I am of the opinion that one of the reasons that Christianity is being rejected to the effect that its influence is rapidly dwindling is because it is essentially too 'simple' of a belief-system to actually be of use in the complex modern world: everything is reduced to either good or bad, and there can be no compromise or grey middle ground.
Now this is very unrealistic: even historians accept that events have no single cause (multi-causality), but are shaped by a combination of many factors converging. Similarly, the modern world is filled by increasingly complex norms and technologies and attitudes that do not snugly fit into the category of 'good' or 'bad', which themselves are ill-defined and very subjective terms.
The same is true of Islam, which only dominates in those less developed nations.
I hypothesize that those new religions we'll see rise up in the future will be pantheistic, or - less likely - possibly polytheistic, in an attempt to not fall into the trap of the "good vs. bad" dichotomy and so as to account for a more diverse set of people and attitudes, which would also have the benefit of allowing it proselytize much more easily.
I actually think that simpler religions often have more appeal, at least to the under educated. As the world gets more complex some people will look for simple answers
Gabriel Walker
I think that this is a very interesting argument that I've never read before. However, how do you reconcile it with the growth of Atheism, which is arguably the simplest belief system of all.
Josiah Lopez
Atheism is not a belief system: atheism is merely the lack of belief in a God.
Declaring atheism to be a belief system is like declaring darkness to be 'black light', when it is merely the absence of light.
Levi King
That's essentially what I meant, I suppose I was just trying to fit it into the language of the original post. You're quite right, it's turning ones head away from the complexity of the issue.
Dylan Lopez
>As the world gets more complex some people will look for simple answers
The less-educated usually do this. But in the developed world, most individuals are aware that their world is one that just doesn't fit into an arbitrary-defined dichotomy.
Same reason why lapsed Christians exist that - despite being nominally so - largely disregard Church teachings. One example is condom usage: despite the Catholic Church calling it sinful and deplorable and dedicating itself to stopping their distribution/visibility, most Catholics in the U.S. and Europe use them because despite being supposedly "bad" in the eyes of God, they certainly have very terrestrial and visible benefits, such as preventing the spread of STDs and preventing unwanted pregnancies, which can in turn lead to broken homes, lack of opportunities, abandonment, etc.
Leo Nelson
Christianity is not a simple belief system - although admittedly lay knowledge of it is. Actual theological debates, on the other hand, are extremely complex. It begs the question: why are people who are "too smart for Sunday school" abandoning Christianity, instead of looking into a couple of millennia of unresolved theological problems? Maybe because they don't dare to touch this area that is the greyest of all.
Jason Ramirez
Despite whatever supposed theological intricacies you claim exist in Christianity, there is no denying that the Christian religion is fundamentally stuck in the rut of "good" (what God supposedly chooses/chose) versus "evil", and this is something theological arguments have never debated. Yes, Christianity is simple, because its entire premise is the oversimplification of history and current events and trying (but mostly failing) to make these fit into a preconceived idea of a battle between "good" and "evil", ideas that themselves are not well-defined and usually boil down to "good = that which I find aesthetically pleasing" and "bad = anything that I dislike personally"
Jason Scott
>Theology
Theological "discussion" is literally on par with children at a playground discussing why their own character in their make-believe play is more powerful than the rest.
It's just making shit up as one goes in order to justify continued belief despite all evidence to the contrary, and any sane person could see how convoluted it is.
Jaxson King
>"good = that which I find aesthetically pleasing" and "bad = anything that I dislike personally"
But that's literally what atheists believe.
Dylan Clark
>But that's literally what atheists believe.
No, it's what Christcucks, kikes, mudslimes, and all religions have done for all of history.
James Gonzalez
Atheism is about being "le enlightened individual who lives by their own rules" which is exactly what you said.
If anything, religious people substitute their own personal preferences for those of their religion.
Tyler Bell
...
Adrian Thompson
No, religious people incorporate their own personal preferences and cultural norms into the religions they adopt.
Hence things such as folk Catholicism and the differences between Latin-American Catholics - more likely to indulge in saint and virgin worship - when compared to Catholics in the U.S. or Canada, or the incorporation of Daoism and Shintoism into Buddhism upon its arrival to China and Japan, respectively.
And you are wrong: atheism is - in simplest terms, so that you won't misunderstand - the lack of belief in a deity. That's all. Anything else is just your supposition.
David Green
>religious people incorporate their own personal preferences and cultural norms into the religions they adopt.
Adapting personal preferences to conform to a religion shows that the religion, not the personal preference, is the dominant force.
Have fun with your troll thread.
Ian King
>Adapting personal preferences to conform to a religion shows that the religion, not the personal preference, is the dominant force.
Talk about shit reading comprehension. Yeah, fuck off, since otherwise, we'd waste the entire thread having to repeat the same thing so that you'd be able to catch up.
Ryan Jackson
...
Blake Peterson
2000 years of being forced to invent more and more metaphors has made Christianity one of the most complex and contrived religions ever.
Jose Cruz
The metaphors have become quite complex, but their message remains very simple: God like this, therefore good, and we must combat whatever God doesn't like, which is evil/bad.
Nathaniel Lee
Pic related is christianity adapting to modern society. The LDS church ties in their lore with science wherever possible, and they always seem to have some sort of answer. They recognize that the bible has been altered continuously throughout history and is not as accurately the word of god as the third testament is(Book of Mormon).
There's a reason LDS is the largest single organization on the planet, it works. Don't count out christianity yet, it's simply evolving like it always has been.
>I hypothesize that those new religions we'll see rise up in the future You have an unrealistic idea of how education and information access works. Anything similar to abrahamic religion in scale and structure isn't going to generate in the near future.
