Neitze was wrong, god was very much alive in 1870. But he's dying now.
The long slow death of god began in the 1980s, the formative years of the internet.
Topic: Pew Research Center - America's Changing Religious Landscape (Read 798 times)
Asians have replaced Hispanics as the largest ethnic group immigrating to the United States. A large part of these immigrants originates from countries such as China and South Korea, where the majority are either non-religious or Atheist. So it is not surprising to see the religious population declining. That said, the evangelical protestant population seems to be stable. It is these people who are the largest troublemakers.
There is no need to change Christianity.
I don't agree in killing someone for sinning. It's not Christian in the least.
The 17th century Christian colony law code was not Christian.
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/special-pleading
If there is no need to change Christianity, pray tell us, why is there an Old testament and a New testament? Why did God get it wrong the first time?
He didn't get it wrong. We did.
There is no need to change Christianity.
I don't agree in killing someone for sinning. It's not Christian in the least.
The 17th century Christian colony law code was not Christian.
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/special-pleading
If there is no need to change Christianity, pray tell us, why is there an Old testament and a New testament? Why did God get it wrong the first time?
There is no need to change Christianity.
I don't agree in killing someone for sinning. It's not Christian in the least.
The 17th century Christian colony law code was not Christian.
There is no need to change Christianity.
I don't agree in killing someone for sinning. It's not Christian in the least.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master%E2%80%93slave_morality
Emphasis mine
Basically, those with slave morality are realizing that democracy is a far more potent tool for enslavement (edicts, laws, etc., control in other words) of those with master morality (businessmen, the rich, right-wingers, libertarians, those who seek freedom from enslavement) than religion. It's just a migration, they're not actually disappearing, only calling themselves a different name and pushing their agenda with a different spin; given Nietzsche is correct, they're adjusting their "re-sentiment" in accordance with modern master values, which is why such incredible, unusual focus has been placed on the gaming community for example, a popular venue for those with master morality; this comic was made to highlight the bizarre refocusing of values, giving a bit of insight to how "re-sentiment" works (literally resentment).
Nowadays they're called SJWs (feminism being among the most popular, complete with its own pinata of the masters being "the patriarchy"), Marxists (USSR or China being the closest examples to slave morality encompassing master morality), democrats, liberals, socialists, egalitarians, and of course "The Jews" as slander, essentially anyone who identifies with the left. Don't be fooled by the rise of atheism, it's still the same stuff from before Christ just with different wording, the slave-moralists are just catching on that the old methods aren't as convincing and that these new methods are, at least for the time being.
Christianity worked out for a long while for slave-moralists--at some points in time completely overshadowing entire nations--but nowadays it just doesn't work out, master-moralists don't listen to the church much anymore, the church is powerless to help slave-moralist desires. Islam is still a very prevalent method of control in the middle east, however I am not sure how long that will last but it seems to be very much functional like Christianity was in the past (albeit abhorred by competing slave-moralists in the west.) You can tell the Catholic pope is trying really hard to appeal to slave morality but I'm not sure how effective it will be; he's certainly convinced a lot anyway, I have atheist friends who really like him regardless of the religion. Ironically, the pope is the very type of person you'd figure the slave-moralists would abhor, but apparently the best way to succeed in this field is to pretend to give a shit about the whims of the masses (as any politician nowadays could attest to.) The numbers will continue to change as the church becomes less popular with master-moralists.
So the question becomes: why's it getting less popular with master-moralists? I believe this is due to the great swathes of information available, particularly due to the Internet. Master-moralists have a desire to accumulate factual knowledge which helps them visualize and fundamentally understand the world around them, to "see" what's going on in the world, allowing them to control it (different from slave-moralist control which involves manipulation of people, rather than the master-moralist's manipulation of objects e.g. business operations.) For most of history, this was hard to pull off: there was no video, no photographs, no wireless signals or audio, all you had to rely on was books and hearsay, so developing an accurate and complete view of the world was very difficult and usually skewed to the point of stupidity (re: earth being center of solar system.) Nowadays it's easy as pie, there's so much content to fill your brain with, and the best part is we all share the same Internet so we all have access to the same stuff, allowing the best (i.e. most relevant and accurate) knowledge to rise to the top, and the rest to fall to the bottom. Essentially, the entirety of the developed world's master-moralist population is steadily coming to the same conclusions on things, and these conclusions are shared, refined, and becoming deadly accurate to the reality of things.
