No Religion - Nearly 10 Million Australians.

[Bathos Logos]

Do you really want to know? There is also a lot given on this topic.

Regards Tony

If it has anything to do with the human beings in question having been led by or inspired by God, without having a single piece of evidence to substantiate that claim, then no... I literally do not want to hear about it. Because it would be entirely fruitless, and therefore frustrating to have to read through. It's like when someone wants to tell you all about their really long dream sequences. Having the knowledge that it didn't actually happen, any part of the dream is entirely inconsequential. What happened in it has very little bearing on reality. Sure, there may be some symbolism there, or something comical or something one might relate to - but in the end it is just make believe. And if it is only make believe, and lacks even the purpose to entertain, then it is basically worthless.

 

[Bathos Logos]

No they are not. A Messenger of God is proven by the fruits of the Spirit, which are the virtues.

So, only when a person is virtuous are you going to claim that they were sent by God? So someone who claims to have been sent by God and ends up being "bad" was not actually sent by God, but anyone who claims to have been sent by God and ends up being "good" was actually sent by God? Your criteria is lacking very much in the "evidence" department, and sounds a lot like you just wanting to attribute good things to God, and not the bad, even when all other parts of the equation are fairly equal.

This answered the previous question I asked. So we can leave it there.

And this is exactly what I was referencing in my post to @firedragon about theists wanting to bow out because things get a little uncomfortable for them. it is not a good look, and is one of the main reasons I feel that people end up having trouble giving religion their full support. If you're always leaving things in an unsatisfactory state, because you can't satisfactorily answer questions, and can only bring to the table more unevidenced stuff... well then.... that kind of behavior speaks for itself in my opinion.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So, only when a person is virtuous are you going to claim that they were sent by God? So someone who claims to have been sent by God and ends up being "bad" was not actually sent by God

The Messengers set the Standards we are to follow.

And this is exactly what I was referencing in my post to @firedragon about theists wanting to bow out because things get a little uncomfortable for them. i

We are told not to offer to those that do not want to hear.

So we will not.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If it has anything to do with the human beings in question having been led by or inspired by God, without having a single piece of evidence to substantiate that claim, then no... I literally do not want to hear about it. Because it would be entirely fruitless, and therefore frustrating to have to read through. It's like when someone wants to tell you all about their really long dream sequences. Having the knowledge that it didn't actually happen, any part of the dream is entirely inconsequential. What happened in it has very little bearing on reality. Sure, there may be some symbolism there, or something comical or something one might relate to - but in the end it is just make believe. And if it is only make believe, and lacks even the purpose to entertain, then it is basically worthless.

Then we have naught to talk about on a Religious Forum.

God brings the Faiths.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

Hey @firedragon
You might have already got an answer on that question, but I can summarise for you.

Every 4 years or so, we do a census. Each household has to respond to a series of questions. Where children are involved, there are still questions to answer. If someone is staying over at your house that night, they would respond on your census rather than their own.

So it's basically a giant survey.

In typical Australian fashion, a few years back lots of people listed their religion as 'Jedi', since there was an urban myth that it would be recognised as a 'real' religion if 50k people listed it. Don't ask me what a 'real' religion is.

But in response to your point, no religion just means 'no religion'. You could absolutely be an atheist and put that, but you could be an agnostic, or spiritual, etc in many different ways.

It's really a measure of adherence to religion...but people being people, they keep tying it to a measure of belief.

True true. Atheists are generally identified as unaffiliated in the USA.

 

[firedragon]

Once again, I feel the need to tell you - not a "thesis" of any stripe. An opinion.

Ok. So you saying that with information dissemination religions are declining was "just an opinion". Which means it's wishful thinking.

It's very difficult for me to grasp this opinion thing because I have been trained to give opinion only after years and years of study. So it could be a paradigm issue.

 

[firedragon]

So, only when a person is virtuous are you going to claim that they were sent by God? So someone who claims to have been sent by God and ends up being "bad" was not actually sent by God, but anyone who claims to have been sent by God and ends up being "good" was actually sent by God?

That's a hasty generalisation. A simple logical fallacy.

Just because one person says "a person sent by God is good" does not mean "anyone good is sent by God". It's like saying "all men in the test cricket team in England wear white" does not mean "any man who wears white is part of the English cricket team". That's an absurdity.

And this is exactly what I was referencing in my post to @firedragon about theists wanting to bow out because things get a little uncomfortable for them.

I don't know where you said that to me. It's irrelevant to me.

 

[Bathos Logos]

Ok. So you saying that with information dissemination religions are declining was "just an opinion". Which means it's wishful thinking.

