jump to last post 1-31 of 31 discussions (368 posts)

Do you think idea called christ would die in another 50 years?

  1. pisean282311 profile image57
    pisean282311posted 4 years ago

    with more and more people questioning divinity of jesus , do you think well marketed and unique in its own kind , christ as idea would die in another 50 years , atleast in educated world?...

    1. Chris Neal profile image83
      Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No. People have been predicting the death of religion in general and Christianity in particular since Nietzsche (sp?) at least, but although it gets stronger or less, it doesn't go away.

      And not just because of "uneducated" people either. Many educated people believe in Jesus.

      1. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        No, "Many" educated people don't believe in Jesus or any other gods.

        There is a mirror image amongst the ignorant and the educated.

        90% of the ignorant believe in gods while 90% of the educated do not.

        1. Dannytaylor02 profile image84
          Dannytaylor02posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          and how many atheists are uneducated? we can start counting with you

          1. twosheds1 profile image62
            twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Nice ad hominem attack. The nations with the highest rates of education and literacy are the least religious. Those with the lowest rates are the most religious. This is according a Pew study. There are intelligent, educated people who believe in gods, but they are the ones who are good at finding intelligent-sounding excuses for irrational beliefs.

            1. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Et tu? The little ad hominem at the end was nicely done as well!

              1. twosheds1 profile image62
                twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                How is belief in gods NOT an irrational belief? Belief in the existence of something for which there is no evidence seems the very definition of irrational.

                1. pisean282311 profile image57
                  pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  @twoshed1 bible is the evidence...PERIOD...

                  1. twosheds1 profile image62
                    twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Are you familiar with Poe's law? I'll take you seriously for the moment. Do you see the logical contradiction with a book that is true because it says it is true?

                2. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Whether you accept it or not, I have evidence and I do believe in God.

                  If you want to know why, I am happy to tell you. I don't assume you will believe it just because I tell it to you, but if you are interested I will tell you.

                  And if you have evidence, then it's not irrational.

                  1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                    A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    No, you have no evidence, if you did, we would all be able to see it. That's what evidence is all about.

                    What you actually have is an irrational belief.

                  2. twosheds1 profile image62
                    twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I'd like to see your evidence, as long as it is in fact evidence, and not wishful thinking, logic games or arguments from ignorance. Repeatable, verifiable evidence only will be considered.

                    Of course, since you're a believer, your evidence is immediately suspect. Why? Because you have a vested interest in a positive outcome.

                3. Brent Hale profile image71
                  Brent Haleposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  You put too much stock in human evidence. Show me some human evidence today, and in 1,000 years I will laugh at your primitive findings.

                4. calynbana profile image86
                  calynbanaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Atheists, before asking theists for proof about their beliefs define your own. How does the universe make sense without a designer? Explain what you believe, and what makes you more logical or less ignorant without the use of ad hominems.

                  I really challenge you to do this.

            2. Dannytaylor02 profile image84
              Dannytaylor02posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              twosheds1
              discounting all the hilbillies of america its probably about the same smile

          2. A Troubled Man profile image60
            A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            lol Coming from you, Danny, I take that as a compliment.

        2. calynbana profile image86
          calynbanaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Where are you pulling your numbers from?

    2. Vegas Elias profile image41
      Vegas Eliasposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No. Jesus will never be forgotten as long as humanity exists. This is because Jesus is a very controversial figure; and it is common knowledge that controversies fuel propaganda negative as well as positive. The end result is that figures connected with controversies become more famous as years go by.
      I would like to correct you thought that Jesus is an idea; It is not true. Jesus was a historical person, a fact which is well documented in Roman records of his time. However Jesus was not a very famous figure then. It is only after His Death that his followers and more so His adversaries used his name and became his followers as a historical trick to survive; Romans His worst adversaries became his followers and formed The Holy Roman Empire which is now continued by The Holy Catholic Church, a nation traversing so many nationalities; A world empire so to say.
      So Jesus lives on in men's mind even today.

      1. cam8510 profile image93
        cam8510posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        The historical Jesus is documented in Roman records, but not WELL documented.  References to Jesus are sparse and lacking in any real information.  My hub "Jesus Walked This Lonesome Valley: or did He?" gives the major historical references.  Check it out.

    3. John Sarkis profile image78
      John Sarkisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      There's an essay I read of Marx once (not sure if he was discussing Hegel or Proudhon?...), but he said that Christianity would eventually be disbelieved, just like Greek Mythology.  Well, he was wrong, because, people believe today just as much as they did 200 years ago.  Christianity is here to stay!

      1. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, that is what Christians would like to believe, just like they like to believe other irrational ideas.

        No, people don't believe the same they did 200 years ago, there was this book published called, "On The Origin of Species"

        Have you heard of it?

        1. TJenkins602 profile image75
          TJenkins602posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Even the Bible says that people will stop believing. (to a large extent)

      2. Josak profile image60
        Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Actually % numbers of Christian believers have fallen massively in the last 200 years, only about 50% of Europe is Christian now for example.

        1. Chris Neal profile image83
          Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          But Christianity is growing in Africa and Asia.

          And the number of educated people who are Christian is not negligible.

          Christianity will not disappear (until the end of time!)

          1. pisean282311 profile image57
            pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            agree that it is growing in underdeveloped region like africa and developing countries...thats why i said 50 years....in 50 yrs africa , asia would be in better position...as people get more educated , more settled then they start questioning and then comes decline...

            1. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              On the contrary, the places where it's growing are place where people sometimes pay with thier lives for being willing to be identified as Christian. Where people understand what's really at stake, they stand up and say, "I'm a Christian." When nothing is at stake, Christianity fades. That's not a flaw in Christianity, it's a flaw in humans.

              1. pisean282311 profile image57
                pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                @chris agreed...people tend to clinch their hopes on illusions when they dont have much in their life to look forward to...it is human nature...religion grows in deprivation....so completely agree to that...thats why as people become less deprive this illusive concepts die and its good that they die, then people can actually contribute in something constructive than waiting for some x,y,z's second coming...

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I agree with your assessment of the physical reality but the underlying reason is not right. It's because people become comfortable with the illusion that they don't need anything, that they can control their own environments. Not only does (nature or God, depending on your point of view) show us in recent history that physically that's not possible, but the growing number of disintegrating families show us socialogically that it's not.

                  1. pisean282311 profile image57
                    pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    @chirs nature v/s human brain is one way of looking at...from where i see it is human brain which gave us electricity , communication tools , internet and all that we see including statue of jesus or church or anything...even concept of god or religion is human brain product....without reasoning existence of human being as race itself would get threatened...

                    i feel immense pride on our ancestors who did what they did to take us to place where we are....coming to religion...yes it did serve human beings purpose and its contribution is immense...but now its utility is limited and we must replace it with reason ....religions do die as we have seen in history and there is nothing new in it....but what we replace dying religion with would make difference...from concept of natural forces as god to many god to single god....we did evolve our concept...but this single god in global world has many versions of who that god is...since it is concept none can reach to one singular conclusion and more people take it literally more damaging it would be for human race...instead of worrying for unproven entity why not take responsibility of our race and work for its betterment...

            2. Brent Hale profile image71
              Brent Haleposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              This is funny. You said that they will start to believe in Jesus, 'get to a better position,' then start questioning Him (implying that they will stop believing in Him) and ultimately 'decline.' I know what you meant, but it actually ended up being a huge supporting statement for Jesus. But then again, that is the way God works. He uses you even if you don't believe in Him. Score: God 1, You 0!

    4. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Only if the problem of child indoctrination abuse is tackled and eliminated will there eventually be a death to religions.

      1. Eric Newland profile image61
        Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        So your ideal world is one in which freedom is completely destroyed?

        Better warm up those gas chambers, then, because you've got a lot of "reeducation" to do.

        1. Josak profile image60
          Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          A troubled man and I often disagree on political matters but I think you are making a really pointless straw man argument here, he did not say he wanted to destroy any freedoms, in fact he said the exact opposite, he is arguing against the indoctrination of children, children are easily brainwashed and religions like Christianity use all the typical brainwashing techniques, songs, mantra/hymms, ritualized behavior and perceived punishment and reward for actions that violate or follow their creed.

          If I took groups of children to a special building separated just for the purpose of teaching them to be good communists, where they were sent at least once a week often much more, taught them songs praising Marx and Stalin, got them to intone prayers to the communist ideals and told them that if they followed my creed they would go to a nice place and if they didn't they would burn without a doubt almost everyone would accuse me of brainwashing. Historical evidence shows you can get children to believe almost anything with an organised structure to do so (see the Hitler youth) and they really have no choice in the matter because their social brains tell them to follow the majority and fear the implied punishments, that is the opposite of freedom it is intentional indoctrination to prey on the weakness of the child's mind and it is readily accepted and allowed, I am with Troubled man on this, indoctrination removes much of the element of choice from a child's life and it does need to be tackled, the reeducation is what is occurring int he churches to children.