The more perspectives you have (i.e. having listened to the perspectives of others, esp. those with very developed perspective), the clearer you can "see", your big-picture vision; a part of this global common understanding process is the rejection of religious principles, as the Internet effectively makes it obsolete. Used to be, you'd get your understanding of the world through religion, which would always be far more developed of an understanding than you'd come up individually or within your limited community, or however far a letter could reach, however many books you could get (harder to get the further back in history you go, allowing the likes of kings and emperors actual advantage in the world as they'd always have an infinitely greater perspective than anyone else.) In other words, people's perspectives were harshly limited, making it impossible to formulate advanced thoughts (well, what we'd call our thoughts.) As communication developed, so was our ability to formulate an idea of the world, giving us a mental "hill" the brain sits on which grows taller every time it learned something new and saw something as someone else saw it, giving a greater and greater vantage point over the world.
Then came the Internet, and people started to communicate, with words and images and videos and audio, more and more people participating all the time, sharing their knowledge and sharing their perspectives, broadening their views far greater than most anyone has ever had in the past, allowing the greatest amount of people with the greatest amount of perspectives to multiply their "visions" and come to similar conclusions. It's a slow and messy operation, and there's a lot of work to do (and undo), but with this constant re-envisioning of the world, of expanding one's mind, inevitably the individual is compelled reevaluate their religious beliefs, which is bound to cause more apostates than having few feeling need to reevaluate resulting in stability in general belief (what one may call stagnation in belief development.)
We're becoming more and more clear and critical in our thought as our ability to form realistic understandings of the world improves, and it's causing very rapid and very structured changes in its participant's beliefs, which in turn effects even non-participants ("internet leaking into the real world".) Religion is becoming unpopular because it's no longer an effective method of control; it's been unpopular for some time, the modern state has long been a replacement for it, there's just lag in between realizing you've abandoned your religion and actually abandoning your religion. I think it's reasonable to expect the popularity of religion to continue to fall; the cat's out of the bag by now, the religious perspective once reigned king in common perspectives when acquiring a complex perspective was difficult, but now it's so easy to have your beliefs expanded and challenged by someone operating outside the boundaries of your perspective, it's that much harder to just stick with a single belief for long.
Gotta keep up with these fast and strange times, it's of extreme importance for a belief's survival to change when it's been challenged on something believed to be untrue. Religion just ain't gonna do it, nor is it standing up to the tests of a super-perspective, really shining the light brightly on its flaws and strengths, as it shines the light on everything; only those beliefs which aren't afraid of the light will survive, i.e. only the most consistent and accurate and true. And of course, their respective shadows, the slave-moralist's re-sentiment, which will prevail simply based on which is the more subversive hate group.
Quote
Slave morality
Unlike master morality which is sentiment, slave morality is literally re-sentiment—revaluing that which the master values. This strays from the valuation of actions based on consequences to the valuation of actions based on "intention".[4] As master morality originates in the strong, slave morality originates in the weak. Because slave morality is a reaction to oppression, it vilifies its oppressors. Slave morality is the inverse of master morality. As such, it is characterized by pessimism and cynicism. Slave morality is created in opposition to what master morality values as 'good'. Slave morality does not aim at exerting one's will by strength but by careful subversion. It does not seek to transcend the masters, but to make them slaves as well. The essence of slave morality is utility:[5] the good is what is most useful for the whole community, not the strong. Nietzsche saw this as a contradiction. Since the powerful are few in number compared to the masses of the weak, the weak gain power by corrupting the strong into believing that the causes of slavery (viz., the will to power) are 'evil', as are the qualities they originally could not choose because of their weakness. By saying humility is voluntary, slave morality avoids admitting that their humility was in the beginning forced upon them by a master. Biblical principles of turning the other cheek, humility, charity, and pity are the result of universalizing the plight of the slave onto all humankind, and thus enslaving the masters as well. "The democratic movement is the heir to Christianity."[6]—the political manifestation of slave morality because of its obsession with freedom and equality.
