The Death/Loss Of Religion In America (2 Viewers)

[hagmania]

Thinking more on this.

I have a small group of guys I meet with weekly. It started as part of a bible study project group with the goal of learning more about how to put our faith into practice and to further friendship and fellowship with one another. The fancy church word for that is "sanctification". It means a person is supposed to become more proficient in living out one's faith.

I've been meeting with this same group for 20+ years now and I have seen with my own eyes, this process play out. And I believe I've seen it in myself. You folks see me post here - I obviously have many many many miles to go. But I have seen a clear and impactful change in myself over the years as well as a change in the guys in the group.

Of course, one could say any man should be "better" at 60 than they were at 40. That's just maturity. This is beyond that. I see improvements in emotional intelligence, in empathy, in kindness and lots of of other areas in these guys that I believe is supernatural. Again, that's not to say we have it remotely "figured" out or have "arrived". Far from it. But I've seen marked improvement and progress that is notable to me.

So if I were to switch the original question to something more like "Is living out your faith a good thing for society?", I would say in my experience, it's yes.

I haven't been a part of a group like this, but I know exactly what you mean when you talk about how trying to live out your faith has results that add up slowly over time. I definitely do not claim to be a good person, but I'm a less bad husband, father, and colleague than I was 25 years ago, and I credit that largely to religion. Aristotle argued that they way you become virtuous is to act with virtue, whether you feel like or not. Eventually your beliefs catch up with your actions, and that code of conduct gets internalized. Today, we tend to denigrate that as "fake it 'till you make it," but Aristotle wasn't stupid and I think his argument deserves better than a bad aphorism.

But I wonder how much of this sort of thing would apply to non-believers as well. Imagine a world where there is a secular version of church -- once a week, non-believers get together in a little club to talk seriously and self-critically about how to properly live one's life, and they raise their kids in that club and donate to the club and pitch in around the club in their spare time and organize some of their social activities around the club. Over the course of a few decades, that sort of practice would probably make a similar difference for them just like church does for us. I imagine that's sort of what Unitarian churches are going for, but I've never attended one of those. (Not disagreeing with you -- just trying to look at it from the POV of our secular GBs).

We do that. It's called having friends!

My wife and I have a fantastic friend couple that we talk about deep matters and personal edification. It's a wholly unique friendship to any I've had before.

Highly recommend.

 

[Captain Cranks]

This is one of those things where being secular is correlated with having higher education and more income. You can correlate a lot of things with money.

I doubt when controlling for education you find a connection.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying correlation = causation. There are some here who want to attach the reduction in religiosity with what they view is an unhealthy society. If that's truly the case, they have a lot of objective data to explain away.

 

[massraider]

We do that. It's called having friends!

 

[Joe Bryant]

This is one of those things where being secular is correlated with having higher education and more income. You can correlate a lot of things with money.

I doubt when controlling for education you find a connection.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying correlation = causation. There are some here who want to attach the reduction in religiosity with what they view is an unhealthy society. If that's truly the case, they have a lot of objective data to explain away.

So I'm understanding what you're saying, are you saying you can attach the reduction in religiosity with what you view as a healthy society?

 

[Captain Cranks]

So I'm understanding what you're saying, are you saying you can attach the reduction in religiosity with what you view as a healthy society?

Not necessarily although there are certain attributes that have improved due to society becoming more secular. Gay rights, for one.

Ultimately, I don't think the equation is either more religion = healthier society or more religion = less healthy society. There are pros and cons of religion in this country and trying to jam things into one of the two aforementioned equations ignores a lot factors that have a much higher impact on the health of our society (social media, tribal news/entertainment, political corruption).

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ultimately, I don't think the equation is either more religion = healthier society or more religion = less healthy society.

Thank you for clarifying. I agree with that.

 

[KarmaPolice]

If most people could practice their faith without judging or pushing it on others... I'd be neutral.

In my experience, that is not the case... generally speaking.

So, I voted that it's positive for society to be less religious.

Background:
Former catholic who went to catholic school, served as lectern and altar boy in catholic mass, etc.

Spending my teens and then some in the Bible Belt of the south has made me realize that a LARGE number of southern "Christians" are massively judgmental of others while being generally subpar humans in their private lives. Baptists largely being the archetype for the "two-faced" tag.

That was my first impulse as well when I first read the OP and question. Similar to your experiences, my upbringing and history is filled with similar b.s. My dad's side of the family was very religious and excluded everybody non-Lutheran, including my mom which by default meant my dad and the rest of our immediate family. My wife's family is Catholic and has similar stuff going on as you can imagine. I am fairly strongly anti organized religion for those reasons. In my experience it does more harm than good and I would have voted yes.

After thinking about it longer, what I think our issue is as a country on the whole is that we did not replace the positive things that comes with the community of the church with things that are positive and fulfilling. What I mean by that was I was amazed at how my mother in law's church community rallied around her when my father in law passed. On top of that, church/religion was something that could unite people with different backgrounds and opinions. It gave people an excuse to be around others and interact face to face. All things that are sorely missing in 2024. Lastly, while I am anti organized religion, I am very pro people finding spirituality and seeking questions like that.

After all that, right now my answer is it's a net negative currently because people haven't filled that void with community, unity, or things that have a positive impact on our mental health. We are becoming increasingly isolated and hopeless.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I guess more accurately what I object to and would like done away with is religious fundamentalism, not religion or organized religion in general.

