The future is for agnostics

The future is for agnostics
do you agree
they outgrew god
as, scholz and macron

 

Of course not. Agnostics and atheists don't have replacement level fertility. The religious do.

 

let's talk about God on September 30, the International Day of Blasphemy

 

OK, remind me next year.

 

You do realize that religious views are not genetically determined, right?

 

Weird. I didn't say that, or anything like that.

Carry on.

 

Ah, so your comment about birth rates had nothing to do with the topic and didn't mean what you said it means. Cool. Yes, since you have admitted that your comment is nonsensical, we should carry on from it.

 

My comment was about the topic, not about religious views being genetically determined. No idea where that thought of yours came from, but it's not topic related.

 

I think you are unfamiliar with your own post. It requires genetically determined religious beliefs. You were talking about the birth rates of religious groups.

 

This is a statement which reveals a very limited mind. Tough luck for you.

 

I appreciate your admission that your previous comment is completely meaningless. That was the whole point of my response. I'm glad we agree your post was meaningless.

 

My statement made sense. Your statements have been incomprehensible and had nothing to do with my statement, or the topic. Unfortunately every interaction with you quickly degenerates into you making statements that have nothing to do with anything other than throwing S against the walls. Sorry I'm not interested in being your therapist.

 

I apologize for assuming that you wrote post #2. You should have a word with whomever hacked into your account and wrote that post pretending to be you.

 

What does this mean?

 

I'm sorry you couldn't comprehend it.

 

Religious people have more kids than non religious.

How fertility rates and religious adherence are connected

 

Jesus Christ said that few go to life in God because it is narrow and difficult, and many go to death because it is wide and easy. So if the future is as you say, where most are too big for God, then Jesus Christ was right. Do you agree?

 

No — @Lil Mike was correctly saying that religion is perpetuated through indoctrination that typically starts in the home.

And he is 100% correct.

 

You have an issue with your post, there is no evidence of a “god” in yours or any other religion.

You are quoting a book written a hundred years after the supposed events occurred in a time where these stories were passed down from generation to generation which was then edited by kings and scholars to push their own narratives.

Ignoring that much of the Bible builds off pagan rituals and holidays, that you think these tales are not only even remotely close to what they originated were is laughable.

How is your belief any more valid than anyone else’s?

 

There is no evidence that agnostics, Atheists, or any belief or philosophy outside the gospel of Jesus Christ is anything more than self serving blabber. Apparently you align with Interaktive's assertion that the future belongs to those who reject the straight and narrow way to God. If so, that aligns with Jesus Christs statement that few find salvation, while the bulk do not. Were the world not filled with counterfeit Gods, there would be no true God for men to attempt to approximate. So the plethora of falsehoods are no final say in the absence of God as Atheists presume. Clearly the falsehoods are used by unbelievers simply as an excuse for procrastination and the closing of their eyes and ears. People can believe what they want. But salvation isn't built on belief. It's built on certainty, which is why we build our structures on solid foundations rather than excuses.

 

Deconversion rates after childhood indoctrination could offset that. Despite low birth rates, the "nones" are a very fast growing demographic. For many, maintaining indoctrination requires a rather isolated existence, which is rarer and rarer as communication technology advances and people meet those of other beliefs, etc.

 

So your assertion is that god is real, you offer zero evidence outside of your belief and you are the only person that is correct.

While the arrogance is impressive that you believe you have chosen the only version out of hundreds of other gods that doesn’t really hold water.

No wonder Christianity is dying — believe me or go to hell will only work on a very narrow set of people and only if you get them young. Is that why y’all are trying to fund religious schools and mandate religion in public schools?

 

That’s an interesting concept but fertility rates and religious adherence seem to involve other factors.

Lower fertility rates seem to be correlated with higher education levels for females, higher GDP per capita, higher use of contraceptives and stronger family planning programs. As you said, higher fertility rates are associated with religious adherence which in turn is associated with lower education, lower GDP per capital and less contraceptive use. Both higher and lower fertility rates are also dependent on where in the world we live. Of course, there is total lack of consensus related to any of this among researchers.

The human race will continue despite religion.

 

That's not self sustaining however. "Deconversion" still requires there to be religious people, having kids, to provide a population for "deconversion." When you think this life is all there is, there doesn't seem to be much incentive to waste it having children to prepare for a future you'll never see, why not party instead?

There may be a social movement or concept that reverses this trend, but we've not seen it yet.

 

This thread was specifically about the future belonging to agnostics, which is why I'm looking at the fertility of the religious vs the non religious. I do acknowledge there are other factors. If every woman was a Phd, the human race would probably die out in a few generations, although we would have lots of peer reviewed articles about it.