The ARIS Study: Christianity On The Decline In America

117 thoughts on “The ARIS Study: Christianity On The Decline In America”

1. Mark,

   Let me recap the main points of our discussion:

   1) You claimed that there is “…not a shred of evidence that there is an afterlife…”, as if you were familiar with the subject.
   2) I am familiar with this subject, and pointed out that there was actually a massive amount of evidence for the existence of an afterlife as well as other spiritual phenomena; That this evidence was available at any major library (and has been for at least 100 years) for anyone interested to access.
   3) I further pointed out that, for emotional reasons I don’t pretend to comprehend, many scientists deny the existence of this evidence: or, if they are made aware of it they claim that it has been debunked – all this without ever examining the evidence themselves. I pointed you to a small compilation of this evidence in a popular book, as an easy way to look at some of it.
   4) You immediately claimed (without actually looking at it) that all of this evidence was debunked – thereby supporting my point #3 above (thanks). You are even willing to let a professional magician with only a high school education make this determination for you – somehow I don’t think you would cede the “Amazing Randi” this authority in your own field.

   By the way, engineer/author Arthur C. Clark spend a one hour television show deconstructing one of Randi’s “proofs”: Randi had set up a dowsing experiment in Australia and claimed that it proved that dowsing didn’t work. Clark demonstrated that Randi’s statistical analysis was bogus and, when done properly, proved (to ~90% certainty) the exact opposite. Naturally, neither Randi nor those scientists who claim that he “debunked” dowsing took any notice.

   You seem to think that I must convince you of the existence or quality of this evidence – why? The evidence is available for anyone to access, just as is the evidence of the correctness of quantum mechanics (as distinct from the multiple, philosophical meta-theories based on QM). (BTY, I probably know more about QM than you credit me with, as I have a MS in solid-state electronics.) If someone chooses to ignore it, that is their business.

   Your attempts to disparage me for my evidence-based belief in an afterlife (as well as other spiritual phenomena) hints of desperation, and illustrates that you have no real arguments to offer. Better you should wonder why you have an emotional need to believe something that is so strong that you can’t even admit the existence of contrary evidence.

   Bob

   LikeLike

2. I know that I’ve joined this conversation a bit late, but I do question some of the way this ARIS survey is being read to say that Christianity is on the decline. In my view, the best reading of the religious situation isn’t how people self-identify. Rather, it is church attendance and polling results on specific religious beliefs (ex: do you belief in God, the Bible is true, Jesus rose from the dead, etc.). From the numbers I’ve seen most Americans, whether they identify themselves as religious or not are fairly non-dogmatic in their beliefs. Many people who identify themselves as religious aren’t really all that orthodox, knowledgeable, and can be relativistic. On the other hand, many if not even most people who identify themselves as non-religious aren’t hardcore atheists and are more likely to be “spiritual but not religious.”

   As for church attendance, some say it has been stable since the 1950s, some say it is on the decline. Some say about 20% of Americans attend a religious service regularly, some around 40%. See for example the following blog post on this:

   http://missionalchurchnetwork.blogspot.com/2008/11/weekly-usa-church-attendance.html

   Granted, there is no perfect way of assessing the religious situation. But at best only 40% of people have attended a religious service on a regular (weekly or better) basis since the 1950s. This means that 60% of Americans are either nominally religious or non-religious.

   What this ARIS study may really show is that more people who would have identified themselves with a religious tradition, but were nominally religious in the sense that they rarely attend service, don’t practice their faith, and aren’t the most knowledgeable about it have recognized that they don’t in all honestly belong to said faith tradition and now consider just check “none” when asked about religious adherence.

   This may be in part to the experiences of the Bush years and the politicalization of religion. It may also be because the sexual values of non-religious Americans have changed vastly since the 1960s and no longer have much in common with religious people. For example, your average atheist, agnostic, and nominal Christian in say 1960 saw homosexuality as abnormal and immoral and frowned on divorce, pre-marital cohabitation, and out of wedlock births. The same isn’t true today at all. Non-religious America has changed greatly since the 1960s and has embraced the values of the sexual revolution in ways that marks them off considerably from religious America.

   In the end, however, I’m not sure if the ARIS study actually shows any real decline in Christianity or any meaningful change. The honest truth is that most Americans weren’t orthodox, committed Christians in the first place. What we may be seeing isn’t so much a huge falling off of Christianity (though some of that may be happening), but a recognition on the part of those who don’t ever attend a religious service and aren’t really religious of where their religious adherence lies. In short, the ARIS survey may show that what is really declining is nominal religious adherence.

   rr

   LikeLike

3. MAJ Tony,

   Great response. I thought your words went straight to the heart of matters. We never chose this, and we will all eventually die. You can’t argue with that. What was I before I was born and what will I be after I die? (Your response had more nuance than this. Please pardon me for simplifing it to something I can get my thoughts around.)

   For me, these are cultural questions as much as existential ones. Everything about western civilization leads us to believe we are individual free agents playing out our lives in an impersonal universe. Religion was invented to soften that perception. Somehow we have to step outside of centuries of cultural conditioning. What is required at this point in human history is a reframing of the questions about life. I think we must move from belief in a dead universe to one that is literally alive, and begin to understand our role in that. We have to see ourselves as part of something larger and something timeless, and do that without all the storytelling.

   The central problem is this: If we continue to identify “me” as only the fraction of the universe inside our own skin then the questions of existence will never go away. We must see the whole as well as the parts. Personally, I don’t think life has a beginning and an ending, and I don’t think “we” do either.

   In any event, thank you for taking the time to respond. Discussions like this are a wonderful way for us all to deepen our understanding of each other.

   LikeLike

4. @ Lance in Texas – Please don’t take this wrong, but I was referring to “orthodox” (as in “orthodox in doctrine”) Christian churches, especially those that (IMO) aren’t so permeated with the kind of perfectionism that infects much of American Protestantism. (Evangelicalism in particular.)

   I was (I think!) also alluding to the way much of the American Protestant segment of the body of Christ has a tendency to run after every “new thing,” no matter how unbiblical. (“Strategic-level spiritual warfare,” the so-called “Prosperity Gospel,” etc.)

   Do I believe that other religions will also attract people, especially if they’re non-legalistic? The answer is “yes,” though I also believe that many of us (me, too) seek comfort in structure, even in rules. (Again, I’ve no intention of dissing you or your faith… but it’s a bit outside of what we know and believe – historically – of/about orthodoxy.)

   LikeLike

5. Additional on regarding the south Knoxville church – Michael, I won’t be mentioning anything
   about the survey or your blog in my planned visit to the pastor of the church. Seems that this rubs baptist pastors the wrong way more often than not.

   I’m a concerned baptist as far as this visit goes. If you have some suggestions on some specific areas to address, it might be helpful in the visit.

   Thanks

   TGfKnx

   LikeLike

6. I was checking out some baptist church websites around the Knoxville area today and came across a
   church in the south part of the city that had been a rather large and well known church body in years past. In the mid 1970s the church sanctuary burned and the current one was built to replace it and this new building probably seats 750+ with
   main floor, wrap-around balcony and mid size choir area. Long story short – I was looking at some of their recent newsletters from 2008 and 2009 and the average attendance(Sunday morning service) now
   stands at 60-65! I suppose that’s quite a lonely feeling in a 700 seat room – they’re hanging on with an aging congregation including the pastoral staff – late 60s-70s. Very few, if any, younger families in that small average attendance. It is a traditional baptist church and I believe it’s possible to grow in that settting but, it will be a difficult task as they will have to reach out to people that they’ve, most likely, been resistant to reaching out to.

   This particular church will be gone in 10 years or less if they don’t make some inroads into the transitioned community around them and attract some outside of that as well. I was shocked and saddened to see this church in that condition. After reading that today I’ve decided that I’m going to visit the pastor and get some “real time” perspective on what has happened and what he and the church might be considering to change the direction – if they’re considering anything. It should be a very eye opening, enlightening conversation.

   The Guy from Knoxville

   LikeLike

7. Rod:

   I see two very big holes in your “new vision.”

   First: none of us choses when, where, or in what socioeconomic status we are born into.

   Second: Physically, we ALL die eventually. Not only that, but we certainly haven’t cracked the code on whether or not we get sick. We may be able to cure the disease, but there’s no fix that guarantees we won’t get the disease. We live longer, but we still get old (perhaps at a slower rate; just compare people born in the 1st world and those born in abject poverty in the 3d.)

   As for comprehending the forces of nature, keep this in mind: every time we THINK we have found the smallest “particle” in an atomic structure, we seemingly find that there is something yet smaller.

   Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. Science is the search for the truth in our natural world. God has no “beef,” as it were, with that. Nor should religion. Aquinas would agree. So did Pope Urban VIII, who was elected to suceed Paul V. Galileo’s problem was he presented his hypothesis (which turned out to be partially incorrect, btw) as absolute fact.

   LikeLike

8. e2c:
   You stated:
   The “traditional” churches (RC, Anglican, Orthodox, Lutheran) are likely to end up being the refuge of those who are seeking something real but don’t know quite what it is or where else they can go that allows them to just be (as opposed to being beaten over the head with a 20-lb. pulpit Bible).

   Yes they will grow, but so will “non-traditional” (as you implied) Churches like the LDS Church. People are seeking Truth. We don’t “beat people over the head with a 20-lb. pulpit Bible” and we have the Truth that many people are searching for. Going back to the 1st & 2nd Century understanding of Jesus Christ answers MANY questions people have in the inconsistencies in many “Traditional” Churches.

   LikeLike

9. “Planting churches”: No, please – no! (I’m not being sarcastic.)

   Acting more like Christ: Absolutely yes.

   I think one of the things that must go is the perceived “need” to evangelize. When people know you have other motives for something as simple as taking a walk or inviting you to dinner – in other words, when you suspect proseletyzing [sp??] is the real main course – why would they bother showing up?

   I’ve been around churches that have gotten obsessed with so-called “church planting” to the exclusion of living out the Gospel in the here and now. To me, it seems like a quintessentially American way to try push something on other people. Then, when we “plant” the churches, we can get all smug and self-satisfied about how we did that and *still* not bother to attend to the real needs of others, both in the church and not.