          1. Eric Newland profile image61
            Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Many religions include a mandate to bring up your children in the same faith. Attempting to force things the other way is a violation of freedom of expression, no question about it.

            And as I've pointed out before, a parent can only ever "force" an immature faith on a child. Once they grow up they will choose to either accept or reject the beliefs they were raised with. I imagine statistics would even bear out the idea that the more overbearing the religious upbringing the higher the rate of falling out of faith at adulthood. Just look at how many essentially atheistic "raised Catholic" people there are.

            And finally, even comparing faith upbringing to child abuse is appalling. On top of insulting people of faith it is, quite frankly, an insult to millions of beaten and neglected children, who in some people's minds are apparently a less important problem than Sunday School.

            1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
              EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Beaten and Neglected children are a problem. But as Child Protective Services quite frequently points out, mental trauma scars for life. Forcing any religion on any child is quite abusive. Your scarring them for life regardless of what choice they make. Your also influencing every choice they make for the rest of their lives with your religion. Prime example is Charles Manson who's father was a Church Pastor.

              1. Eric Newland profile image61
                Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, I'm sure there were absolutely no other factors involved there.

                How do you explain the millions and millions (billions, really) of faith-raised individuals who grow up to be well-adjusted, productive citizens? They were just the lucky ones?

                1. vector7 profile image59
                  vector7posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Nope. they are scarred for life Eric.

                  Parent: "Jesus LOVES YOU."

                  Child: "Why does God have to love me? I hate life... ::sob::"

                  Parent: "Love God because He loved you first, and love your neighbor as yourself."

                  Child: "This is so evil.. Why is life so unfair? Other people can do whatever they want. Why do I need rules anyway?.... ::beats pillow::

                  Oh yeah. I see it now.. lol

                  1. Eric Newland profile image61
                    Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Another good point: go to a typical church and see how closely the kids are actually paying attention.

                    Brainwashing children by teaching them how to surreptitiously draw on the pews when their parents aren't looking.

                  2. Josak profile image60
                    Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    My experience:
                    Grew up in orphanage, forgot to pray or accidentally blaspheme, get caned.

                    Get an educational book from library, book has picture of human evolution from ape to man, book is taken from me and burnt.

                    Taught science is literally the work of the devil who is trying to take my soul.

                    Taught that only christian are going to heaven, everyone I know who is not is going to be burnt forever (graphic pictures included)

                    Do anything nuns don't approve of get told I am going to hell, I have nightmares about burning in hell fire for forgetting to say grace before eating.

                    Start sexual development, have no idea what is happening, react naturally, get caned and again told I am going to hell.

                    Friend thinks he might be gay, is locked away from other children in complete isolation from other children so the disease does not spread, friend hangs himself out of guilt for being gay.

                    Pretty much everyone who came out of that orphanage is deeply religious, what saved me was being adopted out. Totally harmless.

              2. Brent Hale profile image71
                Brent Haleposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I know kids who would rather not go to school. Is it abusive to force school on them?

                1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
                  EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  School is another form of indoctrination, and wouldn't be an issue if they didn't issue a federal mandate to hold the parents responsible for going to school in the first place. However, since I've seen that your only here to argue, this will be the only reply you get from me.

                  1. Brent Hale profile image71
                    Brent Haleposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    You don't have to respond. However, I would hope that parents would send their children to school, or teach their children themselves, whether it was federally mandated or not. The advancement and well-being of our society depends upon the education of our youth.

                    To address your claim that "Forcing any religion on any child is quite abusive" I must ask you, who then should be responsible for the child's upbringing? This statement suggests that you believe parents should not be allowed to take their children to church if the children do not want to go. Who will enforce that? The government? But then you've also displayed displeasure in the fact that the government mandates parents to force their children to go to school. I guess I'm just confused on who, in your opinion, should be guiding children in the right direction.

              3. TJenkins602 profile image75
                TJenkins602posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                If you call "Forcing" a religion mentally abusive, then you can consider my mind destroyed. Having a religion forced upon me is the least of what I've went through.

                If that is abuse, then simply raising your voice at a child is abuse as well. How is it that so many people that go through physical and SEXUAL abuse, which is way worse than "forcing" religion, only to be denied or blamed for it.

                You are a horrible parent for taking your child to church and yet you can rape your child, call him / her stupid, ugly, worthless, etc. LOL!!!

                (I was never raped, but I know a lot of people that were)

                1. A Thousand Words profile image80
                  A Thousand Wordsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  ... Who ever said none of that was abuse? He is merely saying that forcing religion on them is another form of abuse...

                  1. Chris Neal profile image83
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I would pose the same question I always pose, what is the real alternative? There is no way to not impose beleifs on kids when teaching them. Some are more subtle than others, but it still happens. And don't tell me public school doesn't do it, I have spent my entire educational career in public school. Some people try to give me an answer, but it's always based on the supposition that the opposite of "forcing religion on children" is giving them some kind of value-neutral education. I've as yet to see such a beast.

                2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
                  EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  First off, where did I EVER say that it's ok for physical and sexual abuse? Don't try and twist what I say just so you can try and down trod me since you have to find a way to feel good about yourself.

                  Secondly, CPS/DSS does consider raising your voice at a child a form of abuse. I spent many years having to deal with those people because my mother would yell at me. I know what their rules are and how they work.

                  If all your interested in is arguing or trying to put people down, take it elsewhere. This isn't a poo flinging contest.

            2. Josak profile image60
              Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Most children raised in faith stay in the faith as the numbers bear out, it is brainwashing pure and simple with the clear intention of indoctrinating a child into a particular set of beliefs with threats of hellfire and classic brainwashing techniques used on fragile minds and frankly it is disgusting.

          2. Chris Neal profile image83
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Where to start?

            What ATM advocates is not "freedom" but an eradication of religion. He may call it freedom, but it doesn' take any great depth of analysis to understand that it's what he wants. He often says as much. So in order to achieve freedom, you must rob people of the freedom to choose to follow a religion. He wants to save the world, even if he must blow it up to do so.

            Your analysis of "indoctrination" is in fact well understood. What is rarely talked about is whether the opposite of "indoctrination" is indeed freedom. If you were to take children to a special building where they could be prevented from indoctrination and said, "The world is yours, do what you want!" would we really wind up with a pint-sized generation of sophisticated reasoners with a naturally skeptical attitude? Look around any inner city bus stop, it's not very likely.

            Now, "indoctrination" is easy and is used wittingly and unwittingly by many different groups, including religious, social, educational and gang. Teaching is harder especially because younger children especially lack the experience and reasoning capacity to strain out the "bad" from the "good."

            And honestly, what is the end effect of all this "indoctrination?" Does it really create good little, life-long religionists? Sure, the same way the Hitler Youth produced such a die-hard generation of Nazis that Germany had to be wiped off the map because they refused to give it up and today is West Poland, right? In the west, even in "Christian" America, the fact is that once most kids go to college they are thrust into an environment where the indoctrination is sometimes even more blatant, and their natural urges and appetites are catered to like never before. Since most of them never actually thought out what their faith meant or even meant to them, it's not any great surprise that most of them become secular. Mainly, what they become is confused.

            Now THAT'S reeducation!

            1. pisean282311 profile image57
              pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              @chris but where is freedom to choose religion to start with....to choose one must know all available options and should be mature enough to make choice....so till 18 year person should have zero exposure to religion and then allowed to study bible,quran,veda,torah and then make choice to follow one religion or not follow any ...then it can be choice otherwise it is brainwashing young kids in religion of parents...thats not choice at all....

              1. vector7 profile image59
                vector7posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                You mean give your child no help in what is right or wrong?

                Why don't you just deny the right to raise the children at all then?

                That's exactly what you're stating. It is a parents obligation to teach the child what the parent knows as best. The child will come to an age of reasoning and ultimately decide, just as we all are and have now, what they choose personally.

                Not only that, but the "world" is not fit to raise children.

                A brief glimpse at the news will provide ample evidence.

                By throwing everything at them you are still 'indoctrinating' them with the ideology that 'all' religions are the same.

                Teaching children anything is indoctrinating them. And the parent is called the parent for a reason. Until the child is ready, the parent guides the child in the best way they can.

                You can't tell people how to raise their own son or daughter. [unless they are teaching them destructive things such as killing, stealing, etc] Which in such case the gov't will be glad to interveine.. they do so pertaining to much less than what I listed anyhow.

                1. Josak profile image60
                  Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  But teaching them creeds that support homophobia, guilt, sexism, intolerance of other religions and sexual repression is fine? The bible instructs you to kill homosexuals, to kill women who are not virgins, to kill people of other faiths etc. how can it possibly be healthy or positive.

