Wednesday, September 9, 2015

Christianity at the Brink of Extinction

Christianity is at great risk in America. The peril is ubiquitous, intense, and without comparative reference. There is no time in the nations’ history when Christianity was under a similar assault. New denominations of Christianity, at times suffered oppression, but those came from fanatics of another version of Christianity who disliked competition, or diversity of beliefs. Christianity, as a belief, was profuse and well founded. A minority practiced no religion and held no spiritual beliefs. Disbelief in a conventional God was a rarity and generally assumed a metaphysical construct. Worship, or exercise of the beliefs, retained conventional traits. The adherent conducted their beliefs using the tenets and rituals ordained or adopted. They worshipped as their conscience dictated. It was not a passive affiliation. These people retained their credibility and integrity by actually practicing the beliefs they asserted. A very strange religious phenomena/incongruence is currently present. The components of the phenomena speaks to the peril confronting Christianity, and, the individuals practicing it, and other religions specifically, and generically. The incongruence is seen in polling results concerning belief in God, church attendance, and public displays of Christianity and public worship.

Relying upon institutional polling is an unfortunate requirement. Polling is an inconsistent and inaccurate measure of beliefs and opinions as the polls produced suffer from the very same prejudices that cause the polling data irregularities. Unfortunately, polls are the only means to gauge the thoughts and beliefs of a targeted population. The phenomena / incongruence referenced here are found in the contradictions of religious beliefs. The Gallup organization was used for our purposes.

The statistical veracity in Gallups’ reporting is, in part, contingent upon their reputation and credibility. Gallup's queries and interpretative methods, the personnel used, the poll’s configuration: questions asked, sampling, and number of participants, may individually, or collectively, influence the results - and what is reported. Some polls reference earlier surveys - ostensibly to highlight variances in the new poll. Any poll loses credibility when the questions asked and preferences displayed infers an the pollster is antagonistic - seeking a predetermined outcome. Narrowing the size, or targeting a specific sample group, any tactic that stilts result to produce answers that fit the outcome desired is widespread and incredible. Finding a reputable poll that dispassionately and accurately reports views on God and religion in America is difficult.
 Note - not all bias is internal.

Polling organizations typically work at the behest of media; are funded by the media; or rely upon the media to display their work. A conspiratorial relationship often exists; where the interests of the host, or the client/benefactor commissioning the poll, adulterate the polls content by devising designs to produce their preferred conclusions. For example, if a God poll reports a global decline using a comparative index, that practice exposes a potential to highlight the differences - which depreciates the religious beliefs stated in answers.


Every bias has an inverse counterpart, the opposite of the stated objective. The unstated conclusions inferred from the index disparity, conveys the true objective of the pollster. This practice additionally protects the polling organization from negative complaints and assertions of bias.

Despite the biases and problems in construction and interpretation, the Gallup Organization is tested over half a century. They have suffered indignation and triumph due to their methods, reporting, and biases. Gallup are considered reputable, if not infallible. Gallup can draw upon 80 years of polling. That depth of resources provides a dubiously useful comparative context. The questions Gallup uses in their God poll cover the gamut of potential equivocations. The poll’s construction may then diminish misleading interpretations and answers, but... it also provides information to infer conclusions, the answers given, in no way conferred. Polling is more often used to infer conclusions than the overt ostensible purpose given for the poll. The bias/objective of the God poll is to promote secular beliefs; infer no God exists and that faith in God diminishes. Polling organizations are aligned philosophically with the media and academe. So doing (in their view) enhances their credibility and gravitas – as serious reporters of truth and information. :)

The results of a recent Gallup’s “God Poll” follow:

98% of Americans state they believe in “a God”.

When asked if the belief was centered in a “Universal Spirit/Higher Power” (inferring a prototypical agnostic or pagan God) – 7% answer affirmative. 91% affirmed belief in a conventional God.

***Note the overlap with the generic God reply. Only 7% aver belief in the Universal Spirit / Higher Power - the Pagan, or unorthodox God***

The unequivocal question about belief in a traditional or conventional God: “Do you believe in the: God of the Old Testament? Koran? Torah? or another recognized deity traditional deity(s) yielded a 73% affirmative answer. This infers 18% believe in some nebulous - God option.

Curiously, the number of people stating they believe in a traditional God narrows when offered another category of God - Pagan, Universal, Higher Power. Depending upon the statistical deviation accepted for God, the number of people stating belief in a traditional or conditional deity ranges between 73% and 98%.

The intensity of unequivocal trust in the Deity chosen convolutes their affirmations.

Percent polled having a little doubt (on the existence of God) – 14%,

Percent having considerable doubt about God – 5%,

Percent having a lot of doubt about God – 4%,

Uncertainty about God’s integrity (on some level) was indicated in approximately 25% of the population surveyed. The most Godly group; those holding no reservation on their belief in God, tallied between 53% and 71% - using the same calculus above for generic belief in God.

Belief in God measured in America’s Youth (ages 18-29) ebbs at 84%.

Of interest, Gallup selectively isolated the young and reported prior polling outcomes for each category except youngsters. That is unfortunate - as the most recent numbers reported for the youngsters eluded a drop in believers , although no statistical reference for comparison to validate the claim was presented. Whether the absence of reference is an innocent omission or one meant to suggest a declining belief subset among the young cannot be confirmed.

In fairness, young people are an inconsistent and uncertain measure regardless of the “belief” topic investigated. Young people naturally have reservations on virtually every topic. Their opinions and personalities are not yet fully developed. Additionally, the young’s views on life differ, radically, from older people and seniors. They are primed with hormones and obsessed with indulging activities previously forbidden as children. These activities are not wholesome, nor do they align with commandments. Importantly, most youngsters learn the negative consequences arising from the behaviors by indulging them - personal experiences. Highlighting the young’s alleged disproportionate agnostic or atheist views is a gratuitous reference to purpose aver society, collectively, in greater numbers, disbelieves in God and has less need for religion. It also infers disbelief will increase as the young age. Ideology drives the Godless conclusions drawn... and fabricated.

Church Membership:

1 in 10 people hold no official religious affiliation. No reason(s) were reported for that sentiment.


The Southern US contains the greatest percentage of believers.

The Least Godly group - includes agnostics, the “do not know” and the “will not affirm” confederation reside in the North Eastern US - Shocker!

Vermont earns the “Atheist State” moniker.

Godless Traits/Behaviors:

The avowed Godless often hold a post-graduate degree.

The avowed Godless consistently align politically with the Democrat Party as Progressive/Liberal/Socialist/Marxist.

The percentage willing to report they hold atheistic or agnostic views combine to total between 10 and 5%. The avowed atheist, the firmly do not believe in God group, account for lower aggregate <2%. They are the group most likely belonging, and beholding to, organizations who act to assure God plays no role in their lives or a public forum. They want no deity or religion holding sway over their chosen behaviors and lives. They prefer an absolutely rigid secular society and they are very intolerant of religion generally. The onerous, persistent oppression, or elimination of religion, is their preferred policy objectives. They are vocal and vociferous advocating their views. The God-less are so persistent, intolerant, and intransigent, they can be termed Bullies.

Ironically, Bully is the term the Godless axiomatically use to negatively portray opposition to any of their favored policies. The object of the Bully's attention are traditionally fearful, weak willed young people, who, like their Godless older peers, are incapable or unwilling to defend themselves against another in a fair competition. A correlate may be made from their actions - they feel God betrayed and failed to protect them in their youth. From that experience, they (in part) reject the God who failed them and act to eliminate that deity in retribution. They seek the safety and power and security contained in large institutional organizations. The actions of Victims of bullying, reveals they will not tolerate or indulge even casual worship in the public domain. The emotional damage done to their young egos (by others they label bullies) compounds as they age.