...the Jews achieved that miracle of inversion of values thanks to which life on earth has for a couple millennia acquired a new and dangerous fascination--their prophets fused 'rich', 'godless', 'evil', 'violent', 'sensual' into one and were the first to coin the word 'world' as a term of infamy. It is this inversion of values (with which is involved the employment of the word for 'poor' as a synonym for 'holy' and 'friend') that the significance of the Jewish people resides: with them there begins the slave revolt in morals.[7]
Unlike master morality which is sentiment, slave morality is literally re-sentiment—revaluing that which the master values. This strays from the valuation of actions based on consequences to the valuation of actions based on "intention".[4] As master morality originates in the strong, slave morality originates in the weak. Because slave morality is a reaction to oppression, it vilifies its oppressors. Slave morality is the inverse of master morality. As such, it is characterized by pessimism and cynicism. Slave morality is created in opposition to what master morality values as 'good'. Slave morality does not aim at exerting one's will by strength but by careful subversion. It does not seek to transcend the masters, but to make them slaves as well. The essence of slave morality is utility:[5] the good is what is most useful for the whole community, not the strong. Nietzsche saw this as a contradiction. Since the powerful are few in number compared to the masses of the weak, the weak gain power by corrupting the strong into believing that the causes of slavery (viz., the will to power) are 'evil', as are the qualities they originally could not choose because of their weakness. By saying humility is voluntary, slave morality avoids admitting that their humility was in the beginning forced upon them by a master. Biblical principles of turning the other cheek, humility, charity, and pity are the result of universalizing the plight of the slave onto all humankind, and thus enslaving the masters as well. "The democratic movement is the heir to Christianity."[6]—the political manifestation of slave morality because of its obsession with freedom and equality.
...the Jews achieved that miracle of inversion of values thanks to which life on earth has for a couple millennia acquired a new and dangerous fascination--their prophets fused 'rich', 'godless', 'evil', 'violent', 'sensual' into one and were the first to coin the word 'world' as a term of infamy. It is this inversion of values (with which is involved the employment of the word for 'poor' as a synonym for 'holy' and 'friend') that the significance of the Jewish people resides: with them there begins the slave revolt in morals.[7]
Emphasis mine
Basically, those with slave morality are realizing that democracy is a far more potent tool for enslavement (edicts, laws, etc., control in other words) of those with master morality (businessmen, the rich, right-wingers, libertarians, those who seek freedom from enslavement) than religion. It's just a migration, they're not actually disappearing, only calling themselves a different name and pushing their agenda with a different spin; given Nietzsche is correct, they're adjusting their "re-sentiment" in accordance with modern master values, which is why such incredible, unusual focus has been placed on the gaming community for example, a popular venue for those with master morality; this comic was made to highlight the bizarre refocusing of values, giving a bit of insight to how "re-sentiment" works (literally resentment).
Nowadays they're called SJWs (feminism being among the most popular, complete with its own pinata of the masters being "the patriarchy"), Marxists (USSR or China being the closest examples to slave morality encompassing master morality), democrats, liberals, socialists, egalitarians, and of course "The Jews" as slander, essentially anyone who identifies with the left. Don't be fooled by the rise of atheism, it's still the same stuff from before Christ just with different wording, the slave-moralists are just catching on that the old methods aren't as convincing and that these new methods are, at least for the time being.
Christianity worked out for a long while for slave-moralists--at some points in time completely overshadowing entire nations--but nowadays it just doesn't work out, master-moralists don't listen to the church much anymore, the church is powerless to help slave-moralist desires. Islam is still a very prevalent method of control in the middle east, however I am not sure how long that will last but it seems to be very much functional like Christianity was in the past (albeit abhorred by competing slave-moralists in the west.) You can tell the Catholic pope is trying really hard to appeal to slave morality but I'm not sure how effective it will be; he's certainly convinced a lot anyway, I have atheist friends who really like him regardless of the religion. Ironically, the pope is the very type of person you'd figure the slave-moralists would abhor, but apparently the best way to succeed in this field is to pretend to give a shit about the whims of the masses (as any politician nowadays could attest to.) The numbers will continue to change as the church becomes less popular with master-moralists.
So the question becomes: why's it getting less popular with master-moralists? I believe this is due to the great swathes of information available, particularly due to the Internet. Master-moralists have a desire to accumulate factual knowledge which helps them visualize and fundamentally understand the world around them, to "see" what's going on in the world, allowing them to control it (different from slave-moralist control which involves manipulation of people, rather than the master-moralist's manipulation of objects e.g. business operations.) For most of history, this was hard to pull off: there was no video, no photographs, no wireless signals or audio, all you had to rely on was books and hearsay, so developing an accurate and complete view of the world was very difficult and usually skewed to the point of stupidity (re: earth being center of solar system.) Nowadays it's easy as pie, there's so much content to fill your brain with, and the best part is we all share the same Internet so we all have access to the same stuff, allowing the best (i.e. most relevant and accurate) knowledge to rise to the top, and the rest to fall to the bottom. Essentially, the entirety of the developed world's master-moralist population is steadily coming to the same conclusions on things, and these conclusions are shared, refined, and becoming deadly accurate to the reality of things.