 

[rockaction]

Dang, to follow up on KP's point I was going to read this article, but it's behind a paywall. It's from The Atlantic, so it's likely coming from a secular point of view about religion. I think the author is about to argue that we've replaced our religious observances with staying atomized and watching more television and possibly will opine about what that's doing to us. If somebody can sneak behind the paywall and let us know it would be greatly appreciated.

"The True Cost Of The Churchgoing Bust"

x.com

twitter.com

In his tweet, Thompson says, "The point isn't to prescribe forced belief in the almighty and a weekly dose of church to fix America's hanging out crisis—but rather that the loss of religion in the US is so sudden that I'm not sure we've fully grasped the sum of what's been lost."

 

[Runkle]

If somebody can sneak behind the paywall and let us know it would be greatly appreciated.

Non-paywall version posted on msn.com

The True Cost of the Churchgoing Bust
Opinion by Derek Thompson •

As an agnostic, I have spent most of my life thinking about the decline of faith in America in mostly positive terms. Organized religion seemed, to me, beset by scandal and entangled in noxious politics. So, I thought, what is there really to mourn? Only in the past few years have I come around to a different view. Maybe religion, for all of its faults, works a bit like a retaining wall to hold back the destabilizing pressure of American hyper-individualism, which threatens to swell and spill over in its absence.

More than one-quarter of Americans now identify as atheists, agnostics, or religiously “unaffiliated,” according to a new survey of 5,600 U.S. adults by the Public Religion Research Institute. This is the highest level of non-religiosity in the poll’s history. Two-thirds of nonbelievers were brought up in at least nominally religious households, like me. (I grew up in a Reform Jewish home that I would describe as haphazardly religious. In kindergarten, my parents encouraged my sister and me to enthusiastically celebrate Hanukkah—and, just as fervently, to believe in Santa Claus.) But more Americans today have “converted” out of religion than have converted to all forms of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam combined. No faith’s evangelism has been as successful in this century as religious skepticism.

Secularization is old news. The scientific revolution that pitted the Church against stargazers like Galileo comes from the 1600s, and Nietzsche famously declared “God is dead” in the 1880s. But even as secularism surged throughout the developed world in the 20th century, America’s religiosity remained exceptional. Seven in 10 Americans told Gallup that they belonged to a church in 1937, and even by the 1980s, roughly 70 percent said they still belonged to a church, synagogue, or mosque.

Suddenly, in the 1990s, the ranks of nonbelievers surged. An estimated 40 million people—one in eight Americans—stopped going to church in the past 25 years, making it the “largest concentrated change in church attendance in American history,” according to the religion writer Jake Meador. In 2021, membership in houses of worship fell below a majority for the first time on record.

The sudden decline of religion likely relates to changes in both politics and family life. In the 1970s and ’80s, the religious right became a formidable fundraising machine for the Republican Party. As the GOP consolidated its advantage among conservative Christians, religion seemed less appealing to liberal young people, especially if they or their parents already had a tenuous relationship with the Church. In the late 1980s, only one in 10 liberals said they didn’t belong to any religion; 30 years later, that figure was about four in 10. Meanwhile, the decline of marriage, especially among low-income Americans, accompanied their move away from the Church.

That relationship with organized religion provided many things at once: not only a connection to the divine, but also a historical narrative of identity, a set of rituals to organize the week and year, and a community of families. PRRI found that the most important feature of religion for the dwindling number of Americans who still attend services a few times a year included “experiencing religion in a community” and “instilling values in their children.”

When I read the PRRI survey, this emphasis on community is what caught my eye. As I recently reported, the United States is in the midst of a historically unprecedented decline in face-to-face socializing. The social collapse is steepest for some of the groups with the largest declines in religiosity.

For example, young people, who are fleeing religion faster than older Americans, have also seen the largest decline in socializing. Boys and girls ages 15 to 19 have reduced their hangouts by more than three hours a week, according to the American Time Use Survey. There is no statistical record of any period in U.S. history where young people were less likely to attend religious services, and also no period when young people have spent more time on their own.

A similar story holds for working-class Americans. In 2019, a team of researchers published a survey based on long interviews conducted from 2000 to 2013 with older, low-income men without a college degree in working-class neighborhoods around the country. They found that, since the 1970s, church attendance among white men without a college degree had fallen even more than among white college graduates. For many of these men, the loss of religion went hand in hand with the retreat from marriage. “As marriage declined,” the authors wrote, “men’s church attendance might have fallen in tandem.” Today, low-income and unmarried men have more alone time than almost any other group, according to time-use data.

Did the decline of religion cut some people off from a crucial gateway to civic engagement, or is religion just one part of a broader retreat from associations and memberships in America? “It’s hard to know what the causal story is here,” Eric Klinenberg, a sociologist at NYU, told me. But what’s undeniable is that nonreligious Americans are also less civically engaged. This year, the Pew Research Center reported that religiously unaffiliated Americans are less likely to volunteer, less likely to feel satisfied with their community and social life, and more likely to say they feel lonely. “Clearly more Americans are spending Sunday mornings on their couches, and it’s affected the quality of our collective life,” he said.

Klinenberg doesn’t blame individual Americans for these changes. He sees our civic retreat as a story about place. In his book Palaces for the People, Klinenberg reported that Americans today have fewer shared spaces where connections are formed. “People today say they just have fewer places to go for collective life,” he said. “Places that used to anchor community life, like libraries and school gyms and union halls, have become less accessible or shuttered altogether.” Many people, having lost the scaffolding of organized religion, seem to have found no alternative method to build a sense of community.