Ian White
>>Muh mormonism lol no.
Mormonism is obviously made up horseshit and the odds of them being a major world religion 300 years from now are precisely zilch. Plus, as any of the xtians on here will happily tell you, the mormons are not actual christians as they do not adhere to the nicene creed.
Camden Rodriguez
>There's a reason LDS is the largest single organization on the planet only 13 million members, many of which aren't active members. membership is only growing in third world countries. Mormonism is so laughably wrong, even moreso than general christianity. you can read the fictional novels Smith plagarized to come up with parts of the Book of Mormon. you can see the archeological evidence that contradicts the Book of Mormon. we even have an egyptian text that Smith mistranslated to be about Abraham. it won't be long before Mormonism is dead
Carson Ward
>Plus, as any of the xtians on here will happily tell you, the mormons are not actual christians as they do not adhere to the nicene creed are Arians not real christians then?
Ryder Rivera
They aren't actually.
>>Arianism is a Christian belief that asserts that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who was created by God the Father at a point in time, is distinct from the Father and is therefore subordinate to the Father.
This is a heterodox view and makes them heretics. Now, I personally don't give two shits, but words do have these things called meanings.
but early "heretics" were just christians whose beliefs didn't end up being dominant. there's 300 years of christianity before the Nicene Creed even existed
Sebastian Evans
By that logic, all of the early 'Christians' who lived prior to the First Council of Nicaea weren't actually Christians. What would you call them, then?
Robert Brooks
All I'm saying is that the word christian has a very specific meaning that mormonism doesn't have. Also, I'm not an xtian, so I really don't care that much about this issue. I mostly wanted to take some shots at the mormons for being a bunch of idiots who believe in what is essentially bible fanfiction.
Robert Reed
I agree that Mormons are quite distinct from generic christianity, but I think they still fit within the term "Christianity"
Jose Taylor
Arians aren't heretics btw they still accept the Trinity and are Christian brothers please don't spread false doctrines.
Parker Mitchell
Fuck off, Christcuck
Justin Powell
Also Mormons are Christians, they accept the Trinity. Not all Christians accept the Nicene Creed, either way, they are just as Christian as the other groups.
Mason Carter
how does the trinity fit into Mormonism when God the Father and Jesus are actual distinct beings in Mormonism, essentially human in fact? in fact Jesus and Satan are brothers
Levi Mitchell
Implicit in a lack of belief in a higher power is a presence of belief in oneself and one's peers, which typically presents as a trust in science or philosophy. (The exceptions are often people who are depressed or bipolar; generally speaking everyone with a well-functioning mind trusts in something.) What do you think of that angle?
Luis Evans
They don't accept the Trinity as defined in the creeds. Mormonism is a heretic cult.
Liam Gomez
I think you're presupposing too much.
Cooper Perry
Mormons are just as Christian as every other Christian group. It is more heretical to call someone a heretic when they believe in the same grace of God that you do.
According to your opinion, they are heretics, meanwhile, they are enjoying there spirituality like everyone else is.
Ryder Flores
The Trinity is honestly just a semantic cop-out: an acknowledgement of three figures, but using semantics and inventing convoluted theological concepts to make it seem as though they are the same.
>"they're not Christians because it would be inconvenient to my argument to accept them as such."
I know, but having Jesus and God (the Father) as actual distinct beings directly contradicts the term
Brayden Howard
I'm not a christian so i don't consider them heretics. I'm just arguing about terms here. i agree that Mormons should be catagorized as christians
Xavier Rogers
Jesus and the Father are distinct and not distinct. It works on both sides, and both stances actually make more sense together than they do separate.
Samuel Young
I don't think I am, because I'm not saying it's required, I'm saying it's implicit. How many genuine nihilists are there? (Does that even count as not believing in anything, since it's a philosophy?)
Chase White
But the terms is what separates everybody. Imagine the possibilities if the people who are Christian actually were together with Christ the way the disciples were? Where, opinions weren't shunned, but rather openly discussed?
Imagine Christians saying "It is okay that you don't identify as Christian, because it is juist a term and we believe Christ will save you at some point in your life anyways" rather than "you are going to hell because this is what I have been brought up to believe about non-Christians"
There are so many possibilities outside of the "terms"
Adrian Long
Its not so much the contents of the religion. It's moreso the fervor that is important, and in general how well the religion enraptures people.
In fact, I would say that you are wrong in your assessment. The issue isn't the black and white morality, it's the lack of enforcement. The modern Church is constantly giving into people's demands. In doing so they've lost all credibility.
Meanwhile muslims will threaten and even kill someone for insulting their religion or Prophet. Islam takes itself extremely seriously. So much so, that Muslims brought up in Western societies still take the religion very seriously, even though the state will not enforce the religion.
Additionally, there's the issue of conversion and leaving. Its easy to leave Christianity and Judaism, but you must take many steps to join them. Meanwhile Islam is easy to join, but you're marked for death if you leave. Or at the very least you will be looked down upon by other Muslims, and likely your own family to a great extreme.
Ayden Gonzalez
>mfw if OP is right, Gnosticism will be revived
Lincoln Gray
Your reasoning rest on the two assumptions: 1. That all events must be judged as shades of gray - this is not so, many events are simple to judge as simply good or evil in specific normative systems. It follows with what another user said, most people like simple solutions to things and moral problems need that exact kind of solutions to give normal people inner peace.
2. Pantheism will never dominate in our culture because of certain cultural predispositions that are so ingrained as to be all but indestructible, but also invisible to a common man. That is the focus on a person (which corresponds to personal religion with one person being object of worship - examples are christianity, islam, leader cults, modern political movements etc). In Asia however the focus is on the collective and their culture and religion reflects that.
