RSS
Spurred by an exchange between regular commenters dfordoom and EliteCommInc, following are a few graphs showing the change over time in church attendance and certainty of God’s existence among American Christians, as well as the percentages of Americans identifying as Christian, all by broad age cohort:
The stated beliefs and reported behaviors of self-identifying Christians of all ages have relaxed modestly over time, but the more impactful driving force behind Christianity’s decline probably has more to do with the drop in the share of the population identifying as Christian than in the beliefs and behaviors of those Christians.
More stark than the preceding graphs is the subsequent one. It shows changes over time in the percentages of adults under the age of 30 who reported no religious affiliation:
As recently as the early nineties, just one-in-ten young adults were openly irreligious. Today, more than one-in-three are. Welcome to post-Christian America.
GSS variables used: RELIG(1-2,10-11)(4), YEAR, GOD(6), ATTEND(0), AGE
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Christianity had a great run but now needs to fade away. A religion that not only fails to stand up to globo-homo but embraces it is a dead religion. And what kind of a religion elects a retard like Francis to top position?
Also, any faith is only as good as its members. Christianity has long been defined by white people, and the white race has lost its heart, mind, and soul. With people like Pelosi, Biden, Trump, Romney, Pence, Warren, and Hillary as Christians, what kind of religion do you have? One that reflects the flaky idiocy of Pelosi, the shameless opportunism of Biden, the trashy vulgarity of Trump, the craven vileness of Romney, the cowardliness of Pence(who as governor relented under Jewish globo-homo pressure), the nuttery of Warren, and the nihilism of Hillary. If these people had any decency, they would declare themselves no longer Christian but they insist they are. And the church hierarchy are now filled with idiots raised on TV, PC, and pop culture.
One can argue that the true Christian religion isn’t about any of that, and that is true, but as long as the kind of people who fill up the ranks of Christianity mainly worship Jewish supremacists, homos, magic negroes, mammon, or satan, the current religion has no value whatsoever.
This trend is nothing historically new.
"Christianity had a great run but now needs to fade away."
Not really.
"A religion that not only fails to stand up to globo-homo but embraces it is a dead religion"
You mean the liberal elements of Christianity embrace it.
"Also, any faith is only as good as its members."
And how are you qualified to make that judgement?
"Christianity has long been defined by white people, and the white race has lost its heart, mind, and soul."
No, it has been long defined by Christians and those who adhere to its beliefs.
"One can argue that the true Christian religion isn’t about any of that..."
Christians for centuries have been arguing what is "true" about their religion.
The Soviet Union was the only thing keeping religion alive in America in the 20th century. The jump after 1991 would have happened in the 1940s if the Soviet Union had been crushed by Hitler. Nobody in their right mind would have been religious if it weren’t for constant cold war propaganda about religious freedom and the evil atheist union + existential fear of getting nuclear holoraped by the USSR.
Also, any faith is only as good as its members. Christianity has long been defined by white people, and the white race has lost its heart, mind, and soul. With people like Pelosi, Biden, Trump, Romney, Pence, Warren, and Hillary as Christians, what kind of religion do you have? One that reflects the flaky idiocy of Pelosi, the shameless opportunism of Biden, the trashy vulgarity of Trump, the craven vileness of Romney, the cowardliness of Pence(who as governor relented under Jewish globo-homo pressure), the nuttery of Warren, and the nihilism of Hillary. If these people had any decency, they would declare themselves no longer Christian but they insist they are. And the church hierarchy are now filled with idiots raised on TV, PC, and pop culture.
One can argue that the true Christian religion isn't about any of that, and that is true, but as long as the kind of people who fill up the ranks of Christianity mainly worship Jewish supremacists, homos, magic negroes, mammon, or satan, the current religion has no value whatsoever.Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Realist, @Sean O'Farrell, @Corvinus
The true Christian religion is a personal religion. All it does is give 10 incredibly low-bar “commandments” that most people would have adhered to without having ever heard of them. Other than that, just “have faith in the Lord” (whatever that means) and you’re saved. You can take long trips gunning people down recreationally out the passenger’s side window of your car every weekend and you’re still going straight to Heaven as long as you realize that Jesus Christ died for those sins you committed.
Really, there’s nothing un-Christian about Pelosi or the Democrats. Their actions are more in line with Christ than most conservatives. Christianity really isn’t a religion and has no clear or rigid rules other than “believe in Jesus”. It’s really one of the most hollow and unsubstantial things ever conceived. And by religous standards, that’s really saying something.
Ever heard of Catholic canon law? And sola fide is a heresy for the Catholics and the Orthodox.Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @JohnPlywood
It's one of the more catastrophic Protestant heresies.
Perhaps were’re Seeing the sorting of wheat from tares.
One of the greatest problems for all faiths are those who really believe in God, and those who believe for other reasons. The social gospel, or pretending to believe following the advice of Machiavelli just to keep the lower orders on side. The list of those who pretend is pretty long.
So if you have some materialist self justifying nonsense as a belief, and you think it is the new way to master and dominate the world good luck to you, if you think Christ is old stuff, fine go your own way, chase the boys and girls accumulate money, and at the end rest easy, the play ends, perhaps?
Pascal was right though. Atheists risk everything and more on something they can’t possibly know or prove.
The original Christianity was communitarian and the Catholic Church continues this doctrine.
By the way, I think a smaller Church with more orthodox adherents is better in the long run than a larger one with unbelievers pretending for cultural conformity sake.
I agree with Razib Khan that while the percentage of people identifying as Christian will shrink substantially in the U.S., the salience of Christianity (and Christian identity) will increase among the remaining faithful… and this might make Christians more, not less, potent as a political and social force, even as they encounter more conflicts against the secular mainstream.
Orthodox Christianity is 4th century invention.
Authentic First Century Christianity as Jesus intended is still here, waiting for you.
https://www.mjcmjc.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/9/8/985016.gif
The Jehovah's Witnesses are as close as possible to Jesus, Apostles and the first Christians.
Poor, humble and nonviolent, rejecting all false idols (including national flags and anthems), preaching the gospel everywhere, awaiting end of the world every day, always ready to die for their faith.
I do not see anyone here rushing to join them.
But numbers do matter. In most western countries outside the US actual practising believing Christians are maybe 1% of the population among men, maybe 2-3% among women. In those countries Christians have zero political influence. Salience is nice but without numbers you have no political power. That can be a problem.
In countries like Britain there's little doubt that actual practising believing Moslems heavily outnumber actual practising believing Christians.
When the proportion of actual practising believing Christians in the US drops below 5% (which will be soon) American Christianity will also have zero political influence. Which could be a problem given that Christianity has powerful angry vengeful enemies. The most vengeful of those enemies being the homosexuals and the militant atheists. All the salience in the world won't help Christians then.Replies: @Twinkie
This is one of the most moronic and uninformed things ever said of Christianity. It’s clear this commenter’s knowledge of Christianity is based on a very shallow observation of a caricature of a Protestant low church.
Ever heard of Catholic canon law? And sola fide is a heresy for the Catholics and the Orthodox.
Religious impulse is baked into our DNA. Even secular scientists who study the phenomenon acknowledge this.
I have come to believe that there is an evolutionary explanation for these delusions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection#Role_in_religionReplies: @Dumbo, @Stick
I’ve thought for a while now, that those who in the past sought power in the world needed Christianity to achieve that power, and were bounded by Christian moral law.
But now in the modern age with its transcendent power of mass communication the powerful can now spread their own gospel. And their gospel is pretty clear, do what you want, be what you want, indulge every pleasure, there is no sin, there is no god.
The wonder here is that atheists don’t realise that their belief is tailor made to allow the powerful to exploit and use them in any way they see fit.
On this reading atheists are victims and they propagate a philosophy which allows the powerful to act without compassion or constraint
A Twitter mutual of mine tells a fascinating story of an acquaintance who happened to be a fundamentalist Christian, who felt god as “a constant presence.” This woman began taking lithium (presumably for depression, though this was never stated), and this god simply went away.