Imagine, by analogy, a parallel universe where Americans suddenly gave up on sit-down restaurants. In surveys, they named many reasonable motivations for their abstinence: the expense, the overuse of salt and sugar and butter, the temptation to drink alcohol. As restaurants disappeared by the hundreds, some mourned their closure, while others said it simply didn’t matter. After all, there were still plenty of ways for people to feed themselves. Over time, however, Americans as a group never found another social activity to replace their dining-out time. They saw less of one another with each passing decade. Sociologists noted that the demise of restaurants had correlated with a rise in aloneness, just as the CDC noticed an increase in anxiety and depression.

I’ve come to believe that something like this story is happening, except with organized religion playing the role of restaurants. On an individual basis, people can give any number of valid-sounding reasons for not frequenting a house of worship. But a behavioral shift that is fully understandable on the individual level has coincided with, and even partly exacerbated, a great rewiring of our social relations.

And America didn’t simply lose its religion without finding a communal replacement. Just as America’s churches were depopulated, Americans developed a new relationship with a technology that, in many ways, is the diabolical opposite of a religious ritual: the smartphone. As the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt writes in his new book, The Anxious Generation, to stare into a piece of glass in our hands is to be removed from our bodies, to float placelessly in a content cosmos, to skim our attention from one piece of ephemera to the next. The internet is timeless in the best and worst of ways—an everything store with no opening or closing times. “In the virtual world, there is no daily, weekly, or annual calendar that structures when people can and cannot do things,” Haidt writes. In other words, digital life is disembodied, asynchronous, shallow, and solitary.

Religious rituals are the opposite in almost every respect. They put us in our body, Haidt writes, many of them requiring “some kind of movement that marks the activity as devotional.” Christians kneel, Muslims prostrate, and Jews daven. Religious ritual also fixes us in time, forcing us to set aside an hour or day for prayer, reflection, or separation from daily habit. (It’s no surprise that people describe a scheduled break from their digital devices as a “Sabbath.”) Finally, religious ritual often requires that we make contact with the sacred in the presence of other people, whether in a church, mosque, synagogue, or over a dinner-table prayer. In other words, the religious ritual is typically embodied, synchronous, deep, and collective.

I’m not advocating that every atheist and agnostic in America immediately choose a world religion and commit themselves to weekly church (or synagogue, or mosque) attendance. But I wonder if, in forgoing organized religion, an isolated country has discarded an old and proven source of ritual at a time when we most need it. Making friends as an adult can be hard; it’s especially hard without a scheduled weekly reunion of congregants. Finding meaning in the world is hard too; it’s especially difficult if the oldest systems of meaning-making hold less and less appeal. It took decades for Americans to lose religion. It might take decades to understand the entirety of what we lost.

 

[rockaction]

Thanks, Runkle. I appreciate it.

 

[rockaction]

Interesting article. That's pretty much what I've been trying to say in this thread and is something that KP just discussed right before the article. I have to say that I've been heavily influenced by the whole Nietzsche "God is dead" formulation as applied to the rational West, and I always worried what it would look like in America when it inevitably came to pass here.

Now, for sure there are movements afoot to codify religious observances into our laws and religion still has a strong and animating impulse among the populace, but I'm not sure if that sort of codification will increase its sway over the younger generations. It might hasten its decline.

 

[Goldminer1]

Good article. I believe that there is an afterlife, I have no idea what it looks like, but I don't think that when we die, that, we just end. I don't practice any organized religion or go to Church.

Recently, I've actually considered going to church, literally just for the social aspects of being a part of the community.

I'm pretty familiar with the "story" of Christianity as I grew up going to Catholic Church (parents both went to Catholic HS). There are a lot of things that religions teach that I think are nonsense and/or totally disagree with, but as social isolation becomes worse, there are fewer and fewer places to connect to those around us in real life. Maybe the person next to me in Church, believing that a guy with a beard built a boat that was big enough for 2 of every animal to survive an apocalyptic flood in, isn't worth missing out on those real world, interpersonal connections?

People want to -belong- to -SOMETHING- that brings them closer together in the world that exists outside of their cell phone and social media. For some, that sense of belonging has come from a political figure or party, for others it may be a sports team or a social cause.

But the bottom line is - we're lonely. Is it covid? Is it social media? Is it politics? Is it all of the above? Who knows.

I will say though, that as time goes on, I feel more and more like the division, isolation and loneliness that so many of us are experiencing, feels like it is at least on some level "intentional." And I don't say that to mean that there is some secret society of evil people that get together and decide to do this to the populace, but I think that as our isolation has become deeper, that there are groups and people that are using our isolation, to their advantage. Whether that is for monetary, political or social gain, for some people, this lack of connection, isn't a bad thing, it is something to lean into and use to further their own agenda. No matter where you fall politically, religiously or socioeconomically, those are the influences that we need to get out of our culture - not our neighbors that belong to a different poltical party or religion.

 

[massraider]

Non-paywall version posted on msn.com

for all of its faults, works a bit like a retaining wall to hold back the destabilizing pressure of American hyper-individualism, which threatens to swell and spill over in its absence.

Like to know what happens when this destabilizing force of "hyper-individualism" swells and spills over.

 

[rockaction]

Like to know what happens when this destabilizing force of "hyper-individualism" swells and spills over.

Politicians that promise meaning and feeling in your life via their election?

 

[kupcho1]

Like to know what happens when this destabilizing force of "hyper-individualism" swells and spills over.

