Feed on Posts or Comments 01 May 2017

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 27 Jan 2011 12:37 am

One of these articles is wrong

The first article contains good news:

Few Millennials Interested in Religion, Study Finds

An apathetic attitude towards religious and spiritual matters is common among members of this generation, according to The Millennials by Thom Rainer, president and CEO of LifeWay Christian Research, and his son Jess, a Millennial born in 1985. Members of this generation are likely to care less about spiritual matters than those from previous generations, the Rainers wrote.

Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of this generation rarely or never attend religious services, according to the survey conducted by LifeWay on 1,200 Millennials. And spiritual matters was ranked sixth, below friends and education, in a list based on an open-ended question on what is important to respondents.

“The [Baby] Boomers began the decline [in caring about religion] right after the Builder generation. Then came Gen X where it decreased again. And the Millennials are even less so (religious),” Thom Rainer explained to The Christian Post.

Also: “An astounding 70 percent of Millennials agree that American churches are irrelevant today.”

This article indicates that religion, even in America, is in steep decline and is on the way out.

The flip side is this:

‘Believers’ gene’ will spread religion , says academic

Prof Rowthorn wrote: “The more devout people are, the more children they are likely to have.” Some religious sects had fertility rates three or four times the general population, he noted. If people in these groups only married within them, he said “ultra-high fertility groups would rapidly outgrow the rest of the population and soon become a majority”.

For example, the Amish in the US had grown from 123,000 in 1991 to 249,000 in 2010, and were forecast to increase to 44 million by 2150 if past trends continued.

If this were going to happen, wouldn’t it have already happened over the previous thousands of years?

24 Responses to “One of these articles is wrong”

  1. on 27 Jan 2011 at 4:39 pm 1.Anti-Theist said …

    Secular society / government / media has too much influence over today’s youth; expect evangelical families to produce far less than 100% evangelical offspring. Not many households are affluently able to live as an island, producing fundamentalists unchecked. Minds weak enough to fall lock step into these superstitious cults are also much harder to come by than in yesteryears where education levels were significantly lower.

  2. on 31 Jan 2011 at 12:00 am 2.Chance said …

    I was torn on whether to laugh or cry after looking at the site. It is poignant to see those who have bought into the lie of a self-creating box or a box that has always existed. Both, of course defy scientific laws but we are predisposed to see what we want to see. If the box is all that exist, scientific laws must remain true and energy is limited. I’m reminded of the chills felt by Darwin as he considered the eye or even a peacock feather. Imagine his dismay if he could see the complexities today; maybe even Einstein with his cosmological constant.

    I sense that is why Dawkins and other biologist incessantly chant “I know it looks created but it is not” on such a routine basis (See the Blind Watchmaker). It is a constant battle to remind the troops that although God has created the cosmos as outlined in Psalm 19 and the voices are crying out declaring His handiwork, we must shut our eyes even tighter to discount the reality.
    “The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions” is a great read for those who would like a look at just how science now masquerades (in the case of origins) as atheistic philosophy. There is been a ground swell of scientist who are beginning to speak out.

    It is a risky proposition since like Galileo; ones very livelihood can be stripped away by refusing to pursue the dogma. Eventually, the straw-man will be torn down and the definition of science as delineated by men like Kepler will once again come to the forefront.

  3. on 31 Jan 2011 at 11:39 am 3.VeridicusX said …

    @Chance #2

    You believe that people who are not gullible, irrational, dishonest and irresponsible enough to believe in your gods, have “bought into a lie” that there’s “a self-created box” or “a box that has always existed”?

    But, “God has created the cosmos as outlined in Psalm 19 …”.

    You have absolutely no verifiable reasoned evidence for your gods, but you believe in them anyway – even though you believe it’s a “lie” that things can be “self-created” or have “always existed”?

    So, this figment of your imagination is either “self-created” or has “always existed”?

    Let me see if I understand you.

    Stuff that actually exists can’t be self-existent, but stuff which you made up or gullibly, irrationally, dishonestly and irresponsibly believe can?