I have come to believe that there is an evolutionary explanation for these delusions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection#Role_in_religion
It's not "genetic", it's not "in our DNA", it's a need directly related to the beginning of human conscience and self-consciousness, i.e. separation from mere animals (myth of Garden of Eden).
Even if millennials are not religious, they do believe in a lot of irrational/crazy/against common-sense things, even if they don't realize.Replies: @Nodwink, @dfordoom
Also, any faith is only as good as its members. Christianity has long been defined by white people, and the white race has lost its heart, mind, and soul. With people like Pelosi, Biden, Trump, Romney, Pence, Warren, and Hillary as Christians, what kind of religion do you have? One that reflects the flaky idiocy of Pelosi, the shameless opportunism of Biden, the trashy vulgarity of Trump, the craven vileness of Romney, the cowardliness of Pence(who as governor relented under Jewish globo-homo pressure), the nuttery of Warren, and the nihilism of Hillary. If these people had any decency, they would declare themselves no longer Christian but they insist they are. And the church hierarchy are now filled with idiots raised on TV, PC, and pop culture.
One can argue that the true Christian religion isn't about any of that, and that is true, but as long as the kind of people who fill up the ranks of Christianity mainly worship Jewish supremacists, homos, magic negroes, mammon, or satan, the current religion has no value whatsoever.Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Realist, @Sean O'Farrell, @Corvinus
Answer: A stupid one…which doesn’t really set it apart.
I have come to believe that there is an evolutionary explanation for these delusions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection#Role_in_religionReplies: @Dumbo, @Stick
So perhaps there is also an “evolutionary explanation” for your belief. Darwinism/evo psych is circular thinking, basically.
It’s not “genetic”, it’s not “in our DNA”, it’s a need directly related to the beginning of human conscience and self-consciousness, i.e. separation from mere animals (myth of Garden of Eden).
Even if millennials are not religious, they do believe in a lot of irrational/crazy/against common-sense things, even if they don’t realize.
Lmao Reddit has entered the chat
Dumbo, we’ve all heard that canard, “You’re religious too, so there!” It’s stupid. You assert unfalsifiable propositions regarding an undetectable Daddy in the sky. What unfalsifiable proposition does nodwink assert?
Then there’s your nonsequitur pertaining to other people’s irrational beliefs. You’re irrational too, so there!
That’s not discourse, it’s parochial school nyah-nyah-nyah.
Some people don’t want to pretend there’s a god. Grow up.
If you then go on to list a few dozen of the several thousand imaginary beings from history, and ask your interlocutor if they believe in each... even Mormons get the hint once you're halfway through the Egyptian pantheon, which predates the Abrahamic one by a millennium.
People who don't know how to think properly are the super-super-majority, and people who can't think properly believe in all sorts of stupid shit: democracy (representative or otherwise); that government adds to social welfare; that their nation's apex parasites have the right to impose their weltanschauung on other nations; and so forth.
Atheism is the only conclusion compatible with rationalism (agnosticism is incoherent, and mostly exists as a social hedge in places where the society contains a worrisome abundance of religious 'tards).
Not surprisingly, atheism has always been common among people who think for a living: philosophers, scientists and the like.Replies: @another anon, @Audacious Epigone
The most interesting book I’ve ever read on religion is James George Frazer’s “The Golden Bough” – specifically, the 1994 Oxford Classics edition compiled by Robert Fraser from Frazer-with-a-Z’s original second and third editions. (The edition matters because Frazer-with-a-Z released four different editions in his lifetime, which varied wildly in organization, content, and presentation of the underlying ideas.)
Frazer’s fundamental thesis – which he supports via colossal amounts of evidence – is that human religion across nearly ALL cultural backgrounds and ethnicities follows certain very specific common patterns and shares certain very specific traits, and that these commonalities are a side effect of the impact of agriculture and the cycle of the seasons on human daily life.
He also speculates that the arrival of industrial society and its consequent decoupling of human society from agricultural cycles will produce a massive disruption in social and religious patterns, and makes some predictions. He was writing in the early 1900s, and comparing his predictions to the events observed since – at every level from small-town customs to world-historical cataclysms – reveals a fascinating prescience.
If Frazer is correct – if you haven’t guessed, I’m totally convinced he is – all attempts to reverse the collapse of the Old Religion must inevitably fail. Something new will take its place.
Conservatives are unable to cite a single reference to support any of their ideas, and they even have to make up fake crises, such as the crime rate in the Western world, which has been lessening for decades with increasing diversity and Leftist policies. With the developed world having pretty much solved every problem imaginable, through secular methods, I see no reason why conservatives should not be classified as a terrorist threat and imprisoned in concentration camps for threatening to break the current world paradigm. Think about it, what kind of person thinks they know better than the modern secular world? Only the most malicious, hateful, trolling, destructive individuals want to try to interfere with what is happening right now.Replies: @Dissident
It's not "genetic", it's not "in our DNA", it's a need directly related to the beginning of human conscience and self-consciousness, i.e. separation from mere animals (myth of Garden of Eden).
Even if millennials are not religious, they do believe in a lot of irrational/crazy/against common-sense things, even if they don't realize.Replies: @Nodwink, @dfordoom
This separation has only emerged in the very recent past, and is less impressive when you think of how long it took. Even then, progress has been erratic, to put it mildly. Primates also happen to be the most violent of creatures – hardly made in the image of the Lord himself.
Even the fictional protagonist of the New Nonsense (which is almost entirely fanfic written by one mentally-ill former tax collector, who never met the guy in real life) makes clear the the person he pretends is his dad, is the violent psychopath from the Old Nonsense.
I think it's the biggest in-joke in history, that the 'tards are referred to as a 'flock': anyone who understands agriculture, knows that flocks are kept to be fleeced, and then slaughtered... by the people administering them (if not the 'shepherd' himself, then his managers).
Not the first four though. Precious few people would have thought there was anything wrong with having other gods, or with graven images, or worried too much about taking the lord’s name in vain, or keeping “the sabbath” holy.
By the way, I think a smaller Church with more orthodox adherents is better in the long run than a larger one with unbelievers pretending for cultural conformity sake.
I agree with Razib Khan that while the percentage of people identifying as Christian will shrink substantially in the U.S., the salience of Christianity (and Christian identity) will increase among the remaining faithful... and this might make Christians more, not less, potent as a political and social force, even as they encounter more conflicts against the secular mainstream.Replies: @silviosilver, @another anon, @dfordoom
My main concern is what people who ditch Christianity go on to do, especially once the initial relief of doing away with the nutty things Christianity demanded they believe subsides. I think most people do have a “god gene” that makes us want to believe in some “higher being,” and that is always more fun if you do it with other people, so there will always be some people seeking out “churches” of some kind or another.
Now here’s the thing: people also “love a winner.” That’s basically how Christianity eventually won out. Once a critical mass became Christian, then even before it was made mandatory, there was a huge rush of people converting. What worries me is if Islam some day starts looking like that winner.
Just in these threads there are some types – perhaps AE himself is among them – who are such butthurt vengeful assholes who, just because of a bit of “pozz”, would join the Muzz as payback. Even if they don’t actually join, some would welcome their new Muzz overlords just so they can put fags back in the closet. (I rather doubt this sick mentality is as widespread in real life as it is on Unz, but it’s disturbing enough to me that it exists anywhere.) So when you look at the big picture, I think defanging Christianity (or simply keeping it defanged) is better than dumping it wholesale. I think that goes both for Christian purists (like Twinkles) and atheist/agnostic types like me.
(FTR I don't think AE is one of these.)Replies: @JohnPlywood
Ever heard of Catholic canon law? And sola fide is a heresy for the Catholics and the Orthodox.Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @JohnPlywood
True, but it does not differ in style or substance from everything else that gets said on this site about Christianity. The likes of silviosilver, stand d mute, Mr. Rational, Mr. McKenna, Priss Factor, Krak-testicles, Dr. Robert Morgan, nsa…the list goes on interminably…they all say the same things.