Politicians that promise meaning and feeling in your life via their election?

I'M ALL IN!

 

[djmich]

Non-paywall version posted on msn.com

for all of its faults, works a bit like a retaining wall to hold back the destabilizing pressure of American hyper-individualism, which threatens to swell and spill over in its absence.

Like to know what happens when this destabilizing force of "hyper-individualism" swells and spills over.

People are focused on themselves and not families. Not meant to be a judgement, just a data point.

Religion

 

[KarmaPolice]

Non-paywall version posted on msn.com

for all of its faults, works a bit like a retaining wall to hold back the destabilizing pressure of American hyper-individualism, which threatens to swell and spill over in its absence.

Like to know what happens when this destabilizing force of "hyper-individualism" swells and spills over.

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

 

[massraider]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

This sounds reasonable.

I think we got here as a species because our massive brains invented math and science, no thanks at all to religion. A lot of species care for the family, that's not unique.

Just looking at this list of most to least religious countries, kind of tells an obvious tale.

Country	Feel Religious
1	Somalia	99.8
2	Niger	99.7
3	Bangladesh	99.5
4	Ethiopia	99.3
5	Yemen	99.1
6	Malawi	99
7	Indonesia	98.7
8	Sri Lanka	98.6
9	Mauritania	98.5
10	Djibouti	98.2
11	Burundi	98
12	Egypt	97
13	Thailand	97
14	Morocco	97
15	Laos	97
16	Afghanistan	97
17	Guinea	97
18	Comoros	97
19	Myanmar	97
20	Senegal	96
21	Philippines	96
22	Nigeria	96
23	Malaysia	96
24	Jordan	96
25	Cameroon	96
26	Cambodia	96
27	Zambia	95
28	Rwanda	95
29	Qatar	95
30	Mali	95
31	Ghana	95
32	Republic of the Congo	95
33	Chad	95
34	Algeria	95
35	Bahrain	94
36	Liberia	94
37	Kenya	94
38	DR Congo	94
39	Central African Republic	94
40	Uganda	93
41	Tunisia	93
42	Sudan	93
43	Saudi Arabia	93
44	Nepal	93
45	Madagascar	93
46	Palestine	93
47	Benin	93
48	Trinidad and Tobago	92
49	Paraguay	92
50	Pakistan	92
51	Namibia	92
52	United Arab Emirates	91
53	Kuwait	91
54	India	90
55	Tanzania	89
56	Syria	89
57	Bolivia	89
58	Burkina Faso	88
59	Zimbabwe	88
60	Panama	88
61	Ivory Coast	88
62	Guatemala	88
63	Angola	88
64	Brazil	87
65	Lebanon	87
66	Dominican Republic	87
67	Mozambique	86
68	Malta	86
69	Tajikistan	85
70	South Africa	85
71	Puerto Rico	85
72	Romania	84
73	Peru	84
74	Nicaragua	84
75	Iraq	84
76	Honduras	84
77	El Salvador	83
78	Colombia	83
79	Turkey	82
80	Ecuador	82
81	Georgia	81
82	Turkmenistan	80
83	Togo	80
84	Venezuela	79
85	Costa Rica	79
86	Botswana	77
87	Bosnia and Herzegovina	77
88	Poland	75
89	Haiti	75
90	Cyprus	75
91	Armenia	73
92	Mexico	73
93	Iran	73
94	Portugal	72
95	Moldova	72
96	Kyrgyzstan	72
97	Italy	72
98	Montenegro	71
99	Greece	71
100	Singapore	70
101	Jamaica	70
102	Croatia	70
103	Chile	70
104	United States	69
105	Argentina	65
106	Belize	62
107	Uzbekistan	59
108	Austria	55
109	Serbia	54
110	Ireland	54
111	Israel	51
112	Azerbaijan	50
113	Spain	49
114	Slovenia	47
115	Slovakia	47
116	Ukraine	46
117	Taiwan	45
118	South Korea	43
119	Kazakhstan	43
120	Lithuania	42
121	Canada	42
122	Uruguay	41
123	Switzerland	41
124	Germany	40
125	Albania	39
126	Luxembourg	39
127	Latvia	39
128	Hungary	39
129	Russia	34
130	Cuba	34
131	Belarus	34
132	Bulgaria	34
133	Belgium	33
134	New Zealand	33
135	Netherlands	33
136	Australia	32
137	Vietnam	30
138	France	30
139	Finland	28
140	United Kingdom	27
141	Japan	24
142	Hong Kong	24
143	Norway	21
144	Czech Republic	21
145	Denmark	19
146	Sweden	17
147	Estonia	16
148	China	7

 

[KarmaPolice]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

This sounds reasonable.

I think we got here as a species because our massive brains invented math and science, no thanks at all to religion. A lot of species care for the family, that's not unique.

Just looking at this list of most to least religious countries, kind of tells an obvious tale.

I get where you are going, but if we are talking about us as a species, our ability to advance past and overtake other species of Homo was largely due to our ability to form in much larger groups. That is long before math and science, and to do that is to coordinate through a belief of some set of ideas. We couldn't sit around and think about other things like math and science until we had enough of us to be able to sit down and think about those things

Yes, other species have language, rituals, and family, but for the most part they are limited to much smaller groups - take our close relatives like chimps for example. The point of the book (or at least what I took away and have been thinking about since) is that ALL of our religions, traditions, laws, are fictions we make up and have the ability to convince each other of. You can't band together groups of thousands to millions without some common adherence to these stories and fictions. Going back to what I was trying to get at (and remember, I am no fan of organized religion), what concerns me on the topic is that not only is religion becoming less prominent in the country, but so are many of our other traditions and beliefs. There becomes fewer and fewer "stories" that huge groups of us believe in and can rally around.

