CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Is the age of Christianity slowly passing away?
Ludwig Feuerbach once said: "we are living in a period of the decline of Chrisitanity". Obviously this did not apply so much to his own time as he thought but does it now apply to ours?
As the world becomes more and more intelligent, educated, and open to critical thinking, it is hardly surprising that irrational beliefs fade away from society.
That is my opinion, I'm just not the first to think so.
If you think anything that you say hasn't been said before, then you're the one without a brain. Nothing is original any more. Copy and Paste is the norm, not the exception.
You should start giving credit to those whose ideas you've stolen.
That is my opinion, I'm just not the first to think so.
If it is your opinion then you do not put another persons name after it. It doesn't matter whether you are the first to think of it or not, if you came up with it on your own you don't do what I just described, unless you're stupid.
Might as well put a name behind every single word we use... And if we do something or move in a certain way then we should quote the name of who made it first? I honestly don't think names existed back then the way they do now, assuming you could pronounce them right.
If you think anything that you say hasn't been said before, then you're the one without a brain. Nothing is original any more. Copy and Paste is the norm, not the exception.
Basically you're saying that one has to always check if someone has thought of the same and put another person's name after their own creation. You're an idiot. You are saying that everything I do and think is not done by me. If I think, I do not copy paste other people, I literally use my own creative part of my mind to come up with anything. And I'm the one with no brain?
You should start giving credit to those whose ideas you've stolen.
You clearly don't know what stealing something means.
If I think of something then it is of my own origin, I came up with it. It doesn't matter whether someone else has thought the same or not, it is my creation.
If someone writes a book then that person did not really create it? He should put other peoples names as the author? Even though it is obvious that that person created the book, the story, not someone before him/her.
Coming up with something you never knew existed before is stealing it? You literally cannot steal something you did't know even existed! Grow a brain, seriously!
Everytime you reach a point in a debate where you realise you're wring you just insult your opponent and claim their argument is invalid. You really need to grow up.
Then what are you doing here? Debating is about giving one's opinions on some subject, it is about discussing things. Although it is hard to do that if one side has, well, issues with making coherent arguments.
Your supposed to display your opinions as opinions instead of false facts. You then su[pport your opinions with evidence, you don't use your opinions as evidence to support far-fetched claims. You also have to take the other side's argument and dispute instead of asying ridiculous things like "what you said is stupid, so you are stupid" and not bothering to reply to the statement.
Your supposed to display your opinions as opinions instead of false facts
False facts? Are you saying you've never done that? Does life change over time? There you go, evolution is real.
You then su[pport your opinions with evidence, you don't use your opinions as evidence to support far-fetched claims.
Sometimes logic will do, assuming the opposition has enough of it.
You also have to take the other side's argument and dispute instead of asying ridiculous things like "what you said is stupid, so you are stupid" and not bothering to reply to the statement.
If some argument is stupid then it is stupid, I reply by saying it is stupid and then comes the part that is stupid about it. Not my problem you lack what it takes to understand.
The "so you are stupid" only comes if the stupid arguments come one after another, or if an argument is very stupid.
I did not say there "It is a fact all Christians are stupid".
By denying reality, religious people do that because it is required to be religious, you keep yourself stupid, ignorant, in regard to reality. In fact in many cases even delusional (having false and unrealistic beliefs and opinions is being delusional).
I did not say all, I said religion. Religions are based on fantasy and they are meant for taking as reality, it doesn't matter if one is worse than the other, they all have one in common - fantasy. They have no place in modern world nor the future, they insult logic, reason, reality, and make humanity look like a mass of stupid meat.
"I did not say there "It is a fact all Christians are stupid"."
No, you actually said all religious people are stupid. Which is even more ignorant.
"By denying reality, religious people do that because it is required to be religious, you keep yourself stupid, ignorant, in regard to reality. In fact in many cases even delusional (having false and unrealistic beliefs and opinions is being delusional)."
Once again, they do not deny reality.
"I did not say all, I said religion. Religions are based on fantasy and they are meant for taking as reality, it doesn't matter if one is worse than the other, they all have one in common - fantasy. They have no place in modern world nor the future, they insult logic, reason, reality, and make humanity look like a mass of stupid meat."
They are as much a fantasy as evolution, you of course have done little research into either and thus cannot make a comparison.
No, you actually said all religious people are stupid. Which is even more ignorant.
So I forgot to add most. Wouldn't be the first time.
Once again, they do not deny reality.
Then why do some say the great flood happened? Why do they say the souls go into heaven or hell? Why do they say the world is some 6000 years old? Why do they say someone came back to life from death? Why do they say there is no evolution? If someone provides real evidence against those and they deny it then they are denying reality.
They are as much a fantasy as evolution, you of course have done little research into either and thus cannot make a comparison.
I clearly know far more about evolution than you do (the fact that you deny it).
Evolution is a fact, it is real, it is happening as I write and as you wrote your argument.
Fossils, similarities in organisms, organs we have but do not need but are used by other creatures, lab experiments (a bacteria began using a substance it previously couldn't), DNA similarities. Those all support and prove evolution, you by denying it you deny reality.
And you claim my opinions and arguments aren't based on logic and reality. Yet those are the things you contradict with your arguments and opinions. Sorry but, you are delusional.
Here we go again, we can't have a proper debate if you're going to sit there and believe that everything you say is true.
I know you are stupid.
But seriously, when it comes to religion then you are so wrong. You cannot even see it is nonsense. Meaning what I say about it actually is true, because I base what I say on logic.
You responded to my "stupid" statement by enforcing it?
Once again, you enforce more argument instead of disputing it. You clearly hold the delusion that I am stupid and therefore everything I say is stupid.
"But seriously, when it comes to religion then you are so wrong. You cannot even see it is nonsense. Meaning what I say about it actually is true, because I base what I say on logic."
It is based on your logic, I cannot argue with someone who is so closeminded that you won't accept any other form of thinking or opinion other than your own.
"You cannot understand what I say."
I said "You can't apply your own opinion to a debate and force everyone to accept it was fact."
You replied "Of course we have, not my problem you lack logic, especially in regard to something specific."
Your believe that I "lack logic" and you are impressing it as a fact.
Once again, you enforce more argument instead of disputing it. You clearly hold the delusion that I am stupid and therefore everything I say is stupid.
You got it in reverse. First it's what you say that is stupid and from that I conclude that you must be stupid.
It is based on your logic, I cannot argue with someone who is so closeminded that you won't accept any other form of thinking or opinion other than your own.
My logic is based on what really exists or what has the biggest possibility of being real. What I do not know for certain I never claim it to be so either. You on the other hand are religious, and that should say it all.
You are close-minded, not me.
This "Of course we have, not my problem you lack logic, especially in regard to something specific." is not the response to this "You can't apply your own opinion to a debate and force everyone to accept it was fact." Learn to understand what you read.
How exactly am I forcing others to accept my view? Your arguments are stupid in the first place... Of course I will counter them.
Your believe that I "lack logic" and you are impressing it as a fact.
If you didn't lack logic then you wouldn't give so stupid arguments. And if you didn't lack logic then you'd probably also not be religious.
"You got it in reverse. First it's what you say that is stupid and from that I conclude that you must be stupid."
Exactly, whether the statement is "stupid" or not is your opinion and you force it into the debate as a fact.
"My logic is based on what really exists or what has the biggest possibility of being real. What I do not know for certain I never claim it to be so either. You on the other hand are religious, and that should say it all."
No, you "logic" is based on prejudiced and your opinions.
"This "Of course we have, not my problem you lack logic, especially in regard to something specific." is not the response to this "You can't apply your own opinion to a debate and force everyone to accept it was fact." Learn to understand what you read."
Then why on Earth did you write it as a response if it wasn't a response? I've given you lessons on how to debate before and now it's clear you haven't paid attention to them.
"How exactly am I forcing others to accept my view? Your arguments are stupid in the first place... Of course I will counter them."
