Pew report shows American Christian numbers in decline

[bhsmte]

Thank you for your opinion. But I am not convinced, nor impressed. The strong reputation you speak of comes by consensus that rely on poll percentages based on cherry picking perimeters, not by actual headcount evidence of numbers that are constantly increasing in the direction of salvations.

It still remains that the gospel is being preached, there is awakening unto God and revival of the body of Christ going on, and will increase beyond what many could think of to happen. Pew's poll results mean nothing in the face of that.

Again, you were wrong about the poll being the UK, it was America.

Also, Pew has been doing polls for a long time and they follow proven methods to get reliable results. You can discount them if it pleases you, but I will listen to Pew, before I consider your opinion on the matter.

 

[dlamberth]

It still remains that the gospel is being preached, there is awakening unto God and revival of the body of Christ going on, and will increase beyond what many could think of to happen. Pew's poll results mean nothing in the face of that.

The evidence seems to point in just the opposite direction. Do you have anything to show that there really is a revival going on? Report after report seems to indicate just the opposite with church closures and falling attendance. What do you have that shows that's not true?

.

 

[bhsmte]

The evidence seems to point in just the opposite direction. Do you have anything to show that there really is a revival going on? Report after report seems to indicate just the opposite with church closures and falling attendance. What do you have that shows that's not true?

.

IMO, it is simple denial of reality.

 

[dlamberth]

I found this article very interesting:
http://www.angelusnews.com/voices/f...eclining-church-attendance-6913/#.VVUIBpPRX9M

.

 

[gord44]

While I never like to judge anyones spiritual walk, I do find 'church' holds back alot of people. I know people who if they could escape the doctrines of their faith and be allowed to explore beyond the bible, prayer and church, they would find answers to the questions and struggles that plague them. Sometimes I see 'church' as a hospital for the spiritually sick that offers only treatment and not a cure. The true cure in 'church' is after one is dead and they receive their 'reward'. Why not get the cure now?! Why endless treatments that prepare one for the 'cure to come'. I imagine, just like a hospital, if everyone is cured now, they won't need to go to church anymore.

 

[Hammster]

While I never like to judge anyones spiritual walk, I do find 'church' holds back alot of people. I know people who if they could escape the doctrines of their faith and be allowed to explore beyond the bible, prayer and church, they would find answers to the questions and struggles that plague them. Sometimes I see 'church' as a hospital for the spiritually sick that offers only treatment and not a cure. The true cure in 'church' is after one is dead and they receive their 'reward'. Why not get the cure now?! Why endless treatments that prepare one for the 'cure to come'. I imagine, just like a hospital, if everyone is cured now, they won't need to go to church anymore.

Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, James 1:2

The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. John 10:10

Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. Matthew 5:12

Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice. Philippians 4:4

And there's more.

 

[gord44]

Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, James 1:2

Already do. It's a good way to get to a higher vibration.

The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. John 10:10

Couldn't agree more!

Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice. Philippians 4:4

I do every day.


All great quotes. I just wish I saw them lived by more. If you do then props to ya!

 

[A New Dawn]

Sorry, the above has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

It has everything to do with what you said. You said

As for Muslims resorting to violence when their religious sensibilities are offended, perhaps you don't remember all the violence when the movie The Last Temptation came out. As for setting up shariah courts to resolve their own disputes how does that in any way, for their beliefs on you? Even in Islamic countries shariah courts ordinarily only apply to Muslims. In the West, such courts (if there are any) would likely deal only with issues of family law. Do you think Jews are forcing their religion on you because they go to a rabbinical court for a divorce get?​

Sharia courts have been set up in several states, most of them they try to keep in secret, but one showed up in Texas to deal with issues in which they disagreed with the government about the law being broken and how to fix it. They were attempting to take it out of the courts hand and deal with it under sharia law. Also in Texas, just last weekend, a Muslim bounty (I forget the name they gave it) was put on the head of the woman who organized the cartoon drawing contest. That is sharia law overspilling into real life outside of Islam.

I would like to say this about resorting to violence when religious sensibilities are offended (which is what I responded to in my previous post), I do not remember The Last Temptation, I had to look it up and it was back in 1988. I read the review of it, but it did not talk about "all the violence" that surrounded it, so, again, I can't speak to it. I can reiterate my stand, though. Grown people should be able to control themselves. They are not governed by emotions or instincts like animals are. If there was the kind of violence then that we see in ISIS today, then it was wrong. Just like it is wrong today when a Muslim throws gays off the roofs of buildings or stones a woman for adultery or beheads a Christian merely because they are Christian. We do not behead people because they are not Christian, and any comparison made regarding our beliefs with this type of activity is wrong. Speaking what we believe, which is always tempered with love (if one is a true believer) in no way is comparable to what Muslims are doing. Yet that is the constant comparison.

So, on googling violence surrounding the movie, I see that a few theatres in Paris that was showing it were attacked by people throwing molotov coctails that injured 14 people. That was wrong. It was, and I would not condone any action of that nature. There were protests that shut the movie down in many places. I do agree that is a proper way to go about things. I do not believe that proper protests are wrong, what happened in Baltimore and Ferguson, that was wrong. They were not protests, those were riots. The people protesting properly in those places were, unfortunately, overshadowed by the rioting. But protesting a movie is not wrong. To call it violence is inappropriate. Are the Muslim protestors who shut down the movie American Sniper, is that considered violent? One can't be violent if the other isn't considered violent.

 

[A New Dawn]

I googled it and found the following instances which remotely resembled what she is saying. There are cases in Europe, especially Denmark where churches are being compelled by the State to perform gay marriages. The reason this is possible is that there is no separation of church and state in most European countries. Ironic, huh? There is also a complaint filed for a gay marriage in the United Methodist Church, but this is an internal matter, not something being taken up in the secular courts. The third instance is a for-profit wedding chapel which refused to perform gay marriages. Its 'for-profit' status made it subject to non-discrimination laws. The latter will make for an interesting court case.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/j...y-cannot-ban-same-sex-civil-union-ceremony-on

 

[Juelrei]

The evidence seems to point in just the opposite direction. Do you have anything to show that there really is a revival going on? Report after report seems to indicate just the opposite with church closures and falling attendance. What do you have that shows that's not true?

First off, I want to say that I haven't read through the other posts in this thread so forgive me if I'm saying something that's already been covered. I can't speak for what's happening in other states, but..

I live in Indiana, the revival that's been going on since some time in January is spreading, it's made the news. Ministries based in Missouri have picked up the reports about it. Then there's the online ministries that are still going strong.

I just find it hard to believe those polls.

Yes, I realize that there are church closures and falling attendance.. but the issue that should be looked at is why. Rather than it being apostasy, it more likely is contributed to the social and economical concerns of the day. In the light of that, economy has not been a strong point among the Christians who've been taught that being rich is a sin.
People are losing their jobs so money is tight, buying gas to go to church is reduced, money is clung to for feeding one's own family, not for providing money for keeping a church open.

On the other hand, as with all revivals, there are those who are prompted to seek a greater experience with God than the norm of the average churches. So Christians from any of those norm churches do spend the money to go to where revivals are happening.
The closing of churches or falling attendance has nothing to do with Christians quitting their belief in God. But rather could well be a number of members changing churches to those that have the more revived activities.

I just think that it's premature to see only one perspective, that of church closures and falling attendance, and think that is the complete story.

 

[Juelrei]

Again, you were wrong about the poll being the UK, it was America.

Also, Pew has been doing polls for a long time and they follow proven methods to get reliable results. You can discount them if it pleases you, but I will listen to Pew, before I consider your opinion on the matter.

I understand.

 

[LoAmmi]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/j...y-cannot-ban-same-sex-civil-union-ceremony-on

What's funny is if they weren't offering it as a public accommodation for profit, they could do what they want with it. I 100% agree with the judge's ruling because this was not a religious freedom issue.

 

[Theway]

I found this article very interesting:
http://www.angelusnews.com/voices/f...eclining-church-attendance-6913/#.VVUIBpPRX9M

.

I agree somewhat with this article...
A few months ago on my date night, my wife and I were looking for a movie to watch. Unfortunately the only movie that was not R rated was a "Christian" movie.
I don't remember the name of it, however what stuck out to me was that they made it a point three times in the movie to correct someone who called someone else in the movie a Christian; they said they did not want to be called Christian, but "Person of Faith" (as though the title Christian was an insult to them)
The problem was trying to determine by the movie what they meant by "faith" in "person of faith". They made it even worse by going out of their way to try and preach covertly to the audience that rock music in church services was sanctioned by God, and that Preachers can have as much bling and fancy cars as they feel befitting of their station.
If I was a nonChristian, this movie would have turned me off from ever being one.

As I stated before; people are inherently lazy both spiritual and physically. They want to be known as spiritual or in other words "People of Faith" without having to adhere to any dogma, or be put out by having to actually attend a church.

If you want an example of the way we are headed.... Look at what happened to Christianity in Europe.

 

[Theway]

What's funny is if they weren't offering it as a public accommodation for profit, they could do what they want with it. I 100% agree with the judge's ruling because this was not a religious freedom issue.

The problem with that is what you are basically saying is if you are a person or group who holds to Christian morals and values... Don't expect to make a profit.

 

[LoAmmi]

The problem with that is what you are basically saying is if you are a person or group who holds to Christian morals and values... Don't expect to make a profit.

No, what I'm saying is that if you offer public accommodations, you have to follow the law. What if someone held to the morals and values that black people were inferior and shouldn't be served? Should those morals and values trump the law?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

If you want an example of the way we are headed.... Look at what happened to Christianity in Europe.

Apparently a return to religious wars lasting hundreds of years and burning heretics at the stake as well as expelling Jews and confiscating their property is a good thing. A return to Christianity’s highpoint in Europe.

 

[A New Dawn]

What's funny is if they weren't offering it as a public accommodation for profit, they could do what they want with it. I 100% agree with the judge's ruling because this was not a religious freedom issue.

It was wholly owned and operated by the Methodist Church, which set the rules for it's use according to church beliefs. Whether or not people outside their church agreed to use it, they agreed to use it according to the terms set down. It's not like it was a secular camp that had a "camp pastor", it was a Methodist retreat center, made available to all who wished to use it with the caveat that they agree to the rules. Having different groups use it doesn't make it less of a Methodist retreat center, and just because people use it, doesn't mean that they make a profit from it. I didn't see anything in the article about it being a for profit facility.

 

[bhsmte]

It was wholly owned and operated by the Methodist Church, which set the rules for it's use according to church beliefs. Whether or not people outside their church agreed to use it, they agreed to use it according to the terms set down. It's not like it was a secular camp that had a "camp pastor", it was a Methodist retreat center, made available to all who wished to use it with the caveat that they agree to the rules. Having different groups use it doesn't make it less of a Methodist retreat center, and just because people use it, doesn't mean that they make a profit from it. I didn't see anything in the article about it being a for profit facility.

You may be talking about a different situation then.

There was a for profit chapel owned by two ministers somewhere, that advertised to the public they performed weddings for many different faiths etc. This is a public accommodating business the way it was set up and not like a church.

 

[A New Dawn]

You may be talking about a different situation then.

There was a for profit chapel owned by two ministers somewhere, that advertised to the public they performed weddings for many different faiths etc. This is a public accommodating business the way it was set up and not like a church.

That was a wedding chapel in Idaho, I believe. I saw the article last night.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014...-who-refuse-to-perform-same-sex-weddings.html

 

[LoAmmi]

It was wholly owned and operated by the Methodist Church, which set the rules for it's use according to church beliefs. Whether or not people outside their church agreed to use it, they agreed to use it according to the terms set down. It's not like it was a secular camp that had a "camp pastor", it was a Methodist retreat center, made available to all who wished to use it with the caveat that they agree to the rules. Having different groups use it doesn't make it less of a Methodist retreat center, and just because people use it, doesn't mean that they make a profit from it. I didn't see anything in the article about it being a for profit facility.

They opened it up to the public. They are then subject to the same laws that businesses are subject to because they are acting as a business. I imagine the income they brought in from that area was even taxable as a business and not tax exempt as a church.