 

[djmich]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

This sounds reasonable.

I think we got here as a species because our massive brains invented math and science, no thanks at all to religion. A lot of species care for the family, that's not unique.

Just looking at this list of most to least religious countries, kind of tells an obvious tale.

I get where you are going, but if we are talking about us as a species, our ability to advance past and overtake other species of Homo was largely due to our ability to form in much larger groups. That is long before math and science, and to do that is to coordinate through a belief of some set of ideas. We couldn't sit around and think about other things like math and science until we had enough of us to be able to sit down and think about those things

Yes, other species have language, rituals, and family, but for the most part they are limited to much smaller groups - take our close relatives like chimps for example. The point of the book (or at least what I took away and have been thinking about since) is that ALL of our religions, traditions, laws, are fictions we make up and have the ability to convince each other of. You can't band together groups of thousands to millions without some common adherence to these stories and fictions. Going back to what I was trying to get at (and remember, I am no fan of organized religion), what concerns me on the topic is that not only is religion becoming less prominent in the country, but so are many of our other traditions and beliefs. There becomes fewer and fewer "stories" that huge groups of us believe in and can rally around.

Atheist checking in. This post resonates. There is a lot not to like about religion, but it also has served to have done a lot of good imo.

In the west religion has largely been replaced by a sort of cult of the individual and attachment to causes (the -isms, climate change, whatever). But there is seemingly no longer any ubiquitous, binding themes like religion, or even country for that matter.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

This sounds reasonable.

I think we got here as a species because our massive brains invented math and science, no thanks at all to religion. A lot of species care for the family, that's not unique.

Just looking at this list of most to least religious countries, kind of tells an obvious tale.

I get where you are going, but if we are talking about us as a species, our ability to advance past and overtake other species of Homo was largely due to our ability to form in much larger groups. That is long before math and science, and to do that is to coordinate through a belief of some set of ideas. We couldn't sit around and think about other things like math and science until we had enough of us to be able to sit down and think about those things

Yes, other species have language, rituals, and family, but for the most part they are limited to much smaller groups - take our close relatives like chimps for example. The point of the book (or at least what I took away and have been thinking about since) is that ALL of our religions, traditions, laws, are fictions we make up and have the ability to convince each other of. You can't band together groups of thousands to millions without some common adherence to these stories and fictions. Going back to what I was trying to get at (and remember, I am no fan of organized religion), what concerns me on the topic is that not only is religion becoming less prominent in the country, but so are many of our other traditions and beliefs. There becomes fewer and fewer "stories" that huge groups of us believe in and can rally around.

Atheist checking in. This post resonates. There is a lot not to like about religion, but it also has served to have done a lot of good imo.

In the west religion has largely been replaced by a sort of cult of the individual and attachment to causes (the -isms, climate change, whatever). But there is seemingly no longer any ubiquitous, binding themes like religion, or even country for that matter.

Correct. And we are talking America specifically for the discussion. Many of the countries posted on the above list also are smaller, more homogeneous, or maybe have different cultures that value family higher. The results of a lack of religion will have a different outcome there vs here.

 

[Captain Cranks]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

I haven't read the book, but based on your quick summary the thesis seems to view the "rally" only in a positive light. There are dark examples of the tribalism, though. Many of which are steeped in religion and politics.

 

[djmich]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

I haven't read the book, but based on your quick summary the thesis seems to view the "rally" only in a positive light. There are dark examples of the tribalism, though. Many of which are steeped in religion and politics.

Good thing we don't have any of that in todays society outside religion.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

I haven't read the book, but based on your quick summary the thesis seems to view the "rally" only in a positive light. There are dark examples of the tribalism, though. Many of which are steeped in religion and politics.

I should be more specific. Thanks for the follow up. The "rally behind" was more my emphasis than what I got from the book. More the book got me thinking about the ideas of us having the ability to create "fictions" and convince others of those. Ideas like religion, what a corporation is, what a state in, our governments, on and on - these aren't provable physical laws like gravity, these are ideas somebody thought up and convinced others of. His point is that was a big part of making us Sapiens and why we separated from the other Homo species that were around at the same time as it allowed us to form bigger groups.

I think the positive or negative is an argument based on what you personally believe. Religion is an example, and we have seen people in here think just that is either good or bad. More what I was trying to say is that in the scheme of the world, we are a pretty young country that was largely built around a universal belief in many things and we are seeing many of those things eroding away like the belief in God, our government, family, where we get info, on and on. If none of those are replaced with something positive or equally unifying, what does that mean for America?

 

[Da Guru]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

I haven't read the book, but based on your quick summary the thesis seems to view the "rally" only in a positive light. There are dark examples of the tribalism, though. Many of which are steeped in religion and politics.

Religion and politics are both about controlling the masses. I worked at Ford with a couple of Muslim engineers who actually left or are non practicing anymore. We have talked about is many time and to them they said it is all about control. If they did not have some type of religious control in Middle East countries it would be total chaos.