The depths of their ignorance is bottomless. These people know nothing. Furthermore, they are trite and boring. There could not be any less original activity these days than the mindless, uncurious, reflexive disparagement of Christianity that they engage in. You would think, if nothing else, they might be a little more receptive to the religion solely to acquire a bit of conversational panache, but even this token of respect is beyond their capacities.
Apart from the question of whether or not Christianity is true, to be Anti-Christian is also to be anti-historical, anti-intellectual, anti-aesthetic, and anti-conservative.
You simply cannot ignore 2000 years of profundity unless you’re an idiot.
My personal aversion to Christianity came from my experience of anti-intellectualism and other pathologies as I was raised in it. Perhaps that came from my so-called teachers (who could easily have been teaching me something quite different from what they thought) but that's what I absorbed.
I know more about Christianity than I want to. Ironically, had I not been so inundated with utter crap through years of horribly boring Sundays and chatechism, I might Christian today. It's the remnant bitter taste which keeps me away.Replies: @Rosie
(a) original;
(b) actually profound (to the non-indoctrinated);
(c) actually practiced by church leadership;
(d) significant enough to overcome the rest of the primitive horse-shit.
Just one - and to make matters easier for you, let's not have a rule that it also has to be consistent with the collection of 2nd-century-et-seq made-up fanfic that describes the fictional life and fictional works of the fictional ManGod.
If I can't give you a quote from a major philosopher that says the same thing, and predates your source by 500 years, and was actively suppressed by the leaders of you 'profound' anti-knowledge death-cult... I will convert to Catholicism immediately. (Like the vast bulk of adherents, I will still not believe in the obviously-false bullshit, though)
Warning: think hard about (d), and ask yourself - How much do you know about the writings of the early church, and of doctrinal statements in the period between 400CE and the Reformation? What are the odds that I already have a dozen statements of core doctrine from that period, that reveal a deliberate intent to stultify human progress - in science and philosophy - purely in order to maintain secular power?
There is not a single person among the 'greats' of Catholicism who is worthy to do laundry for the great Athenians (who were wrong about a lot of things, but did not assert that their doctrine was so complete that heresy - from the Greek for "choice" - was punishable by death).Replies: @advancedatheist
Also, any faith is only as good as its members. Christianity has long been defined by white people, and the white race has lost its heart, mind, and soul. With people like Pelosi, Biden, Trump, Romney, Pence, Warren, and Hillary as Christians, what kind of religion do you have? One that reflects the flaky idiocy of Pelosi, the shameless opportunism of Biden, the trashy vulgarity of Trump, the craven vileness of Romney, the cowardliness of Pence(who as governor relented under Jewish globo-homo pressure), the nuttery of Warren, and the nihilism of Hillary. If these people had any decency, they would declare themselves no longer Christian but they insist they are. And the church hierarchy are now filled with idiots raised on TV, PC, and pop culture.
One can argue that the true Christian religion isn't about any of that, and that is true, but as long as the kind of people who fill up the ranks of Christianity mainly worship Jewish supremacists, homos, magic negroes, mammon, or satan, the current religion has no value whatsoever.Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Realist, @Sean O'Farrell, @Corvinus
Astute comment, Priss Factor. In its current form, Christianity is contributing to – if not openly supporting – the marginalization and eventual extinction of the White race. For me, adhering to a religion which ultimately leads to such outcome, whether intentionally or unintentionally, is no longer tenable. Under the present circumstances, Dr. William Luther Pierce’s “Cosmotheism” or Mr. Ben Klassen’s “Creativity” appear to be much better “religions” for not only Whites but all of mankind.
No, you're making a convenient excuse. God didn't chose one race of Christians to be dominant, nor must its adherents be from one race.
Ever heard of Catholic canon law? And sola fide is a heresy for the Catholics and the Orthodox.Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @JohnPlywood
There’s nothing about Canon law in the Bible. I’m talking about fundamental Christianity from Jesus Christ in the New Testament. Most U.S. citizens under age 30 have never even heard the term “Canon law” for obvious reasons. Nobody cares about the blatantly made-up stuff that was attached to this formless religion by the Europeans.
Oh really? Name a single gene that causes people to be religious or irreligious. You can’t do it. Not a single study has ever identified any genes that are casuing people to be religious. Anyone can theorize endlessly that genes are responsible for x behavior (limp wristed social science), but it takes a real hardcore manly man to actually identify the genes responsible in GWAS studies. So far, there is not a single study of the latter kind. Nobody acknowledges that religous behavior is baked in to DNA.
Note to everyone else: any time you see somebody saying something like “x behavior is genetic”, abruptly demand them to name the genes responsible, and watch them scram.
2000 years of profundity? Much of those 2000 years were spent in the most dehumanizing forms of poverty and irrelevance imaginable. Not to mention the constant military failures of Christian Europe, particularly in the Orthodox and Catholic worlds. Diarrhea, hunger, malaise, low blood pressure, osteoporosis, mental retardation, ignorance, dental malocclusion and infection, assrape, homicide, child murder, viral pandemic and blindness summed up the entirety of the Christian repertoire in the European middle ages.
The aesthetics of Christianity were Play Dough-tier until well into the 2nd millennium, when it was losing relevance anyway. Yet Europe was on top of the world aesthetically before Christianity reared its mangey head.
Conservatism sucks. I see that conservatives have very little to offer anyone as progressives continue to make the world a better place where conservatives consistently failed.
It's a damned shame that they had to hew to an alien and Semitic religion.
Looks like many young leftists turned away from organized religion at a time when christianity was becoming associated with the Republican Party.
For those for whom actually believing in God is an obstacle the Cultural Left offers a powerful alternative to cultural Christianity. It offers the same sense of belonging and the same sense of purpose and if offers a moral framework. It might be a twisted Bizarro World morality but it's still a moral framework. It tells people what thoughts and actions are virtuous and what thoughts and actions are wicked.
It also offers all the unfortunate things that cultural Christianity offers - the same opportunities for virtue-signalling, the same sense of moral superiority, the same self-satisfied smugness.
But for younger generations it has lots of advantages over cultural Christianity - it's new and shiny, it's modern and up-to-date, and it says that hedonism and consumerism are A-OK.
It's a battle that cultural Christianity just can't win.Replies: @Talha
You make me laugh.
My personal aversion to Christianity came from my experience of anti-intellectualism and other pathologies as I was raised in it. Perhaps that came from my so-called teachers (who could easily have been teaching me something quite different from what they thought) but that’s what I absorbed.
I know more about Christianity than I want to. Ironically, had I not been so inundated with utter crap through years of horribly boring Sundays and chatechism, I might Christian today. It’s the remnant bitter taste which keeps me away.
I have come to believe that there is an evolutionary explanation for these delusions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection#Role_in_religionReplies: @Dumbo, @Stick
Read Julian Jaynes ‘Consciousness and the Breakdown of the Bicameral Brain’. Amazing hypothesis.
By the way, I think a smaller Church with more orthodox adherents is better in the long run than a larger one with unbelievers pretending for cultural conformity sake.
I agree with Razib Khan that while the percentage of people identifying as Christian will shrink substantially in the U.S., the salience of Christianity (and Christian identity) will increase among the remaining faithful... and this might make Christians more, not less, potent as a political and social force, even as they encounter more conflicts against the secular mainstream.Replies: @silviosilver, @another anon, @dfordoom
Catholic Christianity is 11th century invention.
Orthodox Christianity is 4th century invention.
Authentic First Century Christianity as Jesus intended is still here, waiting for you.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses are as close as possible to Jesus, Apostles and the first Christians.