                  You should not let a sorceress live.  (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

                  If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death.  (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

                  They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.  (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

                  But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house.  Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst.  (Deuteronomy  22:20-21 NAB)

                  Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and posses the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants.  (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)

                  "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."  (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

                  Each of these lines are stained in the blood of tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocents, I know that most people absolutely believe that these passages should be ignored (which is it's own hypocrisy) but these are children reading the bible being told it is the center of morality and all that is good, Most people of course decide not to commit murder in the name of god but then:

                  Cursed be he who does the Lords work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood.  (Jeremiah 48:10 NAB)

                  and this is what we are teaching children? I am sure none of this has anything to do with the higher proportions of hate killings of homosexuals or the murder of members of other faiths around the world and throughout history or the much higher suicide rate of gay people etc. etc...

                2. pisean282311 profile image57
                  pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  @vector i am merely stating then stop making claims that freedom to choose religion is given...it is not...one can choose only when alternatives are given...one cant choose is singular faith in being induced in non reasoning kids....

                  also u r mixing teaching moral values and teaching religion....one can teach moral aspect with larger perceptive and then allow children to grow up read bible,torah,quran,veda etc themselves and conclude whether they want to be christian or jew or muslim or hindu or any other religion or atheist....

              2. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                @pisean282311 Yes there is freedom to choose religion and thank God there is, but my point was that atm wants to take that freedom away. He thinks that it creates a greater freedom, but it is still the robbing of a freedom.

                By your logic, then until the age of 18 we must keep children hermetically sealed from anything smacking of philosophy because in order to ensure they have "zero exposure to religion" we must also enforce "zero exposure" to any philosophy of any description. Good luck with that.

                ALL parents "brainwash" their kids. I don' care what they say or how careful they think they're being, they pass their values along to their children. They have to. Small children simply are not capable of living value-free existences and will seek out somebody's values to emulate. If it's not their parents, it will somebody else's. And many will grow up to choose something different when they are older. So some academic exercise in "letting kids make their own choices" is by-and-large the same as telling kids that you don't believe in anything and don't really care about them.

                1. pisean282311 profile image57
                  pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  @chris then u should stop claiming freedom to choose...because what u call choice is not giving option....it is enslaving human brain to pre established doctrine at age where reason is not fully developed.......slavery and freedom doesnot go hand in hand ...does it?...

                  1. Chris Neal profile image83
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Doesn't it? Because if you can't show me a positive system where you can raise positive, well-adjusted, self-actuated individuals in a value-free society, then you are simply trading one form of slavery for another. If it's not the "slavery" of one ideology for another then it's the "slavery" of religion for the slavery of unchecked and unexamined passions.

                    And I've heard plenty of negatives about what should be done but no real positive about how to do it.

    5. NiaLee profile image61
      NiaLeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      NO, believing in an ultimate right and good human and attitude is in the card for a lot of us. We can realize how depicting and rubbing the bad in our faces has influenced our world in the worst way. You can believe in God and Jesus without being sick, weak or crazy.
      If you go in the positive thinking realm, including psychology or not, just observing human behaviors, you will see that showing good example, attitude and teaching them gives the human being a better chance to be a balanced happy healthy successful being than exposition and belief in emotions, passions or other ways that allow or appreciated.
      Take the example of bullying, of course they are people who bully because of religious belief and it is worst than bullying for other reasons, because they should know better than to give themselves the right to hurt somebody else.
      Peace and love are the basis of everything, if you have religion but are missing one or the other, there is a big chance that as an atheist who is missing them, you will have negative energy, attitude, words and actions, that will have consequences. Let's focus on Love and peace.

    6. jacharless profile image81
      jacharlessposted 4 years ago in reply to this



      Short Answer: Definitely.
      Long Answer: For nearly 500 years, the marketing agents have done well in preserving Greco-Roman deism. That is to say the idolization -the "godifying"- of Y`shua [Immanu El] as the Son of Zeus [Iesous; Jesus].

      As a result of that marketing -rekindled in the early 1920's- coupled with a sole authority defined as a book, the concept of anointing [christ] has also come under great scrutiny and sadly, massive snake-oiling. Such saturation without experiential representation (evidence) has caused millions to become the faithfully departed. Globally, there has been nearly a 35% drop in church memberships, appearances, tithing, etc. Most drastically, is the RCC, even after a 5 year marketing push toward a more 'full gospel' style and an equal drop in the COE/Anglican Church.

      Even with a slight increase toward Buddhism and Hinduism (meditation, yogi, etc), the more industrialized nations have pretty much reduced the concepts to entertainment, or weekend fun; while poverty stricken nations still hold on because the marketing companies visit them often and bring gifts of food, water, etc.

      It will most certainly die out, yet not in the sense most hope for or fear.
      The idea is going to dissolve and be replaced with a genuine, daily, practical application of said anointing.

      James.

    7. aguasilver profile image88
      aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I doubt we will be looking at Christ as an 'idea' in the next 50 years, because from the look of things, He will have returned before that period and we will be looking at a whole lot of things differently.

      If He does not return before then, He will still be 'numero uno' in the world popularity issues, as He is attracting more folk to Him all the time.

      Dream on.....

    8. Dave Mathews profile image59
      Dave Mathewsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      You are diluted to think this way Christ is not just an idea. History and geology has proven His existance on earth, has recorded his crucifixion here on earth.

      The truth of Jesus also exist in the Holy Bible and in Man himself. So unless something kills off all of mankind in the next 50 years, Jesus as the Messiah and the son of God will live on.

      1. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        lol It's funny how geology, the study of rocks, somehow proves the existence of a man/god. How does that work, Dave?

        1. Dave Mathews profile image59
          Dave Mathewsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Ha Ha Ha!

      2. twosheds1 profile image62
        twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Dave, we're going to see you in June. Any chance you could get us some backstage passes?

        But seriously, are you familiar with a circular argument? "The Bible is true because the Bible says it's true" is an example of one.

        1. Chris Neal profile image83
          Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The argument is that Scripture has proven itself by all the prophecies that have come true in them.

          Leaving aside the Messianic prophecies. the dream in Daniel proved prophetic. And Jesus did predict the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple.

          That's why Scripture says it from God.

          1. 0
            jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The iliad and harry potter, they are from god, they have prophesies that got fulfilled.
            Nostradamus is the legitimate son of god, all his prophesies are fulfilled.
            Hail god for giving so many scriptures and sending his legitimate and illegitimate children to the world!

            1. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Jomine, are you smoking something?

              Harry Potter and the Illiad never, ever claimed to make predictions about this world we are in now, nor are there any "prophecies" in there that any but the most spaced out people would even try to claim was an actual prediction!

              Nostradamus wrote an awful lot of "predictions" that are so generic that anyone could claim almost anything from them!

              At least get your facts straight!

              1. 0
                jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Why not? It is predicted that patroklos would be killed by hektor and then hektor would be killed by Achilles, which was fulfilled in the end.
                In harry potter it was predicted that the dark lord would rise again and he did.

                What makes your bible different, in that case?

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Daniel.

    9. Eugene Hardy profile image59
      Eugene Hardyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No, not in fifty years, and I'll tell you why:  Two reasons.

      1. Ideas don't die, but they do morph.

      Think Hydra.

      That is why we have hundreds of different denominations of the religion.  It is why the Orthodox and Catholics have split, why protestants were created, why we have subsets, (cults) have formed, (and if they are popular enough will become another denomination).


      As a whole Christianity will change to adapt so that it continues to be relevant to certain sections of the population.

      2. People

      As long as there is large population of believers the 'idea' will continue.

      With that being said, I will give it another 400 years if technological development continues at the current pace and poverty is eliminated, (which is most of the population of new believers).

      1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
        EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I would say another 100 to 200. Just look at the major scientific advancements in the last 101 years. (Gotta include the airplane after all wink)

        I agree with the Morphing effect though. I think it may be heading back towards the Gnostic esoteric view of Jesus and God rather than the exoteric one.

        1. Eugene Hardy profile image59
          Eugene Hardyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Yeah, silly me, I did forget the airplane.

          While I'm at it, another factor I'd to add is denial of the truth.

        2. Chris Neal profile image83
          Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          In a way you're right. It has been heading toward the gnostic view. It has been for centuries, ever since the gnostics started melding pagan mystery religions with Christian ideas. Then it moves away. Then back toward, then back away.

          The reason the "idea" of Christ won't die is because God is constantly revealing Himself to people.

          1. 0
            jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The idea won't die because people like you are so desperate to reinvent it again and again.

            1. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              roll

              Got an actual intellectual/theological argument? Or do you simply like yelling at people you disagree with?

              History will do. I respond to that too.