If they are employed or sanctioned by the government, or another large and powerful organization, a place they feel safe from retaliation, they vent their pent up rage. This group is small in number but strategically positioned to exert the greatest influence possible to eradicate religious worship - and God. They unfortunately hold a majority of positions in academe, agencies of government, the judiciary, scientific institutions, education, many in elected office, and, political action groups. The Godless are well positioned to philosophically offend religion, and to develop and enact policies that legally eliminates worship using government authority, and by pressuring private institutions.

The Egos of the Godless are self centered, and exclusively driven by self serving interests. Their actions infer they are possess all the negative traits they vociferously condemn. For example - The Godless believe the First Amendment only applies to their freedom “from” religion. Only their opinions and biased speech are protected. The Godless are individually and collectively arrogant and condescending of diverse views. They presume their educational credentials and professional employment conveys considerably more accurate conclusions, and influential authority, to their opinions. They use these presumptions and posture to impose and indoctrinate their beliefs and ambitions. From a policy perspective, they are abundantly aware of the conflicts governments face when God and religion hold the attention and allegiance of the citizen. Eliminating religion is essential as it better assures a seamless installation of their preferred society; and to confiscate or modify the ordinary citizen’s personal liberties enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

If the labels are striped away, Marxism appears as their preferred ideology. Marxism presents considerable conflicts for them. As with their unspoken objectives, they must obfuscate and distract to distance themselves from nominal associations the public makes with Marxism. The Godless purposely relabel themselves once their actions create a negative series of memories in the public's mind. Progressive, Liberal, or Socialist are bandied about, as needed, to deceive the public from their true aspirations and convictions - a Marxist totalitarian state. Actualizing religious discontinuity in a society -requires depreciating and eliminating individual liberties and religious worship. God is ridiculed and mocked. The oppression and assault upon religious beliefs has become maniacal and irrational.

The appetites and dependencies of the Godless are the WHY explaining their motivations. The degenerate and obscene behaviors and instinctual needs are preferences they want protected and expanded.

Marxism is a cruel ideology. Remarkably, no application of the ideology has ever succeeded long term. Its protagonists vividly recorded the necessary brutality required to overcome public resistance. Proponents must insult and ridicule generic concepts of freedom and fairness. Violent, consistent oppression of any resistance was requisite to enable its continued practice. Marxism cannot abide free will or contrary opinions. They must be eliminated – traditionally by using the same tactics currently employed to eradicate Christianity - and a weapon!!! Muder is the preferred method.

Importantly, Marxism is embraced by a few to gratify and feed their appetites and dependencies. It is a philosophy that cannot survive in practice. It is a Ponzi scheme that affords the few in positions of power unlimited access to the diminishing returns the collective possesses and produces. Being freed from religious restraint, its proponents indulge instinctual impulses and are thereby sanctioned to do whatever is necessary to retain power and control. Morality does not impede their ambitions or actions. “By any means necessary.” is their fundamental operating maxim.

The promise of eternal life has traditionally empowered people to resist horrific conditions and assaults. God provides mankind an alternative to the tyranny of Marxism. God is anathema to Marxism and explains why every application of the ideology required the elimination of religion. Free will exists and obtains in every earthly life and choice. External pressures and threats do not usurp free will – best evidenced by people who sacrificed their lives to preserve their fealty to God. They chose a death or torture rather than betray their God and faith. A similar display of obedience is greatly needed today.

Modern society diligently strives to discredit and eliminate the concept of free will. The paradigm modern society pursues casts man as consciousness adrift on a sea of influences that drive him to outcomes beyond his choice or desire. Free will is an illusion in this paradigm. External influences in life hold incredible, omnipotent power. Those influences push and pull a consciousness to various consequences irrespective of the objectives chosen. The society, or social collective, creates the external influences, deployed upon the individual members of the collective. The individual’s duty is owed the collective, and no individual needs exceeds the needs of the collective.

No comments:

Post a Comment