Poor, humble and nonviolent, rejecting all false idols (including national flags and anthems), preaching the gospel everywhere, awaiting end of the world every day, always ready to die for their faith.
I do not see anyone here rushing to join them.
Frazer's fundamental thesis - which he supports via colossal amounts of evidence - is that human religion across nearly ALL cultural backgrounds and ethnicities follows certain very specific common patterns and shares certain very specific traits, and that these commonalities are a side effect of the impact of agriculture and the cycle of the seasons on human daily life.
He also speculates that the arrival of industrial society and its consequent decoupling of human society from agricultural cycles will produce a massive disruption in social and religious patterns, and makes some predictions. He was writing in the early 1900s, and comparing his predictions to the events observed since - at every level from small-town customs to world-historical cataclysms - reveals a fascinating prescience.
If Frazer is correct - if you haven't guessed, I'm totally convinced he is - all attempts to reverse the collapse of the Old Religion must inevitably fail. Something new will take its place.Replies: @JohnPlywood
Also, if Frazier is correct, it means religious holdouts have severe mutational defects and are incapable of adapting to the New Society.
Conservatives are unable to cite a single reference to support any of their ideas, and they even have to make up fake crises, such as the crime rate in the Western world, which has been lessening for decades with increasing diversity and Leftist policies. With the developed world having pretty much solved every problem imaginable, through secular methods, I see no reason why conservatives should not be classified as a terrorist threat and imprisoned in concentration camps for threatening to break the current world paradigm. Think about it, what kind of person thinks they know better than the modern secular world? Only the most malicious, hateful, trolling, destructive individuals want to try to interfere with what is happening right now.
Religion is cultural. Who cares about belief. The US has no culture no more. Europe very little. The old just watch TV. The young thumb-type on their phones. No time for going to church when you watch TV or text 12 hours a day. It’s the same with all community organizations. Kurt Vonnegut extolled volunteer fire companies. No such thing any more. At least where I live. The erstwhile volunteer fire and ambulance corpss are all commodified now. I belong to a grange. 20 some members, all old. Utterly doomed. Church is just like volunteer fire and granges etc. Doomed.
As Ezra Pound noted in the Cantos, the late Roman Empire’s preference for Christianity over Apollonius of Tyana and Hellenism resulted in the total loss of their aesthetic and religious traditions.
It’s a damned shame that they had to hew to an alien and Semitic religion.
Plenty of them state openly that they can’t wait for Muslims to knock women down a few pegs. They’re traitors.
(FTR I don’t think AE is one of these.)
My personal aversion to Christianity came from my experience of anti-intellectualism and other pathologies as I was raised in it. Perhaps that came from my so-called teachers (who could easily have been teaching me something quite different from what they thought) but that's what I absorbed.
I know more about Christianity than I want to. Ironically, had I not been so inundated with utter crap through years of horribly boring Sundays and chatechism, I might Christian today. It's the remnant bitter taste which keeps me away.Replies: @Rosie
Almost every religion has a folkish side and an intellectual side. I’d you are acquainted with only one, you don’t really know the religion.
This excellent YouTube channel is a good place to learn about highbrow Christianity.
It took some decades for early twentieth century logical positivism to trickle down, and it will take time for the resurgent Christianity (internally strengthened by a culture of pervasive skepticism) to trickle down.
I’m not too worried about what adolescents think. It’s perfectly natural and normal for youth to be skeptical and challenge authority.
Not in Europe and the Northeast/west USA. You people on this website are forgetting something: you’re all from the same weirdass region of the USA (SOUTHEAST). The rest of the developed world dropped Christianity 100 years ago. The rest of the world has never seen a black person in real life before. 75% of this website’s user generated content revolves around Christianity and black people, but only a small fraction of the rest of the world even thinks about these two things.
Rosie: the resurgent Christianity
Twinkie: the salience of Christianity (and Christian identity) will increase among the remaining faithful…
Hope springs eternal.
God, I do love the strangeness of convergence.
Then there's your nonsequitur pertaining to other people's irrational beliefs. You're irrational too, so there!
That's not discourse, it's parochial school nyah-nyah-nyah.
Some people don't want to pretend there's a god. Grow up.Replies: @Kratoklastes
The best response to “you’re religious too” horse-shit ‘tard talking point, is “And you are atheist with respect to all gods but one. I’m only one god more atheist than you.”.
If you then go on to list a few dozen of the several thousand imaginary beings from history, and ask your interlocutor if they believe in each… even Mormons get the hint once you’re halfway through the Egyptian pantheon, which predates the Abrahamic one by a millennium.
People who don’t know how to think properly are the super-super-majority, and people who can’t think properly believe in all sorts of stupid shit: democracy (representative or otherwise); that government adds to social welfare; that their nation’s apex parasites have the right to impose their weltanschauung on other nations; and so forth.
Atheism is the only conclusion compatible with rationalism (agnosticism is incoherent, and mostly exists as a social hedge in places where the society contains a worrisome abundance of religious ‘tards).
Not surprisingly, atheism has always been common among people who think for a living: philosophers, scientists and the like.
https://asset-1.soup.io/asset/5229/5998_13d2_500.jpeg
(FTR I don't think AE is one of these.)Replies: @JohnPlywood
With a national divorce probability rate exceeding 50% in the USA back in the 1980s, women made it clear 35 years ago that they are the “traitors.”
So I take it you’ve never bothered to read the Old Nonsense then. This ‘Lord’ you mention is a violent narcissistic psychopath: his sole redeeming feature is that he is fictional, having been made up by charlatans seeking to grift a living from a bunch of primitive retards who didn’t understand why storms happen. (Evidently there are still some of those around, the human herd still being mostly imbeciles)
Even the fictional protagonist of the New Nonsense (which is almost entirely fanfic written by one mentally-ill former tax collector, who never met the guy in real life) makes clear the the person he pretends is his dad, is the violent psychopath from the Old Nonsense.
I think it’s the biggest in-joke in history, that the ‘tards are referred to as a ‘flock’: anyone who understands agriculture, knows that flocks are kept to be fleeced, and then slaughtered… by the people administering them (if not the ‘shepherd’ himself, then his managers).
Twinkie: the salience of Christianity (and Christian identity) will increase among the remaining faithful…
Hope springs eternal.
God, I do love the strangeness of convergence.Replies: @JohnPlywood
Clearly anyone who looks at the state of modern fundamentalist Christianity, with Amish and LDS failing to retain half of young adherents, and sees hope in that disaster, is an unrealistic and stubborn individual. The kind of individual who sees a victory in their every humiliating defeat.
Twinkie and Rosie have one thing in common which is that they are both devoted to a war on reality and the truth, and are too scared to acknowledge a probable future outcome in which Christianity is a dead religion.
https://www.heraldextra.com/special-section/lds/spring2019/millennials-and-why-they-leave-the-church-of-jesus-christ/article_90b19e13-6259-572d-b6e3-8c2f60c8dada.html
If you then go on to list a few dozen of the several thousand imaginary beings from history, and ask your interlocutor if they believe in each... even Mormons get the hint once you're halfway through the Egyptian pantheon, which predates the Abrahamic one by a millennium.
People who don't know how to think properly are the super-super-majority, and people who can't think properly believe in all sorts of stupid shit: democracy (representative or otherwise); that government adds to social welfare; that their nation's apex parasites have the right to impose their weltanschauung on other nations; and so forth.
Atheism is the only conclusion compatible with rationalism (agnosticism is incoherent, and mostly exists as a social hedge in places where the society contains a worrisome abundance of religious 'tards).
Not surprisingly, atheism has always been common among people who think for a living: philosophers, scientists and the like.Replies: @another anon, @Audacious Epigone
Checkmate, atheists.
Name a single profound statement in the whole of this “2000 years of profundity” that was
(a) original;
(b) actually profound (to the non-indoctrinated);
(c) actually practiced by church leadership;
(d) significant enough to overcome the rest of the primitive horse-shit.