The more perspectives you have (i.e. having listened to the perspectives of others, esp. those with very developed perspective), the clearer you can "see", your big-picture vision; a part of this global common understanding process is the rejection of religious principles, as the Internet effectively makes it obsolete. Used to be, you'd get your understanding of the world through religion, which would always be far more developed of an understanding than you'd come up individually or within your limited community, or however far a letter could reach, however many books you could get (harder to get the further back in history you go, allowing the likes of kings and emperors actual advantage in the world as they'd always have an infinitely greater perspective than anyone else.) In other words, people's perspectives were harshly limited, making it impossible to formulate advanced thoughts (well, what we'd call our thoughts.) As communication developed, so was our ability to formulate an idea of the world, giving us a mental "hill" the brain sits on which grows taller every time it learned something new and saw something as someone else saw it, giving a greater and greater vantage point over the world.
Then came the Internet, and people started to communicate, with words and images and videos and audio, more and more people participating all the time, sharing their knowledge and sharing their perspectives, broadening their views far greater than most anyone has ever had in the past, allowing the greatest amount of people with the greatest amount of perspectives to multiply their "visions" and come to similar conclusions. It's a slow and messy operation, and there's a lot of work to do (and undo), but with this constant re-envisioning of the world, of expanding one's mind, inevitably the individual is compelled reevaluate their religious beliefs, which is bound to cause more apostates than having few feeling need to reevaluate resulting in stability in general belief (what one may call stagnation in belief development.)
We're becoming more and more clear and critical in our thought as our ability to form realistic understandings of the world improves, and it's causing very rapid and very structured changes in its participant's beliefs, which in turn effects even non-participants ("internet leaking into the real world".) Religion is becoming unpopular because it's no longer an effective method of control; it's been unpopular for some time, the modern state has long been a replacement for it, there's just lag in between realizing you've abandoned your religion and actually abandoning your religion. I think it's reasonable to expect the popularity of religion to continue to fall; the cat's out of the bag by now, the religious perspective once reigned king in common perspectives when acquiring a complex perspective was difficult, but now it's so easy to have your beliefs expanded and challenged by someone operating outside the boundaries of your perspective, it's that much harder to just stick with a single belief for long.
Gotta keep up with these fast and strange times, it's of extreme importance for a belief's survival to change when it's been challenged on something believed to be untrue. Religion just ain't gonna do it, nor is it standing up to the tests of a super-perspective, really shining the light brightly on its flaws and strengths, as it shines the light on everything; only those beliefs which aren't afraid of the light will survive, i.e. only the most consistent and accurate and true. And of course, their respective shadows, the slave-moralist's re-sentiment, which will prevail simply based on which is the more subversive hate group.
As it shouldn't. There is no need to change Christianity.
This attitude is why Christianity (and every other organized religion) are dead things walking in the twenty-first century. Your kind simply won't survive the information age. I'm not sorry.
Quote
In a 17th-century law code for the Puritan colony of New Haven, Connecticut, blasphemers, homosexuals and masturbators were eligible for the death penalty.
Though Tissot's ideas are now considered conjectural at best, his treatise was presented as a scholarly, scientific work in a time when experimental physiology was practically nonexistent. The authority with which the work was subsequently treated – Tissot's arguments were even acknowledged and echoed by luminaries such as Kant and Voltaire – arguably turned the perception of masturbation in Western medicine over the next two centuries into that of a debilitating illness.
Though Tissot's ideas are now considered conjectural at best, his treatise was presented as a scholarly, scientific work in a time when experimental physiology was practically nonexistent. The authority with which the work was subsequently treated – Tissot's arguments were even acknowledged and echoed by luminaries such as Kant and Voltaire – arguably turned the perception of masturbation in Western medicine over the next two centuries into that of a debilitating illness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_masturbation#Tissot
Thou shalt not kill. Vengeance is mine sayith the Lord. We're not the ones to judge others, lest we be judged.
I don't agree in killing someone for sinning. It's not Christian in the least.
As it shouldn't. There is no need to change Christianity.
This attitude is why Christianity (and every other organized religion) are dead things walking in the twenty-first century. Your kind simply won't survive the information age. I'm not sorry.
Quote
In a 17th-century law code for the Puritan colony of New Haven, Connecticut, blasphemers, homosexuals and masturbators were eligible for the death penalty.