You not forcing others to accept your view you are forcing others to accept it as a fact, you do this by denying anything that contradicts it and using the claim to support your arguments.
"If you didn't lack logic then you wouldn't give so stupid arguments. And if you didn't lack logic then you'd probably also not be religious."
This is all opinion and prejudice, which is what makes 90% of your arguments, the remaining 10% are insults.
Exactly, whether the statement is "stupid" or not is your opinion and you force it into the debate as a fact.
As a fact? Because what you said was stupid. And you keep making them! So, the conclusion is, you are stupid.
No, you "logic" is based on prejudiced and your opinions.
I've got very little prejudice, if any. And my opinions? Are you saying you aren't using your opinions? My opinions are based on reality and logic, but I've said that already.
Then why on Earth did you write it as a response if it wasn't a response? I've given you lessons on how to debate before and now it's clear you haven't paid attention to them.
Really? Read it again, perhaps you'll notice this time. Paragraphs... and usually people begin answering from the beginning...
Honestly, how could you not see what that response was meant for? It's self-evident if you read it. You cannot understand written messages? Or interpret them as you see fit? That would explain a lot...
You not forcing others to accept your view you are forcing others to accept it as a fact, you do this by denying anything that contradicts it and using the claim to support your arguments.
That describes you rather well.
I don't deny, I respond with logic. Which is more than you can do (from observation).
This is all opinion and prejudice, which is what makes 90% of your arguments, the remaining 10% are insults
Now this, is a good example of prejudice.
Where did you get those numbers? I'm curious to know.
To you religion makes sense and what it says is real, even though there is abundant scientific and logical evidence to prove it nonsense. I base my opinions objectively on reality, yet you claim I am prejudiced? Hypocrite. Honestly, pretending to be someone you're not... Or you know you are, well, mentally a bit of a mess?
"As a fact? Because what you said was stupid. And you keep making them! So, the conclusion is, you are stupid."
Whether I am stupid or not is your opinion. It is not evidence you cannot use it to support your arguments.
"I've got very little prejudice, if any. And my opinions? Are you saying you aren't using your opinions?"
Where are my opinions in this debate?
"My opinions are based on reality and logic, but I've said that already."
Your version of "reality" and "logic" are based on your opinions.
"Really? Read it again, perhaps you'll notice this time. Paragraphs... and usually people begin answering from the beginning...
Honestly, how could you not see what that response was meant for? It's self-evident if you read it. You cannot understand written messages? Or interpret them as you see fit? That would explain a lot..."
You avoid answering my question because I should already know the asnwer? You do too much of this Nummi, answer the question properly this time.
"That describes you rather well."
Another opinion based on some of your wonderful "logic".
"I don't deny, I respond with logic. Which is more than you can do (from observation)."
Logic such as "It is a fact that religion keeps people stupid".
"Now this, is a good example of prejudice.
Where did you get those numbers? I'm curious to know."
I got them from where you get yours, my "logic" and view on "reality".
Whether I am stupid or not is your opinion. It is not evidence you cannot use it to support your arguments.
My argument that you are stupid is supported by your stupid arguments... It should be easy to understand. My opinion that you are stupid comes from observation, of your arguments, from reading your arguments.
Where are my opinions in this debate?
All of it? Are you saying you don't use your own brain?
Your version of "reality" and "logic" are based on your opinions.
You got it in reverse. My opinions are based on logic and reality, but I've said it a couple of times already. I first need something to base my opinions on... First comes the opinion and then comes reality, and logic? What you said is like saying that everything that exists is because I have thought of it. I wish it was true...
You avoid answering my question because I should already know the asnwer? You do too much of this Nummi, answer the question properly this time.
I haven't avoided your questions... Stupid questions and arguments are, well, stupid. You don't answer what is stupid you say what is wrong about it.
What question?
Another opinion based on some of your wonderful "logic".
It is an opinion. That comes from observation.
Logic such as "It is a fact that religion keeps people stupid"
You clearly don't know what religion is. It's fantasy backed up by repeating the same crap over and over.
I got them from where you get yours, my "logic" and view on "reality".
The problem with your logic and reality is that they come, at least partly, from an ancient and stupid book of fairy tales. Since those tales are fantasy then how can you take them as real? You should have the logic to see what they really are - not real. As you keep claiming you have logic... but you clearly do not have enough of it.
"My argument that you are stupid is supported by your stupid arguments... It should be easy to understand. My opinion that you are stupid comes from observation, of your arguments, from reading your arguments."
You think I'm "stupid" because my arguments are "stupid" you then support this "fact" that my arguments are "stupid" because you observed it. That is what constructing an opinion is, you observe something and give a biased view on it. Your subjectiveness comes from the fact that I'm religious and therefore my argument is "stupid", thus I am "stupid", thus my religion is "stupid" and because I believe in a "stupid" religion my argument is (according to you) stupid.
Ergo, we are caught in an infinite loop of you repeating your opinions and the debate going nowhere until I get bored of you and stop bothering.
"All of it? Are you saying you don't use your own brain?"
It's good to see that you can't provide an example and avoid finding an answer, like you normally do when asked a questtion.
"You got it in reverse. My opinions are based on logic and reality, but I've said it a couple of times already. I first need something to base my opinions on... First comes the opinion and then comes reality, and logic? What you said is like saying that everything that exists is because I have thought of it. I wish it was true..."*
Since, we are clearly going nowehere with this I will stop debating with you now.
That is what constructing an opinion is, you observe something and give a biased view on it.
My views aren't biased.
Your subjectiveness comes from the fact that I'm religious and therefore my argument is "stupid", thus I am "stupid", thus my religion is "stupid" and because I believe in a "stupid" religion my argument is (according to you) stupid.
My objectiveness, not subjectiveness, comes from the fact that you have given stupid arguments. Religion is stupid whether you give stupid arguments or not. And the fact that religion is stupid and you follow it doesn't exactly make you smart... then add your stupid arguments to it, especially if they are based on religion...
Ergo, we are caught in an infinite loop of you repeating your opinions and the debate going nowhere until I get bored of you and stop bothering.
I'm not going in loops, you are. I'm simply repeating what you cannot understand, something that should be easy to understand.
It's good to see that you can't provide an example and avoid finding an answer, like you normally do when asked a questtion.
You keep saying there is this question I never answered... where is it?
Since, we are clearly going nowehere with this I will stop debating with you now.
nummi, Your responses are very amusing. ("My views aren't biased.") Not a single person can claim the impossible and it be taken seriously. Everybody's views are biased. The only difference is that most of us know this.
I know the meaning of bias and what causes it. Things like believing that science can do no wrong, this is bias. What your parents taught you, this is a form of bias. What you watch on TV, a form of bias. Being subjected to anything and everything causes biases. To believe that you are free from any biases shows how little you know about life, people and the world. Go back to your glass house and throw stone at others.
Things like believing that science can do no wrong, this is bias.
Is this directed toward me? If so then where exactly have I indicated that?
What your parents taught you, this is a form of bias.
My parents didn't teach anything else but the normal things like be nice, don't steal, don't stay out too late, don't stay up too late, do your homework on time. You know, the usual, the normal and what is expected of every parent. Not that if you do something wrong God will punish you by putting you into hell where you will burn for eternity, or that God is real because I just said so, etc. (probably coupled with threats of some form, to stop the endless and necessary questions about the nonsense being fed).
What you watch on TV, a form of bias.
I don't watch TV. Even if I had one I would watch almost only discovery channel, discovery science, other similar ones.
Are you saying fictional movies and series are bias? That's... not smart. Or are you suggesting there is a massive conspiracy to keep everything biased? Wait... eh, didn't see that coming. There is a massive conspiracy, it's called religion.
Being subjected to anything and everything causes biases.
That's the point. I'm not subjected to anything, while you are very clearly.
To believe that you are free from any biases shows how little you know about life, people and the world.
You base your claims on an ancient book that doesn't belong here with it's extremely stupid and barbaric stories and rules and whatnot, and yet I know nothing of life, the people, and the world? Are you high? No, you're stupid and ignorant, aside other obvious and more negative characteristics.