Just one – and to make matters easier for you, let’s not have a rule that it also has to be consistent with the collection of 2nd-century-et-seq made-up fanfic that describes the fictional life and fictional works of the fictional ManGod.
If I can’t give you a quote from a major philosopher that says the same thing, and predates your source by 500 years, and was actively suppressed by the leaders of you ‘profound’ anti-knowledge death-cult… I will convert to Catholicism immediately. (Like the vast bulk of adherents, I will still not believe in the obviously-false bullshit, though)
Warning: think hard about (d), and ask yourself – How much do you know about the writings of the early church, and of doctrinal statements in the period between 400CE and the Reformation? What are the odds that I already have a dozen statements of core doctrine from that period, that reveal a deliberate intent to stultify human progress – in science and philosophy – purely in order to maintain secular power?
There is not a single person among the ‘greats’ of Catholicism who is worthy to do laundry for the great Athenians (who were wrong about a lot of things, but did not assert that their doctrine was so complete that heresy – from the Greek for “choice” – was punishable by death).
Leading to some really weird trends in society (the below is the last thing a population with a low TFR needs right now):
I think the (post)Modern world is having a huge wake up call about how important religion is to a civilization.
Peace.
The answer is you can't. This is diversity in Sweden. "There is nothing that is truly Scandinavian", and I am afraid the Swedes are especially susceptible to it.
I don't say this of all the Swedes, but the better sort have been betrayed by the others. Is it any wonder that some of the young men try to burn down the churches there?Replies: @nebulafox
I don’t have time for videos. I especially don’t have time for videos on a religion I gave up in disgust.
Gregor Mendel couldn’t name the genes responsible either. Too bad you weren’t there in the 1860s to make that demand of him and save the planet from the following 150+ years of Mendelian genetics.
Please don’t encourage people to engage in hollow rhetorical posturing.
I will defend christians and Christianity. As for Jesus, what defense does the king of kings need from me. His existence and that of god — is simply not a path of debate I would trod.
“Only a fool says is his heart, there is no God.”
People who sincerely seek God’s existence find it ready enough.
Now on the matter of christian wane. First, despite all of the soothesaying about what christians should do — seek societies of their, etc.
A. Christ said that the world would increase.
B Christ said that people of faith would face persecution
C. Christ made it clear that there will be an end of time and that people of faith should pray that it does not come in winter – for those times will be such even pregnant women will cry out that the mountains and rocks would fall on them
Despite the numerous people who have been antagonist to christian faith and practice (including one Pres. Thomas Jefferson – deliberate dig) the core of chrstian faith has served as protector, not because christians have been so wonderful — there’s plenty of record that is hard to defend, if not impossible, no, because god is faithful and keeps his promises. In this the US has at least attempted to endeavour to embrace at the very least the principles of Christ and most US citizens, even Muslims and others — will acknowledge that. That ethos permeates most if not all of the country. So no doubt the number of people who hold to formal acknowledgement has waned — and here one must take care how that information is gathered — surveys, of church attendances, man on the street . . .etc.
Now in reality despite mistakes of the people of faith, the chritian community in the US has proven to be the most generous force on the planet when it comes to good will, and why even the milk toasteous of organizations slap christian on their brand “christian charity”
God honors that. And I suspect that despite the hoopla — christian force will still be a major player in the affairs of the US.
——————————–
Hilarious and more. Good line laughing and laughing
The minority of Christians who believe that we have reached the "end times' and expect the rapture shows how Christian apocalypticism promotes high time preference behavior. Why bother to invest above-average effort into improving your worldly situation by, for example, getting an education, developing a career, saving and investing money, marrying and starting a family and so forth, if you expect to fly off to heaven any moment now without having to die first?
Religions come and go like everything else. The evidence suggests that people hold religious beliefs as superficial opinions which help to manage existential anxiety. They lose interest in these beliefs when they live in developed countries which provide enough existential security to make daily life a lot more predictable, namely, law and order, full stomachs and access to health care. Notice that Hispanic immigrants become less religious when they migrate to the United Sates, for example.
And this has happened because of general trends in modernity, notably the success of market liberalism in generating wealth well above subsistence needs – namely, in Hayekian fashion, spontaneously, organically and without social engineering to make religion decline. It didn’t require a centrally imposed plan to atheize the society, unlike what the early Soviet Union tried.
(a) original;
(b) actually profound (to the non-indoctrinated);
(c) actually practiced by church leadership;
(d) significant enough to overcome the rest of the primitive horse-shit.
Just one - and to make matters easier for you, let's not have a rule that it also has to be consistent with the collection of 2nd-century-et-seq made-up fanfic that describes the fictional life and fictional works of the fictional ManGod.
If I can't give you a quote from a major philosopher that says the same thing, and predates your source by 500 years, and was actively suppressed by the leaders of you 'profound' anti-knowledge death-cult... I will convert to Catholicism immediately. (Like the vast bulk of adherents, I will still not believe in the obviously-false bullshit, though)
Warning: think hard about (d), and ask yourself - How much do you know about the writings of the early church, and of doctrinal statements in the period between 400CE and the Reformation? What are the odds that I already have a dozen statements of core doctrine from that period, that reveal a deliberate intent to stultify human progress - in science and philosophy - purely in order to maintain secular power?
There is not a single person among the 'greats' of Catholicism who is worthy to do laundry for the great Athenians (who were wrong about a lot of things, but did not assert that their doctrine was so complete that heresy - from the Greek for "choice" - was punishable by death).Replies: @advancedatheist
Augustine strikes me as an A- intellect who probably could have done something useful with his life if he lived in a better-functioning historical period.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1231251048276332545
I think the (post)Modern world is having a huge wake up call about how important religion is to a civilization.
Peace.Replies: @songbird
These are the kind of people who were forced to go to church, or who went from social pressure. So, how can you get them to go to church without the homogeneity to create the social pressure?
The answer is you can’t. This is diversity in Sweden. “There is nothing that is truly Scandinavian”, and I am afraid the Swedes are especially susceptible to it.
I don’t say this of all the Swedes, but the better sort have been betrayed by the others. Is it any wonder that some of the young men try to burn down the churches there?
People who sincerely seek God's existence find it ready enough.Now on the matter of christian wane. First, despite all of the soothesaying about what christians should do --- seek societies of their, etc.A. Christ said that the world would increase.
B Christ said that people of faith would face persecution
C. Christ made it clear that there will be an end of time and that people of faith should pray that it does not come in winter - for those times will be such even pregnant women will cry out that the mountains and rocks would fall on them
Despite the numerous people who have been antagonist to christian faith and practice (including one Pres. Thomas Jefferson - deliberate dig) the core of chrstian faith has served as protector, not because christians have been so wonderful --- there's plenty of record that is hard to defend, if not impossible, no, because god is faithful and keeps his promises. In this the US has at least attempted to endeavour to embrace at the very least the principles of Christ and most US citizens, even Muslims and others -- will acknowledge that. That ethos permeates most if not all of the country. So no doubt the number of people who hold to formal acknowledgement has waned -- and here one must take care how that information is gathered -- surveys, of church attendances, man on the street . . .etc. Now in reality despite mistakes of the people of faith, the chritian community in the US has proven to be the most generous force on the planet when it comes to good will, and why even the milk toasteous of organizations slap christian on their brand "christian charity" God honors that. And I suspect that despite the hoopla -- christian force will still be a major player in the affairs of the US.--------------------------------https://asset-1.soup.io/asset/5229/5998_13d2_500.jpeg
Hilarious and more. Good line laughing and laughingReplies: @advancedatheist
The dissident right YouTube personality Orwell Goode argues that religious belief promotes a lower time preference in society, but the fact that Christianity started out as a doomsday cult suggests otherwise. The Christians who want to de-emphasize this fact out of embarrassment simply can’t get away from the letter of their own scriptures and Jesus’ authority about their religion’s original focus.