   As for the future looking like Mark Driscoll, I find that notion to be deeply troubling (like a number of other commenters here). God help us. The “traditional” churches (RC, Anglican, Orthodox, Lutheran) are likely to end up being the refuge of those who are seeking something real but don’t know quite what it is or where else they can go that allows them to just be (as opposed to being beaten over the head with a 20-lb. pulpit Bible).

   In a way, I can see some close parallels between the so-called “prosperity ‘Gospel'” and this church-“planting” movement, and I’m alarmed by that.

   If Driscoll and pals were really doing the job of building churches, I doubt we would so much as know their given names.

   LikeLike

10. Mark,

    I agree that we are having challenges communicating, and I was trying to just push your idea to the absurd ending. I agree that we need to know when to stop and trust our stuff, and our people. Thank you for the explanation about the Arctic ice. I had not heard that, but it makes sense.

    I also agree with you completely about being careful whom you trust.

    Rod,

    Thank you for replying. I will have to think about some of the things that you are saying. For myself, I must be one of the more primitive types, because I love stories, and even today, my favorite reading are stories. I’ve found some Christian writers that are very good parable writers, and lap their writings up. Walter Wangerin Jr is one of them, and I read “The Shack” also.

    I disagree that Christianity made people weak, though. Just look at some of the non-Christian religions and see. I’m thinking of the ones where the poor never have a chance to break out of their poverty. At least, we Christians are taught that there is difference in people. The serf and the lord of the manor came before the same priest, knelt and recieved communion. Granted, that is the ideal, and may not have happened as much as you and I would have liked.

    Yes, we can do a lot, but just because we can does that mean that we should? How do we decide those questions?

    LikeLike

11. Hello Anna,

    You asked me what my vision was, and how I see the world. I hardly know what to say, it is such an enormous question. But I do have a few thoughts.

    It seems to me there is a new vision taking shape all around us. I could not begin to do it justice in so limited a space but, for me at least, the heart of this vision is the idea that life itself is a creative force, and we are anything but passive observers. That we create and control our own destiny is the empowering idea contained in all of the Enlightenment ideals. Where Christianity convinced us that we are hopelessly weak, we now see that we wield the most powerful force in the universe – life. Where Christianity said the world operates by miraculous forces that are beyond our comprehension, we now see that we can understand the very principles that drive nature. Where Christianity said we are the children of God, we now see that we have grown up. And where Christianity said that our true life starts from the moment of our death, we now see that it started at the moment of our birth. The storytelling tradition of primitive Christianity has exerted a powerful pull on humanity for a very long time, but surely it is time to put our childhood behind us and engage a life that we create for ourselves.

    LikeLike

12. Bob

    I find it hard to believe that you accept a carefully screened collection of anecdotal evidence compiled by a business journalist as a reason to defend the claim that paranormal forces and energy actually exist. As a long time subscriber to the “Skeptical Inquirer”, I have watched the exposure of all manner of such claims as being misinterpretations or, in sadly, outright fraud. As a matter of fact, Randi, the magician, has a standing offer of $1 million to anyone who, under agreed upon controlled conditions, can demonstrate ANY form of paranormality.The offer has been on the table for many years and Randi still has his money. Incidentally, Randi was the guy that demonstrated that Uri Geller’s spoon bending was a slight of hand trick. Geller later sued Randi for defamation of character, lost in court, and had to pay Randi’s legal costs. Schricker’s work is little more than a modern up date on Charles Fort’s work. He, also, was a former reporter with absolutely no technical training and yet his wild claims inspired writers like Charles Berlitz, Erich von Daniken, Ivan Sanderson and, for all I know, Michael Schmicker. I am afraid Bob, that you and I are perhaps irrevocably apart on the subject of the paranormal. I find no evidence to suggest we must resort to a supernatural being to explain our natural world. But I continue to try to disabuse you of the idea that any serious scientist would say that we now know (almost) everything. The search for the “Theory of Everything” is merely a search for a mathematical model that includes all of the fundamental forces in nature, including gravity. Even success in that endeavor (which the detection of the Higgs particle in the CERN collider is designed to do) will not result, I assure you , in the announcement that we now understand everything. By the way, your comment about the emergence of string theory as a possible transition from previous theories is not true. Aside from the fact that alternaives to string theory (branes, for one)are under study, string theory is just a deeper-level theory. Quantum particles still exixt in string theory, but they are not the ultimate foundations of reality, because they are in turn being produced by the vibrations of the strings themselves. Thus the old theory of quantum mechanics, if abandoned, would not have been wrong, just partially right.

    LikeLike

13. AT Chaffee:

    Thanks for mentioning annihilationism, it is definitely a concept I have heard of and would be more sympathetic to (were I a believer).

    The nature v. nurture debate seems to be grounded on different footing depending on whether you believe in sin or not. I would agree that humans are both born with(nature) and learn(nurture) certain tendencies and behaviors that at some early point in life can manifest themselves as what Christians would call “sin”. Humans have created ethics in order to promote a safer and more complex society. We shun behavior that puts us at risk or destroys trust because it harms our livelihood. We love each other because we recognize our common struggle and our biological connection.

    It is true that atheists/agnostics/secular humanists are a massively underrepresented and maligned minority. Very, every few would consider themselves nihilists or anarchists. We simply derive our ethics from our own rational response to the world around us, rather than rely 100% on the words of dead men who knew some things about the world but clearly not everything. Life evolves, and thus so does the human condition and our relationship to each other.

    Gammell:

    I know I personally would not shun the emergence of a new folk religion so long as those persons did not try to change public policy for everyone to conform with their beliefs. If you believe in the rule of law and in rationalism, then you know that trying to suppress religion through any means other than the marketplace of ideas is both wrong and futile.

    LikeLike

14. America is ready to return to the modern world. As the current economic crisis is teaching us, we lived in a bubble screened from reality until the bills came due and the bubble burst. What do you think Americans will say about any organization that spouts outdated theories? They won’t be attracted to them. In addition, Evangelicalism espoused universal acceptance and communalism. It didn’t live up to that PR and the modern mega churches could pay the price for that mis-management. While America will see an increase in atheism, it does not extinguish belief in Christianity’s founder….that’s in the eternal realm if understood as such. I think we may see the spiritually inclined stick to the spiritual and not the religeous. There’s plenty of room for believers in Christ in that world, they just need to hold that belief more tenderly and be a bit more cautious about using it as a tool to castigate.

    LikeLike

15. Anna

    Perhaps our communication problem stems from an improper connection between our relationship with the physical world our personal relationship with each other. As I said bfore, and I still believe, a scientist must be ever skeptical. In your example, of course a scientist will trust the readings of his instruments, until he may notice an anomoly, at which point he will immediately seek to find a reason for the apparent “error”. A good recent example was the discovery that the instruments reporting the shrinking of the Artic ice area had overstated the shinkage by thoudands of square miles. Investigation showed this to be due to the instruments drifting on the sea ice. I think even interpersonal relationships should be examined before major or irrevocable decisions are made A current case in point are those who invested and lost $50 billion in Madoff’s ponzi scheme solely on the basis of “trust”.

    LikeLike

16. I read today – sorry but don’t remember where – an article calling atheists the most under-recognized minority in America.

    There are approximately as many atheists as Hispanics and they have not yet begun to make the changes they are capable of driving.

    Here in Arkansas, for example, you can’t be an atheist and hold state office, per the constitution. Imagine if that were changed to say you can’t be an evangelical Christian?

    Part of the issue with modern Christianity has been its eagerness to use the tyranny of the majority to advance its goals.

    LikeLike

17. “If those in the pews of the megachurches think their grandchildren will be there as adults, I have a bridge I’d like to sell cheap.”

    Sure I know that’s just your opinion, but why is it even an issue? Maybe their grandchildren will go on to serve God in an entirely different way? In the meantime the megachurches are upholding the idea that God is more important than petty denominational divisions, and doing a darn good job. Church forms are transient, and God is fine with that.

    LikeLike

18. Haven’t read all the comments, but a couple of observations. The much proclaimed survey; ” People who don’t believe in God growing” must be examined at face value. The survey showed 10% of Americans fall in this category. Evangelicals are derided as a vocal minority (20+ % of USA) What does that make that 10%, an even more vocal, smaller minority?
    The damage the megachurches and prosperity movement have done is requiring no real commitment to Christian discipleship. They should cast out the teachings of Robert Shuller and pick up Dietrich Bonhoeffer. If there is a falling away in the near future it will be in the seeker friendly movement full of people whose faith is a mile wide and an inch deep.
    America is full of often small vibrant churches faithfully preaching God’s Word and reaching out to broken people. Authentic Christian discipleship may be a narrow path but it is still a soul winning and joyful path.

    LikeLike

19. My initial thought is that this survey is indicative of a shift in the American folk religion from a nominal Christian appearance to the “spiritual but not religious” grab-bag form that has become increasingly common. I think something akin to your notion of an evangelical collapse will come to pass, but a large part will be a result of the growing distance between the folk religion and evangelical Christianity and the end of their intermingling and alliance. Atheists may momentarily celebrate the initial appearance of a more secular society, but they will find the world much more hostile when they turn their materialism-only rhetoric primarily against the new folk religion. Welcome to the New Corinth; same as the old Corinth.

    LikeLike

20. Mark,

    RE: your explanation of ball lightning. I am not aware that there is a single accepted theory of ball lightning — I’ve read a number of hypotheses, none of which are currently capable of explaining the range of observed behavior.

    My own interaction with ball lightning in 1966 (too long to go into detail here) indicated that the (~10 in dia) ball followed the intersection between a magnetic line of force (it tracked due magnetic north) and an atmospheric equipotential surface (it maintained a constant 6 ft height above the ground as it came diagonally down a mountainside with knobs and gullys) — leading me to conclude it was probably an electromagnetic phenomenon. Despite glowing brightly enough to be seen in daylight, it was not hot enough to even singe the cotton string of a badminton net it passed through; but it easily shorted out a gasoline generator’s ignition. The observed track of the ball was over 150 yards, and it lasted for more than 30 seconds. This is not consistent with the expected behavior of a ball of burning silicon vapor. (I spent some time mapping out this encounter, as so many things happened that it seemed an almost ideal natural experiment — now, if only someone had taken a swipe at it with a badminton racket!)