Go back to your glass house and throw stone at others.
This was a weak one... so weak it doesn't even need a real response.
This is funny stuff. Why are you so concerned over someone else's beliefs? If you truly think they are stupid and he is stupid, why bother to keep asserting the same insults and arguments? What difference is it going to make?
Let me give you a suggestion here: When claiming religion to be stupid, at least reinforce it with your own intelligence, because you're not using logic right now. All of your arguments have been fueled by a hatred towards those that are religious, this is emotional.
The fact is, atheists do hold the higher intellectual ground. I respect that and its effective when they use this trait to their advantage. What you're doing here is not effective at all. I'm objectively looking at this, and I'm sure even many atheists agree that the foundation of an argument can't always be based on perceived stupidity of your opponent.
But what do I know? I'm just one of those stupid, religious people.
This is funny stuff. Why are you so concerned over someone else's beliefs? If you truly think they are stupid and he is stupid, why bother to keep asserting the same insults and arguments? What difference is it going to make?
You could have as well said the same to the other guy.
When claiming religion to be stupid, at least reinforce it with your own intelligence, because you're not using logic right now.
???
I used my own intelligence and I used logic...
All of your arguments have been fueled by a hatred towards those that are religious, this is emotional.
In that case you might want to reread those arguments. As you seem to be interpreting them as you want to, not as they are.
What you're doing here is not effective at all.
It cannot be effective, as the one I was arguing with is, well, kind of delusional. It's not the first time I've been in this kind of mess with him.
But what do I know? I'm just one of those stupid, religious people.
With this you kinda did affirm you are stupid. And there's more than one way to look at it.
God complex? Should that not mean I would never consider myself as incorrect? There's a little problem with that...
You seem to have a god complex when it comes to your precious religion, as you deny what denies and defies it. You unquestioningly claim your opinions based on religion to be true and correct. Am I right?
I never claimed to be perfect. As a matter of fact I shout at the top of my lungs, I'm imperfect. You should look up Christianity sometime and the very definition of it will tell you I'm not perfect. It is why I am a Christian.
I make no claims that my religion is any better than yours. Too bad you can't say the same.
Religion is man's interpretation of what we think God wants us to be, not the other way around. Of course I question what I claim, but I also know what feels right and what is the right thing to do. If these things correspond to a religion then that's where I find myself.
That's a very weak "excuse" to be Christian. Simply because you're not perfect? You already don't sound exactly smart.
Perfect is impossible to achieve, unless you consider the flawed state as perfect.
By the way, I never said anything about perfectionism in my previous argument.
I make no claims that my religion is any better than yours. Too bad you can't say the same.
I'm not religious, also the reason I can't say the same.
Doesn't matter which religion, they're all bad. But still, some aren't as bad as others.
Religion is man's interpretation of what we think God wants us to be, not the other way around.
In that case there should be proof that a God exists in the first place. Yet there is none. Meaning all about religion is man-made, including God.
Of course I question what I claim, but I also know what feels right and what is the right thing to do. If these things correspond to a religion then that's where I find myself.
This is so stupid, really is.
If you really questioned your religion then you would not be religious, you'd see it as the nonsense it is.
If you think religion feels right then, sorry, but you are rather messed up in the head (your parents' doing, I presume).
You feel what is the right thing to do? What if one day you felt it was right to start mutilating everyone you saw, then a pregnant woman was just passing by... Disgusting picture, isn't it? See, I don't act only on what feels right, I also act on what is right or not act on what is wrong. The picture you form of yourself is not nice at all, so far.
So, if you wore Santa's costume, had reindeers and a sledge and felt that it was right then you'd be a Santa? Or it applies only to religions? Okay then, a new religion - Santanism (a rival to Satanism).
You were raised as a Christian, am I right? That's why you are a Christian, that is why you think as you do, no other reason.
I was raised without any religion, literally. First time I really heard about them and found out more of what they are was when I was between 12 and 14, and what I found out was all so fucking stupid, downright idiotic. A person who grows up with zero religious influence will in most cases (approximately 99%, I assume) never become religious. I have 3 brothers, none of them are religious and they all were raised with no religion.
People become religious if they are raised as such, luckily some are turning away from those idiotic ways and teachings. Good for them. Bad for you, as you still adhere to it.
I could say the same about any religious missionary's. I don't get why you find that surprising though, that rationally thinking people try and help other people think rationally, isn't that what school's supposed to be about?
Just to confirm, I don't think all atheists are rational thinkers, or that theists aren't, it's just for emphasis.
"I could say the same about any religious missionary's. I don't get why you find that surprising though, that rationally thinking people try and help other people think rationally, isn't that what school's supposed to be about?"
Why do you follow the assumption that all atheists are "rational thinkers".
"I don't get why you find that surprising though, that rationally thinking people try and help other people think rationally,"
This is what I was talking about.
I could say the statement "All atheists are stupid. (Actually, I don't think all atheists are stupid, so you're not allowed to bring my statement into question)"
Well you were saying that atheists are so intelligent and all, so I was playing on your annoyance and continuing the idea that all atheists must be rational thinkers. It's not that I'm not asking you to question me, it's just I'm making sure that everyone got I wasn't being serious. The important point was that the focus was humour, rather than offense, as well as putting one group up rather than a different group down.
Sorry if I've taken your points too seriously, but if you haven't noticed Nummi's joined the debate and his arguments consist of insults against religious people. I just assumed you had taken the same stance.
Insults? By saying as it is, by reflecting reality? The words I tend to use once it is clear they do apply are stupid, idiot, delusional. Mostly it's those. You haven't exactly given many arguments contradicting those characteristics.
Against religious people? Seems you haven't noticed what moronic arguments many of them have given around this site. Rather clear to me why, because you're one of them.
Didn't this mess between us not begin with a Britain debate? You made it rather clear to me there what you are like, in certain areas.
"Insults? By saying as it is, by reflecting reality? The words I tend to use once it is clear they do apply are stupid, idiot, delusional. Mostly it's those. You haven't exactly given many arguments contradicting those characteristics."
Once again, this is your own opinion. I would say it's because of your warped sense of reality but then you would continue to deny everything and then have the aduacity to claim that it is me who doesn't understand reality.
"Against religious people? Seems you haven't noticed what moronic arguments many of them have given around this site. Rather clear to me why, because you're one of them."
I have supported my arguments here with evidence and sources, it is less moronic that your arguments which are all paraphrases of - I think your argument is stupid, therefore it is stupid, therefore you are stupid, therefore you cannot disprove anything I say.
"Didn't this mess between us not begin with a Britain debate? You made it rather clear to me there what you are like, in certain areas."
You dragged religion into the debate and it was there I learnt of your dark prejudices.
I would say it's because of your warped sense of reality but then you would continue to deny everything and then have the aduacity to claim that it is me who doesn't understand reality.
My sense of reality is warped? Yet you take fiction as real. Makes perfect sense.
I have supported my arguments here with evidence and sources, it is less moronic that your arguments which are all paraphrases of
Talking of religion then no, you haven't. The only real thing you can use to "support" religion is the pointless book and the fact that billions follow it. All it shows how many warped minds there are, you included.
And yours is less moronic when I base my arguments on logic and actual things that have evidence? Religion has no evidence other than it exists, what religion claims is nonsense.
I think your argument is stupid, therefore it is stupid, therefore you are stupid, therefore you cannot disprove anything I say.
If something is stupid then it is stupid. You've given plenty of examples of this. If you keep providing them then it is safe to assume you must be stupid.
You dragged religion into the debate and it was there I learnt of your dark prejudices.
Dark prejudices? That's funny. I've said many times already, but I can keep repeating it, I base my opinions on... and I bet you know the rest (actually, I doubt you do since, well, you've claimed something else).
If I remember correctly then I didn't drag it into it, I simply used an example of atheism and you then showed your prejudice. Then I checked if you were religious, and you were, and that explained why you said whatever it was you did.