Though Tissot's ideas are now considered conjectural at best, his treatise was presented as a scholarly, scientific work in a time when experimental physiology was practically nonexistent. The authority with which the work was subsequently treated – Tissot's arguments were even acknowledged and echoed by luminaries such as Kant and Voltaire – arguably turned the perception of masturbation in Western medicine over the next two centuries into that of a debilitating illness.
Though Tissot's ideas are now considered conjectural at best, his treatise was presented as a scholarly, scientific work in a time when experimental physiology was practically nonexistent. The authority with which the work was subsequently treated – Tissot's arguments were even acknowledged and echoed by luminaries such as Kant and Voltaire – arguably turned the perception of masturbation in Western medicine over the next two centuries into that of a debilitating illness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_masturbation#Tissot
Christianity didn't change much and remained closed and unadjusted to the new time.
Many scandals, including pedophilia, sex scandals, financial, etc. are really harming the reputation of Christianity.
But the main reason for the decline of Christianity is that they could not provide the answers to numerous dilemmas and problems of modern man.
They have not changed but everything around them has changed and so they become a relic of the past, something for old people, but not many young man or woman.
Many scandals, including pedophilia, sex scandals, financial, etc. are really harming the reputation of Christianity.
But the main reason for the decline of Christianity is that they could not provide the answers to numerous dilemmas and problems of modern man.
They have not changed but everything around them has changed and so they become a relic of the past, something for old people, but not many young man or woman.
As it shouldn't. There is no need to change Christianity. Humanity as a whole is sinful, which causes the scandals, and humanity is only acting worse and worse as time goes on. It's a shame, but as I said, not unexpected in the least.
This is true and I guess there are a lot reasons for it.
Today's society changed a lot in the past 50 or 60 years, including families, works, technologies etc.
Christianity didn't change much and remained closed and unadjusted to the new time.
Many scandals, including pedophilia, sex scandals, financial, etc. are really harming the reputation of Christianity.
But the main reason for the decline of Christianity is that they could not provide the answers to numerous dilemmas and problems of modern man.
They have not changed but everything around them has changed and so they become a relic of the past, something for old people, but not many young man or woman.
Today's society changed a lot in the past 50 or 60 years, including families, works, technologies etc.
Christianity didn't change much and remained closed and unadjusted to the new time.
Many scandals, including pedophilia, sex scandals, financial, etc. are really harming the reputation of Christianity.
But the main reason for the decline of Christianity is that they could not provide the answers to numerous dilemmas and problems of modern man.
They have not changed but everything around them has changed and so they become a relic of the past, something for old people, but not many young man or woman.
To the top with you!
Lack of religion is less frowned on as it was in generations past. People used to loosely associate themselves with the church for business contacts and fitting in.
Now the internet helps put like minded folks together and the Sunday get together is less needed. Look at 9/11 as a example,not many came out and questioned it right after happening and now that trickle has grown. It takes time and brave people to question why things are a set way.
Not having children is less frowned on
Being single is fine later into life
Lots has changed that used to handcuff people to religion.
This guy gets it. Now the internet helps put like minded folks together and the Sunday get together is less needed. Look at 9/11 as a example,not many came out and questioned it right after happening and now that trickle has grown. It takes time and brave people to question why things are a set way.
Not having children is less frowned on
Being single is fine later into life
Lots has changed that used to handcuff people to religion.
Lack of religion is less frowned on as it was in generations past. People used to loosely associate themselves with the church for business contacts and fitting in.
Now the internet helps put like minded folks together and the Sunday get together is less needed. Look at 9/11 as a example,not many came out and questioned it right after happening and now that trickle has grown. It takes time and brave people to question why things are a set way.
Not having children is less frowned on
Being single is fine later into life
Lots has changed that used to handcuff people to religion.
Now the internet helps put like minded folks together and the Sunday get together is less needed. Look at 9/11 as a example,not many came out and questioned it right after happening and now that trickle has grown. It takes time and brave people to question why things are a set way.
Not having children is less frowned on
Being single is fine later into life
Lots has changed that used to handcuff people to religion.
Any thoughts from anyone on why this may be happening?
Yes, the internet has increased the volume and pace of worldwide information flow by an order of magnitude or two. Religion depends upon the ability to insulate young minds from external information. That is rapidly becoming impossible in the developed world. Any thoughts from anyone on why this may be happening?
A lot of the press on religion is negative - because negative sells news - but could this influence people's intention of how much religion they allow in their world, particularly when religion is (in the press) seen so often alongside violent activities, i.e., war and terrorism?