    The “supernatural” denizens of someone’s deranged imagination can be self-existent but reality can’t?

    If I’m wrong please explain yourself and present actual proof of the various gods you worship.

  4. on 31 Jan 2011 at 7:33 pm 4.Tedder said …

    The natural must obey the laws of science. The natural could not exist forever nor could it create itself. Scientific laws verify this fact and no proof exist disputing this fact.

    God is not governed by natural law and therefore He is able to create something from nothing. Romans 1.

  5. on 01 Feb 2011 at 8:33 am 5.Severin said …

    4 Tedder
    “Romans 1”

    “The Book of Romans was likely written A.D. 56-58.”
    “Romans 1:1 identifies the author of the Book of Romans as the apostle Paul.”
    “„Paul was educated by his mother until the age of five. From age five to ten he studied with his father in the Hebrew scriptures and traditional writings.”

    So, you call Paul as a witness that god exists, and is “supernatural”, a man who lived 2000 years ago, who was educated by his mother and father and by Hebrew school of traditional writings.

    SOME “evidence”! They (including Paul) knew nothing at that time, they thought the earth was flat, and the stars were holes in the sky.
    Should we take seriously someone who had no idea about chemistry, physics, math, who never heard the earth was a globe, had no idea that America, China, Australia, or Antarctic, existed, and had no idea of what the sun or stars could really be.

    Try better!

  6. on 02 Feb 2011 at 5:36 pm 6.VeridicusX said …

    @Tedder #4

    “The natural must obey the laws of science.”

    No, the “laws of science” must obey the natural. A subtle but important difference.

    “The natural could not exist forever nor could it create itself. Scientific laws verify this fact and no proof exist disputing this fact.”


    Since we’re lying and making baseless assertions for whatever reason, which is what “faith” is …

    The Holy Spirit has revealed to me that you’re a pedophile.
    This revelation is not from a false spirit because this Spirit affirms the Blood of Jesus and that Jesus came in the flesh.

    Go ahead, blaspheme God’s Holy Spirit and call him a liar if you dare.

  7. on 02 Feb 2011 at 6:11 pm 7.Rostam said …

    Ted & Chance,

    (sigh) sorry you guys must be greeted by our middle school students. They really should be in class but their parents are down at the welfare office.\

    A single uncaused cause of the universe must only be greater in size and duration than the universe it has brought into existence.
    God Is Self-Existent and Eternal. He is the Self-existent, eternal, “Uncaused Cause” behind all that there is. This conclusion is both ontologically and logically necessary concerning the (“un”) causality of God. For, He is neither an illusion, a god created by another god, or a god who is self-created. Our Lord has no beginning, He has no end, nor is He contingent upon anything. He is Self-contained, the Unmoved Mover, the all in All, and the “I Am”–Who loves and cares for our every breath. Therefore the argumnent still holds true.

    There is much more to say about the uncaused thing including possible questions and objections. But it’s sufficient to say that an uncaused thing would have to be necessary, eternal, changeless, perfect, and unique. (God)

  8. on 02 Feb 2011 at 10:34 pm 8.VeridicusX said …

    @Rostam #7

    You’re mistaken.
    You might be sincere but you’re sincerely mistaken.

    The universe was created by The Divine Committee of Leprechauns.

    (With a bit of help from The Invisible Pink Unicorn – She did some of the heavy lifting and the pulling of stars and planets into place).

    Therefore the argumnent still holds true.

    There is much more to say about the Magical Committee including possible questions and objections.

    The Creator of the universe is obviously a Committee, just look at the duck-billed platypus.

  9. on 03 Feb 2011 at 2:51 am 9.Horatio said …


    You know, that actually sounds more believable than what you actually believe. You need to stick with it.

    We shall refer to you as a commiteeist. Not that you have any dogma that can stand up, but at least you now recognize the silliness of Puff the Magic Universe.