    There are available hundreds of eyewitness reports of ball lightning showing behavior that is not consistent with the Brazilian theory. Perhaps there are many types of ball lightning, and they have found one; perhaps they have found a different phenomenon that is visually similar to ball lightning. At any rate, the claim that the Brazilian research results explains ball lightning seems somewhat premature.

    LikeLike

21. Mark,

    Perhaps I owe you an apology – thanks for your temperate response. I’ll try to clarify my position with the restraint you showed.

    I don’t have a personal stash of evidence about the spiritual world – this is available in any major library, for anyone to research, and has been for nearly 100 years. The fact that most scientists and engineers (like yourself) simply assume that this evidence doesn’t exist (or has been falsified) reinforces my point about the parochialism of science today – they start out assuming that science explains nearly everything, then ignore whatever it doesn’t explain. This is the attitude that I read into your original post (perhaps wrongly).

    If you want a short introduction to some of this evidence, you could do worse than looking at “Best Evidence” by Michael Schmicker. (Note: NOT the book on the Kennedy assassination!)

    As to whether scientists have been “kidding themselves”: Planck’s academic advisor warned him against studying physics, as it was a “mostly completed” field, with only a few loose ends to fix. Fortunately, Planck didn’t listen to him, and his attempt to fix one of the loose ends (blackbody radiation theory) started quantum mechanics. In more modern times, when some physicists talk about a “Theory of Everthing”, they aren’t joking – many think that String theory will become this. It remains to be seen, but my bet is that history is repeating itself.

    You are right to call me on the “mined out” crack – I’m currently patenting a new way to build solar cells, so I don’t believe that either. A better way to make the point would have been to note that electromagnetic theory has been around for 150 years, and there are still apparently electromagnetic phenomena that can’t be explained. To assume that the explanation of these phenomena is a trivial “loose end”, as Planck’s advisor did, might be just as foolish.

    I agree that scientific knowledge builds over time to achieve ever greater insight into physical phenomena. From inside this effort, it is easy to assume that the major part of the World is being explained; and, indeed, this is the attitude of many scientists and engineers. From a larger perspective, I like Isaac Asimov’s simile: That scientific knowledge is like an ever brighter light on an ever higher lightpole. It lights up more and more ground – but at the same time, the boundary with the darkness grows. We are nowhere near an explanation complete enough to even talk about rendering religion moot, and we always will be if science doesn’t start reaching beyond it’s comfort zone. Though they are usually ridiculed today, I admire the courage of the 19th century scientists who assumed that science could study anything, not just what was accepted as “physical”.

    I, personally, would welcome a scientific knowledge-based “religion”. There is a very long way to go to get there, but to make progress, science has to stop ignoring inconvenient evidence that current theories are only scratching the surface.

    LikeLike

22. To Alex,

    God is perfection, correct? Since God is perfect, it stands to reason that He is not only all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving, but also perfectly just. God does not push Himself on us. Consider human familial relations. Equate it to the “Prodigal Son” story. The son was living in sin, and ended up working in a hog lot, wishing he could eat some of the pods that he was feeding the hogs. In the end, the father received back the son, whom he thought was dead, back into the family, not as a servant, but as his son, with all the same rights as if he’d never left. The son, in reality, created his own hell by his actions and choices.

    I’m not so sure that our concept of hell shouldn’t change with the times, because frankly I think we DO create our own hell. Bottom line, hell is going to be awful firstly because it is going to be eternal imperfection, the lack of God’s presence. Secondly, it’s going to be bad because, well, it IS HELL.

    One example of what I think hell might be for, lets take fanatical Islamists, since I’m pretty sure we all agree that class of individuals is going to hell, is a room full of scantily clad women, 72 minimum, all exceedingly beautiful, and he can’t even lay a finger on them FOR ETERNITY, and there’s nowhere to get away from them, either. That certainly would be hell for him (for any man so tortured, I’m sure).

    On the topic of original sin, I found this interesting article by an Eastern Orthodox writer on St. Paul’s theology of original sin. It does go as far as to call Prot. and RC theology, and in practice, many Orthos due to western influence, to be heretical based on Paul’s theology.

    http://www.romanity.org/htm/rom.10.en.original_sin_according_to_st._paul.01.htm#s2

    LikeLike

23. Alex,
    The issues you have with the idea of hell is one of the reasons I fell away from the Episcopal and Catholic Churches and was “inactive” for many years. It never made sense that there were only 2 choices: Heaven and Hell. There was no inbetween. You were either Awesome Or Terrible.

    The Church I belong to does not believe this. We believe that there are 3 degrees of Glory (Heaven). We also believe there is 1 location of NO Glory, but only a Son of Perdition would go there and that there will be very few people there. We believe The Holy Ghost will reside over the lowest Glory, Jesus Christ will reside over the middle Glory, and God (our Heavenly Father) will reside over the highest Glory after the Second Comming when Jesus Christ comes back to judge over us all.

    The Church I belong to has this to say about Original Sin:
    Because of the Fall of Adam and Eve, all people live in a fallen condition, separated from God and subject to physical death. However, we are not condemned by what many call the “original sin.” In other words, we are not accountable for Adam’s transgression in the Garden of Eden.

    Our Prophet said, “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression”

    LikeLike

24. “However, even if it was clear as a bell I could never reconcile the concept of eternal punishment for temporal crimes with an omnibenevolent God, and thus the scriptures must be inaccurate.”

    FWIW, annihilationism is the view that those not in union with the source of life will no longer have life (with some variation-there can be burning up involved). This seems to be late 1800’s theology but some evangelicals, notably John Stott, are sympathetic.
    http://www.the-highway.com/annihilationism_Packer.html

    Original sin is not necessarily a fiat but could also be seen as descriptive. That is, even if it weren’t a sin “nature” (and we can argue about that), there is for sure a sin “nurture” that will be passed on because there is no sin-free culture.

    LikeLike

25. No, please just stick to a “Vicar of Dibley” level of being a vague figure of vanishing authority whose only job is to inform us, with a diffident smile and an apology for being so forward, that the message of Christ boils down to “Let’s all be nice to each other!” And as long as you’re a good person (for a particular value of “good” that does not include doing or saying anything to prod society’s conscience about its pet sins), it doesn’t matter what you do or don’t believe, because it’s all the same anyway at bottom and besides, science has explained the real reasons for everything so religion is relegated to warm, sentimental Christmas Carolling and Easter Bunny fuzziness. — Martha

    Which will resist Islam (which stands for someting definite and ACTS upon it) about as well as cotton candy resists the edge of a scimitar.

    I don’t believe the Bible is clear regarding hell (Gehenna vs. Sheol vs. Hades). It seems that these were all different concepts, With Gehenna being an actual physical place in Jerusalem known to be a nasty place. — Alex

    Gehenna (aka Hinnom Valley) WAS the Jerusalem city dump. As well as an infamous location of human sacrifice when Phoneican Baalism was making inroads on Judaism.

    Carrying on that imagery, Gehenna/Hell is a cosmic city dump, a landfill for refuse who couldn’t make it into the Kingdom. When you strip down and rebuild a house, you’ve got to dump the scrap and garbage someplace.

    I am reminded of a sign saying “God made AIDS to cure fags.” Love thy neighbor, unless he’s gay?

    What is a reasonable, intelligent person to do when confronted with this behavior? — DCX2

    Fred Phelps strikes again?

    LikeLike

26. Mark,

    If you believe in pure skepticism as a philosophy for a scientist, how do you know when to stop testing the simple stuff. By simple stuff, just weigh something, and how do you know that the balance is right, etc. etc. etc. You have to choose when to start accepting answers, or people’s words and deeds. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a great believer in questioning; I once told the truth and admitted that I didn’t believe in scientific evidence. Got me off of a jury (based only on breathelyzer evidence.) But, you do need to know when to stop and trust.

    Alex,

    How do explain Roman’s 5:12? That’s the verse where Paul says: “Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned”

    Solar Hero,

    I find it interesting that you praise the Charismatics. I was involved with them for a time, and enjoyed the worship, but left because there was very little or nothing to challenge my mind. The emphasis seemed to be emotional, not intellectual.
    Can you please give me an example of what kind of theological concept that you consider worn?

    Thank you

    LikeLike

27. The problems are deeper than any of you realize. Theological concepts from the most evangelical to the mainline are worn and prima facie absurd. Only the charismatics can deliver a coherent christology, for instance, thus their popularity.

    LikeLike

28. iMonk:

    I don’t believe the Bible is clear regarding hell (Gehenna vs. Sheol vs. Hades). It seems that these were all different concepts, With Gehenna being an actual physical place in Jerusalem known to be a nasty place. However, even if it was clear as a bell I could never reconcile the concept of eternal punishment for temporal crimes with an omnibenevolent God, and thus the scriptures must be inaccurate. The worst part is that mere indifference towards the Creator is supposedly enough to land us in hell.

    Original sin also calls into question God’s benevolence since we are created already in need of atonement, despite our complete innocence and lack of consent in our Earthly existence. The whole premise of modern Christianity as presented to me has been a cosmic Hobson’s choice (You have free will, but if you don’t use it to Love God then you will face eternal suffering. But God loves you). I don’t believe original sin is actually taught in the Bible, but was created by St. Augustine who tried to scientifically explain that sin was carried by a father’s sperm.