The minority of Christians who believe that we have reached the “end times’ and expect the rapture shows how Christian apocalypticism promotes high time preference behavior. Why bother to invest above-average effort into improving your worldly situation by, for example, getting an education, developing a career, saving and investing money, marrying and starting a family and so forth, if you expect to fly off to heaven any moment now without having to die first?
No comparison. The amount of genetic data out there attached to medical data (which includes religion or lack thereof) is honestly terrifying. Anybody should be able run a GWAS study and get to the bottom of it. Until that happens, there’s no genetic evidence for jack shit.
And this has happened because of general trends in modernity, notably the success of market liberalism in generating wealth well above subsistence needs - namely, in Hayekian fashion, spontaneously, organically and without social engineering to make religion decline. It didn't require a centrally imposed plan to atheize the society, unlike what the early Soviet Union tried.Replies: @nebulafox
I don’t think this is a universal dynamic: the Islamic World has gotten more outwardly pious with wealth and globalization, not less. There has been a massive increase in living standards in many of these countries in the last half-century. In Indonesia, for example, nearly 70% of the populace was living in absolute poverty-two dollars a day or less-during the worst of the 1960s. Society was, if not exactly liberal, far less outright Islamic, with hijabs being rare sights. They are now universal: and now, the absolute poverty rate is more like 17%, and back in the 1990s, it was 12%.
We can debate how much of that is due to the encroachment of modernity and social atomization, though. I find it significant that it is the urban middle class that tends to embrace orthodox Islam, not the Javanese peasants out in the kampungs.
Another interesting dynamic: evangelical Christianity might be on the decline in the US, but it certainly isn’t in Brazil (traditionally deeply Catholic) or the PRC (officially atheist). Both countries, again, have massively increased their standards of living over the past several decades.
The answer is you can't. This is diversity in Sweden. "There is nothing that is truly Scandinavian", and I am afraid the Swedes are especially susceptible to it.
I don't say this of all the Swedes, but the better sort have been betrayed by the others. Is it any wonder that some of the young men try to burn down the churches there?Replies: @nebulafox
>These are the kind of people who were forced to go to church, or who went from social pressure. So, how can you get them to go to church without the homogeneity to create the social pressure?
The answer is that you can’t. In a society where there’s no pressure to conform to religious rites, where taking them too seriously is seen as somewhat odd, those who still go are those who truly believe and make it a part of their souls. That will lead to less numbers, but higher degrees of coherence, and probably an ability to attract people, ironically enough. I think relatively more people would go for a religion that actually demands sacrifice and ritual rather than listening to trite, lukewarm life lessons for an hour on Sunday because it is what is expected.
In societies where that pressure still exists, it is another story.
Perhaps there is a direct cause-and-effect relationship: the more piously Islamic you are, the less productive and poorer you become.
I agree, but the trouble is that a lot of the churches are “converged.” Their leadership often lack traditional values. Even the Catholic Church has a pope who is promoting globohomo, virtually every chance he can get. The churches in Sweden are probably even worse.
“The dissident right YouTube personality Orwell Goode argues that religious belief promotes a lower time preference in society, but the fact that Christianity started out as a doomsday cult suggests otherwise. The Christians who want to de-emphasize this fact out of embarrassment simply can’t get away from the letter of their own scriptures and Jesus’ authority about their religion’s original focus.”
uhhh, just a note, the purpose of Christ is not at all about doomsday —
it’s the restored relationship between humanity and God for those who choose to embrace it. Revelations gets a lot of press, a lot of misunderstood press, misreported press, a lot of opportunistic press from multiple people with multiple agendas, and wrong press.
P.S. I am unfamiliar with Orwell Goode.
But the offering of a new life, a renewed life . . . is hardly reflective of doomsday.
——————
“The churches in Sweden are probably even worse.”
Oddly enough the Churches of Sweden, those scriptural focused are under pressure because they refuse to conform to the social standard.
America may be justly called post Christian now but there will in time be a flourishing post America Christianity.
The idea of Christianity as a “personal religion” is one of the most destructive ideas in all of history. It has been one of the main factors responsible for the collapse of Christianity. Clinging to that idea is a sure-fire recipe for the further marginalisation and eventual complete disappearance of Christianity.
It’s one of the more catastrophic Protestant heresies.
It's not "genetic", it's not "in our DNA", it's a need directly related to the beginning of human conscience and self-consciousness, i.e. separation from mere animals (myth of Garden of Eden).
Even if millennials are not religious, they do believe in a lot of irrational/crazy/against common-sense things, even if they don't realize.Replies: @Nodwink, @dfordoom
Which would not have surprised Chesterton.
Wow the chart at the bottom is one of the most amazing changes in trend I have seen.
AE, is there any further race/region split of this? For e.g., how many southern whites <30 are non-religious today vs 1991?
The turn away from organised religion has happened everywhere, not just in the US. So I don’t think it has anything much to do with the Religious Right’s obscene infatuation with the Republican Party.
For those for whom actually believing in God is an obstacle the Cultural Left offers a powerful alternative to cultural Christianity. It offers the same sense of belonging and the same sense of purpose and if offers a moral framework. It might be a twisted Bizarro World morality but it’s still a moral framework. It tells people what thoughts and actions are virtuous and what thoughts and actions are wicked.
It also offers all the unfortunate things that cultural Christianity offers – the same opportunities for virtue-signalling, the same sense of moral superiority, the same self-satisfied smugness.
But for younger generations it has lots of advantages over cultural Christianity – it’s new and shiny, it’s modern and up-to-date, and it says that hedonism and consumerism are A-OK.
It’s a battle that cultural Christianity just can’t win.
https://mobile.twitter.com/IsmailRoyer/status/1231504307964563456
Peace.
By the way, I think a smaller Church with more orthodox adherents is better in the long run than a larger one with unbelievers pretending for cultural conformity sake.
I agree with Razib Khan that while the percentage of people identifying as Christian will shrink substantially in the U.S., the salience of Christianity (and Christian identity) will increase among the remaining faithful... and this might make Christians more, not less, potent as a political and social force, even as they encounter more conflicts against the secular mainstream.Replies: @silviosilver, @another anon, @dfordoom
That’s possible of course. Although I’d like to see some evidence.
But numbers do matter. In most western countries outside the US actual practising believing Christians are maybe 1% of the population among men, maybe 2-3% among women. In those countries Christians have zero political influence. Salience is nice but without numbers you have no political power. That can be a problem.
In countries like Britain there’s little doubt that actual practising believing Moslems heavily outnumber actual practising believing Christians.
When the proportion of actual practising believing Christians in the US drops below 5% (which will be soon) American Christianity will also have zero political influence. Which could be a problem given that Christianity has powerful angry vengeful enemies. The most vengeful of those enemies being the homosexuals and the militant atheists. All the salience in the world won’t help Christians then.
One benefit of a smaller, "purer" Church is the increased social cohesion.
You yourself make a lot of assertions here, and "I'd like to see some evidence" for them.Of course, they do. But a cohesive, determined minority can often have more power than a diffused, fractious majority. Take a look at, say, Jews or Mormons. They are tiny fractions of the population, but exert outsized influences.Replies: @dfordoom
For those for whom actually believing in God is an obstacle the Cultural Left offers a powerful alternative to cultural Christianity. It offers the same sense of belonging and the same sense of purpose and if offers a moral framework. It might be a twisted Bizarro World morality but it's still a moral framework. It tells people what thoughts and actions are virtuous and what thoughts and actions are wicked.
It also offers all the unfortunate things that cultural Christianity offers - the same opportunities for virtue-signalling, the same sense of moral superiority, the same self-satisfied smugness.
But for younger generations it has lots of advantages over cultural Christianity - it's new and shiny, it's modern and up-to-date, and it says that hedonism and consumerism are A-OK.