  10. on 03 Feb 2011 at 7:44 am 10.Severin said …

    7 Rostam
    „Our Lord has no beginning, He has no end, nor is He contingent upon anything.“

    So: your Lord existed for billions and billions and billions of years (+many more billions = eternity, from ever…) and was no contingent upon anything.

    Then he suddenly decided to create heavens and the earth, and started howering over waters.
    WHAT made him to do such a thing, after he was alone for many billion years?
    Was he bored?
    A Bored God?
    After he „puffed“ the light, he called it „day“, and darkness he called „night“.
    It must be that he personally switched the light on and off for some time, from a big generator (4 or 5 days?), because there was nothing, like sun, that could cause light, then darkness again.
    He called light „day“ and darkness „night“, but we don’t know in which language he did it; in Chinese? Maya language? Greek? English?
    After he „called“ day and night, he made sun and moon, and switched the generator off.
    Then he created animals, including, probably, kangaroos and polar bears.

    Then he created man and woman and told them to multiply, forgetting the dangers of inbreeding.
    Then A+E son Kain „made love with his wife“ and they kept making children for generations.
    WHICH women he took was never explained!
    His sister?
    But she was never mentioned in the Bible!
    Some other women? Where did he get her from?

    After human race enlarged, god killed them all except Noah + Co., and saved all animals except kangaroos, polar bears, armadillos, lemurs, …..
    When did he create them again, was never said.

    A Bored God?
    An Idiot God?
    An untidy, clumsy god?

  11. on 03 Feb 2011 at 7:54 am 11.Severin said …

    9 Horatio
    We never expected you could understand something like irony or sarcasm.
    You are able to understand only that Kain made love with his unexisting wife and made criple generations through inbreeding.

    Maybe I understand your god: after he saw what bunch of criples he made through his order “fill the earth and subdue it” (by inbreeding), he had to hush up his idiocy by some bombastic performance like big flood.

  12. on 03 Feb 2011 at 8:04 am 12.Severin said …

    Rostam, Hiratio,

    Can you kindly explain us who was Kain’s wife?

  13. on 03 Feb 2011 at 1:26 pm 13.Rostam said …

    The more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, inherited from the same parents. Therefore, brother and sister are likely to have similar mistakes in their genetic material. If there were to be a union between these two that produces offspring, children would inherit one set of genes from each of their parents. Because the genes probably have similar mistakes, the mistakes pair together and result in deformities in the children.

    Conversely, the further away the parents are in relationship to each other, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with some of the pairs of genes containing only one bad gene in each pair. The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may have only crooked ones. (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate generation after generation.)

    However, this fact of present-day life did not apply to Adam and Eve. When the first two people were created, they were perfect. Everything God made was “very good”. That means their genes were perfect—no mistakes. But when sin entered the world because of Adam, God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay.

    Over a long period of time, this degeneration would have resulted in all sorts of mistakes occurring in the genetic material of living things.
    his law forbidding close relatives marrying was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18–20). Provided marriage was one man for one woman for life, there was no disobedience to God’s law originally (before the time of Moses) when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other.

    This may be above your abilities but study on it.


    Are the Commiteeist recognized as a genuine religious organization?

  14. on 03 Feb 2011 at 4:59 pm 14.Severin said …

    13 Rostam,
    “When the first two people were created, they were perfect.“
    They were so perfect that hey could not resist simple provocation of the talking snake!
    I would understand them if they could’t rsist sex, but EATING some fruit!
    Some perfection!

    „That means their genes were perfect—no mistakes.“
    They were so perfect that they gave generations that god finlly decided to exterminate, to hush up his own bullshit work.
    How did „sin enter the world“ if people were perfect?

    „Over a long period of time, this degeneration would have resulted in all sorts of mistakes occurring in the genetic material of living things.“
    How long?
    Are you talking evolution?
    So, god created man and let him multiply without any further care from himself, and left people to mercy of evolution?
    How cruel! How unnecessary! How CLUMSY!
    Didn’t he know what will to men in terrible hands of evolution?

