The shocking NEW reason why young people are leaving church

It’s a surprising find, but it’s also true. Americans are giving up on God. A Pew survey reveals that half of the people who have quit going to church no longer believe in God.

Nearly a quarter of the nation no longer attends church at all. This quarter classifies themselves as the “nones.” About half of that group doesn’t even believe in God.

Pew studied this phenomenon in an effort to learn why.

Their results show lack of belief is the leading reason why people stop attending church. The other excuses (they disagree with church doctrine, hypocrisy) are still there, but lack of belief was number one.

The primary reason why people are losing their belief is science.

The finding is astounding. While many scientists find evidence for God in their work, lay people often think that belief and science are incompatible.

A major reason for this is the apparent incongruity between fundamentalist interpretations of Biblical metaphor and widely accepted scientific theory. For example, compelling majorities of the scientific community argue the following points:

– The universe was created with a Big Bang (a theory first proposed by a Jesuit priest).
– The Earth is billions of years old (not 6,000).
-Humans evolved from pre-human ancestors (theory of evolution).
– The planet is warming due to human activity (anthropogenic global warming).

Young people, in particular, are taught these ideas from a young age, and properly so, since the evidence suggests they are facts. The problem is, the few critics of these ideas argue from a basis of biblical evangelical fundamentalism. That is, they insist the Earth was created in a literal six-day span. They suggest global warming is false because God would not use sea level rise to destroy the planet (Genesis 9:13). They deny that humans have evolved at all, claiming that macroevolution does not exist (they misunderstand -or misconstrue evolution, even when they hold degrees in the field!).

There are hypothetical scientific interpretations of evidence which suggest their ideas could have merit, but the preponderance of evidence supports the mainstream scientific theory.

Even the Vatican has embraced human evolution and global warming. But some Catholics remain unaware.

Fundamentalists can be vocal and they get attention. However, most youths are sophisticated enough to tell the difference between science and pseudoscience, at least in these cases. They often conclude religion and science are incompatible. It’s an understandable conclusion, even if unreasonable.

They follow this conclusion by seeking scientific evidence for God. The problem is that God is metaphysical and supernatural, not natural. You cannot fit God into a test tube. You cannot measure God like you can temperatures, cosmic distances, and timescales. Nonetheless, they conclude “there is no God” because they cannot even define the units of measurement for their experiment.

So the primary reason why people are leaving church is because they are not being taught that religion and science are compatible.

Science tells us how, but it takes religion to tell us why. This simple fact needs to be preached, taught, and drilled. Until this happens, we will continue to lose our youth to atheism, which can only offer the how, but never the why.


 

By Marshall Connolly (CALIFORNIA NETWORK)

 









wpsd_autopost:
1

8 comments

  1. Tom Rafferty Reply

    “While many scientists find evidence for God in their work, lay people often think that belief and science are incompatible.”

    No, well less than 1 out of 10 elite scientists “find evidence for God.” Belief and science are not compatible: belief has no way to verify its claims, whereas, science is all about testing and verifying.

    Science does tell us how, but the why claims of religion are all unverified. There are thousands of religions. How do you verify that yours is the correct one?

    1. Klinsar Reply

      This is incorrect. 65 percent of nobel lauretes defined themselves as Christian alone you cant get more elite than that. These research projects are manipulated and the people are under a lot of peer pressure to define themselves as atheists but the proposed span of atheism is simply not the case. In these research projects the definition of God is made in such a way that I as a firm core servant of the Lord could not affirm that I believe in that proposed definition of God.

      1. Tom Rafferty Reply

        Pew Research: ” – – – the National Academy of Science charted belief in God as low as 5.5 percent among biologists and 7.5 percent among physicist and astronomers in a 1998 study.” http://www.seeker.com/are-scientists-atheists-1765139498.html

        Now, with that said, the REAL conflict is not between the religious and scientists but between religion and science, as I stated above.

        I end with a challenge. Please respond if you can reconcile your Christian faith to these facts from science. https://understandrealitythroughscience.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-challenge-for-christians.html

        1. Stephen Denny Reply

          #1. The story of Adam and Eve is metaphor. It’s obvious in the name of Adam which is from Jews ‘adamah’ meaning ‘soil’.
          #2. The question then jump to the story of Jesus and forcing people to think paralel as metaphoric story as Adam and Eve. But that’s not paralel.
          #3. If Adam and Eve is metaphor, is that means that sin also metaphor? The creation of human is metaphorically narated in story of Adam and Eve, and maybe the concept of Law and transgression against the law, which is the beginning of the concept of sin.
          If we read carefully the story of Adam and Eve, we can find how the ancient people taught about law and at what age the law applied.
          First, there are 2 main Tree in the garden of Paradise, the Tree of Life, and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. And when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden Tree fruit, “their eyes were opened and they both knew that they’re naked”.
          Law applied to the ‘mature’ and ‘able to reason’ people. The ancient people defined ‘maturity’ as the beginning of feeling ashamed when they’re naked.
          #4. And what about ‘original sin’?
          Original sin is a concept that the relation of human to his/her Creator is cut off, since the beginning of human life.
          The word religion came from latin ‘religio’ which means to reconnect which cut off.
          #5. If the story of Genesis only metaphor, does it mean that Jesus sacrifice also metaphor??
          Again the question is jump.
          After Moses delivered Israel from Egypt, Moses and Israel prophets foresaw the perfect ‘leader’ or mosyiach. A man with power/ability as Moses, perform supernatural miracles, yet inflicted with rejection lead to his persecution.
          So, the concept of sin redemption is not Christian invention. It has been written 7 centuries before Christ in the Isaiah 53.

          The question about Jesus has nothing to do with the story of Adam and Eve.

          1. Tom Rafferty

            Stephen, you said, “The question about Jesus has nothing to do with the story of Adam and Eve.” Wrong. If there was no “Original Sin” (reality), there is no need for a Savior (Jesus). Such a simple concept.

          2. Stephen

            #1. No, I did want to put lipstick on your lips. I didn’t know you’re a pig. Really.
            #2. Science also understand what is Theological Philosophy. That’s why the ancient thinkers came from religious countries, whether those religions is still exist or has extinct. Science came from questioning. And religions is one of the sources of those questions.
            #3. Yes, Catholic holds the Dogma. And science don’t require you to hold that “science has been confirmed and you have to believe in science” do they? The dogma of Science is: question everything, don’t believe in everything, even in science.
            #4. You’re free to believe what you want to believe. Just like catholic free to believe in everything she want to believe.
            #5. Jesus not only redeems the original sin. Original sin is only one of the sins. Read Isaiah 53. Did it mention original sin redemption only?
            Look, your statement is also a simple misconception.

          3. Stephen

            #6. Even the “original sin” wasn’t a Christian invention. Wanna proof?
            Psalms 51:5 (DRA) (50-7) For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.

            It’s in Jewish Psalms centuries before Christianity.

Leave a Reply

  1. most read post
  2. Most Commented
  3. Choose Categories