Only a small fraction of athiests actually outright attack and insult believers. Mostly its just theists taking offence when arguments against their gods arise. And id say that way more theists go around condemning and spreading threats of hell and hate for gays and non believers than athiest insulting them.
"Only a small fraction of athiests actually outright attack and insult believers. Mostly its just theists taking offence when arguments against their gods arise. "
Not on this site it isn't, I think you'll find that most of the atheists who actually research evolution and know what atheism is about (in contrast to those who become atheist because they don't want to go to church), act as if they know more than Christians do.
If you still need more evidence please take a look at Nummi's arguments.
If they understand and accept the science or evolution and have done research both scientifically and historically to draw the conclusion that god does not exist then they (we) DO know more than someone who blindly follows something they cannot see that has no evidence supporting it while failing to research their own religion and just learn by word of mouth and a storybook, and not accepting evolution because their religion says we were all poofed here because the first man ate a magical fruit in a magical garden because a talking snake told him to then he and his magical rib girl populated earth. What I'm trying to say is most athiests DO know more than christians when it comes to debating gods existance. Plain and simple. And actually many athiests even know their religion better than them (I believe I do).
First of all, your grammer is insulting. Next you assume I "blindly follow" my religion without doing any scientific research at all. Just because I'm Christian doesn't mean i know nothing about science, just because I believe something you don't doesn't reduce me to a culturally inept, close-minded idiot.
First of all, get off your high horse grammar nazi. Second of all yeah, most christians do follow their religion blindly. Im pleased to see you dont yet i dont understand how after researching the religion and science (to what extent i do not know) you still believe that BS. This means that you either A) made excuses for things B) were too stupid to understand them or C) ignored them completely. I recommend you research more in depth about why your religion is false and try to understand arguments against it. It honestly baffles me how someone who did research could still be a puppet to that.
So, hold on, you've picked up some grammer only to ruin your argument with a load of insults and opinions. All you've done is reinforce my original statement.
A: Even the Christians we have now are far less fundamentalist than Christianity was in its prime.
B: Many Christians today are just as fundamentalist as past Christians.
You see no contradiction here? I know you to be intelligent, don't fail me now. Read the two statements again, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this time.
Many Christians can be just as fundamentalist as ye olde Christians even if the aggregate fundamentalism has gone down. These options aren't mutually exclusive. The existence of the Westboro Baptist Church doesn't erase the fact that Europe is no longer a series of theocracies, for example.
You said "the Christians we have now are far less fundamentalist than Christianity was in its prime."
When you the mention "the Christians we have today", you are referring to all Christians. You didn't say the majority of or overall fundamentalism has declined.
'The Christians' doesn't include the majority of Christians? The fundies we have now are far and few between when compared to the amount of fundies in Christianity's prime. Hell, In Christianity's prime there was no real such thing as fundies because everyone was a fundie. Even the fundies we have now are nothing compared to the average Christians of, say, the sixteenth century. Clearly Christianity has lost a lot of the grip that it used to hold.
What I originally said was that the Christians we have now are far less fundamentalist than when Christianity was in its prime. Meaning on average, contemporary Christians are not as fundamentalist as the Christians of the dark ages.
Science is making it harder and harder to believe in a deity and the more scientists playing god (like stemcell research and the cern lab recreating big bang and shit) the more people become atheists. basically science is getting closer to disproving god and so people realize the unfortunate truth.
If God is supernatural, He can never be disproven.
...Nor proven.
But yes, until God is redefined out of the supernatural context it's in now, science (or anything else) will never be able to prove/disprove God's existence
The dna coding and "fine-tuning" of the universe is not at all proof of god. There is definitely more evidence against god found in science which leads logical people to atheism. Wether its stem cell research or other sciences people DO in fact abandon the church because of science. Im gonna ignore the "he'll never be disproven" point because its irrelevant at the moment. The point is science makes it hard to believe and so christians abandon their faith.
The dna coding and "fine-tuning" of the universe is not at all proof of god.
I never said it was. However, you said science was making it "harder and harder" to believe in God. However, these make it easier for many to consider the existence of a divine designer.
Im gonna ignore the "he'll never be disproven" point because its irrelevant at the moment.
How is it irrelevant? You made the assertion that eventually God will be disproven, I take extreme issue with that. Don't say its irrelevant just because it doesn't fit in with your views, however valid you think they are.
Okay so two scientific discoveries support god, who cares? Do you see scientists flocking to church on sunday? no, and this is because the vast majority of science goes against god. And personally i do believe god can one day be disproven, its irrelevant because as you can see the debate is titled "is the age of christianity slowly passing away?". wether god can be disproven or not, the age of christianity is passing, mainly because of people becoming more educated in science.
Okay so two scientific discoveries support god, who cares?
Well I should think many people.
Do you see scientists flocking to church on sunday?
Well, I don't often large congregations of men in lab coats journeying to worship in church, if this is what you mean. Otherwise, my observations do not provide me with the occupations of strangers.
no, and this is because the vast majority of science goes against god.
I don't think the vast majority of it does. Science and God are not always mutually exclusive like atheists like to claim.
And personally i do believe god can one day be disproven, its irrelevant because as you can see the debate is titled "is the age of christianity slowly passing away?".
You're the one who brought it up, if there is irrelevance blame yourself.
wether god can be disproven or not, the age of christianity is passing, mainly because of people becoming more educated in science.
look, science is largely against god, and you've really only given two instances where it is for god. Don't go online and copy paste "ten different ways science proved god" or some other list cause i frankly don't give a rats ass. My scientist church statement was obviously taken very literally. To understand the real meaning, ask yourself how many world class scientists are theists. again no lists i don't care. Im not blaming anyone for irrelevance i simply stated i did not need to address your point because its not important. Nah is always an intelligent argument eh? ;P lets just agree to disagree okay?
THERE IS NO NEED TO GO TO church TO WORSHIP SOME MAKE BELIEVE god OR jesus THE bible ISN'T WORTH READING AND IT IS A WASTE OF TIME . I WOULD RATHER SIT IN MY JUDGES THRONE AND LOVE MY MACHINE FOR HOURS OF FUN MASTURBATING WITH VENUS .
I believe it is, people are becoming more and more educated and will be able to make their own choices with what they have been taught. Also, there is so many religions in the world now, not just Christianity, Catholic, Hinduism ect. People are constantly being introduced to new religions not just the traditional ones. But Christianity will always be around because how popular the bible is across the world.
In this age of rational thought, science, technology ect. Christianity and other ridiculous fairytales have no place in the world. People are beginning to see just how absurd the religion is. Theres no evidence for any of it and no reason to believe in it. Sure some people find comfort in faith. But honestly religion does way more harm than good. Christianity's time is up. People are throwing it away. The numbers show it. Christianity is losing followers.
Numbers show far higher conversion rates from Christian to athiest than the opposite. Also numbers of people attending church regularly is declining drastically. People aren't following it anymore. It's just a label for people now. They're not really true Christians they just say they are when asked.
Numbers show far higher conversion rates from Christian to athiest than the opposite. Also numbers of people attending church regularly is declining drastically.
Yawn. Still making empty claims. What numbers??
Alright, here's my argument:
Numbers show Christianity is growing like never before. More and more people are turning to God than atheism. People aren't really atheists anymore. It's only a label. People say they're atheist, but they're really not, they secretly believe in God.
See what that sounds like? Its jibber-jabber to the nth degree. Please provide some, any statistic supporting a suspicious, empty claim like this.
See my dispute against Axmeister for the sources. The only reason christianity is "growing" is due to higher birth rates than athiests. That's it. And all evidence is suggesting that more and more people are not gonna stay on that path
First of all, one of your "sources" is thankgodforevolution.com....this isn't necessarily a problem, but you could have chosen a way less biased site.