    But, the most important question:
    WHY did god need earth and people?
    WHY he decide to make experiments with creating erath and A+E after so many billom years of his existance without any troubles.

    Finally, can someone kindly tell us WHO, the hell, was Kain’s wife?

    Don’t you know better, Rostam?

  15. on 04 Feb 2011 at 3:56 pm 15.VeridicusX said …

    @Horatio #9

    “… but at least you now recognize the silliness of Puff the Magic Universe.”

    “Puff the Magic Universe” is what theists believe, not atheists!

    Christians believe that God created the universe ex nihilo, “out of nothing”.

    The “nothing” of the superstitious is not the “nothing” of physicists (or Zen philosophers), which is the mathematical concept of zero – the sum of equal amounts of positive and negative something.

    The nothing of the superstitious is, well, absence. God puffed the universe into existence out of “total absence”.

    Anyway, you are laboring under a misapprehension.

    Einstein and experiment have shown that “time” is a property of our universe.
    To imagine that atheists are saying that the universe came about “ex nihilo” is an error – that’s a theistic concept.
    It implies that there was some “nihilo” before time out of which the universe puffed.

    But, there’s no such thing as “before time”.

    Since time is a property of the universe there’s no such thing as “a time” when there was a religious nothing then the universe popped into being.

    Causation is temporal. An effect is the consequence of a cause. (Consequence means “with sequence”).

    Whether or not the universe is temporally finite:

    · There is no time when the universe did not exist.
    · The universe has existed for all time. Therefore,…
    · Causation is a property of the universe. And…
    · There is no “before the universe” when a cause could happen.

  16. on 04 Feb 2011 at 5:47 pm 16.Horatio said …

    Thats a quite a bit of faith you have there V. You are a Puff the Magic Universe guy for sure.

    I bet you believe Ford Fusions wash up on the beech too. No such thing a creator for a universe you certainly do not need one as simple as a Ford.

    I took the liberty of applying for religious protection on the behalf of Commiteeism. You need the protection.

  17. on 04 Feb 2011 at 10:03 pm 17.VeridicusX said …

    @Horatio #16

    “Thats a quite a bit of faith you have there V.”
    “I bet you believe Ford Fusions wash up on the beech too.”

    Facts, Logic and Reason, you ought to try them some time.

    If there are any flaws in the fact-based reasoning (such as any statements of faith), please point them out.
    You can’t can you?

    “You are a Puff the Magic Universe guy for sure.”

    Even though I’ve explained in #15 that it’s you who likely believes in superstitious idiocy not me, you come back with this lie – the same one that I’ve shown to be religious nonsense and logically impossible.

  18. on 04 Feb 2011 at 10:15 pm 18.Boz said …

    Logically of course, if the universe has always existed AND life created itself from the primordial ooze and if we evolved from the first life into what we are today, why is a Ford Fusion washing up on shore illogical?

    Let look at it. A cell is much more complex and evolved from elements found on earth. As well, the Fusion much less complex also formed from elements from our earth. Conclusion based on atheist logic, the Fusion washing up on shore is quite likely. All we need is the magic wand of time.

    And atheist buy into this.

  19. on 05 Feb 2011 at 12:08 pm 19.VeridicusX said …

    @Boz #18

    “… why is a Ford Fusion washing up on shore illogical?”

    Are you retarded? Do you and Horatio think that cars replicate with changes and have populations that are shaped or wiped out by their environment?

    You have the full power of the Internet. An informational resource that could only have been dreamt of by our forbears.
    Or ask a high school child who has just completed an introduction to evolution.

    “… And atheist buy into this.”

    No they don’t. Your thoughts on this are another example of religious mendaciousness.

    I can’t blame you really for failing to grasp the concepts of honesty and integrity. That, I suppose, is a consequence of being taught that “faith” is a virtue.

  20. on 05 Feb 2011 at 12:54 pm 20.JohnnyP said …

    “Puff The Magic Universe”.