Wow. So when someone points out a factual situation, and literally asks someone else "what do you think of this?", anything that is offered up in opinion is "wishful thinking", is that it? It is my opinion that a bit of introspection is in order here for you. You are apparently so very, very biased and paranoid about these things that you have let your imagination run completely freely around in your skull. Is that also "wishful thinking?" Why would I wish that on you? If anything, I wish you (and many, many more that I have encountered like you) were much more level-headed.

It's very difficult for me to grasp this opinion thing because I have been trained to give opinion only after years and years of study. So it could be a paradigm issue.

Very interesting. So, let's say a friend of yours comes to you and says their roommate is acting strangely, hasn't talked to them for a few days, and has been leaving the place a mess, etc. and you happen to know that one of the roommate's close friends just died. Does it take "years of study" before you might offer an opinion on why their roommate might be acting somewhat strangely? I am of the opinion (no years of study here, but I think I have this one pinned pretty good) that this is just a cop-out. An excuse for your hounding me about this to cover the fact that you just don't like atheists, and are therefore bound by your personal hang-ups to be combative and argumentative, just for the sake of fighting what you believe is the good fight. I don't much against this alone, as I admit to doing so myself much of the time. However what doesn't go so well with that outfit is trying to pretend that that isn't what you're doing, and pretending you are on some "higher path" that involves things like "years of study".

 

[Bathos Logos]

Then we have naught to talk about on a Religious Forum.

God brings the Faiths.

Regards Tony

All religious types must necessarily bow before the idea of opinion when speaking with one another on items that they diverge on, and that have no correlation or evidence in reality to handle such disputes, otherwise there would be literally no room for them to get along whatsoever. Therefore, it is my opinion that you should necessarily preface almost everything you say on a religious forum where multiple religions will be proffering their own versions of "truth" with "It is my opinion that...". But you don't. You are not so prudent.

Case in point, you say things like "God brings the Faiths" without equivocation or qualification, and expect that it means something to all others. This is bad form - whether you like it or not. It is my opinion that you should save that behavior for a DIR, or be prepared to be taken to task by someone. Perhaps not myself. But someone. And, in my opinion, they would be doing so rightly, and for the good of us all.

 

[Bathos Logos]

The Messengers set the Standards we are to follow.



We are told not to offer to those that do not want to hear.

So we will not.

Regards Tony

You know the types of information I would like to hear - you just don't have it. That much is entirely clear.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The 2021 Census was completed by over 90% of the population and thus returned useful data.

Religion was interesting.

View attachment 64098

I see this is a trend that was foretold, but there will come a time when people realise that Faith is the only way to help humanity.

What are your thoughts?

Regards Tony

I find it interesting that Christianity stayed basically flat while "other religions" and "no religion" had tremendous growth.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Then we have naught to talk about on a Religious Forum.

Even if religion dies out completely (which I doubt will ever happen), we can still talk about religion as a historical curiosity.

I mean, people still talk about the Roman Empire.

 

[firedragon]

Wow. So when someone points out a factual situation

It's not a factual situation. It is just wishful thinking.

Very interesting. So, let's say a friend of yours comes to you and says their roommate is acting strangely

That's very different to making claims like you did.

I understand that you are making wishes as opinions. Many do. But I am not from that type of background. Hope you understand.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I find it interesting that Christianity stayed basically flat while "other religions" and "no religion" had tremendous growth.

I was born in the Age when Christianity was still in the High 80%

But this report shows the trend in a graph. What I find interesting is that people do not see the change happening. Whereas in the Baha'i Writings it offered that the Word of God makes all things new and the change happens, it is inevitable, it becomes the way of life, knowingly or unknowingly.

Taken from this story

People like Abe may overtake Christians as the dominant religious group in Australia

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Okay, so if this is teaching "directly from God" then why is God speaking/writing in the third person here? As in - why is it not "I leave not My children comfortless..."? Why isn't it written like that? Oh... that's right, it is because it was written by men. Human beings.

Do you really want to know? There is also a lot given on this topic.

Regards Tony

If it has anything to do with the human beings in question having been led by or inspired by God, without having a single piece of evidence to substantiate that claim, then no... I literally do not want to hear about it.

Then we have naught to talk about on a Religious Forum.

God brings the Faiths.

Regards Tony

Even if religion dies out completely (which I doubt will ever happen), we can still talk about religion as a historical curiosity.

I mean, people still talk about the Roman Empire.

@9-10ths_Penguin

If you follow from the start my statement is applicable to the discussion.

Regards Tony

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

was born in the Age when Christianity was still in the High 80%

And did you leave Christianity?

But this report shows the trend in a graph. What I find interesting is that people do not see the change happening. Whereas in the Baha'i Writings it offered that the Word of God makes all things new and the change happens, it is inevitable, it becomes the way of life, knowingly or unknowingly.

That's one take on it, but I'm not sure why we should jump to that.

In absolute numbers, the decline of Christianity is pretty slow. It only seems quick in that graph because Australia's population is growing so rapidly.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And did you leave Christianity?