    LikeLike

29. Anna
    I appriciate your comments concerning Bob’s reply to my posting. I am aware of course of the ball lightning phenomona, its been around since Ben Franklins day, at least. The current theory suggests and in fact has been demonstrated in a Brazilian lab, that lightning vaporizes silicon into a cloud which then oxides rapidly in air producing a glowing, hot, sphere which persists up to 8 seconds. This has ,as I said, been demonstrated in the lab. It is further speculated, but not yet demonstrated that other materials could be similarly vaporized such as aluminum. In any case it is not likely to be the work of ghosts, angels or demons. As far as the philosophy of science goes, I believe that a true scientist’s philosophy is pure skepticism. Accept for the moment the theory that best explains and predicts events in the real world, but be ready to abandon or modify that theory should a fact or observation occur that contradicts the expected result. To me, at least, that is a clear relationship between the philosophy of science and scientific facts.

    LikeLike

30. Martha,

    Ah, OK. You’re right about that: a religion with no sharp edges isn’t worth having.

    LikeLike

31. J,
    You left me confused with one of your statements:

    *Generational horizons- the end of churches because no younger generation exists- are everywhere in the mainlines.*
    Ah ah ah! One exception: As they have been doing for the past 35 years, Unitarian Universalists are very, very slowly growing. Like, a fraction of a fraction of a percent.

    How is it that you consider Unitarian Universalists to be one of the mainlines?
    From their own beliefs page they admit the following:

    “Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion that encompasses many faith traditions. Unitarian Universalists include people who identify as Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Atheists, Agnostics, Humanists, and others. As there is no official Unitarian Universalist creed, Unitarian Universalists are free to search for truth on many paths.

    Even if they are growing, it isn’t Christianity that they are advancing.

    LikeLike

32. Martha,

    Yes, it does make perfect sense, doesn’t it? I am just putting into practice what I learned in Sunday school. After all, I had great Christian teachers. And I am not reproaching Christianity; I am merely using their own tools to attempt to understand, and uncover, their modus operandi. Deception at its best. Maybe, under these premises, the scribe I invented does really exist.

    LikeLike

33. Alex: Which do you believe we have here:

    1) Eternal punishment and original sin are not taught in the Bible at all.

    2) Eternal punishment and original sin are taught in the Bible, but Christians need to excise them from their beliefs anyway.

    thanks

    Michael Spencer (A person who would be happy to do away with both doctrines if Jesus didn’t teach them.)

    LikeLike

34. I was raised in an evangelical mega church and was so turned off by the tone deafness of its leadership that I never looked back after I left for college. Some of my friends from similar backgrounds opted for congregations with more doctrine, but I took the opposite route and ultimately lost faith.

    I agree that the church is dying, and until the majority of Christian denominations repudiate the doctrine of eternal punishment and original sin then it will continue to do so.

    LikeLike

35. Mark,

    I think that you missed Bob’s most important phrase about EE, he mentioned that there were still a number of phenomena that were unexplained, such as ball lightening.

    I was glad to read his posting because I am a formulating chemist, and I find challenges daily. I have to, more frequently than I would like, to try to either explain a difference in a raw material and if it changes anything in what we make it into. (and to my sorrowful irritation, the suppliers tend not to be able to help.)

    I think that part of the problem is that modern science does NOT make a clear distinction between its philosophy and the facts of science. You may be talking past each other because of this confusion

    LikeLike

36. That Other Jean, I was not denigrating the Corporal Works of Mercy by any means. What I intended to show scorn for was the view that religion (Christianity in our particular context) is perfectly fine as long as it confines itself to nice, harmless, agreeable things like works of charity. But please don’t drag your horrid deity into this, or even faintly intimate that the reason you are doing these works is because He has commanded us to love one another, or for any reason other than social utility.

    No, please just stick to a “Vicar of Dibley” level of being a vague figure of vanishing authority whose only job is to inform us, with a diffident smile and an apology for being so forward, that the message of Christ boils down to “Let’s all be nice to each other!” And as long as you’re a good person (for a particular value of “good” that does not include doing or saying anything to prod society’s conscience about its pet sins), it doesn’t matter what you do or don’t believe, because it’s all the same anyway at bottom and besides, science has explained the real reasons for everything so religion is relegated to warm, sentimental Christmas Carolling and Easter Bunny fuzziness.

    LikeLike

37. Ah, I see, F. Leon.

    You reproach Christianity for inventing fables by inventing a fable.

    Yes, that makes perfect sense.

    LikeLike

38. Bob
    As a fellow engineer, Bob, you surprise me in your assertion that I even suggested that “scientists have been kidding themselves with the idea that we have an almost complete knowledge of the universe since Newton”. I am not a scientist (BSEE and MS Nuclear Engineering), but I know that scientific knowledge builds over time as ever greater insight into physical phenomena is achived. Newton’s laws, as you must know, are still the basic models for the design of macro mechanical devices. The old saw which you repeat that later discoveries blows the old paradigm apart is nonsense. Einstein’s work started with an application of Larence’s transformation which was based on Newton’s laws of motion. A few years later Heisenburg, Bohr and others developed quantum mechanics by combining Einstein’s work with earlier quantum physics using a new form of matrix mathematics. Quantum Mechanics, as you probably know, is at the heart of solid state physics which, in turn, makes possible the design and production of most modern electronic devices. To suggest that any scientist is so arrogant as to either claim that we now know (almost) everything or ignore a phenomenon that he doesn’t understand tells me that you have never worked closely with a true scientist.
    And, Bob, I would be delighted to review any of the “massive amount” of 19th century higher-quality evidence you have that supports either the existence of an after life or supernatural interaction with human life. I would agree that since it is logically impossible to prove a negative, there may indeed be as you put it, a spiritual component to the universe, there just isn’t any solid evidence to support that theory.

    Biophysics is making rapid advances in understanding the fundamentals of biological systems, but the science is in its infantcy. I have never read of anyone working in that field (and I do read of their progress)who has even suggested that our understanding of these systems is any where near being complete. On the contrary, anyone in the field who stated that would be ridiculed as a total joke, to use your words. In closing, Bob, I am sorry you find the field of electrical engineering to be “mined out” with no remaining challenges. I suggest you read the IEEE journal for inspiration.

    LikeLike

39. I feel the need to correct this:

    Sadly, since then the church has been busily destroying its credibility among the educated and thereby shutting out people from the gospel.”

    This sentence, I suggest, should read, “Sadly, since then uneducated people have been busily destroying their credibility among the educated and thereby shutting out people from the gospel.”

    Lets not forget the deep (and historical) socioeconomic and class-divides in play when we speak about “educated” people, and lets make doubly certain that we don’t unknowingly adopt their ‘rationalist’ prejudices when we analyze the evangelistic efforts of the uneducated. The Evangelical American Christian zietgeist we’re all tearing down here was built on the labor of the Baptists, Methodists, immigrant Catholics et. al., whose formal educational and economic attainments were generally modest. Seething underneath all these debates that are supposedly about science is a class battle, and fundamentalist religion is falsely taken to be the ideological fault-line when it’s really just a scratch in the dirt compared to the real churning of value / capital ongoing.

    LikeLike

40. Here’s some food for thought regarding science and religion. “Aquinas v. Intelligent Design” http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2008/0811fea4.asp

    I think what will in the long run prove to be to the advantage of the Catholic Church, with respect to science, is it’s intellectualism, especially Thomism, which is a Christianization of Aristotle. The basic premise is that religion and science are not mutually exclusive, as God is the author of the laws of nature. “God is the author of all truth; the aim of scientific research is the truth; therefore, there can be no fundamental incompatibility between the two. Provided we understand Christian doctrine properly and do our science well, we will find the truth.”

    LikeLike

41. One thing about the “least of my brothers” reference —

    In that particular Gospel account, there is no loyalty oath, no identifying oneself with a denomination or even “the Name above all names.” There is just the unconscious, intrinsic reaching out to others in need in sincere care and compassion. The ones deemed successful were not even aware that they had done anything Divinely noteworthy. And they were the Saved.

    Judge with righteous judgment, I think.

    LikeLike

42. Mark said, “I submit that there is not a shred of evidence that there is an afterlife…”

    Correct. That’s why we call it faith. I have chosen to follow Jesus as who he said he was and believe what he said. That probably seems irrational, even crazy to many, but I’m OK with that.

    As for your statement “There is hope in the fact that as the level of education rises, the need to believe in the supernatural wanes so our grandchildren may indeed live in a more rational world”. Hitler abandoned his Catholic upbringing for a secular state, Joseph Stalin was an avowed atheist, Paul Pot abolished all religions in Cambodia in an attempt to create a Utopian society. All three were responsible for the death of millions. Hardly a rational world.

    And yes, the Christian community also bears responsibility for participation / complicity in genocide throughout recorded history, so you needn’t remind me of the crusades or nuns in Rwanda. Whether or not a person chooses to believe in God wouldn’t seem (based on our history so far) to be a predictor of peaceful co-existence with one’s neighbors, so don’t I wouldn’t get my hopes up.

    LikeLike

43. Mark,

    The story you tell is neat and tidy, but it’s just a story told by secular scientists to reassure themselves. (I’m not dissing secular scientists – I’m one myself.) The idea that science is a (nearly) complete explanation of the world doesn’t stand up to even moderate examination. Scientists have been kidding themselves with this idea for 200 years, at least – ever since Newton published his theories. As soon as the “end of science” is announced, new phenomena are discovered that blows the old paradigm apart.
    Far from “not a shred” of evidence, there is a massive amount of evidence for the existence of a spiritual component to the universe (yes, including an afterlife, as well). Much of the higher-quality evidence was actually generated by scientists themselves in the late 19th century, when studying it was temporarily in vogue. Today’s scientists usually assume, without any justification other then wishful thinking, that the matter has been adequately explained.
    Even in a “mined out” field such as Electrical Engineering (my field), there are numerous physical phenomena (some repeatable, some not) that have never been even approximately explained by current theory: ball lightning and water-arc explosions are a couple of examples. Most things that can’t be explained by science are simply ignored by scientists. The idea that scientific explanation in the life sciences is even approximately complete is a total joke.
    As an Engineer/Scientist, I’m not going to accept a religious explanation as the truth, without proof. However, I don’t buy the “secular fairy-tale” that current science explains more than a tiny fraction of the Universe.