              1. 0
                jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Do you even understand what you say?
                You make a claim, then state valid arguments that support the claim. What is this theological argument? Who is yelling?
                God is a logical and rational fallacy. Jesus is an imaginary person who never lived. You people are desperate to keep him alive as is the Muslims who want Allah and Hindus Vishnu to be alive. So it is your Hope and fear and your desperation that keep him alive and him getting reinvented in newer and different forms.

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  So what you're saying is, "Yes, I like yelling at people."

                  And you follow  that with a stream of insults.

                  Peace.

                  1. 0
                    jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    OK, I understood. Speaking logically and rationally to you, is yelling and it is an insult.

      2. Chris Neal profile image83
        Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I agree. If technological advances continue at their expanding pace and government does succeed in controling sufficient numbers of the population (government will never eliminate poverty. The harder it tries, the harder it fails,) then enough prophecy will have been fulfilled that Jesus will indeed, come back.

        At that point, Christianity will cease to be practiced on the Earth!

        1. artblack01 profile image80
          artblack01posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          According to revelation, it all should have been done with during the lifetime of those who wrote revelation. The end times and the coming of Jesus. The problem with your example is that happens all the time. Nations rise an they fall and new ones come up to replace them. Why didn't Jesus come back in the middle east where he is from centuries ago when stuff like that was predicted? You see, it's all just mythology, there is no unfulfilled or imminent fulfilled prophesy. It's done. The bible failed. God doesn't exist. Get over it.

          1. Chris Neal profile image83
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I try hard not to pick fights in these forums. If I'm challenged by someone who addresses me the way you did, I usually try one time then let it go.

            But you're wrong.

            Nations rise and fall and things that were predicted come to pass. But not in the time or way that humans want them to. Time is not the same to God as it is to humans.

  2. TheMagician profile image89
    TheMagicianposted 4 years ago

    I don't think so.

    While religion will always have it's place in the world, no matter how small, Jesus is usually a highly revered name, even for those who aren't religious. Many people who are agnostic or even atheist find him to be a great human being, so Jesus will most likely never fall out of interest.

    However, the idea of Christianity is a completely different idea. It'll probably fall out of favor eventually (doubtful in your or my own lifetime, and I'm still very young), but it'll still always be a learned subject.

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @TheMagician jesus yes , i was talking about Idea called christ...christ means saviour while jesus was human being who preached and has his vision about how world should be...Jesus would always be well respected human being who worked for good even if Christianity seized to exist...so i agree on that part...

  3. 0
    Emile Rposted 4 years ago

    No. As long as belief in God persists, people will search for an understanding. The three monotheistic religions will probably be the primary place they go to show their reverence.

    Compare the three. Judaism is great, but seen as exclusive to a certain group of people. You can certainly convert, but you can't argue heredity. You still aren't  completely Jewish.

    Islam will have to pull itself out of the dark ages before the western world can view it as a viable alternative.

    That leaves Christianity and Christ. With 30,000 sects, I'm sure anyone can find a place of worship that fits their philosophy and personality type. Plus, Christianity doesn't seem to prohibit individual worship and thought. Not in the free world, anyway

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @emile you have a point....but christianity is declining barring under developed countries ...belief in god would persist , i agree with that...christ phenomena is too young ...belief in god is much much older but as we have seen concepts of god keeps evolving and every god concept has its prime age and decline and then exitinction or dormant phase...judaism was real breakthrough idea though not unique...it was parallely evolving idea in many society but judaism could give it shape and enrol its masses...

  4. 0
    Jhudahposted 4 years ago

    I also dont think so.

    but i think religion is more likely will be gone. because as i have observed, it becomes more and more shallower than ever. more people now follow the religion but not God Himself. Im a Christian but dont really consider it as a religion.

    1. TheMagician profile image89
      TheMagicianposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It certainly has become more and more shallow, with all religions. People also like to point fingers at each other far too much, claiming the other isn't a believer because their ideas don't match up. Oh well.

      1. pisean282311 profile image57
        pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        @TheMagician ya and it is with all religions...he cant be christian because of xyz or he isnt mulsim etc kind of statements...

      2. 0
        Jhudahposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        well.. life is about patience. we really cant force people to believe what we believe.

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          hmmm...yup

    2. artblack01 profile image80
      artblack01posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      A religion is the belief and reverence in a supreme being.  You can in other words be a religion with only one member.  The bible has so many different interpretations christianity can be broken up into different sects because everyone has their own opinion.

      1. Chris Neal profile image83
        Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        That's a tad simplistic. Yes, there are multiple interpretations of aspects of the Bible, but Christians all agree on the necessary basics, that God exists, that He is One, that Jesus came and died for our sins and rose on the third day. It's not like there are fifty thousand little factions at war with each other, like some tribal area with multiple warlords carving out their areas.

  5. mischeviousme profile image60
    mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago

    I would hope 50 years or less... Realistically, it'll probably be around for another 100 years or so. Until we can rid ourselve's of certain religious beliefs, the violence and hate associated with such attitudes, will ever be a thorn...

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @mis but it wont be non violent...when hardliners feel threatened they turn violent...we see it in islam and i dont think hardliners in christians are any different....

      1. mischeviousme profile image60
        mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Their not... It's called a pack mentallity for a reason.

    2. Chris Neal profile image83
      Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      True (as far as it goes) but when religion is gone, other reasons for violence and hate will rise to take their place.

      In fact, religion in America is usually not the reason for violence or hate. Sometimes, yes, but not for the most part.

      And no matter how much "education" we have, people will always want to know certain things. So, religion is not likely to go away in the next 50 nor the next 500 years (assuming Earth lasts that long.)

      1. mischeviousme profile image60
        mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        As long as there is a title to defend or a position to fortify, there will be violence.
        As long as there is a thing to have or a land to occupy, there will be violence.
        As long as there is an idea to coveit or an attachment to importance, there will be violence.

        1. Chris Neal profile image83
          Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          If I'm reading you correctly, then we agree.

          Although I wouldn't put it in quite so Buddhist terms.

          1. mischeviousme profile image60
            mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The funny thing is, I'm not really even a buddhist...

            1. A Thousand Words profile image80
              A Thousand Wordsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              But you often sound like a practitioner of the Dharma. My boyfriend says the same thing about me, however, and I'm not a buddhist, so, I get it, I suppose.

              I'm not all that into labels myself, but is there any way that you refer to yourself as in this regard? Just curious.

              1. mischeviousme profile image60
                mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I just obderve the world and act accordingly and as is appropriate, basically being mindful of myself and how I affect others.

            2. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              From what I know of you, I believe you. But the way you sometimes phrase things sounds Buddhist to my ears. Sorry for making an assumption.

              1. WD Curry 111 profile image60
                WD Curry 111posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Have you ever heard of Transcendental Meditation? I think mischievousme is into Incidental Hesitation.

              2. mischeviousme profile image60
                mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                My parents were very oriental, eastern, in their beliefs. I just adopted the attitude, not the religious aspects.

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Yeah, that would make sense!

                  1. mischeviousme profile image60
                    mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Is it not the responsibility of the student to build upon a structure? Could not the same be said of son and father?

      2. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        When we remove the reason for violence and hate (religion) it does not mean other reasons suddenly sprout up out of nowhere, that is a logical fallacy.



        Yes, it is, for the most part.



        You contradict yourself, education IS about know things. There is no knowledge in religion, only irrational beliefs.



        Yes, it will disappear as more people become educated. We are already witnessing a decline in religious nonsense as more information about the world around us is made available.

        1. Eric Newland profile image61
          Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The reasons for violence, hate, and war are fear and greed. Religion just happens to be a handy way to rally the troops. Analyze any "religious" war and it becomes completely obvious that the religious aspect is just a front. The leaders who started the war just wanted something the other guy had. They told the people God wanted them to invade simply because it sounded better than "I want you to risk your lives and kill these people so I can get richer."

          And history has shown that nations that abolish religion usually do so so the government can ascribe themselves the infallibility that was previously ascribed to deities. It's cutting out the middle man, so to speak.

          If anything, a non-religious world would start wars even more efficiently. The Glorious Motherland commands that the Glorious People sacrifice themselves to protect their families from the evil fascists! Oh, and so I can buy a bigger palace.

          1. A Troubled Man profile image60
            A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I understand believers wish to ignore the fact the their religions are the cause of most violence and hatred in the world, that's obvious.



            You're talking about communism and dictatorships, but if you look at secular countries, your argument falls flat.



            No, we would have eliminated the cause of many wars. Sure, there are other reasons for wars and those can be dealt with as well.

            1. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I've never ignored the fact that religion is used as an excuse for violence. It always has been and always will be.

              I'm simply realistic enough to know that when you remove religion as the pretext, others will pop up.

              Sort of like how you love to act like it's us religious people who cause all the chaos and strife in these forums yet you are the single biggest continuous cause of strife in these forums I've seen.

              wink

              1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Religion isn't an excuse for the violence, it is the direct cause.



                That isn't realistic at all. By removing the cause, you remove the reasons for violence. Religions make good people do bad things, hence by removing the cause, good people will remain being good.



                Yes, I understand you believe that because I question irrational beliefs and ridicule the dishonest answers, hence you believe questioning those beliefs is the cause of strife. If your answers weren't dishonest, there would be no ridicule.

                I also know many believers here ignore the fact that I have applied dollops of accolades and heaped piles of kudos on those believers who have answered honestly.

                Clearly, if you believe I'm the biggest continuous cause of strife here, that would only serve to mirror the content of your posts.

                1. Jerami profile image77
                  Jeramiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  A chronic debater is going to debate regardless of the subject matter and/or the situation. It is an addiction.

                    I will Bet-CHA a nickle that when you are ALL alone in a room, that you still can not stop it. That you debate against yourself. And nobody wins,

                  1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                    A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Oh I see now Jerami, you didn't know this was a public forum. What did you actually think it was?

          2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
            EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            So then the war between pagans and christians that forced Constantine to choose one had to do with nothing but greed and fear? It's documented that the christians started this war so..I guess christians were extremely greedy and extremely fearful that their voice would eventually die out. Not much has actually changed then.

            1. Chris Neal profile image83
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Documented by whom? Constantine became a Christian because of a vision he had before he defeated his enemy. No Christian caused that. And frankly, if you want to state that there was a "war" between the Christians and the pagans, the pagans started it and the pagans were winning until Constantine had his conversion. Get your history straight.

              1. Eric Newland profile image61
                Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah, you do start to feel a little fearful when your faith is punishable by death for long enough. And if self-preservation is greedy, then I guess that would make them greedy.

                And when you think about it, even the Crusades were just a big land dispute.

                1. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  As far as many of the Crusades are concerned, they were even worse! A lot of them were simply political manuevers (sp?) by the church to raise taxes!

              2. janesix profile image59
                janesixposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Lol

                Constantine wasnt converted.it was a political move.

                His mommy made him do it

                1. Eric Newland profile image61
                  Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I understood that he came to favor Christianity early in life and waited until his death bed to convert because a prevelant school of Christian belief at the time held that once you were baptized you literally could not sin again or you'd be damned. That receiving forgiveness was a one-shot deal.

                  But I'm hardly an expert on that time period.

                  1. Chris Neal profile image83
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I hadn't heard that one but I would believe it if I could find documentation. A lot of church teaching on baptism did hold that you needed to be baptized or you couldn't get into Heaven.

                2. Jerami profile image77
                  Jeramiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually it is written that Constantine never converted until he was on his deathbead in 335 or 336 I think.

                     And the war he was fighting at the time as his suposed vision in the sky had nothing to do with religion.
                    It was a battle over who would be the Next Emperor.
                   
                    At least that is how I understood that which I read.

                  1. Chris Neal profile image83
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    It's true that the war was over who would be Emperor, not about religion. His vision was before the decisive battle.

                3. Chris Neal profile image83
                  Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  There was unquestionably a lot of politics in it but Constantine's conversion was genuine. But he was no theologian, that's for sure.

    3. artblack01 profile image80
      artblack01posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      When education becomes a right and not a privilege and our nation funds education as much as they do war then religion would indeed die in our nation. Why not fund education more? Smart people won't join the military.... At least not as infantry. There is more to that as well. Think about what creates nationalism, and other fascist things.... Ignorance. And if you don't understand how something works you will say god did it an if you think god did it you won't bother finding out how it works.

  6. TheMagician profile image89
    TheMagicianposted 4 years ago

    I only hope sooner than later it's realized by most that there is a different between knowing and believing... and I also hope that each and every person can be allowed to believe what they like with the understanding of others that anything is possible. You just can't be sure of anything smile

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @magician agreed...

    2. mischeviousme profile image60
      mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      That's why I choose to believe that all I have is a level of understanding, you can't know anything, especially since all things are conceptuallized with language. So then, knowledge and understanding are completely subjective.

      1. pisean282311 profile image57
        pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        @mis quiet right...you made a very interesting and important point...conceptualized in language...

        1. mischeviousme profile image60
          mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          It's just an observation and I am no more right for saying so, just as they are no more right than anyone else.

          1. pisean282311 profile image57
            pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            got that..thanks for sharing...

  7. Eric Newland profile image61
    Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago

    There is a saturation of half-believers, but that doesn't mean there aren't true believers. I can concede to the possibility of Christianity shrinking over time the way things are going, but I believe it will become stronger as a result instead of weaker.

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      how it would be stronger...do u mean that it would be like judaism....less in number and strong in faith?

      1. Eric Newland profile image61
        Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        More or less, yes.

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          well interesting point...might be...

          1. TheMagician profile image89
            TheMagicianposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            That's definitely a good point, I didn't think of it.
            Very possible smile

        2. Chris Neal profile image83
          Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I agree, very interesting point.

  8. Greek One profile image80
    Greek Oneposted 4 years ago

    We Christians ain't going anywhere Pisean...

    but the good news is, if you play your cards right and get me Ms. Rai's telephone number, I'll see what I can do about getting you into Heaven with me smile

    1. Eric Newland profile image61
      Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Blessed is the wingman, for he is a bro in Christ.

    2. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @greek lollol try muslim version of heaven...in christian version u  might get bored...

      1. Greek One profile image80
        Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        i know it will be boring.. that's why I want to get in my 72 virgins now

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          lol good point , why wait for heaven when u can have it now...but that applies to christian heavens too...why wait to get bored when u can get bored right now tongue

          1. Greek One profile image80
            Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I'm already married

            1. pisean282311 profile image57
              pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              lol

        2. Jesus was a hippy profile image60
          Jesus was a hippyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          hahaha what if your 72 virgins are all 90 year old spinsters?

          1. Greek One profile image80
            Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I'll be dead.. who am I to complain?

  9. CraigP2 profile image60
    CraigP2posted 4 years ago

    I don't think the concept of christ as a savior will die out anytime in the near future. The concept is indoctrinated into people at such a young age that most people won't be willing to let it go.

    1. mischeviousme profile image60
      mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It is a shame that the propensity for thinking for one's self, is squashed before one can be mature enough to rationalize and ingest logical information.

    2. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @craig u have a point...but with time do u think indoctrination would get diluted?

  10. Lawrence Da-vid profile image61
    Lawrence Da-vidposted 4 years ago

    Personally, I don't believe that "GOD" is going to continue this disorderliness much longer without intervening.

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @lawrence personally times we are living in best time for human species....much much before jesus , times where even worse , when god didnt intefere then why would god interfere now?

  11. artblack01 profile image80
    artblack01posted 4 years ago

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JI-0py- … AAAAAAAGAA

    Sorry, seems like a spam but it's the best response I could see to this question.

    1. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Some thought he was dead when he was crucified. 50 yrs? I wouldn't give it odds in Vegas.

      1. artblack01 profile image80
        artblack01posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        If he was crucified if he existed.

  12. janesix profile image59
    janesixposted 4 years ago

    Not in fifty years,no.

    As things get worse religion will only get stronger,and christianity is no exception.

    I give it another few hundred years at least

    1. 0
      Ryan-Morganposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      In the case of the USA, then yes, things will take longer. I recommend the link below, as it is both surprising and supportive of your view.

      http://www.futuretimeline.net/23rdcentu … nd-usa.htm

      1. pisean282311 profile image57
        pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        @ryan 2240....oh no....too long man....

  13. 0
    Ryan-Morganposted 4 years ago

    In 2060, we'll be incredibly advanced as a race, with fewer borders between people. We'll charge up our 16-core super-smart-phones from fusion power, jump on trains from London to New York (maybe a few decades later), have super-intelligent robots running parts of authority - it will be nothing like today.

    And just like oil, religion will be a thing of the past for the 90% of rational humanity, and good riddance! The world will be a better place without it.

  14. Dannytaylor02 profile image84
    Dannytaylor02posted 4 years ago

    in 30 years time we'll be out of food, we arent as clever as you think haha we have no sustainable resouces

    1. Druid Dude profile image60
      Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Give it a hundred years.

    2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Only if we produce another 44 billion people in that time. When and if we hit 50 billion people on the planet, it will no longer be able to sustain life. Currently there are only around 6.8 billion people so we have a long ways to go yet.

    3. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @danny come one we as race invented religion , god , democracy , agriculture and everything which we use today...we are smarter species...we would overcome most challenges other than earth quakes , meteorite clash...

  15. WD Curry 111 profile image60
    WD Curry 111posted 4 years ago

    What's with the Eastern Block English, comrade?