 

[Gatorade]

I voted bad. The decline in religious belief and/or participation has gone hand in hand with the decline in moral values in this country. Many factors are involved, including church scandals, removal of prayer in school, the Internet, idolization (entertainment, sports celebrities) , false religions (climate change, political), a more diverse culture and just plain apathy. Many great cultures have been destroyed by similar moral decline. Hopefully, the USA will realize this before it is too late .

 

[massraider]

More what I was trying to say is that in the scheme of the world, we are a pretty young country that was largely built around a universal belief in many things and we are seeing many of those things eroding away like the belief in God, our government, family, where we get info, on and on. If none of those are replaced with something positive or equally unifying, what does that mean for America?

The more time I spend in different places, the more I realize how massive this country is, and unifying people this different was always going to be tough. (I am not sure it was ever that unified behind religion and government anyway, but that's neither here nor there. This is an interesting topic.)

To put a number on it, It is about 900 miles from Cincinnati to Boston. It's about 300 from London to Paris. It's about 800 miles from London to Prague. There's 5 countries and 4 languages between England and Czechia, same distance as Boston to Cincy. Someone from rural Idaho maybe figures people from BOS and CIN are similar, and someone from NYC maybe thinks people from Montana and Colorado are similar. But people in those places know that's not true, at all. I don't know what is going to unify someone from Portland OR, Jackson MI, and MIami, FL.

I don't think it is religion. I was raised Baptist. Well, whatever version of Baptist I was exposed to. Because going to different parts of the country, and going to different Baptist churches, the differences were notable. Southern Baptists aren't not doing the same stuff I was doing as a kid. And that's just one segment of Protestant.

But leaving that aside, the distance, the fool's errand I think it is to have religion unifying a country this massive, I think local engagement and community is valuable, achievable, and worth investing in, for sure. I think there are multiple other more realistic ways to do it, however.

 

[the moops]

I voted bad. The decline in religious belief and/or participation has gone hand in hand with the decline in moral values in this country. Many factors are involved, including church scandals, removal of prayer in school, the Internet, idolization (entertainment, sports celebrities) , false religions (climate change, political), a more diverse culture and just plain apathy. Many great cultures have been destroyed by similar moral decline. Hopefully, the USA will realize this before it is too late .

Explain this please

 

[dgreen]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

I haven't read the book, but based on your quick summary the thesis seems to view the "rally" only in a positive light. There are dark examples of the tribalism, though. Many of which are steeped in religion and politics.

Religion and politics are both about controlling the masses. I worked at Ford with a couple of Muslim engineers who actually left or are non practicing anymore. We have talked about is many time and to them they said it is all about control. If they did not have some type of religious control in Middle East countries it would be total chaos.

Do you mind unpacking this idea a bit? I've heard this a lot and I wonder where it comes from. Don't get me wrong, I certainly see the idea of control in a lot of religious and political activity, but, to me, saying that's what they are "about" implies that's their primary objective and that explains the origin of them. Is that what you're saying. If so, is this claim people make based on some type of historical evidence back to the ancient religions and politics?

 

[beef]

The push for more religion, wanting it public and using it to shame others is what drove me away from it.

 

[Da Guru]

I think the argument is that we as a species got where we are because of our ability to work in groups, communicate, care for family, things like that. More specifically during these discussions I have been thinking of the book Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of that book was pointing out our ability to create these "fictions" that allow us to stay together and rally around common ideas. That's a bit what I was getting at with my comment above that we haven't replaced religion with anything healthy in a replacement. On top of that if we start leaning too individualistic, our narratives, rules, and laws will start to reflect that as well. It's much harder to keep families, communities, and even countries together when those groups no longer have common ideas to rally behind.

I haven't read the book, but based on your quick summary the thesis seems to view the "rally" only in a positive light. There are dark examples of the tribalism, though. Many of which are steeped in religion and politics.

Religion and politics are both about controlling the masses. I worked at Ford with a couple of Muslim engineers who actually left or are non practicing anymore. We have talked about is many time and to them they said it is all about control. If they did not have some type of religious control in Middle East countries it would be total chaos.

Do you mind unpacking this idea a bit? I've heard this a lot and I wonder where it comes from. Don't get me wrong, I certainly see the idea of control in a lot of religious and political activity, but, to me, saying that's what they are "about" implies that's their primary objective and that explains the origin of them. Is that what you're saying. If so, is this claim people make based on some type of historical evidence back to the ancient religions and politics?

More what I was trying to say is that in the scheme of the world, we are a pretty young country that was largely built around a universal belief in many things and we are seeing many of those things eroding away like the belief in God, our government, family, where we get info, on and on. If none of those are replaced with something positive or equally unifying, what does that mean for America?

The more time I spend in different places, the more I realize how massive this country is, and unifying people this different was always going to be tough. (I am not sure it was ever that unified behind religion and government anyway, but that's neither here nor there. This is an interesting topic.)

To put a number on it, It is about 900 miles from Cincinnati to Boston. It's about 300 from London to Paris. It's about 800 miles from London to Prague. There's 5 countries and 4 languages between England and Czechia, same distance as Boston to Cincy. Someone from rural Idaho maybe figures people from BOS and CIN are similar, and someone from NYC maybe thinks people from Montana and Colorado are similar. But people in those places know that's not true, at all. I don't know what is going to unify someone from Portland OR, Jackson MI, and MIami, FL.

I don't think it is religion. I was raised Baptist. Well, whatever version of Baptist I was exposed to. Because going to different parts of the country, and going to different Baptist churches, the differences were notable. Southern Baptists aren't not doing the same stuff I was doing as a kid. And that's just one segment of Protestant.