    LikeLike

44. Rod Mullen was correct that the inflection point of history was the Enlightenment. Sadly, since then the church has been busily destroying its credibility among the educated and thereby shutting out people from the gospel. The church staked everything on its losing gamble that science would eventually be proven wrong so that its traditional (but non-essential) beliefs that conflict with science would be justified. And so we’ve seen the church wrong on an unbroken succession of issues: geocentrism (it hurts to even name that over-wrought and inflated issue), geology and the extent of the flood, the age of the Earth and universe, and now — coming into ever sharper focus with the tremendous influx of genomic data — evolution and the literalness of the Adam and Eve account. (This last one strikes closest to the essentials of the faith, but in my opinion is not really an essential after all when the genre of the account is taken into account.) What kills me is that the church is almost completely unaware that this is why it is losing. Rather than recognize our 300 years of failure, we once again double down and take the bad gamble, asserting our failing traditions over the evidence. Whereas we should have been patrons of the sciences, giving full support and freedom to investigators, waiting to see what truths of nature God was going to surprise us with, we have let the world know that we are the enemy and alternative to science (which just happens to be tremendously successful and thus increasingly identified by our neighbors as the foundation-stone of their worldview). I’m convinced that the conversion of a culture always occurs from the intellectual class downward. (Paul wanted to preach before Caesar, recall.) Grassroots growth among the population does precede conversion of the intellectual class, but ultimately the overall culture won’t be converted until the intellectuals are. Well, we have lost the intellectuals in the West almost completely. You can hardly find a Christian professor on campus these days. The education establishments even down to K-12 levels are easily converting the youth away from Christianity by making us appear intellectually backward, or rather pointing out how we actually _are_ intellectually backward (in our evangelical instantiation). So it’s no wonder that we are losing the souls of people all around us. But why can’t the church see this? The only answer I can see is that the power of tradition won’t let people face the facts. People just don’t want to question the literalness of Adam and they can’t bring themselves to do it, no matter how obviously out of touch they are with science and no matter how high a stumbling block it puts in front of people who aren’t starting from the same traditional bias that we are. It’s heart-breaking. I’m only now finding my voice on this issue, and I hold hope that maybe some others are, too. But I have to wonder if the church is already, no matter what, too late for this generation.

    LikeLike

45. Anna A.

    In my comments, my references to fear had to do, in part, with the experiences I had when I was very young. My parents, priests, nuns, teachers, etc., instilled fear in me at a young age because they wanted me to go to church, confession, etc., so that I could be saved, but they never told me from what. In their eyes, I was just a new recruit.

    I think human beings must believe in some Higher Being who loves us, but this choice must be personal. I had no choice when I was young, but to follow what my parents and other grown ups dictated me. I have that choice now.

    Thank you for your comments. Love is certainly the answer.

    LikeLike

46. F. Leon,

    I feel sorry for you, that your main response to Christianity is fear. I can understand where it is coming from, because too often Christ is not shown as the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for His Sheep, but as the Judge. Also, all forms of Christianity have added stuff to it; like being told that I’m not a Catholic because I don’t like praying the rosary or that Baptist women NEVER wear slacks.

    The heart of the gospel is LOVE. God loves us, Jesus loves us (and wants us to love God, then our neighbor and even ourselves.)

    I won’t pretend that it is easy, because it isn’t. Scary too. Imagine a birthday cake candle loving and being loved by the sun. I hope that I have helped you understand, just a little bit.

    LikeLike

47. Rev. Rowland,

    Please re-read my quote. I said that the quote is not really racist… but I could not pinpoint what the writer really meant. He might have meant something else, but you can ask him. Maybe he is the racist in this instance, who knows?

    As a member of a minority who was born and lived in a remote part of the world, I have seen and experienced first-hand the way missionaries operate in such an environment. Perhaps I was too harsh when I stated that these people “have no minds” because they certainly do— one of them is answering your posting. What I meant is that, when they are contacted by these saviors, they usually do not have experience with religious matters, or, worse, its consequences. In that sense, they are ignorant. They are ripe for conquest. The Catholic Church has been a very active protagonist in these sad tales.

    LikeLike

48. Martha,

    Glad you asked that question. I cannot give you a reference for his location, not even the name of the scribe because it was an example, a figment of my imagination.

    My point is that we don’t really know who wrote such things. For example, who wrote the stuff in Genesis? Was it written by some divine being? Was he/she/it from another planet? I don’t know. We don’t know, do we?. The snake in the Garden of Eden would be another appropriate example. When I was very young, the tale of the snake instilled fear in me because, like Indiana Jones, I hate snakes. The mention of Satan, likewise, had a similar effect on me. As a result, I had to go to church, or else, you know what.

    The key word is fear. That is why one often reads that Satan is a Liberal. Church-going people are supposed to fear Liberals because Liberals have their eyes opened and can spot a sleigh of hands a mile away.

    LikeLike

49. “That’s not religion. Awe, terror, rage, savage indignation, delight, and the peace that passeth understanding – yes. Sticking plaster for society – no.” – Martha

    Martha, I only have a problem with that last bit. There’s this verse in Matthew about “Whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.” It seems to imply that “sticking plaster for society” is pretty important.

    Perhaps if Evangelicals (and others) concentrated more on helping others and less on feeling good about themselves, or praying for something good to happen to them, or whatever’s in vogue this week, Christianity wouldn’t be declining in this country. Yeah, I know–salvation is a gift, and is not won by works. Doesn’t matter: take that gift and DO SOMETHING with it!

    LikeLike

50. um, F. Leon, how do you start a post by calling a statistical fact, (ie: that if not for the influence of Hispanics in Catholicism, the RCC would be in much steper decline) RACIST, and end with such a statement:

    “The only remaining frontiers to keep the “faith” going are remote places in the world where people have no minds and are, therefore, submissive to the words of preachers and missionaries.”

    This last statement of yours is not only racist, but imperialist as well, as it shows you believe people in ‘remote places’ have no capacity to reason or think.

    Dude……party foul!

    LikeLike

51. Every advance in the history of mankind starting tens of thousands of years before Moses (if there really was a Moses) was accomplished by man. From his discovery of fire, agriculture, animal husdandry, metalurgy, irrigation, architecture,money, democracy and culminating in the modern miracles of jet planes, computers, digital TV and cell phones, to name a few. All of these things would have been called works of God by preceding generations. Any objective study of history must lead to the conclusion that all through his evolution, man has invented some sort of God, or Gods, to explain the obsevations around him, that he could not understand. As science has led to more and more complete understanding of the world he lives in, relgion has become focused on the one mystery that science cannot explain. Namely, where do we go when we die? The fear that this may be the only life we have is the bedrock on which the Christian, Muslim and Jewish faiths rests. I submit that there is not a shred of evidence that there is an afterlife, nor any evidence that God has ever concerned himself in the affairs of mankind, although there are those who maintain that the tsunami that killed a quarter of a million people in Thailand was indeed one of his “acts”. One final observation: There is hope in the fact that as the level of education rises, the need to believe in the supernatural wanes so our grandchildren may indeed live in a more rational world.

    LikeLike

52. Willie – we have too many tribal drums thumping now…. enough already!!

    F.Leon – Read the post again and take it in its context “things” were not ment in a bad manner – it was actually a compliment – it were not for the hispanic people it would be far worse off. Your last paragraph
    was just silly!

    LikeLike

53. James 1:27: Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

    Sounds an awful lot like social work to me.

    LikeLike

54. I think some readers have misunderstood the context of my post. I don’t hate Christians. I don’t want to see Christianity disappear. I don’t think that people should join a religion just because the practitioners are nice.

    What I do believe is that there are some irrational behaviors on the part of some Christians and that turns a lot of people off. I am reminded of a sign saying “God made AIDS to cure fags.” Love thy neighbor, unless he’s gay?

    What is a reasonable, intelligent person to do when confronted with this behavior? Do you think Jesus would hold that sign?

    What I want, and what others like me want, is a religion that espouses universal truths that apply to all humans, without marginalizing others or using minorities as a target for rallying support. Do not lead us to God as if we are sheep, but walk along beside us as if we are discovering the God together.

    As Christians, you have the opportunity to provide a religion for those of us who have yet to identify with one. It is your own selfish demand to legislate morality for others that is holding us back.

    LikeLike

55. Trust has been broken. The remedy is not to continue to demand trust. The remedy is transparancy. Authority at all levels and all sectors has been abused and on the information super highway word spreads quickly. The social consciencousness is bombarded with new revelations of corruption and hypocracy on a regular basis. With story after story in the public eye, it seems pervasive and this is not only impacting decisions but confirming negative stereo types. These stereo types are consistently reinforced and we are relegated to an us vs. them mentality and guess what: a culture war.

    It seems like we forget that the wisdom that is from above is without hypocrisy and willing to yeald.

    The church has lost the moral high ground and can no longer afford to be dogmatic. The old debates have gained nothing. The only hope for growth and healing is thoughtful dialog in a spirit of sincere comradery. With such negative results and such dire predictions, the church can no longer posture as though it has all the answers. Its not even asking the right questions.

    LikeLike

56. F. Leon, could you please provide me with the name and/or location of that one particular scribe who invented the devil out of nowhere, managed to get this imaginary construct inserted into all copies of the Scriptures produced globally, and avoided having anyone go “Hey, last time I read this, that ‘Satan’ guy wasn’t mentioned anywhere!”

    Kthanxbye!

    LikeLike

57. The Guy from Knoxville
    Wrote

    Boy this post opened up the looney bin and all the
    nut cases have come flooding in!

    I’m not exactly sure who the guy from Knoxville is referring to but in case it is me let me explain. I enjoy being around Christians and attending church each Sunday. I consider Christians to be my tribe and the church service is where I go to hear the tribal drum being beaten. So look around next Sunday and you may see me there.

    LikeLike

58. James of Duluth

    Clearly you thought long and hard before writing obituary of the evangelical movement. In normal times hubristic rants are best left falling to the ground but we find ourselves in an age that listens and acts upon foolish intellectual thought. The Evangelical Christian Church as you have defined it never existed so it can’t be killed. The Evangelical Christian Church has always been focused on their communities by God’s inspired leadership in the community this will continue with or without building and money.
    Like most rambling thought there a few truths worth digesting if they were not already subject of debate within the community. If you intention was to spur debate within among evangelicals’ then I would remind you of Matthew 7:5 “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” However, if you intention was to feed the flames of Evangelical Christian hatred then may God have mercy on you.

