Is the Internet killing religion?

[JB Books]

I truly believe these hucksters will be called to account by God someday.

I don't think the internet is killing religion. Seems like the internet generates more of everything - good, bad, or indifferent. I do get the feeling that denominational chuches are declining in membership and participation, but I think there are many factors in play other than the internet.

The gospel of prosperity - I love the slot machine analogy!!! Why didn't the tribes think of that angle??? Reels of Prosperity with Joel Osteen and some of his colleagues on the screen.

Cedar Creek

 

[Junior Bonner]

I don't feel anything about religion, one way or the other. I just don't. I'm the same way with abortion, marijuana, neighbors that have a lot of in and out traffic etc. Is it right or wrong? I don't know. It just doesn't matter to me. If I had to pick just one word that matters, my word would be Poontang...

 

[TerryMiller]

And, finally, there is finally the Creationists who, not long ago, wanted to replace Science courses with Creationism. They wanted to feel they were entitled to say the Earth is only 3,000 or so years old. They wanted to have the entitled right to say that dinosaurs never existed, that the bones archaeologists did up were planted by the hands of Lucifer to stray man from faith. They wanted to say that Evolution doesn't exist when it does and is proven by the Galapagos Islands itself, where Charles Darwin have first explored the idea of the Theory of Evolution.

I'm glad you mentioned that Darwin "explored" the idea of the Theory of Evolution. Because, evolution is still just a theory.

Let me ask a couple of questions, but first go to this site and just start with the top portion of the article about the process of coagulation. However, if you look below that first portion, you'll see a whole lot more that is written about the various elements and processes of that vital function.

Blood Coagulation: Hemostasis

So, while I have no expectation that anyone can answer either of my questions, let me start with this one: Considering all the elements and processes (including interactions between elements), might we presume that it would take many generations for the process of coagulation to "evolve?" After all, evolution is supposed to be the gradual changing of species that is passed from generation to generation through procreation.

Now, considering the likelihood of many generations needed for this to evolve, how is it that mankind, prone to kicking around in the woods and rocks and injuring themselves, didn't bleed to death before coagulation was accomplished? Personally, as much as I injured myself as a kid, I doubt I would have made it to puberty, let alone be able to "pass along" an evolutionary element.

Now, Darwin later stated that two things would "destroy" his theory of evolution: one, the lack of finding any fossil remains of a "transformational creature," and two, that the cell could be proved to be "irreducibly complex." So far, after 150 years of mankind looking, the fossil remains of the transformational creature have not been found. Also, with the advent of better technology in the form of microscopes, to include electron microscopes, the cell has been found to be VERY complex.

 

[TerryMiller]

I'm not sure it's the same God. 3 very distinct religions have very different ideas about the God they worship. Each claim to worship the true God.

Actually, all three religions trace their roots back to Abraham and his God. With Islam, the lineage goes through Ishmael, while Judaism and Christianity trace back through Isaac.

Each is actually correct in that there is "one god," but each practices their worship differently. While both Judaism and Islam deny that Jesus was the Messiah, there are some Jews that are called Messianic Jews that do believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Since Islam didn't come about until about 600 years or so after Christ, they would naturally deny Jesus as Messiah because they want to believe what Mohammed wrote in the Quran.

Oh, and to be truthful about it, even the Roman Catholic church didn't come about until about 300 years after Jesus.

 

[TerryMiller]

Now, back to the original poster's question, I believe that the internet is actually helping religion. There are so many churches that are even streaming their services via the internet, and there are so many religious sites and resources for bibles and bible study that can be found. Bible Gateway is one that even has the Bible in numerous translations.

Speaking of which, let me touch on something here. I don't ever call anyone "reverend," even if it is their "title" as a minister. There is only one place in the Bible, and not found in every version, where the word "reverend" appears, and that is used as a description of God. Sorry, but I can't bring myself to address a human with a term that only applied to God in biblical text.

Also, regardless of one's "faith," I cannot judge anyone unless they have done despicable things that are clearly spelled out as sins. After all, I am not God, nor will I speak for his judgement.

 

[dak]

What transformational being is there between a wolf and a chihuahua? I mean, the Earth is only 5000 years old and dinosaurs ate my great great great great great aunt Matilda, so the theory of evolution in regards to time confuses me.

I like the stoned ape theory and while I'm agnostic I'd like to believe if there is an omnipotent being he'd be drunk and very selective to only bless 'murrica(also that he's a he).

 

[mightymouse]

Depends on the religion. Global warmists and gun owning socialists seem to thrive on the internet...

You left out Taoist free range nudists and flea farming inverted fascists.

 

[mightymouse]

The lack of religion is a big part of America's problem. We need to move this country back to its Judeo-Christian roots.

Mad Dog Puppy--one of your split personalities has come back from the dead. All hope is not lost (yet).

 

[dennishoddy]

Speaking of which, let me touch on something here. I don't ever call anyone "reverend," even if it is their "title" as a minister. There is only one place in the Bible, and not found in every version, where the word "reverend" appears, and that is used as a description of God. Sorry, but I can't bring myself to address a human with a term that only applied to God in biblical text.

I see your point. The Rev Jesse Jackson, and the Rev Al Sharpton have never stood in a pulpit. Its a title acquired by going to some school, or class or whatever. Usde by them to acquire some tax advantage, and supposed respect among their base.

 

[Danny Tanner]

Trends in many of the greatest nations show that religion is dying off. That doesn't mean that the idea of God, or gods, is dying, though. The internet broadens the availability of information. The more people learn facts that contradict claims made from the bible, a text supposedly the literal word of God, the more they question their religious beliefs (why do you think Islamic countries heavily filter/restrict internet usage?). Some question enough to turn to a disbelief in God, some question enough to continue a relationship with God on a personal level, but doing away with organized religion.

I agree with Deerslayer in a sense that I wish the world were void of religion, but I know that'll never happen. Knowing that, I just wish religion would stay in the churches, minds, and homes of individuals and their families and out of the law books in which we ALL must abide. Until then, I'll be forever critical of religion. Allowing Christianity to dictate laws is unAmerican, considering we are not a theocracy. Much like the sometimes laughable religions of civilizations past, one day future civilizations will look back at us and laugh our religions, ironically and hypocritically much like civilizations today.