It's a battle that cultural Christianity just can't win.Replies: @Talha
Well, at least they are becoming more and more open about their intentions, this is good – this is the kind of fight I’ve been waiting for. This is clear cut good/evil stuff:
https://mobile.twitter.com/IsmailRoyer/status/1231504307964563456
Peace.
“The idea of Christianity as a “personal religion” is one of the most destructive ideas in all of history. It has been one of the main factors responsible for the collapse of Christianity. Clinging to that idea is a sure-fire recipe for the further marginalisation and eventual complete disappearance of Christianity.
It’s one of the more catastrophic Protestant heresies.”
No. The relationship that Christ establishes is with an individual. And each person has a relationship with Christ. It really is unique and the Apostles make that case when Paul discusses individual practices:
Romans 14 1- 13
As that passage continues in the chapter we absolutely have an obligation one to another as believers. However, when someone stands before Christ they stand with him and they stand alone alone. That seems to be very personal to me.
—————————————-
https://www.christianpost.com/news/evangelical-churches-growing-fast-in-switzerland.html
https://www.christianpost.com/news/evangelical-churches-growing-fast-in-switzerland.html
”
Also, any faith is only as good as its members. Christianity has long been defined by white people, and the white race has lost its heart, mind, and soul. With people like Pelosi, Biden, Trump, Romney, Pence, Warren, and Hillary as Christians, what kind of religion do you have? One that reflects the flaky idiocy of Pelosi, the shameless opportunism of Biden, the trashy vulgarity of Trump, the craven vileness of Romney, the cowardliness of Pence(who as governor relented under Jewish globo-homo pressure), the nuttery of Warren, and the nihilism of Hillary. If these people had any decency, they would declare themselves no longer Christian but they insist they are. And the church hierarchy are now filled with idiots raised on TV, PC, and pop culture.
One can argue that the true Christian religion isn't about any of that, and that is true, but as long as the kind of people who fill up the ranks of Christianity mainly worship Jewish supremacists, homos, magic negroes, mammon, or satan, the current religion has no value whatsoever.Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Realist, @Sean O'Farrell, @Corvinus
“with the drop in the share of the population identifying as Christian than in the beliefs and behaviors of those Christians.”
This trend is nothing historically new.
“Christianity had a great run but now needs to fade away.”
Not really.
“A religion that not only fails to stand up to globo-homo but embraces it is a dead religion”
You mean the liberal elements of Christianity embrace it.
“Also, any faith is only as good as its members.”
And how are you qualified to make that judgement?
“Christianity has long been defined by white people, and the white race has lost its heart, mind, and soul.”
No, it has been long defined by Christians and those who adhere to its beliefs.
“One can argue that the true Christian religion isn’t about any of that…”
Christians for centuries have been arguing what is “true” about their religion.
“Christianity is contributing to – if not openly supporting – the marginalization and eventual extinction of the White race. For me, adhering to a religion which ultimately leads to such outcome, whether intentionally or unintentionally, is no longer tenable.”
No, you’re making a convenient excuse. God didn’t chose one race of Christians to be dominant, nor must its adherents be from one race.
Divorced woman: Corvinus
That commenter is a troll. We know today that lots of things are at least partially or substantially genetic (inherited) such as intelligence, but we can’t pinpoint to a single responsible gene, because such traits are usually polygenic.
“The dissident right YouTube personality Orwell Goode argues that religious belief promotes a lower time preference in society, but the fact that Christianity started out as a doomsday cult suggests otherwise. The Christians who want to de-emphasize this fact out of embarrassment simply can’t get away from the letter of their own scriptures and Jesus’ authority about their religion’s original focus.”
Excuse the delay here.
And the rest entirely incorrect. The endgame for christians is new life and restoration. I am not the least bit bothered by christians who acknowledge that at some point in time our societies will become so corrupt that they implode and there will eventually a divine intervention, to set things aright.
That is not a “doomsday” cult. You are abusing the term here. A doomsday cult” is a group or organization that sets about the enacting the end of the world as actors. They seek it out, The scriptures don’t seek to end the world nor do they wish it. Furthermore the scripture I reference in paraphrase is not noting a doomsday nor advancing it — but instead acknowledging the eventual decay.
In fact that reference is just the opposite — “pray that it does not come in winter” . . . and it is christian ethos that holds back the tide Christ’s return is not a doomsday — but a fresh start.
“That commenter is a troll. We know today that lots of things are at least partially or substantially genetic (inherited) such as intelligence, but we can’t pinpoint to a single responsible gene, because such traits are usually polygenic.”
I have no idea whether the commenter making the point is genuine or not. But the point is spot on. If you claim that X is cause N then you need to support it with evidence, in this case noting X and its relationship to N. Absolutely humans as biological entities inherit biology. And despite the steady stae of biological functions even they can and are impacted by environment. If that is true for biological behavior, then accounting for it regarding human conscious existence is a tough row.
I have no idea whether the commenter making the point is genuine or not. But the point is spot on. If you claim that X is cause N then you need to support it with evidence, in this case noting X and its relationship to N. Absolutely humans as biological entities inherit biology. And despite the steady stae of biological functions even they can and are impacted by environment. If that is true for biological behavior, then accounting for it regarding human conscious existence is a tough row.Replies: @EliteCommInc.
slight amendment:
If that is true for biological behavior, then accounting for it as the sole or primary determinant regarding human conscious existence is a tough row.
Thanks for the confirmation. I didn’t have to look at GSS to know that “agnostic” is the fastest growing segment of under 30’s, I just had to look around me with clear eyes and see what’s there.
In my opinion it is Churchianity that they are walking away from, not necessarily Christianity.
Conservatives are unable to cite a single reference to support any of their ideas, and they even have to make up fake crises, such as the crime rate in the Western world, which has been lessening for decades with increasing diversity and Leftist policies. With the developed world having pretty much solved every problem imaginable, through secular methods, I see no reason why conservatives should not be classified as a terrorist threat and imprisoned in concentration camps for threatening to break the current world paradigm. Think about it, what kind of person thinks they know better than the modern secular world? Only the most malicious, hateful, trolling, destructive individuals want to try to interfere with what is happening right now.Replies: @Dissident
If this isn’t a troll…
Hit the "Ignore" button on it already, and stop feeding it.
Honestly, you’re THAT clueless?
Hit the “Ignore” button on it already, and stop feeding it.
Turn your culture and your news media over to an anti-Christian cult and this is what you get.
This isn’t anything that anyone has said much about here, but I’m curious about your view on the coronavirus that’s been making headlines. Based on what you’re hearing from people in your line of work, is this even as big a deal as the flu? Or is this a case of contagious hysteria ginned up by hypochondriacs in Beijing, amplified by breathless coverage from journos salivating at the thought of a Pulitzer?
In general, I take the view that things are rarely as bad as they look or as good as they look. So put me in the category of people who think that COVID-19 will neither skip white people and only hit East Asian nor kill millions worldwide (so, somewhere between SARS and Influenza).
That anti-Christian cult being of course liberalism.
That anti-Christian cult being of course liberalism.
Liberalism should not be considered anti-Christian. It should be considered indifferent to religious belief, but in favor of uninhibited theological inquiry.
You cannot be a liberal and a Christian. If you're a liberal you have chosen the anti-Christian camp.
I am not expert enough in epidemiology to comment on it, except to say that due to the large-scale consolidation that has occurred among hospitals (esp. those with trauma and high-level ICU capabilities) in the U.S., we are more poorely prepared for a pandemic than we were before. And we never did have that good of a “redundancy” in our capabilities in the past.
In general, I take the view that things are rarely as bad as they look or as good as they look. So put me in the category of people who think that COVID-19 will neither skip white people and only hit East Asian nor kill millions worldwide (so, somewhere between SARS and Influenza).
But numbers do matter. In most western countries outside the US actual practising believing Christians are maybe 1% of the population among men, maybe 2-3% among women. In those countries Christians have zero political influence. Salience is nice but without numbers you have no political power. That can be a problem.