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/images/soviet_aron_849272.jpg

  16. WD Curry 111 profile image60
    WD Curry 111posted 4 years ago

    https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSeurhiLLnS3_ufrWOZQsMfDKDB0V3n-b8jk3f8PouI3dLar6bX5g

    and Sudan and Somalia, and Iraq and anywhere else with a murderous heart towards the Prince of Peace. It is not a game. You have everything to lose, or everything to gain. Why turn down the gift of life from the king? At least leave well enough alone.

    Find another hobby.

  17. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 4 years ago

    Do you think idea called christ would die in another 50 years?

       No I do not.  However, our concepts of who he was and is will be greatly improved. I think!

  18. 0
    erickcbposted 4 years ago

    @ Eric Newland: I agree with you 100%

  19. cam8510 profile image93
    cam8510posted 4 years ago

    Christianity is still among us after 2000 years.  Why would it suddenly disappear?  There have been intellectuals on either side all along.  The fact is, the man Jesus received barely a footnote in secular history during the first two centuries and much of that is shallow and sheds no true light on him.  As long as the Bible continues to be published, Christianity will remain.  While secular history is all but vacant of information about the man Jesus, the Bible is packed with historical people and places.  That does not prove that Jesus existed or that he was god incarnate, but it does give it a sense of  validity. 

    Most people are hard wired with a need for a god.  I really don't think that is debatable.  Was that a part of evolution?  Could be.  Did god really create us with a "god shaped hole" that only he can fill?  Who knows.  But the upward look is in the eyes of most people and Christianity fills that need as do a host of other religious traditions. 

    But it is my opinion that Christianity will remain because it fills the needs for companionship, being part of something bigger than oneself, being right while the rest of the world is wrong.  Also, it has become more of a cultural element than a religion.

    1. Eric Newland profile image61
      Eric Newlandposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I will say this: if Christianity is dying out it won't happen while I'm still alive, not even if I'm the last man on earth who believes in it. And I know I'm not the only one who feels that way.

      1. vector7 profile image59
        vector7posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Nope. Sure aren't

        Second that.

        1. tammybarnette profile image61
          tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Third:) Christianity will be here till the end, and then ALL will know.

      2. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        But, it will die out, nonetheless, just like all the other myths and superstitions. The problem is how much damage it will cause until then.

  20. 61
    mashutiwposted 4 years ago

    no

  21. Brett Winn profile image88
    Brett Winnposted 4 years ago

    Somehow, I have the feeling that Jesus will be around just as long as He wants to be!

  22. mischeviousme profile image60
    mischeviousmeposted 4 years ago

    Why can't christians and muslims see the world for what it is? Has the path to enlightenment been that set astray?

    1. Chris Neal profile image83
      Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Personally, God is the ultimate enlightenment, and knowing Him is seeing the world as it is. I know you disagree, but that is my experience.

      1. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        "Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position known to be false. An argument which is misused to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary. "

  23. Druid Dude profile image60
    Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago

    ....and on the third day, will rise again.

    1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      you can't rise if you can't die, you only play dead and then twiddle your thumbs for a few days while cooling your heels.

      1. Chris Neal profile image83
        Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        If you're human you can die.

        Jesus wasn't ONLY God just as He wasn't ONLY human!

        His human body could full well feel the pain of the beating and the crucifixion.

        This stupid idea of "zombie Jesus" that I've started reading doesn't answer any questions, it only sidesteps the issue.

        Jesus was a man, and as a man He could die. And as a man, He DID die, then came back from the dead. His death was to take our sins upon Him. His resurrection was so that sin could be overcome.

        1. A Thousand Words profile image80
          A Thousand Wordsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          "His human body could full well feel the pain of the beating and the crucifixion."

          Maybe He could've come as another "man" in numerous times in "history" and experienced all of the other ways he'd caused men to die.

          -Mauled by a lion.
          -Turned into a pillar of salt
          -Destroyed by fire and sulfur
          -Drowned
          -Opened up the Earth to swallow Himself
          -Had a baby torn out of his pregnant stomach and then killed.

          What else should be added to this list? What other pain should He have "felt?"

          1. Chris Neal profile image83
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            So in other words, because He didn't experience any of the pains you mention (and no, I'm not missing anything here,) He couldn't possibly be God?

            He came the way He did and died the way He did to fulfill the Old Testament Prophecies about Him.

            God is turning into a very convenient scapegoat for the pain of the world.

            1. cam8510 profile image93
              cam8510posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Christianity is not immune to scrutiny.  Not only has the Church historically committed atrocities, but God Himself has done so.  The very acts of God as recorded in the book of Joshua for example, if committed by any other religion, would suffer the wrath of modern Christianity.  But as it is, Christianity itself is guilty.  Christianity must find another way to define the holiness of God other than body counts of thousands slain by God and his cronies.

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Absolutely, and if you were familiar with my output you would know that I am not shy about admitting the errors and atrocities of history committed by the Church or those claiming Christ's name.



                Jesus never defined holiness that way, neither have His true followers. Those who have will suffer His wrath at the end of the age.

            2. A Thousand Words profile image80
              A Thousand Wordsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              No, He is the cause of it. You cant introduce and create all the factors for a certain scenario to take place, and then not take any responsibility for it and what comes after, sorry. My point isn't being made that He isn't "God" because He hasn't experienced all of those things. I often hear people saying God "knows" how we feel. He suffered, too, blah blah. No. It's impossible for Him to "know" how we feel. He can taste it, but He doesn't know. Because to know our pain, and still often do nothing about it, does indeed make Him sadistic. Or to know our pain, turmoil, etc., and create a place where'd we'd have to experience it more simply for expressing our free will? Nah, I don't buy it. Chris, my mind isn't changing on this particular subject, and it's cool that your's isn't, either. I've got more understanding of your perspective, and vice versa.  Let's agree to disagree,

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                It all boils down to a simple explanation, God is not God.

                If He is everything that you say He is, then He cannot be the God of the Bible.

                If He is everything you say He is, He is inherently limited and unable to do all the things God can do, therefore He is not the God of the Bible.

                I don't think I need to tell you which I believe. smile

                1. A Thousand Words profile image80
                  A Thousand Wordsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  The thing is Chris, I have based all that I've said on your own Bible and how God is displayed in scripture .

                  In scripture, what can we find out about this God?

                  -He created naive people with a lack of knowledge of good and wrong, who also had the "ability" to choose whether they would heed His words, even though they lacked the ability to know what they were doing was bad or good, as they, again, hadn't eaten of the tree yet, who then eat of the Tree disobeying God's command. How can you exercise free will yet when you don't even know right from wrong?

                  -He then decides, instead of continuing to let them stay with Him, chastising them, and giving them another chance to do His will, He kills them (as it was believed that they would've lived eternally, but could now die)

                  -Man had to do hard physical labor and women have to suffer awful birth pains during childbirth (some women die from it)

                  -For the actions of two people, He decides to likewise allow every member of the human race from then on not only to die, but to have the possibility of going to Hell.

                  -A Hell that He created for Satan, a former angel that He also created.

                  -IF God DID know what would happen for Him creating Lucifer, THEN He chose to create Lucifer ANYWAY, knowing that He would trick Eve's NAIVE heart.

                  -IF God DID know that putting the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil BEFORE Adam and Eve were ready to partake of it, AND that the serpent would tell Eve lies that played her curiosity (that HE (God) made in her otherwise she would've had none), and she _couldn't_ have known it was "wrong," and He DID know what was going to happen next, then He is sadistic.

                  -If He DIDN'T know, He is not omniscient. I don't buy what Christians say in the regards that He has the ability to choose not to know, it's just as bad.

                  -So, because either God knew how it would turn out and WANTED it to be that way, otherwise He would've weighed all the options and thought it a bad idea to approach it the way He did, since it would result in the destruction of millions of billions of people, OR, He is not omniscient at all, and/or has very limited foresight.

                  -God expresses weak human characteristics: jealousy, easily offended, the ultimate form of unforgiveness (as far as those that he allows to go to Hell), neediness and insecurity (He already had angels with "free choice" worshipping Him in Heaven, what was His gain to create humans as well, unless He needs worship to feel big and powerful? Maybe it gives Him power like the greek gods yikes), and the list goes on.

                  ALL of these things exist and are clear as day in the book you call "Truth." But you can't see it because you don't want to. I don't put "God" in a box, but you put it in a box called "Christianity" and you see Him as the one defined there in, and the one who's "taking care of your needs." I question that seriously, because there are people all over this planet that, no offense, need more help than even you do. But they still die of hunger. Or at the hands of their husband. Or power hungry government officials (and all authority is given by God). Or little girls/boys are being physically abused by their fathers or members of the clergy. The list goes on... If God is omniscient, He saw all of these things coming to pass one day, and He STILL chose to do things the way He did. Want to talk about someone making a choice? What about HIS choices?

