Christianity shrinking in U.S.; Mormon numbers essentially flat

[Gameface]

To address that point, what I see very frequently are religious people define what they consider to be a God worthy of their worship, even when their requirements are contradicted by what's written in the Bible.

 

[NAOS]

No smoke, no mirrors. I just addressed a point in a post of GF's that I felt like bringing up.

He made a point that all of the religious people he talked to worship a different God.
I see it as possible that all of those people can worship the same God, but understand/explain/see/etc the same being in different ways.

I used the concert/accident/school/etc as a real life example of something similar.
It is fact, even in your zero faith world, that in many, many, many cases witnesses to some incident all witnessed the same thing and saw completely different things or explained it in very different terms/ways.

Not a whole lot different than this imo.

But... go ahead and attempt to discredit using your lame "smoke and mirrors" and other cliche lame excuses to not even try to understand the point I made.
Classic NAOS, imo.

My original post was specifically directed at that one comment of GF. Not directed at the whole of this thread, or anything any other poster stated.

It's a truism to say that everybody will experience the same object or event differently. They have different bodies, different histories, etc. You can put God into this 'magic slot' or you can put a baseball.

It is smoke and mirrors because, as a truism, it added nothing, while taking the discussion away from the existence of God. Classic distraction. Classic Spazz. I understand perfectly well the point you made.

 

[babe]

To address that point, what I see very frequently are religious people define what they consider to be a God worthy of their worship, even when their requirements are contradicted by what's written in the Bible.

I imagine I might be, in your estimation, one of these sorts.

First of all, don't equate "religion" or "Belief in God" with the Bible too closely, particularly with LDS types who refer to other "authoritative sources". Howard in here might be much more strictly going by his understanding of the Bible, as with other fundamentalist Bible-centered faiths.

Second and lastly, you can find something in the Bible to contradict almost anything else in the Bible quite easily, because we all pick and choose stuff we focus on, and we tend to interpret things differently even when we're talking about the same scripture. And I don't view that as particularly inconsistent. Scientists can do pretty much the same thing with a Peer-reviewed research article if they want. And if it's politicians you set for a standard of consistency, well, you'd have to be dreaming something.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

In your view what is the basis for the claim that God exists?

1- Yes my basis for why I believe God exists starts with a spiritual affirmation. It definitely is the strongest part of my belief, that only gets stronger as I take the evidence I see/hear/feel/read/experience into account.

2- I have had numerous "personal" experiences that prove to me bit by bit that what I choose to believe is real.

3- The Human body itself.

4- The beauty and magnificence of all of the animal and plant life, this planet, everything about it.

5- This Solar System, Galaxy, Universe.

6- The order, and innumerable amazing things that go on with each and every part of 3-5. We as Humans only know a thimble full of information about any of it compared to the ocean and oceans we don't know or understand.

7- The numerous accounts of people that have died and found there was more to life after death. (I realize some are fake, not all are)

8- I have tested the "does God truly exist" hypothesis for myself in many ways and found it to be true for myself in all sincerity.

9- I have accounts of many, many, many other people that believe that God exists. (while this doesn't mean much by itself, it is a small piece of the puzzle)

Yes, my "proof" that God exists does have strong ties to personal experience, but that is not all. It is a combination of many things.

Also I understand the desire for proof and the dislike of having faith in something you can't hold the proof in your hand.
That's part of the test here.

(this was just a thrown together post, not thought out in great depth... for what it's worth)

 

[Jazz Spazz]

To address that point, what I see very frequently are religious people define what they consider to be a God worthy of their worship, even when their requirements are contradicted by what's written in the Bible.

Do you have any specific examples? Serious question, not trolling. Just very curious.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

It's a truism to say that everybody will experience the same object or event differently. They have different bodies, different histories, etc. You can put God into this 'magic slot' or you can put a baseball.

It is smoke and mirrors because, as a truism, it added nothing, while taking the discussion away from the existence of God. Classic distraction. Classic Spazz. I understand perfectly well the point you made.

Your opinion. Of course... I disagree.

I felt there was a misunderstanding or miscommunication in the "different Gods" point, and my comparisons were to illustrate that difference in understanding between what GF stated and how I see it to be. It was not useless fluff, but useful in the point that I was pursuing.