In countries like Britain there's little doubt that actual practising believing Moslems heavily outnumber actual practising believing Christians.
When the proportion of actual practising believing Christians in the US drops below 5% (which will be soon) American Christianity will also have zero political influence. Which could be a problem given that Christianity has powerful angry vengeful enemies. The most vengeful of those enemies being the homosexuals and the militant atheists. All the salience in the world won't help Christians then.Replies: @Twinkie
I posted relevant data before, including priests of the more recent cohorts being far more conservative politically and doctrinally orthodox than those of several decades ago.
One benefit of a smaller, “purer” Church is the increased social cohesion.
You yourself make a lot of assertions here, and “I’d like to see some evidence” for them.
Of course, they do. But a cohesive, determined minority can often have more power than a diffused, fractious majority. Take a look at, say, Jews or Mormons. They are tiny fractions of the population, but exert outsized influences.
Does mormonism as a religion have any real influence?
Cohesive, determined minorities can have enormous influence, if they're organised and disciplined. Perhaps Christians can achieve that. It helps a lot if your cohesive, determined minority has a lot of money, or has a lot of money behind it.
I do concede the point though that ditching the lukewarm Christians and the cultural Christians and the liberal Christians and the Kumbaya Christians could be an asset.Yes, I'll concede that point as well.Replies: @Twinkie
Conservative Catholics are the new Jews.
Who knew?
So the fact that it is liberalism that has, more than any other factor, destroyed Christianity should be considered to be just some sort of accident?
You cannot be a liberal and a Christian. If you’re a liberal you have chosen the anti-Christian camp.
One benefit of a smaller, "purer" Church is the increased social cohesion.
You yourself make a lot of assertions here, and "I'd like to see some evidence" for them.Of course, they do. But a cohesive, determined minority can often have more power than a diffused, fractious majority. Take a look at, say, Jews or Mormons. They are tiny fractions of the population, but exert outsized influences.Replies: @dfordoom
What’s interesting is that Judaism as a religion has practically zero influence. The Jews with influence are not just secular Jews, they seem to be in most cases extremely secularised Jews.
Does mormonism as a religion have any real influence?
Cohesive, determined minorities can have enormous influence, if they’re organised and disciplined. Perhaps Christians can achieve that. It helps a lot if your cohesive, determined minority has a lot of money, or has a lot of money behind it.
I do concede the point though that ditching the lukewarm Christians and the cultural Christians and the liberal Christians and the Kumbaya Christians could be an asset.
Yes, I’ll concede that point as well.
Does mormonism as a religion have any real influence?
Cohesive, determined minorities can have enormous influence, if they're organised and disciplined. Perhaps Christians can achieve that. It helps a lot if your cohesive, determined minority has a lot of money, or has a lot of money behind it.
I do concede the point though that ditching the lukewarm Christians and the cultural Christians and the liberal Christians and the Kumbaya Christians could be an asset.Yes, I'll concede that point as well.Replies: @Twinkie
It doesn’t matter whether the religion per se has influence or not. The fact is that the people who belong to these religions (or ancestral/cultural identity, however tenuous, in the case of Jews) have influence. And a factor (and I argue a strong factor) in that outsized influence comes from social cohesion – sharing a common identity and being very defensive about that identity (which is to say believing that your group is under threat from the rest of the society).
As Christians become a smaller fraction of the population and as “casual” Christians leave the religion, among the remaining faithful, the salience of Christian identity will increase and will inevitably bring it into greater cultural and legal conflict with the secular mainstream, which will in turn further strengthen the internal cohesion and sense of identity of being Christian.
By the way, I have seen this with my own eyes. Take, for example, the Catholic parish to which the late Supreme Court Justice Scalia belonged. This parish – obviously very orthdox – has been bleeding parishioners for a long time. But for much of its history, only roughly 20 families have significantly supported the parish financially while hundreds of others were merely “hangers-on” who contributed little despite being in a very affluent area. But even as the overall number of “official” parishioners has fallen, the number of active contributors has increased and the amount of contributions from them has risen as well. Moreover, this growing core group has become exceedingly cohesive – they attend daily Mass, homeschool their children together (or otherwise send their children to very orthodox Catholic schools in the area), they socialize and help each other, conduct business with each other, and engage politically together. In other words, they have become more like the Mormons, and act as a community under threat.
So the end result is that the parish is much smaller than before, but also more cohesive and potent.
Money is useful, but is not the only tool to exert influence. What is the majority religious denomination among the Supreme Court Justices again?
SCOTUS: 3 Jews, 5 Catholics, and 1 Episcopalian raised as a Catholic. And when one of the Jews dies of old age, the replacement will likely be a Catholic.
And what great Culture War victories have Catholics won as a result of their domination of the Supreme Court?
Joe Biden recently flipped to the pro-abortion side after all these years. Many people and many pundits, some of whom qualify as people, believed, and some still believe, that he is going to be our next President. You would think that he would need Catholic votes to take PA, but apparently not.
Or how about D.C. v. Heller? That was Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito. Again, all Catholic justices.
And don’t forget that the earlier majority was very tenuous (4 v. 4 with Kennedy being moderately conservative). The great gift of Trump’s victory is that the SCOTUS is now more solidly rightist than before (Roberts is now the moderate and that’s saying something). Should Trump win again, he will likely get a chance to replace Ginsburg with another conservative Catholic justice. It will be 6-to-3, then, which means the margin of victory for the right will be much greater (can afford to have one conservative justice go wobbly on a case or two). And I suspect Roberts will fall in line as he will be loath to be on the losing side of opinions.
And what great Culture War victories have Catholics won
Joe Biden recently flipped to the pro-abortion side after all these years. Many people and many pundits, some of whom qualify as people, believed, and some still believe, that he is going to be our next President. You would think that he would need Catholic votes to take PA, but apparently not.
They (Scalia, most notably) held back a lot of the Left’s agenda. Burwell v. Hobby Lobby ring a bell? The majority justices were Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas – all Catholics.
Or how about D.C. v. Heller? That was Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito. Again, all Catholic justices.
And don’t forget that the earlier majority was very tenuous (4 v. 4 with Kennedy being moderately conservative). The great gift of Trump’s victory is that the SCOTUS is now more solidly rightist than before (Roberts is now the moderate and that’s saying something). Should Trump win again, he will likely get a chance to replace Ginsburg with another conservative Catholic justice. It will be 6-to-3, then, which means the margin of victory for the right will be much greater (can afford to have one conservative justice go wobbly on a case or two). And I suspect Roberts will fall in line as he will be loath to be on the losing side of opinions.
John, how long have you been married?
Religiosity has increased reproductive fitness for roughly ever. It would have had a hell of a time sticking around if it didn’t.
If irreligious whites had as many kids as religious white Christians do, there’d be no “extinction of the White race” to talk about.
I think you’re putting forward the-Nurture-of-the-gaps, but we’ll know one way or the other by the end of this decade.
Gothic cathedrals are play doh tier? C’mon!
Can humanity without culture, without religion, though? I guess we’ll find out.
If you then go on to list a few dozen of the several thousand imaginary beings from history, and ask your interlocutor if they believe in each... even Mormons get the hint once you're halfway through the Egyptian pantheon, which predates the Abrahamic one by a millennium.
People who don't know how to think properly are the super-super-majority, and people who can't think properly believe in all sorts of stupid shit: democracy (representative or otherwise); that government adds to social welfare; that their nation's apex parasites have the right to impose their weltanschauung on other nations; and so forth.
Atheism is the only conclusion compatible with rationalism (agnosticism is incoherent, and mostly exists as a social hedge in places where the society contains a worrisome abundance of religious 'tards).
Not surprisingly, atheism has always been common among people who think for a living: philosophers, scientists and the like.Replies: @another anon, @Audacious Epigone
Christians were persecuted in imperial Rome for atheism exactly along the lines of what you lay out above.