                  1. Chris Neal profile image83
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    They did know right and wrong. They knew that God told them to abstain from one very specific activity. Doing what He said was right, not doing it was wrong.

                    "He kills them" is a little misleading. He didn't take a sword and kill them right away. As to whether they could not die prior to this or not, I'm not convinced. Why have a Tree of Life  that they could eat from if they wouldn't die even if they didn't eat from it? You know?

                    Yes, some women do die from it. My wife and I have discussed this. I accept that man needed to be punished because it was highly likely (as in, the difference between being inevitable and being almost inevitable was negligible,) that since man did it once, he would keep doing it. History has born that out. Men used to die from the intense physical labor too, although I don't quite compare the two.

                    He also allowed every member of the human race to choose whether to love God or not. If you can't choose to love, you can't really love.

                    I've never said God could choose not to know. That to me borders on blasphemy.

                    As for the rest, I understand what you're saying. You're saying that God can be reduced to a hypothetical equation whereby either way we can blame Him. Either He's stupid or He's cruel. But what if He's not stupid and He's not cruel? What if God really is beyond our limited ability to comprehend?

            3. A Thousand Words profile image80
              A Thousand Wordsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              My original response with posted without me having known that you'd made other replies to some of the other things I wrote, so I recant the not talking about it anymore. I do have some points that I want to make, and then I'll decide whether I can even afford to keep responding. Man, these forums eat up my free time.

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Amen to that!

        2. 0
          jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          What does that mean?
          What is 'death'?
          What is this 'sin' he take upon him?
          Who/what is this 'sin' to be overcome?
          How does a 36hour coma/death does that feat?

          1. Chris Neal profile image83
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Death is, um, death. You know, dead. Not living. Like you and I will both be one day.
            Sin is turning away from God. It is saying to God, "I can do it better my way." It is saying, "You don't exist."
            If it is not overcome, we cannot be with God in Heaven. The alternative is very unpleasant, indeed.
            Which is it, death or a coma? They're not the same thing. Which question are you asking?

            1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
              EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              How do you know what sin is?

              If Jesus were mortal, then he wouldn't have been able to come back either. Hence he was immortal which means his "death" counted for nothing at all. If you can't die, then the act itself, for any reason, is meaningless.

              So then you agree that by your faith, you really don't have a choice in the matter, you must believe or be tormented forever. Sounds like some real "unconditional" love there.

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                That's a nice try, but no.

                Sin is defined in the Bible. I believe the Bible. Therefore I know what sin is, and that every single one of us (myself included) is guilty. I don't expect you agree with that, but that is the answer to your question.

                I stand by what I wrote. Jesus existed in a human body, and that human body experienced a very painful, protracted death. As in it was no longer alive. His spirit did not die. Neither will yours or mine. But His body very much experienced death.

                He died.

        3. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          lol Hilarious contradiction.

        4. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
          EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          As you said, Jesus was both God and Human.

          He never exerted signs of being omniscient.
          He never exerted signs of being omni-potent.
          He never exerted signs of supernatural strength.

          BUT he did exert a sign of immortality by rising on the third day. His immortality would've come from his fathers side, or his "god" hood. Which means he knew that he wasn't going to Die, just as God knew that he wouldn't Die in his omniscience. Which invalidates the entire act to begin with in my opinion.

          1. Chris Neal profile image83
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            You definitely don't understand what I was saying. But then, I didn't really take time to explain it either, not as properly as I should have, so please forgive me for that. I will, but not now because it's late and I must attend to my wife.

            Good night.

            1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
              EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              History has always shown the proclaimed "sons and daughters" of the immortals called Gods to show some sign of their parentage. That's what I was going off of when I wrote that.

              G'night though. Hope all is well.

          2. Chris Neal profile image83
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            He predicted the destruction of the Temple. He predicted His own death. He predicted Peter's denial.



            He healed blind people, He healed lepers, and He raised the dead.

            I'm not sure what you mean by "supernatural strength." So I won't hazzard a guess.



            So in other words, He wasn't human? Or He didn't die? He was/is human, and His human body did indeed die. Some kind of "Passover Plot" scenario is frankly impossible for a human body, which He had. He got the skin literally stripped off his body and died on the cross. He was dead. Yes, He came back to life but to assert that as the same as not dying is a logical stretch. It isn't logical.
            He did die.

            1. A Troubled Man profile image60
              A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              lol WOW!

            2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
              EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              First, you just negated free will. Omniscience is based on the fact that the future is pre-determined and nothing changes it.

              I'll have to get back to you on the rest of them though. I don't remember the rock denying Jesus, a prediction of your own death is self-fulling as I know everyone here will eventually die. Never heard him predict the destruction of a temple though, so I'll definitely be looking into it.



              Hercules was purported to have supernatural strength. Obviously though, you focus on one thing instead of all of them. Just to give a bit more education to you, every single Miracle Jesus performed, was performed 600 years earlier by Pythagoras.



              First off, if he IS human, then he IS dead. Humans don't come back from death.

              Secondly, your stating that his flesh was completely stripped from his body, which is an outright lie. The Bible says no such thing. It said that his back was laid open by a whip, but not that his body had no flesh on it.

              No, being Dead and coming back to life is an illogical stretch. The better possibility that he was immortal (therefore unable to die incase you don't grasp the meaning of it). Which means though it may have seemed like he died on the cross, he really didn't. He put on a good show, then waited three days to reveal himself to create his self-fullfilled prophecy.

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                That's true, if He IS human, then humans don't come back from death, unless they are brought back (like Lazarus,) or...
                if they ARE human and they ARE God!

                You're argument seems to be that He either had to be fully human OR fully God, He couldn't possibly be both. Except that He is fully human and He is fully God. The Bible makes that clear. His human body did die, His Godhood did not.

                As for the rest of your argument, you actually in an intersting way illustrate a point I've made many, many times. That point is that many people want to treat God as some sort of Jewish version of the Olympian gods, a human writ large and more powerful but if anything even more venal than "mere humans." I've made that point, but I've never read anyone illustrate it as literally as you do. And this illuminates quite a lot about your arguments. But the God of the Bible is much, much bigger than the gods of the pagan cultures surrounding Israel.



                As I've written to you and to others, I do wrestle with free will. I don't fully understand it, but I do beleive that God has given it to us. I don't believe that God's being omniscient negates our free will.



                That's a bit simplistic. If all He said was, "You know, I'm going to die," then you'd have a point. But He predicted the time and method of his death, which only a few people who He had no access to would have had any idea about.



                What I actually wrote was, "He got the skin literally stripped off his body," but I'll cop that I should have been more specific. He was scourged by the Romans, and though there are people who don't believe He ever existed, there is nobody who denies that the scourge was a horrible way to be tortured. The leather thongs of the whip had pieces of glass, pottery and bone tied in and when you were whipped with it, it literally tore the flesh off your body. I should have stated the flesh was ripped off His back. Sorry. The fact is that after forty lashes (minus one) with the scourge, it's a miracle He was even still alive!



                Since you've chided me on my lackadaisical research, I decided to jump on the Gibsonian web and check this one out. I was vaguely aware that Pythagorus was attributed with miracles, but I didn't know which ones. So I looked. Of all the sites I found, only one of them that was attributed to Jesus was also attributed to Pythagorus, where He supposedly died, went to Hades and then came back. And only one site even listed it. None of them listed healing the sick, raising the dead, or turning water into wine. And the more scholarly made it plain that a lot of what we "know" about Pythagoras came from Neo-Platonic writers in the Second Century AD! Which goes to illustrate another point that has been made, if Christianity seems to have copied from a pagan religion, more likely than not it's the other way around.

                1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                  A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Someone was smoking something, the authors of the Bible, perhaps. lol

            3. A Thousand Words profile image80
              A Thousand Wordsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Of course he "predicted" his own death. He and anyone else labeled as a heretic would've faced it if their claims were "blasphemous" enough, and insulting, and/or threatening to their already established laws and customs. The world wasn't as EC back then. "Predictions" are quite easy to do when you are an observant person, if you know the laws of the land, the current social tensions, etc. Many, anthropologists, psychologists and other types can make quite accurate "predictions" of what will happen in a persons life, or societies as a whole, financial fall-outs, and all sorts of other things. If he knew Peter well, which I'm sure he did, than he could predict easily that Peter would deny him because there was something about his personality to make him seem like the type. You can't even be specific about what Jesus said to him as far as when he would do it because the gospels all say something different. As far as the destruction of the temple was concerned, it's no different. If you understand how the Romans operate, the social/political climate, the hatred, hunger for power and dominance, etc, could easily lead anyone to believe that it would be destroyed, and "Jesus" may have just made an educated guess and we'll never hear the end of it.