Secondly, BOTH of your sites are articles on Christianity decline in the U.S. Now, I think I'm right in saying that this debate is about the entire world's population. Nice try though. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I frankly only care about the US. the middle east will always be blind followers by threat of death and actually parts of europe have more athiests than us. If I'm not mistaken England has a higher athiest birth rate than us. Makes me kinda wanna live in England who's smart enough to get rid of this BS. but I love America and hope that someday we'll all grow up.
How is that ignorant? Arrogant sure, maybe, but not really. Sure the debate is about Christianity as a whole but I only care about it in my country where it affects me. Soooorry.
And how is it not accurate? The middle eastern countries being mostly muslim will always be god believers because they have a law in the religion that says kill unbelievers. They basically tell you you can't leave the religion. And they actually carry out those threats.
It's not coincidence that most all of the top athiest contributors and debators are European.
No they aren't born with that. I was refering to athiest couples birth rates. People raising their kids as athiests is higher there. The only growth rate Christianity still shows is birth rates. That's it. And who says those kids will stay that way? Evidence of declining church attendance and a vastly higher christian to athiest conversion rate suggest otherwise.
And I'm not going to leave America I'm just saying I wish that we were ahead of the game like them. And someday soon we will be.
How is that ignorant? Arrogant sure, maybe, but not really. Sure the debate is about Christianity as a whole but I only care about it in my country where it affects me. Soooorry.
Ignorant in that events that occur outside the U.S. can affect you too. It is also arrogant, yes. Again, you're just changing the debate present to what you personally care about-don't apologize, just avoid debating if you're going to attempt to shrink the debate to a level you think is reasonable. Or start a new debate about Christianity in the U.S.
And how is it not accurate? The middle eastern countries being mostly muslim will always be god believers because they have a law in the religion that says kill unbelievers. They basically tell you you can't leave the religion. And they actually carry out those threats.
So now you've abandoned the sole subject of this debate in an attempt to mask your completely irrelevant and wrong statement. That's why its not accurate. I couldn't care less about your rants on Islam, execute them in a place in which its a bit more relevant.
It's not coincidence that most all of the top athiest contributors and debators are European.
I know its not a coincidence. Atheists like to argue.
No they aren't born with that. I was refering to athiest couples birth rates. People raising their kids as athiests is higher there. The only growth rate Christianity still shows is birth rates. That's it.
But is that not still an important rate? Anyways no, there is a huge rate of Christian growth in Africa.
Evidence of declining church attendance and a vastly higher christian to athiest conversion rate suggest otherwise.
I really would like to take your word for it. But you're a smart guy, you can back up your claims.
Well, your article only covers the U.S. I assumed we were talking about the entire world, but I guess if you're going to ignore 6 billion people, that's alright. Because clearly the U.S. is a microcosm of the entire world...
In western civilization it is: 68% of people aged 18-25 consider themselves atheist/agnostic. In the age of skepticism Christianity is fading quite fast and I presume that it will be all but eradicated in 1st world countries by the time I die.
However, in 3rd world countries, Christianity is growing quite rapidly. All throughout Africa missionaries are sent to try and spread the Gospel of Christ and have been succeeding overwhelmingly.
So, it depends on how you define the "age of Christianity" on whether you agree or disagree with it passing away.
I got it from my dad who got it from Bill O'Reilly... but regardless of whether I am right or wrong on that one citation, there are numerous polls citing that atheism is taking over western civilization.
It is fading in western civilization; my statement is contextual.
Then why do atheists fight so hard to get people to not believe in their god(s)?
How am I contradicting myself? One statement is about 1st world countries and western civilization while the other is about 3rd world countries... yet again, it is contextual.
Fading in western civilization... highly contextual.
I still don't buy that atheism is taking over Western civilization. Even so, it would be offset by the rise of Christianity in other parts of the world like you've mentioned.
Yes, it is. I'm not saying this is a good thing, either, but that's the way it's going, and any sane person can see this. Take the example of New Zealand. Originally, it was a very religious country (especially with Christianity) but it is now one of the least religious Western countries in the world. The Bible was (and still is, I believe) the most sold book in the world, but this number is shrinking too. As the world moves onto the theories of evolution, Christianity is being abandoned.
I don't know if I would consider New Zealand a western country, but either way its population is not significant enough to show that Christianity is fading in general.
I have to be honest..... I mean like more and more ppl are following the devil then god. I know I'm a Christian but I remember when I was a kid and I went to church it was always full and everyone would go every Sunday but now en days barley ppl go once a month. Even my. Own friends don't go to church and most of me don't believe in god because they haven't seen proof of him but I strongly disagree with them but now I have to agree for this.
TO BE HONEST THERE IS NO BETTER AND MORE POWERFUL GOD THAN SATAN TO FOLLOW AND IT IS SO MUCH FUN TO FOLLOW AND LOVE SUCH AN AWESOMW GOD , THE god IN YOUR church IS ALL WASHED UP AND DOES NOTHING FOR ANYONE ANYMORE SO COME TO THE DARK SIDE AND LOVE AND WOESHIP A REAL GOD OF POWER .
Easily, humans as a whole are starting to care less and less about religion. There are many polls out there showing that religion is slowly dying. Christianity is starting to look more and more false as science improves, people are just to stubborn to admit it.
That is exactly why it wont die out people are stubborn and no matter what proof is thrown at them they will still believe in Christianity, wether it will exist in the manner it does now who knows I think less people are going to Church but that does not meen less people believe although many will disagree with me I dont think you need to go to Church to be a Christian. A lot of people are treating Christianity as their own personal relationship with God rather than going to Church and telling everyone what a great Christian they are they it's all becoming a more personal private thing
Yes, I do not know why they do their own personal thing and still call themselves Christian. Religion is basically hope, I have hope i know where it is. Others that can't find their hope, turn to religion. I just hate seeing people fight over different religions, when all it is, is hope.
Yes, I do not know why they do their own personal thing and still call themselves Christian.
The whole of Christianity is based on a personal relationship with God. That's why.
Religion is basically hope
To you maybe. Most people who believe in God do so because they earnestly believe its the truth, not wishful thinking.
I have hope i know where it is.
That's good, hope is a positive thing.
I just hate seeing people fight over different religions, when all it is, is hope.
These people do not accurately represent the faith itself. It seems like you have more of a problem with the people following the religion, not the religion itself.
IT SHOULD PASS AWAY QUICKLY FOR THE bible AND SO CALLED jesus DO NOTHING FOR ME SO THE bible ISN'T WORTH THE PAPER IT IS WROTE ON , SO I DESTROYED IT UNDER MY BIG BEAUTIFUL JUDGES CHAIR WHILE MASTURBATING OUT HUGE VICIOUS EVIL POWER LOVING LOADS OF JUDICIAL JUICES THAT MY GOD SATAN WANTED ME TO HAVE FUN MACHINE MILKING OUT MAKING ME LOVE FOR THIS TO GROW SO STRONG NOTHING CAN GET IN MY WAY HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA .
LET THOSE christians DIE WITH THEIR STUPID BELEIF SO GIVE VENUS JUDGE 666 YOUR VOTE OF APPROVAL THAT THE GOD OF MONEY AND POWER IS GOING TO DOMINATE AS IT SOULD FOR THAT IS THE LOVE THAT GROWS SO STRONG ITS BONDS CAN'T BE BROKEN .
Well, that's what they keep telling us. The end times are upon us, right?
I lost track of how many raptures I've lived through, only to go out the next morning and see Christians milling around in a fugue state, depressed that it isn't the end of the world.
I LOVE THE WAY OF THE DEVIL SO FUCK YOU ABOUT NOYCHING IT DOWN FOR SO CALLED chrisianity SHOULD GIVE WAY TO THE ONE IN CHARGE OF HATE AND MASS DESTRUCTION , SATAN .
Gradually, yes. Although most theists or christians wouldn't see it that way because they've simply never dared to believe atheism as a liable choice. God(s) aren't needed to explain the existence of life or the universe anymore.
I know that more and more people are openly 'coming out' as Atheists. The more scientific research we have done, the more people will drop Christianity and join the world in Truth, not Faith --- Fact, not Fiction.
I ONLY LOVE AND CARE ABOUT ALL MY WORLDLY BELONGINGS AS MANY OTHERS DO INCLUDING MONEY AND POWER SO JUST LET SO CALLED christianity DIE FOREVER , IT MEANS NOTHING AND IS JUST A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME GOING AND WORSHIPPING A god THAT ISN'T THERE .
FUCK THOSE SO CALLED christians AND THEIR STRONG BELIEF IN SOME FAKE PHONEY ASS god AND THE STUPID bible . I DESTROYED THE bible BENEATH MY BIG BEAUTIFUL JUDGES CHAIR ROLLED BIG HOLES IN THE PAGES , GUESS I MADE IT A HOLY BOOK . I SIT HERE MAKING LOVE TO MY MACHINE THAT TURNS ME ON SO MUCH LOVING IT FOR HOURS AND HOURS WAY MORE THAN ANY christian CAN LOVE god . I LOVE MY MACHINE MORE AND MORE ALL THE WAY TO THE END god damn it , HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA .
YOU SO CALLED christians SHOULD GO AWAY WITH YOUR WASHED UP GOOD FOR NOTHING god THAT DOES NOTHING FOR ANYBODY . I LOVE ALL MY WORLDLY BELONGINGS THAT I HAVE AQUIRED FOR MY PLEASURE ONLY AND WOW DO I LOVE AND ENJOY THEM AS MY GOD .
Dude.. Just because you don't believe in it doesn't make you a better person, you keep talking as if your superior. Your not. I'm on your side of the argument but take it down a notch bro. Your being straight disrespectful and making this wole side of the argument look foolish. Btw that goes for all the posts I've seen by you.
IT NEEDS TO PASS AWAY , I PUT THIS OLD bible UNDER MY JUDGES CHAIR AND ROLLED ALL OVER IT DESTROYING THAT WORTHLESS BOOK LAUGHING AND MASTURBATING ALL OVER WHILE DOING IT LOVING EVIL LET SO CALLED christianity DIE FOREVER AND HAVE FUN .
On the contrary, Christianity is spreading much farther and faster than it has ever done so before; almost one of every four people in the world are a Christian of some denomination.
To say that Christianity is fading away is opposite of the truth. The age when Christianity begins to pass away isn't due for a while.
IT SHJOULD BE PISSED ON AND PUT OUT FOR GOOD . THERE IS NOTHING YOUR SO CALLED god HAS TO OFFER AND MY LOVE AND WORSHIP TIME WITH MY MACHINE TURNS ME ON LIKE NOTHING HAS EVER LOVING MY MACHINE FOR HOURS AND HOURS MILKING OUT SATAN LOVING LOADS OF POWER LOVING JUDICIAL CUM , HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
If you aren't going to debate here, can you spend your time elsewhere? I would like to debate with you, but that would require you to explain yourself, and what your argument is for YOUR side of the debate that YOU'RE supporting. There's a reason why this is called CreateDebate.
No, not this age. Currently less than 5-6% of the world are atheists, while I believe a study (though, I'm not sure if it's recent) says about 2M of the world are Christians, which is 2/7's of the Earth's current population. However, I do believe that as our knowledge of the universe and science increases, Christianity will lessen. Perhaps even all theist religions, for that matter.
We can't really say for sure, though, as it is so immensely difficult to judge future events.
I've always thought a few thousand years down the line (if we make it that long) religions like Christianity and Hinduism and Islam will be regarded much the same way we regard the religions of the ancient Greeks or Egyptians; as silly, fairy-tale myths used by a primitive culture to explain a world they didn't understand.
I think several thousand years down the line, again, if we make it, theistic, dogmatic, clergy-ruled religion as we know it will have ceased to exist. I just don't think humanity can stay this stupid forever.
"I've always thought a few thousand years down the line (if we make it that long) religions like Christianity and Hinduism and Islam will be regarded much the same way we regard the religions of the ancient Greeks or Egyptians; as silly, fairy-tale myths used by a primitive culture to explain a world they didn't understand. "
Hinduism, I believe was around the same time as the Greek and Egyptian civilizations anyway. Christianity arrived around the same time as the Roman Empire, but you didn't see Christianity die away when Rome did. Time is not the killing factor of religion.
"as silly, fairy-tale myths used by a primitive culture to explain a world they didn't understand."
Primitive culture? Name anything about culture in the 1900's which is more "primitive" than that of today.
"I just don't think humanity can stay this stupid forever."
You're right, the sooner they ditch the theory of evolution the quicker science can progress.
You're right, the sooner they ditch the theory of evolution the quicker science can progress.
That's just idiotic. Scratch that, it's delusional. Evolution is supported and proved by science. You remove evolution, you also have to remove science.
Science is constantly advancing and expanding, it's not religion that may not change, ever (dictated by its own rules). There are things we don't know right now but are real. If some day those were to be removed then all science should go with it. Why remove some parts that make sense and are proved real but not everything else?
You keep comparing science and religion as if they're on the same level. Religion is not a science and science is not a religion. They are mutually exclusive but not opposites.
You keep comparing science and religion as if they're on the same level. Religion is not a science and science is not a religion.
Your mind must be really messed up if that's how you understand what I said.
They are mutually exclusive but not opposites.
Have I ever said they are opposites? One is based on reality and logic, the other is based on nonsense, irrationality, and pure fantasy. One changes, the other may not.
"Your mind must be really messed up if that's how you understand what I said."
I'm fed up of having to repeat your arguments because you don't understand what you say.
"Science is constantly advancing and expanding, it's not religion that may not change, ever (dictated by its own rules)."
That is a comparison you are comparing science and religion. I'm saying that they are not things you can compare because they are mutually exclusive.
"Have I ever said they are opposites? One is based on reality and logic, the other is based on nonsense, irrationality, and pure fantasy. One changes, the other may not.
Actually, they do sound like opposites..."
Only because you perceieve them as such. You really need to get a grip on reality.
I'm fed up of having to repeat your arguments because you don't understand what you say.
I don't understand what I say? Hello! I'm not the delusional one here!
That is a comparison you are comparing science and religion. I'm saying that they are not things you can compare because they are mutually exclusive.
You said "as if on the same level". Religion is far below science.
So what if they are mutually exclusive, you can still look at what they are like, you can still compare them.
Only because you perceieve them as such.
I perceive them as they are. But you clearly don't.
Illogical is the opposite of logical, right? Reality is the opposite of fantasy, right? One has the freedom to change if necessary, the other may not change, you do get this? There you go, in essence they are opposites.
You really need to get a grip on reality.
Me, a grip on reality while you seem to lack it on a rather high level? Yeah, right... You really need to get a grasp on reality.
"I don't understand what I say? Hello! I'm not the delusional one here!"
Once again, you dodge the point of the argument with one of your petty insults.
"You said "as if on the same level". Religion is far below science."
Only in your mind.
"So what if they are mutually exclusive, you can still look at what they are like, you can still compare them."
If something is mutually exclusive that means they have nothing to do with one another, thus you cannot compare them. If you do compare them it's to your own biased view of the world at which point you will always favour one or the other.
"I perceive them as they are. But you clearly don't."
Once again, you form an opinion and shove it into the debate as fact.
"Illogical is the opposite of logical, right? Reality is the opposite of fantasy, right? One has the freedom to change if necessary, the other may not change, you do get this? There you go, in essence they are opposites."
Up is the opposite of down and left is the opposite of right. Yes they are all opposites.
"Me, a grip on reality while you seem to lack it on a rather high level? Yeah, right... You really need to get a grasp on reality."
"It is a fact that all Christians are stupid" - Nummi.
I agree that evolution is key to our understanding of the origins of life on earth however it is NOT a proven fact, science merely supports it and as it stands it is still only a theory. Having said that, I really do think Darwin was on to something cause let's face it, its more realistic than believing in a man in the sky.
The fact that living organisms change across generations is proof of evolution (and there have been made lab experiments; a bacteria began using a substance it previously could not). So, yes, it is a proven fact.
Nothing in science is a proven fact. Karl Popper's theory of Scientific Falsifiability clearly shows that any scientific hypothesis, law, or theory, must be able to be proven false: if not, it is not science.
So whatever mountain of proof we have for evolution (or any scientific law, even one as simple as gravity for example) it cannot ever be claimed to be truly proven, only claimed that is is extremely likely (the baseline for scientifically accepting something as 'fact' is that is must reach a sigma 5 probability of being incorrect: 1 in 5 million or more).
Yes, Popper's Falsification Principle declared that verification was an impossible goal (which Hume had already identified). Popper said that it is impossible to prove a hypothesis, so the only means of testing it out is to apply the criterion of falsification. Scientific laws cannot be verified but they can be falsified which shows that they can be tested empirically but even then, nothing can be a proven fact. Thus the theory of evolution is still only a THEORY.
Agreed. But my point was that despite the fact that 'it is not proven', it is irrational to go against those 1-in-5-million statistics and claim 'the sooner they ditch the theory of evolution the quicker science can progress', as Axemeister did, which you - indirectly - defended.
Go to YouTube and type in "An Archaeologist Defends the Bible," and watch the entire lecture. Patten cites peers against the Bible, and then sends them back to kindergarten.
Today there are many versions of so-called "Christianity" that do not even teach the Bible, but teach instead, 'church doctrine.' These will indeed pass away.
But mankind was created to have a spiritual nature, to look outside himself with appreciation and wonder at the power that made him and his surroundings, and to reach out to that power for more knowledge of it.
The Bible is a truly amazing book. In the lecture cited above, a silver piece hundreds of years older than the Dead Sea Scrolls was found in a tomb, and quotes a Bible passage exactly as it reads today.
This is one reason we can believe the Bible--it has been miraculously protected by its inspirer, and comes to us today, in any translation, as God's word for mankind--our 'owner's manual for life.
Those who criticize it are not looking at the whole picture, or verses in context.
The first century Christians knew the Bible writers and were so convinced of their authenticity that they were willing to undergo death along with their families, for its preservation. They were not superstitious, but taught to shun spiritism and superstition. They KNEW what they witnessed to be true.
Today, we who believe the Bible rest upon the writings of these first century witnesses of God and Christ, and God's promise is that one day the true knowledge of Him will cover the entire earth.
Even under great persecution, you cannot take that out of someone's heart. So no, Christianity in its true form will never pass away.
MOST SO CALLED christians GO TO SOME church MAYBE ONCE A WEEK TO worship god HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I SIT HERE IN MY BIG RED DEVIL LOVING JUDGES CHAIR FOR HOURS EVERYDAY LOVING IT MORE THAN ANYTHING EVER AND MY GOD MAKES ME FEEL GOOD SITTING HERE MASTURBATING WITH MY VENUS MILKING MY COCK LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE GETTING SATAN LOVING LOADS OUT .
Missionary convert rate decreases 3% due to failures to convert. Missionaries are loosing areas to convert and religious organizations chosen its time to gain religious variety.
Sure christianity is the largest religion but does that have to do in this scenario? If its so big then why hasn't everyone agreed to it?
I think the Christianity that is declining is the real one. As a whole is not. I think that we are living in the times described by Matthew 24. Where false teachers and prophets will come deceiving many. Jesus warned us about this. Unfortunately that is exactly what we are seeing now a days. "Christians" who don't pray, fast, or even read the Bible. "Pastors" who only care about the offerings and not the sheep's. Not all are like that but that is what modern Christianity is heading for.
no. even tho a lot of people are becoming atheist, Christianity is still the leading religion as of now. people become christain everyday, and people become atheist everyday, but christainanity will live on forever. ;)
The numbers clearly show declining christians and growing athiests. Basically the only growth for christianity is children who are born into it. No educated individual who is not part of it will become it after they reach the age of logic/reason which is about 13-14. Christianity will certainly not live forever. Its dying out. And for good reason. I bet the greek thought Zeus would live on forever too. Times change. Gods die.
Not really. Because if you go to a church, for the most part there are going to be ex gang members, alcoholic, prostitutes, drug dealers, adulters, homosexuals, unbelievers, and so on that needed a change in their lives, and found that change for the good threw Jesus Christ.
"No educated individual who is not part of it will become it after they reach the age of logic/reason which is about 13-14."
Coincidently it's just when they hit puberty, what do you think they will want to do at that age? Follow a religion that frowns upon sex before marraige or ditch that religion for a theory that allows them to do whatever they want without any guilt on their conscience.
"Its dying out. And for good reason. I bet the greek thought Zeus would live on forever too. Times change. Gods die."
That is one of the worst arguments possible for a debate like this. "The deities of civilizations such as Rome and Greece died out so Christianity must follow the same path", Christianity has already lasted a lot longer than both of those civilizations and, as showed in the source above, it is still growing.
On another note were playing two different games hear you see. You're playing the numbers game. Sheer amounts of people labled as christains. What playing is the belief game. Sure theres probably alot of people who call themselves christain who dont read the bible, go to church, or follow any of jesus's teachings. They just say theyre protestant, or baptist because thats what they were raised as. I called myself a protestant for a long time because thats what my family was. But during that time i never really believed in god, hated going to church 1 sunday a year (if that) and never read the bible. Ironically the bible is one of the things that lead me away from christainity. The amount of church going people is declining FACT.
"On another note were playing two different games hear you see. You're playing the numbers game. Sheer amounts of people labled as christains. What playing is the belief game."
I'm playing a numbers game? Your the one who said "The numbers clearly show declining Christians and growing atheists", which they don't.
"Sure theres probably alot of people who call themselves christain who dont read the bible, go to church, or follow any of jesus's teachings. They just say theyre protestant, or baptist because thats what they were raised as. I called myself a protestant for a long time because thats what my family was. But during that time i never really believed in god, hated going to church 1 sunday a year (if that)"
Likewise, a majority of atheists are atheists not because they believe in evolution, or even know it, but because it allows them to do whatever they want without any conscience of sin. You yourself have said that you "hated going to Church" so you wanted an alternative answer for life to believe in, which atheism provided.
"and never read the bible. Ironically the bible is one of the things that lead me away from christainity."
If you never read it how can it turn you away from Christianity?
"The amount of church going people is declining FACT.
Hold on, you moan at me for citing wikipedia but you then use blatantly subjective sources to support your argument? At least get statistics from a nuetral website.
And those "facts" only apply to the U.S.A, you cannot possibly make a statement that the amount of churchgoers around the world are declining.
Wow you are just spewing bullshit now. What I'm saying is that evidence is showing people are not really following the religion anymore and more and more people are becoming athiests. And you automatically assume that just cuz I don't believe in god that I'm an athiest. I'm actually Wiccan. And our most basic rule is "harm none". And no, people don't turn from god cuz then we can do whatever we want you ignorant fool. Do you even hear our arguments? YOU HAVE NO PROOF OF GOD. simple. Not historically, not physically, and sure as hell not physically. And also, people aren't free to kill and steal willy nilly after leaving god. Theyre called morals. We don't kill or steal because those are bad things to do and we know that. We dont do it cuz a skydaddy says so or for fear of hell. Its stupid to think that without a god people would be evil and corrupt beings who murder and attack others. No. That's what's wrong with the religion. It suggests were all worthless sinners pathetic and evil in the eyes of god and without him we'd be horrible and helpless. That's not true. We don't need to be taught right and wrong. We are born with it. Basically I didn't leave god because I hated church and wanted a carefree fun life. It's because I grew up and threw away stupid blind beliefs in things I couldnt see or feel. And before you say "oh well you're still wiccan" I don't believe in the deities I just practice it. It's based on manipulating bioelecricity so there's your evidence for it's truth.
I didn't read the bible during my time as a "protestant" I did read it when researching why the religion is fake so that I could understand biblical references and not be a hypocrite when arguing about the bible. It's evil and absurd and I shouldnt even have to explain why.
www.evilbible.com
Skeptics annotated bible.