I was not discussing the existence of God at all. My point was directed at that one comment which was about multiple people that believe in God worshiping different Gods.

Classic attempt at conversation change though. Classic NAOS. I understand your skipping my point entirely. I get you.

 

[LogGrad98]

People can't even define "beef".

So what's your deal?

It's what's for dinner?

 

[The Thriller]

If this study is true then why do so many more Americans not believe in evolution, global warming, and science?

Why are so many states making it harder to get an abortion? Why are so many states only teaching abstinence for sex edu?

Why are so many states whitewashing American history?

Why are so many (red) states instituting Sharia Law with a Christian twist?

 

[LogGrad98]

If this study is true then why do so many more Americans not believe in evolution, global warming, and science?

Why are so many states making it harder to get an abortion? Why are so many states only teaching abstinence for sex edu?

Why are so many states whitewashing American history?

Why are so many (red) states instituting Sharia Law with a Christian twist?

As opposed to sharia law with an atheist twist?

 

[babe]

I'll have kids in fifty years?

well, maybe not. Depends on some stuff. But maybe somebody else will, and it's true that what goes around, comes around. A couple of generations in fifty years is enough for a lot of things to change, but one thing that doesn't change is new generations rejecting old stuff and looking for new solutions.

One thing my philosophy class professor was adamant about, twentieth century philosophers believed they had no answers, that nobody has answers, and there are no answers. Secular Humanism means we only look to ourselves for answers, but then we're told there are none. . . . and then we're told the government is the answer.

People being people, and human nature being what it is, I'm pretty sure another generation or two will work up the guts to call all that bull.

After seeing the results of twentieth century "religion" . . . . er. . . . I mean public indoctrination. . . .it is virtually certain that a rising generation will re-invent "God" and/or invoke self-existing absolute truth that we just can't ignore any more. Then there will be a lot of purported "answers", which in turn will have to be judged a hundred years after that.

 

[babe]

If this study is true then why do so many more Americans not believe in evolution, global warming, and science?

Why are so many states making it harder to get an abortion? Why are so many states only teaching abstinence for sex edu?

Why are so many states whitewashing American history?

Why are so many (red) states instituting Sharia Law with a Christian twist?

Smart questions here.

Because, if fewer in number , believers are taking more action. Couldn't say "believers" are getting stupider. They're moving right along on pace with their sparring partners, the agenda-pushers.

 

[babe]

People can't even define "beef".

So what's your deal?

I can't stomach these discussions without humor.

The higher the steaks in a debate, the hotter the sauce, and more tenderizing the handling, please.

 

[NAOS]

Your opinion. Of course... I disagree.

I felt there was a misunderstanding or miscommunication in the "different Gods" point, and my comparisons were to illustrate that difference in understanding between what GF stated and how I see it to be. It was not useless fluff, but useful in the point that I was pursuing.

I was not discussing the existence of God at all. My point was directed at that one comment which was about multiple people that believe in God worshiping different Gods.

Classic attempt at conversation change though. Classic NAOS. I understand your skipping my point entirely. I get you.

If you genuinely feel that the root of Gameface's position on this matter comes down to how believers talk amongst themselves about a God -- specifically, that the diversity in their discourse is a primary problem in his own belief in a God -- then I apologize for my comments. I think it's clear that this isn't the root, and that the comment you responded to was more of an outlying issue. It reads like you jumping at an outlying issue with a well-played (over-played?) sleight of hand which tries to jump over the main issue. (And, the main issue was something I was interested in discussing, so....)

I still find your point to be a truism, however.

 

[NAOS]

No smoke, no mirrors. I just addressed a point in a post of GF's that I felt like bringing up.

He made a point that all of the religious people he talked to worship a different God.
I see it as possible that all of those people can worship the same God, but understand/explain/see/etc the same being in different ways.

I used the concert/accident/school/etc as a real life example of something similar.
It is fact, even in your zero faith world, that in many, many, many cases witnesses to some incident all witnessed the same thing and saw completely different things or explained it in very different terms/ways.

Not a whole lot different than this imo.