              How does this prove omnipotence? Aren't Christians supposed to able to do these things as well? Even people who aren't Christians will be able to do these things, seeing as some of them will reach the white throne and God will say "I never knew you" according to your scripture, and we certainly won't argue that any of them are omnipotent, so not a good example.

              1. Chris Neal profile image83
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                If I say, "Hey, I'm going to die someday," then your point is roundly proven and I should just shut my mouth. If I say, "Hey, I'm going to get dragged off and beaten up by such-and-such, then nailed up on a tree and die, then rise on the third day," and it happens that way then maybe I'm on to something. And if I happen to die in a specific way that was predicted thousands of years before and it happens that way, then maybe it's not something that just anybody could have done.



                Except that; a) Jesus predicted the actions for a specific time with a specific sign, and b) only hours before, Peter had taken a sword and cut off the ear of the servant in order to try to stop the arrest. Jesus Himself had to put a stop to it, which implies that Peter would have gone farther ("Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.") Peter did everything to the fullest, and he was the first to publicly confess Jesus as the Christ.



                On the contrary. The difference is that Christians (and those who think they're Christians) will do it in the name of God. Jesus did it in His own name. This distinction was extremely important in the New Testament and will be no less important on Judgement Day.

  24. AudreyCB profile image61
    AudreyCBposted 4 years ago

    I agree with Dave Matthews. Taking his answer into consideration, I'll also mention that God writes that His word will never fail:

    Mat 24:35     "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

    Mar 13:31 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

    Luk 16:17     "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.

    Luk 21:33 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

    You're implying that the uneducated world is the world that believes in Christ, yet Lee Strobel is a very well known journalist who worked for the Chicago Tribune who, through careful study and research conducted from interviewing only the most qualified in their field had to lay down his pride in light of all the overwhelming volumes of evidence for Christ and admit that He is divine and was the Son of God.

    1. cam8510 profile image93
      cam8510posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      In response to AuidreyCB.  There are also many former Christians, equally as intelligent as Lee Strobel, who have walked away from Christianity for the exact same reason Strobel became a Christian:  They studied the evidence.  So, people study the evidence, become Christians, or non christians.  What does that tell you?  People use "evidence" to arrive where they want to arrive.  Frankly, Christians speak of Strobel as though he has done something extraordinary.  He studied the evidence for and against the deity of Christ.  Shouldn't all Christians have done the same?  I have found that most are afraid to look at that evidence.  And Faith is no excuse for not thinking.

      1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
        EinderDarkwolfposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Well put.

    2. artblack01 profile image80
      artblack01posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Lee Strobel is a liar.  I read his book and I found that his questions were typical questions I got asked by Christians in the past before the book was written, that would assume some such silliness.  I wish I still had the book that way I could quote the intellectually dishonest questions and assumption and misleading cons in the book.  One example is the questions are false dichotomies.  "Do you feel guilty for believing in a lie?"  If you answer yes or no then you are admitting to believing in a lie.  There are many questions like this that assume certain principles are true and none of the debates Lee Strobel has relies on evidence all are debates on philosophical ideologies...  in other words Lee Strobel is not a Journalist he is a paparazzi.  I don't believe he ever did any factual based research in his life.  Nor do I believe he was ever actually an "atheist".  I have this debate with people  about the idea that someone could not really be an atheist but agnostic but I will clear this up if asked.

  25. ofclouds profile image60
    ofcloudsposted 4 years ago

    Philosophy and religion are closely tied with humanity—in my opinion they, along with art, define us as such.  Most forms of religion will endure as long as mankind is here to experience. We are creatures of question, and there are questions which will never be fully answered in a satisfactory way: “Why did my brother die?” “Why did she hurt me?” “What have I done to deserve poverty, disease, hatred?” – pain and loss, joy and love are phenomenon that will forever exist within the spectrum of our experience, for long as we are human. I believe we seek reason for them. Science can explain a lot of things, but it won't tell us who to thank after surviving a car crash; it won't explain why we find the sunrise beautiful, why life has chosen to live, what our reason for being is (if there is one). And, even if it does, there will always be people who believe that the physical explanation isn't enough, hence the metaphysical.

    Why is there always such a division between the seen and unseen? If I want to believe that science is the physical evidence of a higher power, I'm going to. God doesn't have to clash with science. It's dangerous to label theists as inherently ignorant or archaic or out-moded simply because you have come to a different conclusion. And there's nothing wrong with rejecting the notion of religion. In a lot of ways it isn't logical, it defies our senses—but, in a way, that's the point. It relies on an underlying sense of trust and faith that, somewhere, behind the veil, there is purpose in a tragic yet beautiful world. The risk of being wrong is innate, but where isn't that true?

    1. cam8510 profile image93
      cam8510posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      of clouds, good explanation of how the two sides cope with life.  It appears from your comment, and I agree, that the best way for both sides to proceed is to live and let live.  I agree to a point at least.  There is value in debate.  I am appalled at two things.  The sickening arrogance of atheists and the nonreligious on one side and unthinking, blind faith on the other.   Both attitudes are symptoms of a deeper disturbance in people which I am convinced is fear.  Fear because that emotion often accompanies anger which is another thing we see on both sides.  So, what is everyone afraid of?  Being proven wrong and along with that humiliation, the loss of a deep seated, personal world view.

  26. Druid Dude profile image60
    Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago

    Jesus tried to make clear that we are all man/god. "God is inside of you, his light shines from out of your eyes"" He also said "You are all gods". Peter said that "Jesus was a man, approved of God" Lastly, if Jesus were as most seem to believe him to be, The God...then to whom was he praying in the Garden at Gethsemane?

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @dude he was praying to Allah...

    2. Dannytaylor02 profile image84
      Dannytaylor02posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Druid dude your right in saying that jesus is not god but that doesnt mean that we are all god...god has a name in the bible so its not just a generalisation of the world around us, and when jesus said we are all gods he was quoting a pharisee teaching.

  27. Druid Dude profile image60
    Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago

    Free will is what material man insists upon. We are in denial, and seek to usurp total control over us and our world. That control is an illusion, therefore, free will is an illusion...and a dangerous one. It says that we can merrily go our own way...all 6 billion of us...in total disregard to any other of that six bill. Total chaos. That is the end product of "free will". It is the many, not the individual. When the many determine what the individual can or will do...there is no FREE WILL! AND the individual can't determine the course for 6 billion others. We must relinquish free will, or we will destroy mankind and his earth also.

    1. Dannytaylor02 profile image84
      Dannytaylor02posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      dont disagree with you there, however people DO have spiritual free will and can choose to believe what they want to and they will have to deal with the consequences that their belief brings.

      people are very selfish as you say and if we carry on as we do i cant argue with what your saying..."or we will destroy mankind and his earth also" nope we will destroy gods world which he will not allow, we do not have free will when it comes to his possesions so he will step in before that happens.

  28. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 4 years ago

    I liked the analogy of the family.
      And it is true here on earth. We can not subject the rest of the family to such an intruder even if they are related.

      It is my thoughts that every one here on earth has a spirit which was once in this other dimension.
      We came down to this lower dimension to enjoy a physical existence.
      In essence, we are all angels which came down here,
      And by SOMEBODYS interpretation; we fell down to the earth.

      Imagine thousands of children going to Disney land. NO Adults!  The children are told to have fun but don't take anyone else’s fun away from them while having their own.
      If you don't follow the rules you will be punished when you get back home.
      If you do follow the rules you will be rewarded when you get home.

      Some people would consider the lack of such rewards as punishment.

      If you really behaved extra badly you may be grounded, go to your room (Hell)! while the rest of the children gets to go to Disneyland another day.

      this last sentence implies reincarnation which may or not be true.

      And none of it may be true? 
      I will say that this concept makes more sense to me than any other I have heard.
      Just translate a few words in scripture differently and believe some of scripture exactly as it implies and there you have it.

  29. Chris Neal profile image83
    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago

    Amen!

  30. Druid Dude profile image60
    Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago

    Brent: A lot of these guys don't want to admit that. It takes the wind out of their assaults on other people's beliefs, which they view as a threat. It is related to anti-semitism, this anti-christian, anti-muslim thing. Messy business.

    1. Brent Hale profile image71
      Brent Haleposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Hey Druid Dude! I'm not sure if I'm the Brent this was directed towards, but good point. I also think a lot of their dislike for religion is based off of their association of religious radicals with religion in general.

  31. Druid Dude profile image60
    Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago

    I agree. You mention 'facts' that you don't cite your resources for, such as 'It has been proven that Jesus never existed'. The only people who could believe this aren't terribly intelligent. If you are so RIGHT, speak the truth, even if it hurts.

 
working