But leaving that aside, the distance, the fool's errand I think it is to have religion unifying a country this massive, I think local engagement and community is valuable, achievable, and worth investing in, for sure. I think there are multiple other more realistic ways to do it, however.

Many people don`t realize that North Korea is smaller than the state of Mississippi. Michigan is 10 times bigger than Israel and Lebanon.

The land mass and different backgrounds and cultures of this country make it impossible for everyone to have the same thought process.

 

[HomerSimpson]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

 

[dgreen]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

What do you have against brown guys?

 

[HomerSimpson]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

What do you have against brown guys?

Literally nothing. Just most bible thumpers think Jesus was a white guy with super ripped abs.

 

[dgreen]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

What do you have against brown guys?

Literally nothing. Just most bible thumpers think Jesus was a white guy with super ripped abs.

Ok. I assumed you didn't, but since your post seems to indicate a problem with basing one's life on fairy tales from 2000+ years ago, the inclusion of the "brown guys from the middle east" also comes off as something you have a problem with.

Now, by pointing out that Jesus wasn't white, you seem to be indicating that you think it is important to consider the cultural context of these 2000+ year old documents and not approach them from a 21st century American lens. If so, I definitely agree with that!

 

[HomerSimpson]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

What do you have against brown guys?

Literally nothing. Just most bible thumpers think Jesus was a white guy with super ripped abs.

Ok. I assumed you didn't, but since your post seems to indicate a problem with basing one's life on fairy tales from 2000+ years ago, the inclusion of the "brown guys from the middle east" also comes off as something you have a problem with.

Now, by pointing out that Jesus wasn't white, you seem to be indicating that you think it is important to consider the cultural context of these 2000+ year old documents and not approach them from a 21st century American lens. If so, I definitely agree with that!

All good! I just feel like (and I know feels aren't facts) most current day Christian's preach based on Jesus being a white guy who died for their sins (he was from the middle east) and "feel" like they must be right. (Because they have faith). The original bible wasn't even written in English and re-translated multiple times and cut and trimmed by King's. And the original words were written by guys (who's names were modernized) who never heard of toilet paper or TV or the internet. But yeah, we can totally trust the stories they tell. Maybe God should have sent his son down a few thousand years later and he could do a Tik Tok about turning water into wine.

 

[thecatch]

The push for more religion, wanting it public and using it to shame others is what drove me away from it.

One can make the observation that it's decline has had negative societal consequences without thinking the remedy is to force people to engage with it more. That obviously needs to be a personal choice. My family and I recently started going to church after a multi-decade absence and everyone, even my kids, have found it be uplifting experience and we're happier for it. I regret not restarting that tradition sooner. But I can respect that's not going to be the case for everyone.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

What do you have against brown guys?

Literally nothing. Just most bible thumpers think Jesus was a white guy with super ripped abs.

Ok. I assumed you didn't, but since your post seems to indicate a problem with basing one's life on fairy tales from 2000+ years ago, the inclusion of the "brown guys from the middle east" also comes off as something you have a problem with.

Now, by pointing out that Jesus wasn't white, you seem to be indicating that you think it is important to consider the cultural context of these 2000+ year old documents and not approach them from a 21st century American lens. If so, I definitely agree with that!

All good! I just feel like (and I know feels aren't facts) most current day Christian's preach based on Jesus being a white guy who died for their sins (he was from the middle east) and "feel" like they must be right. (Because they have faith). The original bible wasn't even written in English and re-translated multiple times and cut and trimmed by King's. And the original words were written by guys (who's names were modernized) who never heard of toilet paper or TV or the internet. But yeah, we can totally trust the stories they tell. Maybe God should have sent his son down a few thousand years later and he could do a Tik Tok about turning water into wine.

I've been attending church my entire life, and I've never once heard a single pastor teach that Jesus was a white guy. Not once, ever.

Thanks for ruining what had been a halfway decent thread though.

 

[massraider]

One can make the observation that it's decline has had negative societal consequences

That's an opinion, not a fact.

We can find instances when there's a negative, and instances when there is a positive.

Net positive? I think it's reasonable to think that, but I'm not going to concede this as a fact, that one can just observe

 

[thecatch]

One can make the observation that it's decline has had negative societal consequences

That's an opinion, not a fact.

We can find instances when there's a negative, and instances when there is a positive.

Net positive? I think it's reasonable to think that, but I'm not going to concede this as a fact, that one can just observe

It's not a provable fact in that sense, I agree. You've successfully split the hair, congrats.

 

[massraider]

One can make the observation that it's decline has had negative societal consequences

That's an opinion, not a fact.

We can find instances when there's a negative, and instances when there is a positive.

Net positive? I think it's reasonable to think that, but I'm not going to concede this as a fact, that one can just observe

It's not a provable fact in that sense, I agree. You've successfully split the hair, congrats.

I don't think I am splitting hairs at all, but I get what you mean.

The entire thread is that we've lost something good with decline of religion in the country. I think when considering positive and negative, there is an argument to be made it's not a net positive at all. If we start listing the negatives, I cannot imagine the thread will last too long, and I sure don't wanna be the guy listing the bad stuff.

It's a minor point I'm making, but the thesis of the thread is not a fact, it's an opinion. That's all I was saying

 

[HomerSimpson]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

What do you have against brown guys?

Literally nothing. Just most bible thumpers think Jesus was a white guy with super ripped abs.