But... go ahead and attempt to discredit using your lame "smoke and mirrors" and other cliche lame excuses to not even try to understand the point I made.
Classic NAOS, imo.

My original post was specifically directed at that one comment of GF. Not directed at the whole of this thread, or anything any other poster stated.

And let the record show that you're the one who made this personal. There is not another comment between us that goes this far off the thread and into this level of presumptuousness.

Also, atheists still have access to the process of 'believing'. You don't have to go through any 'god' in order to have that. For someone who likes to debate with atheists, I'd think you'd either know this already or at least respect them enough not to throw out this kind of castigation. Calling my experience/world or their experiences/worlds "zero faith" is wildly off-the-mark.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

One who follows Christ and His teachings. And no, it isn't. Most people I've met that call themselves Christians go to church once or twice a year and believe in God and that's as far as it goes. That isn't Christianity, that's their own religion.

That's why it's generally good that people like you don't get to be the ones that make the rules for others regarding their own religious beliefs or to define what makes someone a 'true believer.'

A nice example here of the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

And let the record show that you're the one who made this personal. There is not another comment between us that goes this far off the thread and into this level of presumptuousness.

Also, atheists still have access to the process of 'believing'. You don't have to go through any 'god' in order to have that. For someone who likes to debate with atheists, I'd think you'd either know this already or at least respect them enough not to throw out this kind of castigation. Calling my experience/world or their experiences/worlds "zero faith" is wildly off-the-mark.

I apologize if that offended you.

I should have stated it as "zero faith in God".

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

We will re-invent "God" as the times require.

I don't think we will ever get past this.

Sadly, as much as such things as the study reference in the OP give me hope, I agree with you here. I think humans, as humans, are hard-wired, in general, to believe is something 'greater than themselves' and to look for meaning and significance in what are mostly random and non-significant events. A belief it God, is one manifestation of this human hard wiring.

To me the most interesting, and broader question, is whether the gains humanity has made in the last 50 years (counting from the onset more or less of the civil rights movement) in increasing respect for human dignity, civil rights/liberties and freedoms (which are secular, not religious, human values), is a blip in the human timeline, or a sustainable trend. I'm afraid it's a blip, as I'm afraid it's contrary to human nature and thousands and thousands of years of human existence. I believe the decline in religious belief is part and parcel of this other trend (both cause and effect, I suppose), and if that trend continues, then the decline in religiosity will continue as well.

Of course, it's all more complicated than this, as we have to account for increasing education levels, incomes, access to info, etc. But, hell, I'm just shooting from the hip here not trying to craft a manifesto.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

No smoke, no mirrors. I just addressed a point in a post of GF's that I felt like bringing up.

He made a point that all of the religious people he talked to worship a different God.
I see it as possible that all of those people can worship the same God, but understand/explain/see/etc the same being in different ways.

I used the concert/accident/school/etc as a real life example of something similar.
It is fact, even in your zero faith world, that in many, many, many cases witnesses to some incident all witnessed the same thing and saw completely different things or explained it in very different terms/ways.

Not a whole lot different than this imo.

But... go ahead and attempt to discredit using your lame "smoke and mirrors" and other cliche lame excuses to not even try to understand the point I made.
Classic NAOS, imo.

My original post was specifically directed at that one comment of GF. Not directed at the whole of this thread, or anything any other poster stated.

For what it's worth, I though your example of the concert/accident/school was a very good one and well explained.

 

[RandyForRubio]

That's why it's generally good that people like you don't get to be the ones that make the rules for others regarding their own religious beliefs or to define what makes someone a 'true believer.'

A nice example here of the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.

Like I said, I don't make the rules. Jesus did that. And I'm not perfect and I'm often wrong, but I still try to follow Jesus' teachings as much as I can.

 

[Stoked]

Was looking at demographics of the U.S. on Wikipedia and it indicated that 5% of the 20ish% that were listed as no faith were not in fact no faith. They refused to answer or were unsure if there is a God. Only 15% said there is no God.

Also what are the growth/decline rates for other religions (Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, Wiccan...). Also what about the difference between religion and spirituality. I would call my self Christian as I believe in Christ but I am not religious. I'd consider myself spiritual.