That's one take on it, but I'm not sure why we should jump to that.

In absolute numbers, the decline of Christianity is pretty slow. It only seems quick in that graph because Australia's population is growing so rapidly.

I marked the Census with Baha'i and have done every year since 1984.

I think the story shows the trend, people no longer know where to look for purpose of life.

They are turning away from God, the only hope to finding that purpose.

Regards Tony

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I marked the Census with Baha'i and have done every year since 1984.

I think the story shows the trend, people no longer know where to look for purpose of life.

They are turning away from God, the only hope to finding that purpose.

Regards Tony

That sounds pretty prejudicial on your part.

Leaving religion is not turning away from "the purpose of life."

For most non-religious people, it's generally not even turning away from God. It would be nice if your stats broke things down more, but if Australia is following the sane pattern as other places, most of the "non-religious" people in the census are SBNR types.

The trend I see was something that showed up in a modelling study I read about a few years back: a lot of people in majority, establishment religions are in them for reasons other than faith: in the worst cases, not attending can be considered a crime, but even when there's legal freedom of religion, a person can find themselves excluded from society or opportunities by not participating in the majority religion.

As religiosity wanes, a tipping point is eventually reached: smaller size means the religion is less influential, which means membership conveys less benefit, which means people leave, which means the religion gets smaller, which then feeds back on itself over and over until all that's left are the "true believers" who would stay even without the social benefits.

Some of the people who leave the majority religion might not rejoin any religion at all (and some of them might end up atheists), and others who leave the majority religion end up in a minority religion that they enjoy more. It sounds like the latter is what happened with you back in the day.

If I had to bet, I'd say that this is what's behind the trends you've pointed out.

 

[Bathos Logos]

It's not a factual situation. It is just wishful thinking.

So, the decline in stated importance of religion is not a factual situation in your estimation? As in, you don't care what the data demonstrates, or what various surveys of people from all around the world all correlatively have found, correct?

That's very different to making claims like you did.

The only real claim I made was what is supported by the data. Otherwise, I have repeatedly admitted to you and informed you that what I stated on top of that (the reasons - dissemination of knowledge, ready access to argumentation from both sides, etc.) was just opinion. I obviously can't know the true reason necessarily, and haven't done much of any legwork to try and seriously investigate it, but it is my opinion based on my own anecdotal experiences, and the fact that the stated importance of religion in people's lives is in decline as reported by the surveys being done by various independent organizations.

I understand that you are making wishes as opinions. Many do. But I am not from that type of background. Hope you understand.

Yours is the wishful thinking. Wanting to be able to label my statement of opinion as "wishful thinking". I am not really wishing anything. I am seeing the decline and when someone asks me what I think the cause is, I am bound to answer something. And that something is going to be my opinion. You really are just trying to get to a point where you can hand-wave away the actual data as well, because you're going to paint me as "wishing religion would go away" (a sort of strawman) and therefore try to call into question whether anything I have to bring to the table is objective and that is just dishonest. The data isn't mine. The surveys were not conducted by me, and they were not conducted by just one person. There is a current decline (whether or not there will be a surge in the future is mostly irrelevant), I stated my opinion as to the root causes of that current decline, and I also opined that it will likely continue, and gave my reasons for that. Those are my opinions. You can call them "wishful thinking" all you like, honestly. Doesn't change my opinion, so I am not sure what you think you're accomplishing with that, other than trying to look like you "won" against me so that other readers aren't somehow influenced by my opinion or something. It's quite ridiculous.

 

[firedragon]

The only real claim I made was what is supported by the data.

It's not supporting what you claimed. It's too shallow.

Otherwise, I have repeatedly admitted to you and informed you that what I stated on top of that (the reasons - dissemination of knowledge, ready access to argumentation from both sides, etc.) was just opinion. I obviously can't know the true reason necessarily, and haven't done much of any legwork to try and seriously investigate it, but it is my opinion based on my own anecdotal experiences, and the fact that the stated importance of religion in people's lives is in decline as reported by the surveys being done by various independent organizations.

Accepted.

So, the decline in stated importance of religion is not a factual situation in your estimation? As in, you don't care what the data demonstrates, or what various surveys of people from all around the world all correlatively have found, correct?

I think you are mixing two things. Nevermind. Theism has increased after a decline in the last century. Whole century. Atheism has decreased after huge jump with the communist movement which is correspondence data. Importance of religion is a whole different ball game. That does not provide insight into growth or decline in theism or anti theism. For this you have to get into age groups, historical data to compare in retrospect to see at 18-29 they don't think religion is important, but when they grow they think it's more important, are becoming stupid after the age of 29 or do they have other reasons?

A quantitative study like that needs much further analysis and one will have to go to the build up of the hypothesis which would have been an initial qualitative study in order to understand it better.