Exciting Times We're In

[Ophir's Gopher]

@meta

It's absurdly rash to think this is the end of anything. It's probably not even the end of Child abuse in the Catholic priesthood.

Like I said, we're either in the midst of the dying or it's evolved into a shadow of what it once was. Clearly, only a liberal remnant in each major faith has a clue as to what's going on. The fundies and dogmatists are in lala land. The Pope is an example of a dogmatist and the worse that religion get, even without the child abuse cover up. That's where I think you and I depart. Consider the efficacy of the Catholic church. Its head is clearly up its ass with respect to sex education and STD and pregnancy prevention in Africa and all over the world. This is not an anomaly.

Atheism is dying out. It's gone way down from 12% i the 90s to 1.5% now. That's assuming adherence.com and the Pew study. 2 billion people are Christians something 35% world wide, 3% are atheists world wide. You are vastly underrating the importance people place upon religion. those Billion people will not let Christianity die out.

Sorry, but atheism is definitely not "dying out." The number of people who declare themselves non-religious is increasing drastically. One wonders why you dedicate so much time to lambasting the scourge of of new atheism -- the bloggers, the Harrisses, and the Hitchenses -- if atheism is rapidly dying.

But you are too youg to know what exciting times are. In my life I remember from the news media and from knowing some people where in each catasrophy I've "seen" or been around durning

coup de etat agisnst american President

Oswald killed Kennedy. He was an expert marksman (proven)and a delusional madman (proven). Conspiracy theorizing itself is a quasi-religious delusion. I say this as a former conspiracy theorist.

America losing first war that the majority of it's people are aware it obviously lost
Man lands on moon!
Counter cultural movement forever changes nature of American society
end of cold
demise of communism
Berlin Wall comes down
Western Eruope experincing a boody war on it's on contenant
Mass genocides around the world (Guatemala, Bosnia, Croatia, Ruwanda)
Total absolute idiot elected President two terms in a row (two different Presidents)
First women on Sup court
First woman speaker of house
First woman to mount major presidential camapign
first two female secretaries of state
The whole woman's movement totally widely unimaginably more successful than anyone wildest dreams when it began, reversing 5,000 years of sexism.
First Black President in American History
Major U.S. city almost wiped out by flood
Volcano holds the world's air line industry hostage
Major landmark destroyed by terrorists kills 5000 people.

I agree. all of this is amazing. You know what else is amazing? The self implosion of the Abrahamic religions triggered by its ignorant leadership and laity. If you don't see signs of that, I'd encourage you to look harder. remember when you told me you know very little about christian apologetics? That's what I'm talking about. You have to scratch the surface of William Lane Craig's untenable arguments regarding evolution (for example) to even begin to see what's happening. Many other examples of such stupidity in the other religions. Young folks are getting wise to it. That's all I'm saying.

Christianity dying out is far from one of them.

It's definitely morphing into something unrecognizable and far more liberal. That was my point all along. Perhaps these religions aren't dying. Maybe only the dogmatic/fundamentalist core is collapsing. either way, it's incredibly interesting to watch and certainly nothing to be threatened by or depressed about. This is a good thing, and I'm priveledged to see it happening.

Very interesting that you mentioned 9/11. The self-implosion of religion is WAY more interesting to observe than the fall of the twin towers. Religious terrorism is just the same bullshit that has happened for millenia. Nothing new or unprecedented about it at all, except for the effect it had in triggering the collapse of religion.

[Gwarlroge]

...Which of William Lane Craig's evolution arguments is untenable?

[Ophir's Gopher]

...Which of William Lane Craig's evolution arguments is untenable?

The one I was thinking about wasn't even an argument. He said that the only evidence for evolution that he saw was Darwin's finches and the peppered moth.

His actual arguments about evolution suggest that there is reasonable doubt to dismiss evolution while at the same time he says that evolution -- if it were true -- wouldn't be incompatible with Christianity. This is such an obvious attempt to play both sides of the fence. And it's a perfect example of Christian apologists bungling of the issue. Evolution must muddy the waters of their faith. If it didn't, they'd not expend so much energy to refute something that, by their own admission, doesn't contradict the Bible. Obviously, it presents a problem. Much of evangelistic marketing material makes a sloppy attempts to demonize Darwin and evolutionary theory.

Balking at the natural revelation (of all things!) is like shooting the Christian mission in the foot. Who in their right mind would worship a God that the apologists and theologians don't even fully trust?

[Ophir's Gopher]

Craig on evolution (From his blog):

As I explained in my exposition of the Doctrine of Creation, when it comes to questions of the origin of life and biological complexity, biblical Christians enjoy the advantage over the naturalist of being truly open to follow the evidence where it leads. Since I think, for the reasons explained in the podcast, that an evolutionary theory is compatible with the biblical account in Genesis 1, the question of biological origins is for me a straightforward scientific question: what does the evidence indicate about the means by which God brought about life and biological complexity? My honest, layman’s assessment of the evidence makes me skeptical of the neo-Darwinian account and leaves me with a probing agnosticism about the theory.

Think about what he says here. Craig, a theologian with no scientific credentials, feels a "probing agnosticism" about evolution that leaves him skeptical. Even though real scientists who interpret the evidence that falls every day into their laps aren't skeptical at all about the clear evidence, and even though it doesn't challenge his faith, he remains a skeptic about evolution. Consciously or subconsciously, he's put the blinders on. This is why atheists are unmoved by apologists like Craig. He has a real problem with being who he is: a primate.

That would be amusing if it weren't so disturbing. I feel sorry for him. If I met him, I'd love to have a beer with the guy and really try to explain to him how damaging his position is to the credibility of Christian apologetics and evangelism.

[met]

Somebody quote me some stats if i'm wrong but . . . iirc xianity and Islam were both still GROWING against world population growth, albeit the rate of growh i8s de-and-not-acc-celerating . . . but even that's a far cry from actual shrinkage, much less being "on the verge of dying out"

so... wtf?

[Ophir's Gopher]

Somebody quote me some stats if i'm wrong but . . . iirc xianity and Islam were both still GROWING against world population growth, albeit the rate of growh i8s de-and-not-acc-celerating . . . but even that's a far cry from actual shrinkage, much less being "on the verge of dying out"

so... wtf?

Institutions can lose tremendous amounts of credibility without shrinking demographically. Yea, a lot of Italians are Catholic. Sure, Saudi Arabia is brimming with Muslims. Israel is definitely overrun with Jews. It's the core dogmas and untenable perceptions of reality that won't jibe with the next generation. You see that in the liberal traditions becoming more popular. Today, few people can defend anything like Marian apparitions and papal infallibility. They older generation won't pass the baton of antievolutionism and homophobia to the next generation. Ain't gonna happen. As a result, these religions are a vapor of what they once were. That trend will continue.

[met]

Could be. Or it could be wishful thinking on your part.

Both x-ian and Islamic fundamentalism have been "in decline" before and both resurged in the last half of the last century. (. . . NOT that either flavour really represents "the core tradition" anyway. Islamic fundamentalism is largely a reaction to western socioeconmic and cultural dominance and the x-ian version is pretty much limited to the 5% or so of x-ians who live in the US, ie it's a particularly American spin on the religion)

... but all in all, people who self-describe as either x-ian or Muslim still make up more than half the world pop, i think . . .

[fleetmouse]

Belief In God Plummets Among Younger Generation

[Gwarlroge]

Craig on evolution (From his blog):

As I explained in my exposition of the Doctrine of Creation, when it comes to questions of the origin of life and biological complexity, biblical Christians enjoy the advantage over the naturalist of being truly open to follow the evidence where it leads. Since I think, for the reasons explained in the podcast, that an evolutionary theory is compatible with the biblical account in Genesis 1, the question of biological origins is for me a straightforward scientific question: what does the evidence indicate about the means by which God brought about life and biological complexity? My honest, layman’s assessment of the evidence makes me skeptical of the neo-Darwinian account and leaves me with a probing agnosticism about the theory.

Think about what he says here. Craig, a theologian with no scientific credentials, feels a "probing agnosticism" about evolution that leaves him skeptical. Even though real scientists who interpret the evidence that falls every day into their laps aren't skeptical at all about the clear evidence, and even though it doesn't challenge his faith, he remains a skeptic about evolution. Consciously or subconsciously, he's put the blinders on. This is why atheists are unmoved by apologists like Craig. He has a real problem with being who he is: a primate.

That would be amusing if it weren't so disturbing. I feel sorry for him. If I met him, I'd love to have a beer with the guy and really try to explain to him how damaging his position is to the credibility of Christian apologetics and evangelism.

(Warning: hastily composed--lots of "I think" and "I don't think.")

I don't think Craig is agnostic about all interpretations of the evidence: he specifically singles out the neo-Darwinian account as the one he doesn't believe. He often says that random mutation and natural selection are not efficacious to produce the variety of life that we see, and that there is disagreement among experts about whether the neo-Darwinian account is adequate. I think he does subscribe to some vague form of evolutionism, or Old Earth Creationism, which suggests that humans might have evolved from "lower" primates. (See here.

I don't think Craig is agnostic w/r/t the neo-Darwinian synthesis of evolutionary theory because he's a theologian with no scientific credentials. I don't think he disbelieves it because he's secretly afraid of being not only a sinful human but a primate. I also don't think he is skeptical of evolutionary biologists without good reason. Craig's position on evolution does nothing to damage the credibility of Christian apologetics or evangelism, either, because to discredit everything someone says because you think he's a kook on one issue is simply bad logic--it's a red herring fallacy. The majority of Craig's work is world-class, from what I've read.

Now I do disagree with Craig on one thing: namely, I don't think that Biblical Christians are the only ones who get to "follow the evidence where it leads." Naturalists can adhere to naturalism without believing in evolution--the one does not entail the other.

[Gwarlroge]

The fundies and dogmatists are in lala land.

Exactly where I want to be! ...I realize that I am still in the world, however, and plan to remember that.

Its head is clearly up its ass with respect to sex education

Probably.

and STD and pregnancy prevention in Africa and all over the world.

Here I think I should disagree with the STD prevention part. I remember thinking the Pope was wrong, and then realizing that he was right.

Sorry, but atheism is definitely not "dying out." The number of people who declare themselves non-religious is increasing drastically. One wonders why you dedicate so much time to lambasting the scourge of of new atheism -- the bloggers, the Harrisses, and the Hitchenses -- if atheism is rapidly dying.

If religion is dying out, why are you so interested in it, Ophir's Gopher? (BTW, did you go to the U of M? Ophir was famous for gold, and the U has Golden Gophers, including Goldy....)