    Way to miss the point.

    LikeLike

59. Your quote, which I am adding verbatim below, is not really racist… what is it?

    “Hispanics are the only thing floating in a sinking American Catholicism. Catholicism in the northeast is in rapid decline. Stunning, really.”

    To begin with, Hispanics are not “things” and they don’t float. Most of us go to church to visit socially; we leave the “believing” to the older generations. Things will get worse for the church, however. As members of the younger generation grow up, they will also leave religion. And that is stunning.

    Many of my contemporaries have “inherited” (forced, really)religion from our parents. This was akin to being brainwashed, but forcefully accepted— the choice was not there. Nowadays, most people, including the floaters, are learning that there is not such a thing as Satan, for example. This notion, and many like it, is only the product of the nightmares of a scribe from antiquity, a monk who, in his spare time, wanted to make things more interesting and fearful. He needed converts, you see.

    Therefore, I am not surprised (maybe somewhat elated, however) that people are leaving organized religion in droves. These are people who are educated, have degrees, etc. They have opened their eyes, and closed their wallets, to reality. The only remaining frontiers to keep the “faith” going are remote places in the world where people have no minds and are, therefore, submissive to the words of preachers and missionaries.

    It is a cruel world, but reality bites.

    LikeLike

60. “[W]hen the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?” – Luke 18:8

    Guys, I think we just answered that question.

    I think what’s happening is that we’re going “back to the future”, so to speak. If the house church movement continues to thrive in greater numbers than before and big denominations continue faltering into nothingness, the picture of Christianity in America’s future will look more like the early Christian church meeting at believers’ homes during time of the Roman Emperors.

    The non-religious community will grow, but there will be a very vocal and hostile one dominating all discourse which, with other religious groups and the government, will eventually eliminate all Christianity from public life.

    Seen in California a few years ago was this one T-shirt with the message, “So Many Christians, So Few Lions…”

    It will come to a point in which, when push comes to shove, those remaining Christians will say, in open defiance of the seculars, “Jesus is Lord, not the State/Government/Leader.” Exactly what happened during the time of the Emperors. We all know how it ended.

    The lions are waking up after an age-long nap.. and they’re mightily hungry…

    Oh, BTW: to the dude who talked about how the Enlightenment promises the better future… Look at the other side of the Enlightenment coin – the French one. Yep, “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite”. Did you see that little guillotine emblazoned in that coin? You should. Did you know that little machine cut the heads off nuns, priests, and many, many innocent people during the Reign of Terror, including Marie Antoinette? Hey: Robespierre was a very efficient follower of the Enlightenment! After all, he was a fan of Voltaire, right? … right? Today’s America is being quickly populated by those whose political influences can be traced to the French Enlightenment/Napoleonic Code. How promising…

    LikeLike

61. Clearly you thought long and hard before writing obituary of the evangelical movement. In normal times hubristic rants are best left falling to the ground but we find ourselves in an age that listens and acts upon foolish intellectual thought. The Evangelical Christian Church as you have defined it never existed so it can’t be killed. The Evangelical Christian Church has always been focused on their communities by God’s inspired leadership in the community this will continue with or without building and money.
    Like most rambling thought there a few truths worth digesting if they were not already subject of debate within the community. If you intention was to spur debate within among evangelicals’ then I would remind you of Matthew 7:5 “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” However, if you intention was to feed the flames of Evangelical Christian hatred then may God have mercy on you.

    LikeLike

62. Michael,

    The full detailed ARIS report is available here. There is a wealth of information here, far beyond what was available in the summary articles.

    It should keep me busy with blog posts at Eclectic Christian for quite some time. 🙂

    LikeLike

63. Steve,

    Well said.

    Wyman

    LikeLike

64. Nick wrote:

    “Secularism and every other ism will fall before Christ and His church…”

    One of those isms might be evangelicalism, which isn’t necessarily the same as ekklesia (i.e. church). The hollow shell of evangelicalism can fall, yet His people assembled just might remain. I read of people out there that are disillusioned with the “organized churches” as they exist and are trying to form communities that don’t resemble what we’re accustomed to seeing. I’m not bothered so much by people leaving “churches.” I think people are realizing that what’s “out there” isn’t really any worse than what’s “in here,” so they leave.

    LikeLike

65. Michael,

    Boy this post opened up the looney bin and all the
    nut cases have come flooding in! I’ve always known that I was a bit “sheltered” but the abject hatred for christians is of a level that I had not expected assuming I’m reading all the above right. This is good for me though as one needs to see the real world and realize what’s really happening. I’ll admit that I have great issues with my SBC background but I can never go to the point of an outright denial of Christ that is so evident in some of the comments above.

    I suppose we need to see just what the world really thinks because it’s very evident that many sitting in the church pew, especially in the megas and similar, have no clue how they come across to people and if that’s so with them it’s 100X or even 1000X worse for
    hardcore fundie churhes and similar.

    Reeling somewhat from reality…. but it’s needed.

    LikeLike

66. Your insight is prescient. Please read a very brief Catholic response to this prophetic article at bonreport.com.

    Truth is not relevant, and your analysis is based on truth.

    Your hope for home churches though is misplaced. Chaos and disunity will never auto-assemble, and will certainly never answer the culture with one voice. What voices manage to answer will have no authority. House churches are simply a structure, not a faith. You can’t hand on a house church to your children in the same way you can’t hand on a conversation with your neighbor to your children. It is another stillborn idea, yet born from a sincere desire to “reboot” Protestantism. There are other ways to “reboot”, yet the most basic of ideas escape sincere believers, due large in part from the plethora of teachers Paul warned us about.

    Paul predicts that when there are “many teachers”, it is a bad sign, and that is where we are at. (2 Timothy 4:1-5) And isn’t the situation you describe exactly this? If not, what WOULD a multitude of teachers in a Christian landscape look like? And would it not end up exactly what you describe as present – and doomed?

    To “reboot”, you have to back to the beginnings, to the foundation, which according to Paul is the Church, not private interpretation of Scripture, not random ministries without authority, not multitudes of teachers leading this way and that.

    As monkeys banging on typewriters will never produce a Sonnet, so to will random views of the faith mount together to produce a cohesive and singular answer to the evil of our times. And a singular answer is what it needs. Look around – you just might find one…

    LikeLike

67. grace:

    Not wearing the cooler clothes is a defining issue of fundamentalism.

    I take it you aren’t a Driscoll fan? 🙂

    peace

    ms

    LikeLike

68. To all those anticipating the ultimate demise of religion and the dawn of a bright new age of rationalism –

    – haven’t we been waiting for this to happen since the 18th century (Age of Enlightenment)/14th century (Renaissance)/50 B.C. (Lucretius, “De Rerum Natura”)?

    Wouldn’t hold my breath, chaps and chapesses 🙂

    Also, in regard to “helping the poor” – religion is not social work. Religion is not nice. Religion is damn terrifying (as Chesterton puts it in one of his “Fr. Brown” stories). You don’t need to be religious to be a nice person. There are ethical atheists out there who are brimming over with the natural virtues. That is praiseworthy.

    That’s not religion. Awe, terror, rage, savage indignation, delight, and the peace that passeth undestanding – yes. Sticking plaster for society – no.

    LikeLike

69. Doug,

    Forgive me: you said 30 years ago, not the 1930’s. So the crazy lunatics who believe in the historicity of Scripture took over in the 1970’s! My bad.

    Wyman

    LikeLike

70. Christians shouldn’t have engaged in the Culture Wars? What should they have done, then? The so-called Culture War is driven by profoundly anti-Christian (and anti-Human, even) elements — any religion that doesn’t fight it is toast; completely co-opted by the opposition.

    I am not personally a Christian, but I believe that there are profound truths about Human nature and the World that religions must keep promoting — that is, in fact, one of their main values. Because these truths are based on thousands of years of experience, they will inevitably appear conservative compared to the reckless abandon with which “Progressives” want to move into “new” territory by scrapping them. (Not so “new” actually, as history provides ample evidence of the destructive effects of most of the secularists’ projects.)

    LikeLike

71. Is there something I need to know about ACTS 29?

    I don’t see a future for traditional fundamentalism…

    ACTS 29 is traditional fundamentalism dressed in cooler clothes.

    LikeLike

72. Doug,

    You are absolutely correctly! People only started believing that the stories of the Bible actually happened in the 1930’s. Before the 1930’s (you are correct!) it was viewed as a glorious collection of motivational allegories.

    cough…cough…cough Excuse me!

    I mean, Jesus and Paul and the rest clearly held to your understanding of scripture.

    Oooooh my. 🙂

    Wyman

    LikeLike

73. This is truly “Good News”! How long will this antiquated superstition subvert our collective progress? Jesus makes many a failed prophecy (Mark 9.1, Mark 14.62) and these prophecies were never intended as future metaphor. Apologetics made that swith-a-roo. Turns out the “all-knowing son of god” wasn’t so all-knowing. But, don’t let that get in the way of insisting you must worship him or suffer an eternal hot-bath. It’s the cult of Christianity. It’s time of relevance has passed. AMEN!

    LikeLike

74. Earth and life on it is much older than a literal reading of the Bible would lead one to believe. Life started simple and became increasingly complex over vast amounts of time. Ice cores going back hundreds of thousands of years show no worldwide flood. Many are not troubled by these facts and simply say regarding the Bible. ” God said it I believe it and that settles it” In my view,many in the future are going to increasingly question the authority of the Bible and leave the church. Those that stay will not be interested in scientific facts,they will base their beliefs on emotional feedback, and who cannot be moved at the picture of the father of the prodigal son standing in the road looking for his lost son. Christianity will be around for a long time.

    LikeLike

75. Dan: Did you read past the headline?

    LikeLike

76. Sex-focused politicizing and capitalistic self-help are the foci now. Ultimately neither can satisfy spiritually and both eventually make churches look ridiculous.