    Haha, that actually made me chuckle. Cute play on words, there.

    However, Hor & Pals, as has been pointed out already, it’s you who believe god waved his arms and Poof! The universe magically/supernaturally appeared.

    Call the kettle black much?

  21. on 18 Feb 2011 at 4:12 am 21.BJE said …

    Rostam said …

    “Because the genes probably have similar mistakes, the mistakes pair together and result in deformities in the children.”

    hmmmm…..so……. :

    You understand how genes work, but then would denounce evolution?

    Just like christians are so quick to spew parts of the bible and say others are not relevant.

    Christians are so narrow minded its dangerous to humanity.

    Remember christians…..at one time you were quick to persecute people who were trying to move science forward…


    I will admit there are christians that are devoted to mainly good, but…..


    If jesus would still be living he would not approve of how christians acted throughout the centuries.

    “SHES A WITCH…!!!!”


    I didnt know brainwashing a group of people is so easy!!

    Tsk Tsk, Christians be ashamed of your obvious delusion

    The mormon religion is laughable, islam is laughable, christianity is laughable

  22. on 16 Mar 2011 at 3:59 am 22.Revelation said …

    YOU ALL WHO ARE ATHIEST ARE COMPLETE IDIOTS! It is soooooo evident that God is real!!!

    It makes sense to believe a divine being created the world. but that EVOLUTION CRAP is destroying people’s faith.

    What your saying for EVOLUTION is something came out of nothing.
    There was nothing, then a big bang, then something was created. Then life evolved from soup to rocks, to bacteria, then changed from animals to humans.? confusing much?
    YOU are the ones that are delusional. I know GOD exists by the plain miracles every day.

    what about barren women?
    for years they couldn’t get pregnant and now some have kids. What? evolution decided to let give birth? No, it was God.

    YES Christianity, like every other religion has its flaws and I’m not saying Christianity is the way to go. But believing that that my ancestors came from monkeys is insulting to me.

  23. on 16 Mar 2011 at 6:52 am 23.sonofapreacherman said …

    @ 22.Revelation
    Ramble much? Feeling threatened? Yawn…

    The pseudointellectual assertions of Rostam aren’t much better.

    I’m not here to attack others, but at least now there are two of you who know exactly how I feel about the silly empty words you’ve posted herein.

    Professor Bob Rowthorn is well-versed in mathematics and economics but not so much in genetics. His article, in my opinion, is purely speculative, yet the conclusions he has drawn from statistical inference are nonetheless somewhat interesting in a mildly scary way.

    LifeWay Christian Research is an extension of the Southern Baptist Convention much like the baculum is an extension of the male Mephitis mephitis. I have serious questions about the accuracy, objectivity, veracity and validity of the survey which they conducted. I can’t help but wonder if their motive for publishing the results of this survey was determined before or after the results were tabulated and/or manufactured.

  24. on 16 Mar 2011 at 7:10 am 24.TGHO said …

    @22 Revelation,

    Makes sense to believe in a divine being? LOL, no, actually it makes sense to *not* believe in the supernatural. It’s very clear, from the mountains – the exabytes – of data we have, that there is no god, no demons, no faeries, nothing at all like that.

    Of course evolution is destroying people’s faith. That’s because it’s a valid explanation for how humans arose and requires no divine guidance. A simple scientific explanation where previously people had to look to the supernatural for an explanation. You may as well claim that the theory of gravity, or of thunder, is destroying people’s faith.

    Evolution is most definitely not “something out of nothing”. And the tree of life, from bacteria to complex mammals is elegant, simple and very easy to understand, not at all complex.

    Barren women were helped by *science* (IVF, fertility drugs, etc.), not by some imaginary, non-existent being.

    You don’t get a choice in what I believe. And furthermore, you don’t get a choice about the scientific explanation of how humanity evolved. That’s determined by the data – and all humans, you, me, your family, my family, evolved from an ape-like ancestor. If that “insults” you, you need to grow up and expand your mind.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply