They are just as fun as traditional religious Great Causes; produce just as much sense of belonging to a Special tribe; and are just as satisfying to whatever it is in the wiring of Sapiens that releases endorphins when we pursue Great Causes.