And how is it biased? It's a non fiction article and those are real numbers. And the USA is really all I care about. In fact alot of counties have even more nonbelievers than us. And places like middle east will always be followers because they're killed if they're not. And I don't really care about them.
Wow you cited Wikipedia! This only proves my point that whatever research you did wasnt sufficient if wikipedia is your go to source.
The only reason christianity still rises is because they have higher birth rates than athiests or agnostics. I was refering to conversion rate which i apologize for not clairifying. Athiests are growing due to higher conversion rates. People are converting WAY more to athiesm than christianity which is the only rate that matters because it involves thought.
It has nothing to do with bodily desires. At that age a childs mind starts to seek answers. They begin to ask questions. Questions that christianity just cant answer. So unless that questioning nature is systematically repressed by christian teachings of hellfire then they will most likely leave the religion.
The deities of Greece and Rome died because the countries died. I dont see the USA being destroyed anytime soon, nor Israel, or Mexico or any other mainly judeo/christian country. Thats why its lasted longer. However, without a doubt, christianity will die out. Theres too many loopholes, contradictions, questions, and absurdities related with the religion that as people get smarter, it just doesnt make sense. People are being born into it, it doesnt mean they believe it.
"Wow you cited Wikipedia! This only proves my point that whatever research you did wasnt sufficient if wikipedia is your go to source. "
It is one of the only universally accepted sources on this site, hence the fact I used it. You have yet to disprove the source.
"The only reason christianity still rises is because they have higher birth rates than athiests or agnostics. I was refering to conversion rate which i apologize for not clairifying. Athiests are growing due to higher conversion rates. People are converting WAY more to athiesm than christianity which is the only rate that matters because it involves thought."
Care to provide evidence for it? And the conversion rate for Christianity accounts for around 10% of the growth rate.
"It has nothing to do with bodily desires. At that age a childs mind starts to seek answers. They begin to ask questions. Questions that christianity just cant answer. So unless that questioning nature is systematically repressed by christian teachings of hellfire then they will most likely leave the religion."
So what you're saying here is that a 13-14 year old child is more likely to question a meaning to life instead of wondering when they can have sex?
Also, there are many questions Christianity answers which science cannot, for example what happens after you die.
"The deities of Greece and Rome died because the countries died. I dont see the USA being destroyed anytime soon, nor Israel, or Mexico or any other mainly judeo/christian country."
Actually the Roman empire converted to Christianity. And if what you say is true then the age of Christianity isn't slowly passing away, because many countries who strongly believe in it show no sign of passing away either.
"Thats why its lasted longer. However, without a doubt, christianity will die out. Theres too many loopholes, contradictions, questions, and absurdities related with the religion that as people get smarter, it just doesnt make sense. People are being born into it, it doesnt mean they believe it."
Your only evidence for this is your own assumption. What happens in the United States doesn't necessarily happen over the rest of the world. In Europe growth of atheism is fuelled by people being born into it and as you said "people are being born into it, it doesn't mean they believe it" most of the atheists in Europe know nothing about evolution aside from "humans came from monkeys".
Ok tell me what else Christianity explains? And btw saying we go to a magical place in the sky to be with god or going to an inferno with an evil half goat monster isn't an explanation. It's a made up little story to give people hope and to scare them into staying Christian. There's no evidence for this afterlife in any way. It's not an explanation at all. And science says that our brains shut down and were dead. Plain and simple. We cease to exist at that point forwards. It ain't pretty or fun to think about but hey sometimes that's the truth. Christianity in reality can't explain anything. It can't even prove the simple point that god exists in any way. All Christianity has is a 2000+ year old book that bible scholars agree is mostly fabricated. Sure it may have been written about a handfull of real people. But it's been changed so many times people nowadays are like the kid at the end of a game of telephone believing what he just heard is the original statement. It's stupid. And you also have this ignorant thought that all 13-14 year olds are sex craving pigs and male. 50% of them are female. And that thought of 14 year old males only thinking about sex is no doubt brought on by your Christian beliefs that all men are sex craving chronic masturbators. No I quoted this age as the age of logic and reason. Having nothing to do with sex. Or puberty. Kids begin to ask questions. I know I did. And kids are smarter these days than they were years ago. They've been taught to seek answers and think. So they do. "why is god real?" they ask. "because Jesus died for your sins and the bible says so". "well how do you know?" "um...well. It just is true, stop asking such questions it's heresy". That last part was literally said to me when I asked how do we know god loves us? In Sunday school. My point is kids are smart, asking questions, and not getting answers. You don't have to accept evolution or even understand it to not believe in god. You have this strange concept that it's either god or evolution. Kids don't understand evolution and more and more see that god just doesn't make sense. They may not even know what atheism is but they just dont believe in god. Now I'm not saying all kids don't believe in god but I'm in highschool and nearly every person I ask says they don't believe in god. Only a very small percentage of our school is Christian. Our town churches are hemeraging money and are only half full on Sundays. I know my town isn't the only one seeing this.
And you think the Romans willingly believed in Christianity? Are you kidding me? They converted under the threat of execution! Just like many other places! Christianity didn't spread from peacefully telling people the "good news". It spread by terror and violence. Honestly, if you explain Christianity to a normal person (who let's say doesn't even know of it) there is absolutely know way they're gonna believe it. If they have even a tiny bit of rationality in them they'll see it just doesn't make any sense. The only people becoming Christians are people desperate for hope, or people who were raised strictly through it their whole life. If you did the same thing with Santa clause then people today may still be at ages of 16-80 putting their stockings up and waiting for santas arrival. It's funny. Eventually kids are told by their parents or peers or both that Santa isn't real and they explain that he's a story and that magick isn't real. But they still keep the kid believing that a magical sky daddy created the universe then made a man and a rib girl and the man ate a magic apple because a talking snake told him to but the snake was really an evil monster who reighns over hell and the man and woman were poofed onto earth and populated it together and a man was told by this god to make an impossibly big boat and put 2 of every species on it and then god flooded the world but then those animals and that man somehow repopulated the earth and then sky daddy sent down his son by getting a woman who never had sex pregnant and this guy made blind people see and walked on water but then died to relinquish the evil in our souls from us by dying on a cross then he rose 3 days later and flew into the clouds and now we symbolically cannibalize him to keep this evil away because sky daddy is ALWAYS watching. But a man seeing all kids at once and delivering presents around the world is more ridiculous. OK.
1...People turn away from religion for a lot of reasons. One of them being that they do not want to be made to feel they must live by any rules not of their own making--moral and ethical rules. They do not want to be told that fornication, homosexuality and adultery are immoral; or that cheating in business is unethical.
Why, even when it comes to spirituality, they do not want to be told anything is wrong.
They want to blend everything into a kind of evolutionary spiritual soup without definition or boundaries, just as they claim to have taken creation out of science.
Why is this so? Because of mankind's inherent selfish nature.
A good example of this: find one politician in the world that is trustworthy, moral and ethical. None exist.
2...As more people become atheistic, those become the majority. Who wants to dare go against the majority, to appear foolish and superstitious, and thus less intelligent?
The only people who will risk that are those that have strong evidential reasons for believing in God. It's worth the risk.
I see no reason to believe it is. There was never an "age" of Christianity. I don't think its ever going to go away as long as our world exists. Christianity is not even declining right now. Yes, science is advancing, but I don't think physical evidence ever really played much of a role in Christianity anyway.
Please, Troy, look at the YouTube presentation, "An Archaeologist Defends the Bible," and you will see evidence after physical evidence that the Bible is absolutely trustworthy as a book of both history and spiritual faith.
It seems like the percentage of freethinkers and/or non-believers is rising. Though I think it's due to an age of being more comfortable to "come out" (not to say that there are no problems with people coming out anymore).
I see Christianity having it's prime just like the rest of the religions, and it's fall, just like the rest of the religions. A new religion will probably take it's place.