    LikeLike

77. Also, the denialism in this thread is EXACTLY what I mean when I say that many of us don’t have the wisdom to make sense of what’s happening to the church.

    Come on, guys.

    LikeLike

78. doesn’t something have to be really ugly…before someone can appreciate beauty in something else? the evangelical movement just keeps getting uglier…while the way of Jesus…the Kingdom movement looks more beautiful and attractive to a world hungry for beauty, love, justice, mercy, discipline, and depth.

    keep up the good work…

    peace…love…grace…

    brandon andress

    LikeLike

79. Dan, read the study. The church isn’t going to vanish entirely in the West, but we are facing a “demographic nightmare scenario” where we’re going to lose a LOT of cultural influence and our monopoly on all things moral-and-family-related. Losing our ‘majority’ isn’t an apocalypse scenario, but it is going to radically test the commitment and wisdom of the people who remain with the old groups, as they answer to a culture who no longer gives them the wide berth they used to command. If you were a child in the 50’s, the world of your youth was warm and welcoming to professions of Christianity, but today and for the forseeable future, the indifference and incomprehension of the secular worldview towards the claims of Christian believers is a different environment.

    America is in the process of becoming a nation of people who were raised Christians and don’t believe in that stuff anymore and can’t really remember what it was like.

    LikeLike

80. You’re also on Hotair.com

    LikeLike

81. Does this mean that evangelicals will finally support conservative political candidates who do not share the same views on abortion for instance?

    Does this mean that evangelicals will finally be able to keep personal spiritual beliefs private where they belong and out of the political landscape, thus helping to avoid the destruction of viable candidates with whom they agree on almost every other single fiscal and policy issue?

    And does this mean that we’re finally going to have to stop pandering to loons who believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old?

    LikeLike

82. “If you do not provide a religion which speaks to them, they will leave yours; the core message of *Christianity* is valuable to them, but the *Christians* themselves are the turn-off.”

    The problem with this is that it betrays a heartless, equivocal idea of discipleship on the part of the “seeker” – it takes a pretty childish, insipid view of humanity to base your decision to confess a religion solely based on whether or not the people who are in it seem nice.

    That’s just narcissism – self-interest as the sole defining criteria of what is true or worth doing or worth belonging to. Conversion to Jesus, it seems to me, involves being able to see humanity’s common depravity and to love them and yourself patiently, which is the first thing you notice when you realize the magnitude of Jesus’ life, death and the message of the church. That glimpse of insight is what seems to separate the persevering disciples from those of us for whom Sunday morning can only be a hobby or a family singalong activity.

    LikeLike

83. Here we go again. Mr. Spencer – It’s easy to criticize the church of Jesus Christ. Like it or not, the church (believers in the life, death, resurrection of Jesus the Christ) is made up of Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant believers of varying stripes and degrees. Yes, with all our flaws (and we have many), we are the church. Mr. Spencer, you’ve damned Evangelicals and basically said that the world wins. I thought that the gates of hell (read secularism), would ont prevail against the church. Who said that? Oh yeah – it was Jesus. Secularism and every other ism will fall before Christ and His church – this you can bank on. Jesus loves His body flawed though it may be. – Shalom

    LikeLike

84. Pro 4:18 – But the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, That shines brighter and brighter until the full day.

    You remind me of the Pentecostals I grew up with that kept talking about it being “five minutes ’til midnight”. If walking in darkness is where your comfort level is then you should investigate what it means to be righteous through Christ that 1 Corinthians teaches. Otherwise, you’re just dribbling from fallen nature and we all know nothing good comes from that.

    I’m not promoting mega-churches or the like, but Christ hasn’t stepped down off His throne because you’re feeling gloomy.

    LikeLike

85. Well folks, I’ve been wondering where all the “trash religion, church and christianity” has come from all the sudden but, perhaps we need to see this as a wake-up call. I don’t agree with many things stated in the comments and especially the last few above. Claming to follow Christ while dismissing his teachings in scripture as a collection of inspirational stories etc. with no factual basis makes absolutly no sense what so ever – why follow him at all??

    My business takes me to churches all the time and, if anything, I see a trend back towards traditional churhes even by younger folks – the churches that seem to have the biggest issues in all the change are the SBC churches. I generally don’t bother with them when I’m out (I’m a pipe organ co rep P/T) they’ve pretty much bought contemporary trends anyway while others are turning away from it similar to the comment from Darcee above. This is not to say that a collapse won’t happen but there is a little sanity left ane even though the move back towards traditional is small and slow but it’s there never-the-less.

    Just my thoughts……

    LikeLike

86. Doug — “Sort of like people who watch Soap Operas and think that the actors were the real folks. Delusional.”

    I agree, to a degree. Whether the Bible “actors” were real folks or not is not the point. It is whether the Bible stories are convincing us to treat our real neighbors like the real people in need that they are, or are we being convinced to relate to the “Holy Ones” from the stories we think we know and draw back from the “sinners” we do know. Of the above, which did the Pharisees do and which did Jesus do …? Read the stories ….

    People do things — decide to frequent places and be with people — when they perceive those things to be in their best interests. When church attendance and affiliation delivers on the promises of healing and peace related in the Biblical accounts, those churches fill up.

    LikeLike

87. Hello Michael,

    after reading your article on Evangelical demise and your belief that Catholicism and Orthodox religions will benefit from this demise I believe your summation is incorrect.
    Christian ideals will always be with us whether we are religious or not but religion of all kinds is what is disappearing from the world’s culture. Catholic churches are closing in the east faster than any where else but that trend will spread to this country and eventually the world.
    One of the biggest drivers of this rapid decline of religion is its insistence that Darwin’s evolution is essentially a farce and that Creationism is how the world evolved. People in this country and the world over have come to realize how unreasonably dogmatic religion is and have chosen the world of Darwin and of course repudiated religion.
    Tomorrow is already here and religion will soon be buried in the ashes of history. Whether for good or bad depends on whether the secular world accepts a new world secular morality which will incorporate Christian ideals.

    LikeLike

88. To me this is not a Faith in God issue as some may suggest, It’s a Faith in people that has been eroded. Many of the folks that flock to the mega-churches do not want fellowship the way the local smaller churches have. Also imho they are sucked in by the leader of these churches telling them how great they are and how evil those others are. They are encouraged to convert others by words instead of showing other there faith by deeds. Imo just like the meltdown of banks we will have a meltdown of churches not because of God because of man.

    Sorry if this doesn’t make sense I’m not a writer
    God Bless,

    LikeLike

89. When I grew up Christians were good and the focus was on helping the poor.

    The Bible was considered a collection of stories to inspire the words of Jesus.. and only fanatical mentaly unstable folks thought that they were to be believed as real fact.

    Sort of like people who watch Soap Operas and think that the actors were the real folks. Delusional.

    But some how in the last 30 years, the delusionals took over… now when I think of Christians, I think of small minded, bigots.

    What a shame.

    I consider myself a follower of Christ’s teachings.. but not a so called “Christian”.

    I do not want to be a part of THAT club.

    LikeLike

90. DCX2-

    “If you do not provide a religion which speaks to them, they will leave yours; the core message of *Christianity* is valuable to them, but the *Christians* themselves are the turn-off.
    Reminds me of a button I once saw in a store. “I have no problem with God, it’s His fan club that I can’t stand.”

    Reminds me of the book Dan Kimball recently wrote, They Like Jesus But Not The Church.

    Here is his website:
    http://www.dankimball.com/vintage_faith/

    LikeLike

91. I think if you look closely at the Catholic Church in general you will see that the “traditional” Catholic parishes are still growing while the more progressive parishes are floundering. Same goes with our religious communities. We have convents bursting at the seams with young women who have kept their habits and Latin mass while the more progressive orders haven’t seen a postulate in 20 years. Our Pope Benedict while roundly criticized by the main stream media as too conservative is more a reflection of the reality that what is ancient in the church is surviving, what is newfangled is fading fast.

    LikeLike

92. *Christianity to me is like a college football conference*

    …and the coaches are grotesquely overpaid and are prompting investigations that their recruitment is sucking resources away from actual professors and students

    …and many of these coaches are fairly openly abusive toward their players and/or other people around them, but no one seems to much care because “they deliver”

    …and the top players are indolent, misogynist thugs perennially being hauled in handcuffs out of nightclub fights

    …and these players always seem to magically get A’s even though they’re never seen in class

    …and the eternal cycle of teardown-rebuild-teardown of ever more ginormous stadiae for them to play in consumes brobdignagian quantities of money and energy and often is undertaken by bulldozing humbler, less well-heeled neighborhoods, businesses, etc.

    Good metaphor, Ed.

    LikeLike

93. *Generational horizons- the end of churches because no younger generation exists- are everywhere in the mainlines.*

    Ah ah ah! One exception: As they have been doing for the past 35 years, Unitarian Universalists are very, very slowly growing. Like, a fraction of a fraction of a percent.

    LikeLike

94. Your report ties directly into the following facts (please see hyperlinks within the articles).

    http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91002

    http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80738

    Peace,

    -D

    LikeLike

95. If Christianity is on the decline, it is only because there is no Christianity that they can identify with. Perhaps the Bible underlines a story, and this story has a meaning; the meaning is still important today, but the story needs to evolve.

    I think that today’s Americans want a Christianity which tolerates other religions as merely another interpretation of God, but not a replacement for God. I think today’s Americans see nothing wrong with gays. If you do not provide a religion which speaks to them, they will leave yours; the core message of *Christianity* is valuable to them, but the *Christians* themselves are the turn-off.

    Reminds me of a button I once saw in a store. “I have no problem with God, it’s His fan club that I can’t stand.”

    LikeLike

96. “It is the role of the church to reach out to the community and minister to those who are in physical, psychological, and spiritual need (not the government, I might add)”

    I don’t really care whose job it is, all that matters is that it gets done. If the churches aren’t doing it then the government should do it.>>>

    Hear! Hear! The unfortunate fact is that most churches aren’t interested in helping those in “phsyical, psychological, and spiritual need.” It’s so much easier to say, “I’ll pray for you,” and send the person on their merry. The churches that are interested in trying to help either don’t have the resources to meet ALL of the needs (some area churches are very good to the non-profit where I work), or they really haven’t got a clue about the reality of the situations.

