Have we lost the faith of our fathers?

[MoreCoffee]

I had lunch with a good friend yesterday, we had some Thai food and chatted about laptop computers and technology and religion. It was almost like a conversation here in Christianity Haven. My friend is an atheist. A PhD in education and quite insightful. Some years ago he gave me an adage I've valued ever since "Shopping is better than buying". During our discussion we observed how hard it is to believe in what cannot be seen and cannot be detected by scientific instruments and can't be proved to be by philosophical argument - God and his angels - and how Christopher Hitchens was so articulate (cynical too) in his analysis of religion. I mused that We live in increasingly secular lands now and few people believe in God and angels which makes me wonder if we in the west have abandoned the core of our culture having sold what might be called our "birth right" for a material "mess of pottage" in the things we own and eat and enjoy because it seems as though the more we have the less we are willing to believe in goodness and God and his angels. Naturally my friend looked for other explanations for declining birth rates, manners, and the flush of young people with face metal, tattoos, and back pack ghetto blasters not to mention tablet sized phones that draw their attention more than their surrounds.

Have we lost the faith of past generations being drawn into a cult of possessions as a substitute?

 

[psalms 91]

I had lunch with a good friend yesterday, we had some Thai food and chatted about laptop computers and technology and religion. It was almost like a conversation here in Christianity Haven. My friend is an atheist. A PhD in education and quite insightful. Some years ago he have me an adage I've valued ever since "Shopping is better than buying". During out discussion we observed how hard it is to believe in what cannot be seen and cannot be detected by scientific instruments and can't be proved to be by philosophical argument - God and his angels - and how Christopher Hitchens was so articulate (cynical too) in his analysis of religion. I mused that We live in increasingly secular lands now and few people believe in God and angels which makes me wonder if we in the west have abandoned the core of our culture having sold what might be called our "birth right" for a material "mess of pottage" in the things we own and eat and enjoy because it seems as if the more we have the less we are willing to believe in goodness and God and his angels. Naturally my friend looked for other explanations for declining birth rates, manners, and the flush of young people with face metal tattoos and back pack ghetto blasters not to mention tablet sized phones that draw their attention more than their surrounds.

Have we lost the faith of past generations being drawn into a cult of possessions as a substitute?

Faith is definitely lacking today both within and without the hurch

 

[MoreCoffee]

Faith is definitely lacking today both within and without the hurch

The faithful remain still, God promised that they would remain within the church until the end of the ages and the last judgement. They will be here to receive him when he returns. They remember that every year at the season of advent and also in their prayers all through the year saying Thy kingdom come thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. So when faith seems lacking in the world and in one's religion it is comforting to remember God's promises and have hope in his faithfulness.

 

[psalms 91]

It also says few and that is what I am seeing today

 

[MoreCoffee]

It also says few and that is what I am seeing today

Yes, there are fewer now (as a percentage) than in past times yet even today one third of human kind professes faith in the Lord Jesus Christ though of that third only some live a life consistent with the faith that they profess. Isn't it interesting that in the Apocalypse of saint John the theologian it is said And the four Angels were released, who had been prepared for that hour, and day, and month, and year, in order to kill one third part of men. Revelation 9:15 Perhaps there's a lesson in the proportions?

 

[Lamb]

The faithful remain still, God promised that they would remain within the church until the end of the ages and the last judgement. They will be here to receive him when he returns. They remember that every year at the season of advent and also in their prayers all through the year saying Thy kingdom come thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. So when faith seems lacking in the world and in one's religion it is comforting to remember God's promises and have hope in his faithfulness.

I can't top this answer :thumbsup:

 

[Rens]

-

 

[psalms 91]

Yes, there are fewer now (as a percentage) than in past times yet even today one third of human kind professes faith in the Lord Jesus Christ though of that third only some live a life consistent with the faith that they profess. Isn't it interesting that in the Apocalypse of saint John the theologian it is said And the four Angels were released, who had been prepared for that hour, and day, and month, and year, in order to kill one third part of men. Revelation 9:15 Perhaps there's a lesson in the proportions?

Perhaps you should accept verses that say narrow is the gate and straight is the way and feww be that find it, also it says when I return will I find faith, and the verse I just mentioned. It points to many that think so but few that actually are

 

[MarkFL]

It is said that the socialization is the largest driving force for religiosity...children are largely indoctrinated into the religion of their parents. As fewer people practice a religion, so fewer children will be raised to be religious, weakening the inter-generational spread of religion. Increasing internet access and usage are highly correlated with secularization. As of now, churches are closing across the world, faith is fading, and those men and women who live their lives according to secular values and humanist principles are on the rise.

Some estimate that by 2050, Islam will be the world's largest religion, however, religions will likely share a continually shrinking percentage of the entire population...but I also think that will level off at some point, at least in the near future.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It is said that the socialization is the largest driving force for religiosity...children are largely indoctrinated into the religion of their parents. As fewer people practice a religion, so fewer children will be raised to be religious, weakening the inter-generational spread of religion. Increasing internet access and usage are highly correlated with secularization. As of now, churches are closing across the world, faith is fading, and those men and women who live their lives according to secular values and humanist principles are on the rise.

Some estimate that by 2050, Islam will be the world's largest religion, however, religions will likely share a continually shrinking percentage of the entire population...but I also think that will level off at some point, at least in the near future.

I was raised as an atheist by an atheist father and a mother who didn't promote religion.

 

[Rens]

I was raised as an atheist by an atheist father and a mother who didn't promote religion.

I think it's sometimes better to be raised by atheists. Kids who are forced to go to church want nothing to do with it anymore and if you're always told He doesn't exist you're like: hmmmm I'm not just going to accept that.

 

[MarkFL]

I was raised as an atheist by an atheist father and a mother who didn't promote religion.

And I was raised Christian...sometimes we just don't follow our upbringing.

 

[MoreCoffee]

And I was raised Christian...sometimes we just don't follow our upbringing.

Very True Mark

I wonder which of us has chosen the "better way"

 

[MarkFL]

Very True Mark

I wonder which of us has chosen the "better way"

You and I are the exception, and not the rule. It seems most follow the religion of their upbringing. But as for you and I, I think we are both fortunate to live in societies free enough to make our own personal choice. I think that is the better way. A substantial portion of Earth's people live under regimes where the "wrong choice" can have bad consequences.

 

[Stravinsk]

You and I are the exception, and not the rule. It seems most follow the religion of their upbringing. But as for you and I, I think we are both fortunate to live in societies free enough to make our own personal choice. I think that is the better way. A substantial portion of Earth's people live under regimes where the "wrong choice" can have bad consequences.

Instead, in many parts of the so called "free society" - teaching creationism, intelligent design and any other model than the heliocentric model is not in the "choices" at all.

Unless children are home-schooled. But the system is not set up to allow that to happen for the majority of the population. You get a state school education with all the benefits/consequences of considerable brainwashing whatever the State thinks is best. But it's a "free society", because we say it is.

 

[MarkFL]

Instead, in many parts of the so called "free society" - teaching creationism, intelligent design and any other model than the heliocentric model is not in the "choices" at all.

Unless children are home-schooled. But the system is not set up to allow that to happen for the majority of the population. You get a state school education with all the benefits/consequences of considerable brainwashing whatever the State thinks is best. But it's a "free society", because we say it is.

Creationism/ID, flat-Earth, young Earth, astrology, phrenology, water divining, etc. are simply not science. These should therefore obviously not be in the science classroom. Freedom shouldn't include choosing to teach unfounded hypotheses as science. What a grave disservice that is to our children, and unfortunately it's going on right here in the school district in which I live, and many others here in the U.S.

 

[Stravinsk]

Creationism/ID, flat-Earth, young Earth, astrology, phrenology, water divining, etc. are simply not science. These should therefore obviously not be in the science classroom. Freedom shouldn't include choosing to teach unfounded hypotheses as science. What a grave disservice that is to our children, and unfortunately it's going on right here in the school district in which I live, and many others here in the U.S.

You see - you do not *really* believe in freedom Mark. You only say you do, and it is not true when you say it.

You say Creationism/intelligent design is "not science". It's not science by YOUR definition, and then if someone disagrees, you'll do an appeal to authority. So and so says this. Or the "consensus" say this. Herd think and appeal to authority is all that is.

But - even if I were to agree with you (I don't) - but even if I were to agree with you on your definition - you are an advocate of mental slavery because Creationism or Intelligent design doesn't have to be done in a class that also teaches Big Bang or even has the word "science" in it's title.

Nope. You don't believe in freedom. Not really.

 

[MarkFL]

It's not science by the very definition of science, not by my definition.

See, that's the main problem here in the U.S. We have people who are profoundly ignorant of science and the system of process applied to it. It is easy for them to be fooled into thinking pseudo-science is science, and would have these things taught alongside real science.

You're so fervent in your desire to go against authority, that you reject valid authority/consensus backed by process and evidence and instead see conspiracy everywhere.

 

[Stravinsk]

It's not science by the very definition of science, not by my definition.

See, that's the main problem here in the U.S. We have people who are profoundly ignorant of science and the system of process applied to it. It is easy for them to be fooled into thinking pseudo-science is science, and would have these things taught alongside real science.

You're so fervent in your desire to go against authority, that you reject valid authority/consensus backed by process and evidence and instead see conspiracy everywhere.

Because a name like Einstein or Isaac Newton is revered in a book that says I should revere them and believe their theories does not constitute a *valid* authority to me. Their thoughts on the matter must fit all the criteria and be provable not only in mathematical equations but also in the physical realm. They must explain all the data, be provable by example, and must do so all the time under the same conditions.

 

[MarkFL]

Because a name like Einstein or Isaac Newton is revered in a book that says I should revere them and believe their theories does not constitute a *valid* authority to me. Their thoughts on the matter must fit all the criteria and be provable not only in mathematical equations but also in the physical realm. They must explain all the data, be provable by example, and must do so all the time under the same conditions.

It's not the names, although those names became famous because their work achieved the pinnacle status of "theory" by brutal peer review, but it is the fact that their theories work so well, explain how things work and make predictions that agree with observation. I invite you to learn some physics, some mathematics, try to leave your prejudices against authority behind, and see what science actually has to say about the natural world.