Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 16:26:27 GMT 10
www.cnsnews.com/news/article/global-study-atheists-decline-only-18-world-population-2020#.Home » News Global Study: Atheists in Decline, Only 1.8% of World Population by 2020July 24, 2013 - 2:18 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By Michael W. Chapman Subscribe to Michael W. Chapman RSS Follow Michael W. Chapman on Twitter 320 22 Atheist Richard Dawkins. (AP) (CNSNews.com) – Atheism is in decline worldwide, with the number of atheists falling from 4.5% of the world’s population in 1970 to 2.0% in 2010 and projected to drop to 1.8% by 2020, according to a new report by the Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Mass. In its report, Christianity in its Global Context, 1970-2020: Society, Religion, and Mission, researchers analyzed data on church membership and activities from thousands of Christian denominations and other religions worldwide, presenting that data from 1970 and 2010 for a 40-year comparison and, using that information and related demographic data to forecast the world religious makeup in 2020. (See ChristianityinitsGlobalContext(1).pdf) The numbers show that in 1970 there were 165,500,000 atheists worldwide, about 4.5% of the global population. In 2010, the number of atheists had fallen to 136,582,200 or 2.0% of the population. If trends continue, according to the study, there will be 136,685,000 atheists in 2020, or about 1.8% of the world population. “Projections to 2020 indicate a sustained decrease of the global share of the non-religious,” reads the study. “This is due primarily to the resurgence of Buddhism, Christianity, and other religions in China, and Christianity in Eastern Europe.” “If this trend continues, agnostics and atheists will be a smaller portion of the world’s population in 2020 than they were in 2010,” says the study. “Although the number of atheists and agnostics continues to rise in the Western world, the current growth of a variety of religions in China in particular (where the vast majority of the non-religious live today) suggests continued future demographic growth of religion.” “From the point of view of 1970-2010, there has been a global religious resurgence, and it seems likely to continue into the future,” reports the study. In reference to agnostics, the data show they constituted 14.7% of the world’s population in 1970 but declined to 9.8% of the population in 2010; they are projected to fall further by 2020, to make up 8.9% of the population. (See ChristianityinitsGlobalContext(1).pdf) Commenting on the study, Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said that much of the decrease for atheists “is attributable to the demise of that atheistic genocidal wonderland called Communism: the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to a spike in religious affiliation, both in Russia and in Eastern Europe,” as the study documents, and “China is also in the throes of a religious revival.” Citing the data from the report, Donohue said “Russia was 38% Christian in 1970 and in 2010 the number jumped to 71%. The world’s first officially atheistic state, Albania, is now 63% Muslim and 32% Christian.” While Christianity and Islam dominate on the world religious stage, the data show that Islam is on the rise. Christians comprised 33.2% of the world’s population in 1970, 32.8% in 2010, and are projected to be 33.3% in 2020. For Islam, Muslims comprised 15.6% of the population in 1970 and grew to 22.5% in 2010; they are projected to hit 23.9% of the world’s population in 2020. “Two religions, Christianity and Islam, dominate religious demographics and seem poised to continue that dominance in the future,” reads the study. “In 1970 those two religions represented 48.8% of the global population, and by 2020 they will likely represent 57.2%.”
Christian apologist Dinish D'Souza made this point in some of his work when people asked about incorporating the atheist viewpoint into societal values. "Why?" he responded, "Atheists are becoming increasingly irrelevent in world terms."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 16:42:15 GMT 10
What is an atheist?
It seems to me that the term atheist is a label invented by religious idiots who have no backbone to stand on their own two feet, so blindly believe in bullshit, using religion as a crutch. They object to rational people demanding proof of things which cannot been seen or heard or felt or smelled or tasted or measured, so those religionists stick the ATHIEST label on them.
I have never called myself an atheist (I have no need of bullshit labels)....it is idiots like Altair and Matty-boy and Dib who throw the atheist label around at people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 18:29:31 GMT 10
"They object to rational people demanding proof of things which cannot been seen or heard or felt or smelled or tasted or measured,"
How do you prove integrity ? Morality ? So according to you because they cannot been seen or heard or felt or smelled or tasted or measured it's irrational to believe in them?
Further how do you apply any of your criteria to abstract ideas or principles ? Your own criteria would fail or have you missed that basic point?
Your view Kiwi is called rational positivism and is actually dated and out of vogue because we believe in many things that you can't actually prove.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2013 18:31:31 GMT 10
I have never called myself an atheist That must be a great relief to the professing atheists on this board
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 5, 2013 19:17:58 GMT 10
When I look for good independent information, my first point of call is always Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 5, 2013 19:18:21 GMT 10
Only kidding!
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 5, 2013 19:22:33 GMT 10
And this is not a case of shooting the messenger, when the messenger is clearly so incompetent, which I will prove beyond doubt. (unlike skippy and the Vicar of Dibley being able to prove the existence of any god beyond any doubt).
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 6, 2013 17:00:04 GMT 10
Yoo Hoo, Skippedy Doh Dah!
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 10, 2013 11:19:12 GMT 10
What happened, Skippy? Facts got your tongue?
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 12, 2013 19:27:43 GMT 10
Still avoiding this, Skippy? Are you channelling your inner Tony Abbott?
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 14, 2013 8:25:34 GMT 10
When I look for good independent information, my first point of call is always Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts. Yeah because everyone knows, that once a person become a theist, all the raw data gets reported poorly. (Since a theist isn't bound to a 'do not lie' morality clause, or any standard like that.) Not like all those self-congratulatory, agenda-laden, atheists websites.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 14, 2013 10:18:09 GMT 10
And this is not a case of shooting the messenger, when the messenger is clearly so incompetent, which I will prove beyond doubt. (unlike skippy and the Vicar of Dibley being able to prove the existence of any god beyond any doubt). There are so few things that can be proven beyond doubt. One must wonder why slartibartfast would set such a stringent criteria on the supernatural, when he holds exceptional belief in certain 'alleged' natural phenomena with no evidence at all.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 14, 2013 11:32:38 GMT 10
And this is not a case of shooting the messenger, when the messenger is clearly so incompetent, which I will prove beyond doubt. (unlike skippy and the Vicar of Dibley being able to prove the existence of any god beyond any doubt). There are so few things that can be proven beyond doubt. One must wonder why slartibartfast would set such a stringent criteria on the supernatural, when he holds exceptional belief in certain 'alleged' natural phenomena with no evidence at all. Like?
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 14, 2013 11:49:36 GMT 10
There are so few things that can be proven beyond doubt. One must wonder why slartibartfast would set such a stringent criteria on the supernatural, when he holds exceptional belief in certain 'alleged' natural phenomena with no evidence at all. Like? ...morality, mathematics, aestheticism, music, the scientific theory, love, freedom, justice, art, logic, the laws of the universe, darwin's theory, history, ethics, culture, etc
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 14, 2013 11:53:52 GMT 10
Nothing damages the truth more than stretching it. You can't damage truth. You can only garnish it with your special brand of bullshit, Earl.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 14, 2013 13:59:30 GMT 10
Pastors aren't infallible, and I am entitled to disagree with him.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 15, 2013 8:27:24 GMT 10
...morality, mathematics, aestheticism, music, the scientific theory, love, freedom, justice, art, logic, the laws of the universe, darwin's theory, history, ethics, culture, etc Huh? None of those can be proven?
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 15, 2013 11:01:08 GMT 10
None of these things can be proven physically, nor are they self-evident.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Aug 15, 2013 11:25:22 GMT 10
Pastors aren't infallible, and I am entitled to disagree with him. But ever since 1870 the Catholics have claimed that the Pope is infallible on the basis of Matthew 16:18 - the "Tu es Petrus" bit. And also on the basis of Mark 3:16, 9:2, Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. It's one of the big issues I have with Catholicism, along with their views on abortion, divorce, human sexuality, priestly celibacy, women in the priesthood ... etc etc ... Dominus vobiscum to all of you!
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 16, 2013 0:42:13 GMT 10
Pastors aren't infallible, and I am entitled to disagree with him. But ever since 1870 the Catholics have claimed that the Pope is infallible on the basis of Matthew 16:18 - the "Tu es Petrus" bit. And also on the basis of Mark 3:16, 9:2, Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. It's one of the big issues I have with Catholicism, along with their views on abortion, divorce, human sexuality, priestly celibacy, women in the priesthood ... etc etc ... Dominus vobiscum to all of you! Then I suppose it's a good thing that I am not a Roman Catholic.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 16, 2013 0:45:34 GMT 10
None of these things can be proven physically, nor are they self-evident. But God is? Yes. It's called the "Law of Causality" If consciousness exists in the Universe, and we are a finite effect--then a greater consciousness (ie: God), must be a necessary Cause.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Aug 16, 2013 0:51:17 GMT 10
If that's what you enjoy, have at it.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Aug 16, 2013 2:41:33 GMT 10
But ever since 1870 the Catholics have claimed that the Pope is infallible on the basis of Matthew 16:18 - the "Tu es Petrus" bit. And also on the basis of Mark 3:16, 9:2, Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. It's one of the big issues I have with Catholicism, along with their views on abortion, divorce, human sexuality, priestly celibacy, women in the priesthood ... etc etc ... Dominus vobiscum to all of you! Then I suppose it's a good thing that I am not a Roman Catholic. Dib you have no idea ... Not having a go at you, it's just an expression meaning "you have no idea ... how right you are! Take Down Under. Catholicism is the single biggest religion on the island continent at the bottom of the world. Must be all those Irish convicts that the British shipped out. Followed by millions of Catholic southern Europeans - especially Italians - after WW2, not to mention Poles and Catholics from Central Europe. Also, a lot of Eastern European refugees from former Communist countries were Catholic. Most Ukrainians I've met here have been Catholics. We used to call them "Iron Curtain Countries". There used to be something called "Captive Nations Week" in July and on the Sunday of that week there would be a Catholic mass in a lot of churches around the country in which members of the parish whose families had originally come "from behind the Iron Curtain" would attend the Mass dressed in their national costumes. During the Cold War Masses on Sunday would conclude with a "Prayer for the Conversion of Russia" - that meant the Soviet Union. So it wasn't just religious, it was political. We have a national Census every 5 years and the Census routinely finds that 25% or more of Australians identify as Catholic. I live in the least Catholic part of the country and that's the state of South Australia where the capital is Adelaide. I can't quickly find a percentage figure but it's the only part of Australia where the British never sent convicts so it never got a large Irish component of the population. If anything it's the most "English" of the Australian states and you can hear it on the local accent. The other group that heavily colonised this part of Australia was German Protestants. So this is the most Protestant State and statistically contains the smallest proportion of Catholics. But the eastern States have large numbers of Catholics and that's where the three large cities of Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne are located. So you also get a lot of lapsed Catholics and ex-Catholics. But Rome doesn't let go of you so easily. If you've had a solid dose of Catholicism in your childhood it tends to stick with you. And you kick against it - for the rest of your life. I can always pick a tortured ex-Catholic. You know the movie Schindler's List"? It's based on a novel of the same title (actually it was originally called Schindler's Ark but that's another story!) which was written by an Australian named Thomas Kenneally. Now that guy has "tortured ex Catholic" written all over him. He cheerfully admits as much himself and reckons it's what stirs his creative juices. The guy who will in all likelihood be our next Prime Minister after September 7, Tony Abbott is more Catholic than the Pope - in a manner of speaking! In any case he did once study for the priesthood. Apparently he goes to Mass not just on Sundays but several times a week. He has admitted to practising the odd bit of mortification of the flesh which I find a tad scary. When he does become PM he'll lead a government that's riddled with Catholics. Half his Cabinet will be Catholic. So if you think that "Roman Catholic" is a good thing not to be, then thank your God that you were brought up in civilised Canada. I mean the "civilised" bit sincerely. From the few weeks I spent in Canada 10 years ago (can it really be that long ago - already?) I got the impression that it was a very civilised place while we're still a bit wild & woolly.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 16, 2013 7:15:40 GMT 10
Yes. It's called the "Law of Causality" If consciousness exists in the Universe, and we are a finite effect--then a greater consciousness (ie: God), must be a necessary Cause. No, it doesn't. Double bollocks. That's just fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Aug 16, 2013 7:18:33 GMT 10
None of these things can be proven physically, nor are they self-evident. Triple bollocks!
|
|