A lot of the press on religion is negative - because negative sells news - but could this influence people's intention of how much religion they allow in their world, particularly when religion is (in the press) seen so often alongside violent activities, i.e., war and terrorism?
From a purely Christian perspective, the bible says the last days will be filled with deception, and many Christians will fall away from their faith. This is hardly shocking or surprising news to me.
Any thoughts from anyone on why this may be happening?
A lot of the press on religion is negative - because negative sells news - but could this influence people's intention of how much religion they allow in their world, particularly when religion is (in the press) seen so often alongside violent activities, i.e., war and terrorism?
A lot of the press on religion is negative - because negative sells news - but could this influence people's intention of how much religion they allow in their world, particularly when religion is (in the press) seen so often alongside violent activities, i.e., war and terrorism?
There are less Christians in America now than there were when I wrote the OP a few hours ago. Approximately 500 americans died in the past two hours, ~80% of them were christians.
Don't hate, remember I'm just a humble messenger of publicly available data.
Don't hate, remember I'm just a humble messenger of publicly available data.
Christians decline sharply as share of population; Unaffiliated (atheists & agnostics) as well as Other faiths continue to grow
The Christian share of the U.S. population is declining, while the number of U.S. adults who do not identify with any organized religion is growing, according to an extensive new survey by the Pew Research Center. Moreover, these changes are taking place across the religious landscape, affecting all regions of the country and many demographic groups. While the drop in Christian affiliation is particularly pronounced among young adults, it is occurring among Americans of all ages. The same trends are seen among whites, blacks and Latinos; among both college graduates and adults with only a high school education; and among women as well as men. (Explore the data with our interactive database tool.)
To be sure, the United States remains home to more Christians than any other country in the world, and a large majority of Americans – roughly 70% – continue to identify with some branch of the Christian faith. But the major new survey of more than 35,000 Americans by the Pew Research Center finds that the percentage of adults (ages 18 and older) who describe themselves as Christians has dropped by nearly 8% in just seven years, from 78.4% in an equally massive Pew Research survey in 2007 to 70.6% in 2014. Over the same period, the percentage of Americans who are religiously unaffiliated – describing themselves as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular” – has jumped more than six points, from 16.1% to 22.8%. And the share of Americans who identify with non-Christian faiths also has inched up, rising 1.2 percentage points, from 4.7% in 2007 to 5.9% in 2014. Growth has been especially great among Muslims and Hindus, albeit from a very low base.
Christians Decline as Share of U.S. Population; Other Faiths and the Unaffiliated Are GrowingThe drop in the Christian share of the population has been driven mainly by declines among mainline Protestants and Catholics. Each of those large religious traditions has shrunk by approximately three percentage points since 2007.
Read more: http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/
American Christians are a dying breed. The truth hurts, no?
The Christian share of the U.S. population is declining, while the number of U.S. adults who do not identify with any organized religion is growing, according to an extensive new survey by the Pew Research Center. Moreover, these changes are taking place across the religious landscape, affecting all regions of the country and many demographic groups. While the drop in Christian affiliation is particularly pronounced among young adults, it is occurring among Americans of all ages. The same trends are seen among whites, blacks and Latinos; among both college graduates and adults with only a high school education; and among women as well as men. (Explore the data with our interactive database tool.)
To be sure, the United States remains home to more Christians than any other country in the world, and a large majority of Americans – roughly 70% – continue to identify with some branch of the Christian faith. But the major new survey of more than 35,000 Americans by the Pew Research Center finds that the percentage of adults (ages 18 and older) who describe themselves as Christians has dropped by nearly 8% in just seven years, from 78.4% in an equally massive Pew Research survey in 2007 to 70.6% in 2014. Over the same period, the percentage of Americans who are religiously unaffiliated – describing themselves as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular” – has jumped more than six points, from 16.1% to 22.8%. And the share of Americans who identify with non-Christian faiths also has inched up, rising 1.2 percentage points, from 4.7% in 2007 to 5.9% in 2014. Growth has been especially great among Muslims and Hindus, albeit from a very low base.
Christians Decline as Share of U.S. Population; Other Faiths and the Unaffiliated Are GrowingThe drop in the Christian share of the population has been driven mainly by declines among mainline Protestants and Catholics. Each of those large religious traditions has shrunk by approximately three percentage points since 2007.
Read more: http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/
American Christians are a dying breed. The truth hurts, no?
Jump to: