Is the internet killing religion?
-
I have heard that the internet is where religion comes to die. This may be in part due to the ease of access to information about science and conflicting views about religious dogma. It also appears that atheism/agnosticism is on the rise, in particular for developed countries with easy of access to the Internet.
Just wondering what other people thought.
-
Religion survives in the backwoods.
Prior to the internet, people didn't have a place to go to find out the truth about religions. The only place to turn was others who are in the same religion they are. So it's not like they'd ever get an unbiased view on things.
-
Religions are using internet too, to spread their message. There are countless religious web sites.
-
TRUE, there are a lot of religious websites out there. HOWEVER, they aren't telling anyone anything new, except maybe through "apologetics" (mental gymnastics to make things seem to be what they are not).
The only "new" stuff on religion comes from the atheist and skeptic sites.
-
Emile Zola, a French writer over 100 years ago, wrote a trio of Books called the Three Cities. Lourdes, Rome and Paris are the cities he discussed, in a narrative form. He was talking about the slow death of religion, and the need to the Roman Church to reinvent itself if it even intended to be relevant again.
In the States, religion began to die a slow and inevitable death starting around the 1950's when Workers began moving to the suburbs. This is also the beginning of the argument that TV was killing religion (and making kids stupid).
Should I mention the Crusades, when the Europeans began to try and find ways to make religion relevant in their time? How about the Renaissance, the so called end of Religion, and the beginning of "enlightenment"? The Printing Press, Common News (i.e. cheap papers), Penny Dreadfuls and Pulp Fiction?
My point, and I am beating a dead horse, Religion has been dying out for about the last 1500 years. The Internet is just another reason for crackpots to claim the end of the world, and try to bring people back to religion, mostly so they can milk them for all the money they can.
Jonestown?
-
If it were only that easy. People with closed minds who don't want to really learn anything about anything else tend to stay that way and will seek out specific sources of information to spruik their beliefs, rather than having an objective discussion.
Sadly, the advent of the internet hasn't solved peace in the Middle East, or increased any secularism in governments around the world.
-
I do not think that the internet itself is responsible for declining faith around the world.
As they say, "knowledge is power", and I think this is the true driving force behind the change. More and more people are continuing to tertiary education, literature that openly advocates atheism is no longer taboo and there are an ever increasing number of people who openly criticize religion.
As others have mentioned, this process began long ago, well before the internet. That's not to say the internet has not played a major role in this—the very nature of the internet has surely accelerated this process.
-
No not at all. At the end of the day, people still need a reason to live and be good. Atheism hasn't provided it. Modern atheism is more extreme and dogmatic than modern Christianity. Its one fierce dogma just shouting out the others.
-
No not at all. At the end of the day, people still need a reason to live and be good. Atheism hasn't provided it. Modern atheism is more extreme and dogmatic than modern Christianity. Its one fierce dogma just shouting out the others.
Well, I don't think so, I don't know what kind of atheism have you experienced, but I can say that I'm an atheist and is not a dogma, is just common sense. There is no proof that god exists, and since we're talking about an unbelievable unrealistic being, I see no reason to believe that there is, and I don't know why should I follow his teachings. For me god it's on the same level than Sauron and Voldemort, just fantasy. If someday someone will find evidence of its existence, I will accept the evidence, as all atheists will do (I assume). But as long as one thing seems a nonsense, it sounds like a nonsense, and there is no evidence that disprove that it is not a nonsense, I consider it a nonsense. And I don't understand what's wrong with that
And also, I have a reason to live, just do not concerns an imaginary creature, and I'm pretty good, even without a soul -
_**Religion = Faith
:cheesy2:**_
-
_**Religion = Faith
:cheesy2:**_
Yup, and if the internet exposes more religions for the fairy tales they are then it's just another reason for me to say for like the one hundred and forty fourth time "God Bless The Internet".
Hey, I am not denying the rights of idiots to believe in whatever they want but I will continue until my last breath to deny them the right to deny me.
-
No not at all. At the end of the day, people still need a reason to live and be good. Atheism hasn't provided it. Modern atheism is more extreme and dogmatic than modern Christianity. Its one fierce dogma just shouting out the others.
This might be the funniest comment I've ever read on a gay porn forum.
-
Atheists are becoming more and more dogmatic. Whilst saying that 'if it was proved I would believe it' they insist that those with a different view are fantasists. This is classic dogmatism. The atheists are shoving their views down others throats in classic bible thumping style, whilst all the time complaining about bible thumpers. Its pretty hypocritical. If you don't believe me, watch a few youtube videos. Or become acquainted with anything to do with Dawkins or Hitchens, for example.
-
No not at all. At the end of the day, people still need a reason to live and be good. Atheism hasn't provided it. Modern atheism is more extreme and dogmatic than modern Christianity. Its one fierce dogma just shouting out the others.
This might be the funniest comment I've ever read on a gay porn forum.
Well the standard of comedy might be low in that context, or just that your sense of humour is weird. Perhaps you have no taste.
-
Promoting science and reason != peddling a millenia-old book as the universal dictator of truth.
-
No not at all. At the end of the day, people still need a reason to live and be good. Atheism hasn't provided it. Modern atheism is more extreme and dogmatic than modern Christianity. Its one fierce dogma just shouting out the others.
If you need a sky daddy so you don't slit your wrists or do bad things, then you need serious help.
Atheists have no "dogma" other than there is no god and religion should not be forced on others. Everyone is an atheist when it comes to other people's religion.
-
Religions just a result of the successive social progress i guess. but globally speaking, without religious, that's not a imperfect society anymore, as nothing is perfect.
-
The quote function's not working for me today, so I'll cut and paste.
"If you need a sky daddy so you don't slit your wrists or do bad things, then you need serious help. "
Typical patronizing, emotionally autistic response from a half witted socially retarded atheist
"Atheists have no "dogma" other than there is no god and religion should not be forced on others. Everyone is an atheist when it comes to other people's religion. "
Bullshit. Neo-atheism has all the hallmarks of a cargo cult. It has a missionary zeal and a fundamentalist profile. It has cult leaders, viz.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9286682/the-bizarre-and-costly-cult-of-richard-dawkins/
-
Religions are using internet too, to spread their message. There are countless religious web sites.
I could not agree more. Every religion enjoys easier way to spread its words.
-
The quote function's not working for me today, so I'll cut and paste.
"If you need a sky daddy so you don't slit your wrists or do bad things, then you need serious help. "
Typical patronizing, emotionally autistic response from a half witted socially retarded atheist
"Atheists have no "dogma" other than there is no god and religion should not be forced on others. Everyone is an atheist when it comes to other people's religion. "
Bullshit. Neo-atheism has all the hallmarks of a cargo cult. It has a missionary zeal and a fundamentalist profile. It has cult leaders, viz.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9286682/the-bizarre-and-costly-cult-of-richard-dawkins/
You were the one that said people need religion so they have a reason to live. You also said that people need the threat of going to hell to do good.
That is extremely pathetic reasons to believe in god{s}.
Atheists don't need religion/god{s} to have a reason to live or do good. That's the difference.
So call my previous reply as "emotionally autistic" but I stated the truth.
As for Dawkins and his comments about babies being born without a religion, he is 100% correct. It's not surprising that kids are the same religion/non religion as their parents.
Santa and the Easter bunny have more evidence that they exist than god does. Every years kids all over get presents from Santa. What does god do for those same kids?