Ok. I assumed you didn't, but since your post seems to indicate a problem with basing one's life on fairy tales from 2000+ years ago, the inclusion of the "brown guys from the middle east" also comes off as something you have a problem with.

Now, by pointing out that Jesus wasn't white, you seem to be indicating that you think it is important to consider the cultural context of these 2000+ year old documents and not approach them from a 21st century American lens. If so, I definitely agree with that!

All good! I just feel like (and I know feels aren't facts) most current day Christian's preach based on Jesus being a white guy who died for their sins (he was from the middle east) and "feel" like they must be right. (Because they have faith). The original bible wasn't even written in English and re-translated multiple times and cut and trimmed by King's. And the original words were written by guys (who's names were modernized) who never heard of toilet paper or TV or the internet. But yeah, we can totally trust the stories they tell. Maybe God should have sent his son down a few thousand years later and he could do a Tik Tok about turning water into wine.

I've been attending church my entire life, and I've never once heard a single pastor teach that Jesus was a white guy. Not once, ever.

Thanks for ruining what had been a halfway decent thread though.

I never meant to ruin it. My bad. Just all my super Catholic family has these portraits of white Jesus hanging everywhere. And they are kinda awful people, So I guess I was turned off at a young age from religion (as well as my brother and sister). I will bow out. God Bless you (and I mean that non sarcastically)

 

[dgreen]

Let's all live our life's based on a book of fairy tales written by a bunch of brown guys from the middle east 2000+ years ago! Cool!

What do you have against brown guys?

Literally nothing. Just most bible thumpers think Jesus was a white guy with super ripped abs.

Ok. I assumed you didn't, but since your post seems to indicate a problem with basing one's life on fairy tales from 2000+ years ago, the inclusion of the "brown guys from the middle east" also comes off as something you have a problem with.

Now, by pointing out that Jesus wasn't white, you seem to be indicating that you think it is important to consider the cultural context of these 2000+ year old documents and not approach them from a 21st century American lens. If so, I definitely agree with that!

All good! I just feel like (and I know feels aren't facts) most current day Christian's preach based on Jesus being a white guy who died for their sins (he was from the middle east) and "feel" like they must be right. (Because they have faith). The original bible wasn't even written in English and re-translated multiple times and cut and trimmed by King's. And the original words were written by guys (who's names were modernized) who never heard of toilet paper or TV or the internet. But yeah, we can totally trust the stories they tell. Maybe God should have sent his son down a few thousand years later and he could do a Tik Tok about turning water into wine.

Yeah, I get your point. Like @IvanKaramazov , I certainly have never heard "Jesus was white" preached or even implied, but so much of our art represents him in a very European way. To your larger point, though, I do think much of American Christianity, while probably admitting he wasn't white, interprets the Bible through a particular lens that doesn't align too well with how it was originally written. There are fairly big movements, though, in that area and I hear more and more people considering the original context. That could just be a skewed view based on the circles I'm involved with. YMMV.

While this may be largely, or at least partly, true about American Christianity, I honestly think "the other side" of this debate is making the same mistake by placing modern expectations on the Bible and concluding that it's just a bunch of nonsense that has no significance to us today. Expecting a 2000+ year old text to play by our rules is a mistake made by both conservatives and liberals.

 

[massraider]

Yeah, I get your point. Like @IvanKaramazov , I certainly have never heard "Jesus was white" preached or even implied, but so much of our art represents him in a very European way

You didn't need to hear it. They showed you the image. If you were 10, and someone asked you to draw Jesus, that's what you would have drawn.

 

[beef]

I pray I can find the church and congregation that actually focuses on what I believe Jesus was preaching. I keep finding the imperfect vessels to do God's work that ends up making my soul feel corrupted as if they're really the anti-christ.

 

[dgreen]

Yeah, I get your point. Like @IvanKaramazov , I certainly have never heard "Jesus was white" preached or even implied, but so much of our art represents him in a very European way

You didn't need to hear it. They showed you the image. If you were 10, and someone asked you to draw Jesus, that's what you would have drawn.

My church doesn’t have images of Jesus. That’s just not been a thing in the tradition I’ve been a part of. Sure, I probably had animated children’s Bibles and I’m guessing Jesus was white in those. But, this whole “Jesus was white and that impacted your Christianity” thing is pretty foreign to me. I know that’s potentially a minority experience in the US, so I’m not speaking for anyone else.

Now, the ignorance of what it meant for Jesus to be a Jew, that was probably more relevant in my childhood than his skin color. However, my congregation has taught with a focus on Jesus’ Jewishness for a while now, so that’s changed quite a bit for me.

 

[bigbottom]

Has anyone attended a church in the U.S. that doesn’t use the anglicized names for the disciples?

Edit: And I mean that as an honest question. I know some Catholic services are in Latin.

 

[HomerSimpson]

I pray I can find the church and congregation that actually focuses on what I believe Jesus was preaching. I keep finding the imperfect vessels to do God's work that ends up making my soul feel corrupted as if they're really the anti-christ.

I am not anti-God or anti-Jesus. I am anti-Religion. They are all man made.

 

[dgreen]

Has anyone attended a church in the U.S. that doesn’t use the anglicized names for the disciples?

Edit: And I mean that as an honest question. I know some Catholic services are in Latin.

I haven't, but I'm pretty sure Messianic congregations will use the Hebrew names. There are a few English translations (Complete Jewish Bible, Tree of Life Version, Orthodox Jewish Bible) that will preserve the Hebrew transliterated names and even some other words.