    LikeLike

97. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Superstitions like religion have no place in the modern world except to incite people for or against something that its leaders desire, usually power and money.

    Make the world a better place for all our children and future generations. All we have is this place, the here and now, and all our descendants will have is what we leave them and the condtion it is in when we give it up.

    LikeLike

98. The problem with making predictions on statistical studies is that the data is always lagging and the assumption is that the relative status quo with the rest of the culture will continue as is.

    But sea-changes in church affiliation/attendance have been tied to world-wide cataclysms in the past, and we certainly are not immune in that area — might be on the brink right now.

    Steve Scott -” Okay, now; Christianity might be on the decline, but is Christ on the decline? Or are the old wineskins broken like a dam? Maybe the vines are being pruned, the wheat threshed.”

    I agree — and even the first assertion has to be qualified — is the success of Christianity measured by denominational membership? Or is it to be measured in in how the message has been so ingrained in a society that most no longer feel the need to be preached to incessantly twice a week, morning and evening?

    LikeLike

99. Christianity to me is like a college football conference:

    Everybody is playing the same game, but some teams are powerhouses while others are only fit to be homecoming opponents. The powerhouse teams have the best coaches who have installed their own system to make it easier to win more games. The powerhouse teams have more wealthy alumni, who are more than happy to contribute to the next stadium expansion or upgraded athletic training facilities. Their fans, emboldened by years of championship play are dismissive snobs of the “cow college” fans of the other less successful teams.

    And as long as it means more wins, more TV time, and bigger bowl game revenue, no one cares if the coaches are recruiting in another team’s traditional territory.

    Now, game attendance and TV revenue is down because another sport is making inroads and stealing away potential student-athletes. Everyone in the conference is left trying to make the game of football more appealing rather than trying to understand the appeal of soccer (yes, I know that the rest of the world considers this to be the real game of football) and adjusting to the desires (needs) of the audience.

    Stupid analogy over.

    On a serious note: Since I have a simple-minded belief that the Church will survive regardless of the ups and downs of individual denominations or entire movements, then I say good riddance.

    LikeLike

100. Always challenging, iMonk. I just hope we don’t plant churches because it is the relevant thing to do and will help evangelicalism stay afloat as is. I want to see churches planted because the kingdom rule of God is expanding and we have a heart for authentic church expression, which includes reaching and equipping people.

     Challenging stuff.

     LikeLike

101. “It is the role of the church to reach out to the community and minister to those who are in physical, psychological, and spiritual need (not the government, I might add)”

     I don’t really care whose job it is, all that matters is that it gets done. If the churches aren’t doing it then the government should do it.

     LikeLike

102. I used ACTS 29 as an example of aggressive church planting. Is there something I need to know about ACTS 29? Seem to be state of the art in cross cultural church planting and Driscoll is talking 400 church plants. If evangelicalism is going to survive, that is the route.

     I don’t see a future for traditional fundamentalism except in the extreme corners of the Bible Belt. (But the Bible belt is shaky. Really. I think we’re going to see a huge fallout away from the church there.)

     Look at the ARIS study folks.

     LikeLike

103. I’ll just come out and say it…

     Good Riddance.

     LikeLike

104. This is totally just a prediction on my part, but i think that in the future two types of churches will continue to survive.

     First, churches with firmly intrenched institutions and traditions, i.e. RC, Orthodox, and Anglicanism.

     Second, churches that present themselves as certain. For example, Independant Fundemental Baptist, Extreme Charismatics, etc. Churches that are to the extreme in whatever pet doctrine they hold to and promote.

     Folks in uncertain times want order and certainty.

     The denomiations that are going to suffer most are the large middle ground theologcially “mushy” ones.

     Does that make sense?

     Maybe I will be wrong.

     LikeLike

105. The future is Acts 29? God help us all.
     Ditto what Nate said.

     LikeLike

106. Rod,

     What kind of vision do you have? How would you like to see the world?

     For myself, I’d love to see it easier to make/find communities where everyone can be accepted for who they are, and what they believe.

     LikeLike

107. I’m not entirely familiar with Acts 29 as an organization either, but if the Driscoll cult of macho is the future, I believe I’ll just start facilitating a house church, thank you much.

     LikeLike

108. Rick: I don’t have the numbers, but I would estimate that less than 20% of megas are church planting churches. A big amen to those that are.

     All: This research isn’t about “real” Christians. It’s about self-identified religious choices. Please remember that and don’t sermonize.

     LikeLike

109. I’m one of the secular people you mention in your story. I was raised in a fundamentalist christian family and eventually realized this was just not my vision of the world. The truth is Christianity has been dying for 300 years. To understand history, you only need to study one brief period — the 18th century. It’s the inflection point around which all history now pivots. It has been called the Enlightenment for good reason. Out of that century came the roots of the ideals we now cherish – liberal democracy, the scientific method, capitalism, freedom, and tolerance, to name a few. All of these are completely out-of-sync with the Christian worldview. We can never go back. It’s time that we all join together to create a new vision to replace the old. Now that’s a worthy challenge.

     LikeLike

110. I agree in general with your piece. I would appreciate further elaboration on one of your final paragraphs (“If you are an evangelical…).

     Grace and peace.

     LikeLike

111. The problem with most churches is they are more concerned about social status and image than they are helping the sick, the hungry, and the poor. It is the role of the church to reach out to the community and minister to those who are in physical, psychological, and spiritual need (not the government, I might add). Churches also need to focus on diversity. If churches become less concerned (yes, I include black churches in this comment) about race, origin, economic status,dress, etc, they will attract more members.

     I will say that the youth movement in the evangelical movement is very strong which signals that the movement will continue to grow.

     LikeLike

112. “If you are an evangelical and you aren’t enthusiastically supporting innovative, cross cultural, missional church planting, you might want to go pre-plan the funeral. The future isn’t the megachurch. The future is ACTS 29.”

     I agree with your emphasis on the cross cultural church planting, but do you mean all megachurches?
     What about the megachurches that are encouraging missional church planting, partly by going multi-site and partly by providing resources (Northpoint Community for example)?
     Of course, some of those that creating and lead ACTS 29 are megachurch pastors.

     LikeLike

113. As Christians, we need to stop (yes it’s difficult) comparing ourselves to the other believers around us. Remember that there are enough hypocrits in the church and you’re just another, right? Are you the pharisee in the front row or the weeping publican in the back? We need to focus on improving our relationship with the Lord and our relationship with our bros and sisters will follow suit.

     LikeLike

114. Christ is not on the decline. What is changing is the way we represent Christ to the world. We must learn to RE-present Jesus in a manner that is “innovative, cross-cultural and missional.” And this way of thinking is as old as the book of Acts itself. We must move on from protecting the Church as an organization and remember it is a living organism — changing, growing, moving in different ways according to different needs. The principles of the Christian life will stay the same. However, the way we practice those principles are ever-changing. If we are not open to different practices of the common principles of Christianity in all its various forms, we will find ourselves without any influence in a world that sees Christianity as a primary holdover from the days of their grandparents.

     LikeLike

115. Okay, now; Christianity might be on the decline, but is Christ on the decline? Or are the old wineskins broken like a dam? Maybe the vines are being pruned, the wheat threshed.

     About that bridge. I’ll toss in that ballpark the Dodgers play in on the other side of that bridge so we can sell a package deal. I can taste those Dodger dogs now.

     LikeLike

116. “If those in the pews of the megachurches think their grandchildren will be there as adults, I have a bridge I’d like to sell cheap.”

     Michael, that statment brought to mind a thought
     that those new and once new mega-church buildings with 2,500 to 9,500 (SE Christian – Louisville)
     seats will become in the suburbs what the old, but beautiful, “downtown” church buildings of the past are now where a couple hundred, or less, people spend more on the maintenance of the building than the actual ministry of the church.

     It will be sad and I see this time and again when out in the older downtown areas in my organ work. There are very few that have any growth most are hanging by the perverbial thread and teeter on the brink of collapse and I do see signs that some of those cavernous mega-churches are starting to see some decrease in attendance as well. I don’t see as many new church auditoriums being built like we had in the late 80s and all through the 90s either and some of those are only half full or less on any given Sunday.

     Interesting info – going to get a bit rough over the next 15-30 years.

     The Guy from Knoxville

     LikeLike

117. Not familiar with the ACTS 29 movement. I understand why people leave church, I did, it was a Southern Baptist one that did it, and it might be Orthodoxy that brings me back. I don’t fit this survey though, I still identify myself as a disciple of the man Jesus (a very poor one). I do hang with a lot of people who have given up or never gotten on board. You have done a yeoman’s job of describing many of the problems here, it’s why I come.

     But you know there are many other reasons as well besides all the mutually exclusive and contradictory truths. People want to be loved and cared for, they want some true fellowship, not I’ll pray for you. They want something that doesn’t ask them to turn their reasoning off, or ask them to deny scientific truths. They are tired of compartmentalizing their life, tired of acting one way for the preacher and the choir and one way in the rest of the world (and tired of the seeing the preacher and choir do the same).

     Many of you won’t agree with this, as many of my Protestant friends in person don’t, but as long as we can shop our way around the various sects, denominations, whatever. I don’t think we’ll ever get out of this pattern. At some point people, at least me, must feel their is something worth submitting authority to, and that can’t be hundreds of ever splintering churches.

     I know since I’ve left church that I talk to a wider variety of people, I give money to those who need it, or work with them to help them do what needs to be done. We may share a laugh or a drink, or a rest under a tree, or even some tears. We talk about the man Jesus, and what the book says if they want to. That’s more than church usually was for me.

     It’s late and this is rambling, but maybe what the U.S. offers doesn’t have much Christ in it, maybe this process you describe and the surveys shows is needed to rebuild something better. I mean I believe God the Father, Jesus and the Spirit can bring people to them.

     Peace.

     LikeLike