In the U.S., Christianity loses members while atheism grows. Why?

[Copernicus]

It seems that LDS membership is growing quickly... as long as you assume that everyone who was ever a member of the LDS Church (or the child of a member) remains a member as long as they live, even if they abandon the church and its teachings altogether... unless they explicitly ask the Church to have their name removed from the membership roll.

Right. That point was made in the newspaper column that Katzpur responded to. This is a case where people use statistics to spin data. It would be interesting to see more recent data on the LDS church that took age into account. The trend across all religious groups in the US seems to be for a decline in faith as you go from older to younger demographic groups. This weakly supports the hypothesis that the Internet is a big factor in the decline of religion, as it seems to influence younger generations more than older generations.

IMO, your statistics probably include a large proportion of people who can't be reasonably considered to be Mormon.

I suspect this, too.

 

[madhatter85]

Right. That point was made in the newspaper column that Katzpur responded to. This is a case where people use statistics to spin data. It would be interesting to see more recent data on the LDS church that took age into account. The trend across all religious groups in the US seems to be for a decline in faith as you go from older to younger demographic groups. This weakly supports the hypothesis that the Internet is a big factor in the decline of religion, as it seems to influence younger generations more than older generations.



I suspect this, too.

again, you are spewing forth conjecture based on 0 evidence.

Pew Forum: A Portrait of Mormons in the U.S. -- Article posted July 24 2009

Mormons tend to be slightly younger than the general population. Two-thirds (66%) are under age 50, compared with 59% of the public as a whole. Only two major U.S. religious traditions (Hinduism and Islam) and the religiously unaffiliated have populations younger than Mormons. At the other end of the age spectrum, by contrast, are mainline Protestants and Jews. Among each of these groups, half (51%) are 50 or older.

Next time, look at the data before you embarrass yourself.

 

[Copernicus]

again, you are spewing forth conjecture based on 0 evidence.

I don't know about your background. I admit that I am not professionally qualified to analyze the statistical results. However, my opinion is based on my experiences, and I have had a little experience with the use of statistics to create false impressions. So I am highly skeptical of charts that may represent a skewing of the data.

Pew Forum: A Portrait of Mormons in the U.S. -- Article posted July 24 2009

Thanks for the reference. The Pew Forum specializes in religious surveys. Although they do tend to have a religious bias, they seem to make every effort to be objective.

Mormons tend to be slightly younger than the general population. Two-thirds (66%) are under age 50, compared with 59% of the public as a whole.

But this tells us nothing about their growth relative to the population as a whole. For example, it does not take into account apostate Mormons who identify themselves as Mormons. The two factors that seem to be at play here are: 1) Mormons tend to have more children than those of other faiths, and children are always counted as members of the religion. 2) Mormonism is strongly evangelical, which means that it brings in a lot of converts. This ignores the point made in the article that the religion seems to generate a lot of apostates, as well.

...Only two major U.S. religious traditions (Hinduism and Islam) and the religiously unaffiliated have populations younger than Mormons. At the other end of the age spectrum, by contrast, are mainline Protestants and Jews. Among each of these groups, half (51%) are 50 or older.

Again, the average number of children in families of those religions may be a factor, and Islam is also strongly evangelical. I can believe that the overall population of self-described mainline Protestants and Jews is declining more rapidly than Mormonism.

Next time, look at the data before you embarrass yourself.

Let's try to keep it civil, ok? I don't think that you are looking at the data objectively. The newspaper article that criticized public statistics on the growth of Mormonism made some good points that you have not addressed--e.g. the growth in the apostate population.

 

[madhatter85]

Let's try to keep it civil, ok? I don't think that you are looking at the data objectively. The newspaper article that criticized public statistics on the growth of Mormonism made some good points that you have not addressed--e.g. the growth in the apostate population.

Let me pose something to you. Say you are a cattle farmer, and you have 1000 head. when it comes time to bring them in for the night and you find that 5 of them are missing and you only have 995 in the corral. do you then just only say you have 995 head? No, you don't you still have 1000 head and until you know what happened to them.

The same is with adherents in the LDS church, there is every effort made to re-activate wayward members. Membership is membership which means at one time they believed the gospel to be true enough to make a baptismal commitment. most wayward members don't come to church because of sin and they know better but don't want to stop or feel to ashamed to go to church. It has nothing to do with belief. But we are still going to count those who may have lost their way until we know there is no chance of return for them.

None of the membership demographics include those who have been excommunicated or names removed from the records.

as for the graph showing growth, this growth is in spite of those members who apostatize. Say you have 1000 members at the end of year 1. Then during year 2, 200 members leave and you gain 500 new members. At the end of year two your membership has reached 1300; showing a growth of 30% in one year. That is how membership growth in the LDS church is counted.

 

[fantome profane]

Let me pose something to you. Say you are a cattle farmer, and you have 1000 head. when it comes time to bring them in for the night and you find that 5 of them are missing and you only have 995 in the corral. do you then just only say you have 995 head? No, you don't you still have 1000 head and until you know what happened to them.

People are not cows. The Mormon Church does not own people just because they were once Mormons. Your analogy is not only invalid it is disgusting.

 

[madhatter85]

People are not cows. The Mormon Church does not own people just because they were once Mormons. Your analogy is not only invalid it is disgusting.

It is not owning them, nobody "owns" another. the analogy works because it's the same as the one about Christ and his sheep.

Until they are excommunicated or their records are removed by request, we count them as members because we are held accountable for doing all we can to help those who are in need.

 

[gnomon]

It is not owning them, nobody "owns" another. the analogy works because it's the same as the one about Christ and his sheep.

Until they are excommunicated or their records are removed by request, we count them as members because we are held accountable for doing all we can to help those who are in need.

Isn't this sort of like saying that Brett Favre is still a Packer.

 

[Copernicus]

Let me pose something to you. Say you are a cattle farmer, and you have 1000 head. when it comes time to bring them in for the night and you find that 5 of them are missing and you only have 995 in the corral. do you then just only say you have 995 head? No, you don't you still have 1000 head and until you know what happened to them.

To be honest, from a statistical point of view, you would only have 995 until you found the other 5 head. Data is data. If you tried to sell cattle that you were not actually in possession of, you would be committing fraud, no matter how much you might wish to claim ownership of that number. And people are not cattle. Apostasy is a matter of personal conscience. Cattle, by law, are not permitted to leave their owners. People are permitted to leave their churches (or ought to be).

The same is with adherents in the LDS church, there is every effort made to re-activate wayward members. Membership is membership which means at one time they believed the gospel to be true enough to make a baptismal commitment. most wayward members don't come to church because of sin and they know better but don't want to stop or feel to ashamed to go to church. It has nothing to do with belief. But we are still going to count those who may have lost their way until we know there is no chance of return for them.

Are you claiming that those religions that lose their members to Mormonism are entitled to the same consideration? Are you willing to erase those people from your rolls? It is this kind of juggling of statistics that diminishes credibility, and that was one of Peggy Fletcher Stack's points in her Salt Lake City Tribune article Keeping members a challenge for the LDS church.

None of the membership demographics include those who have been excommunicated or names removed from the records.

Not everyone who quits the LDS church gets official leave to do so.

as for the graph showing growth, this growth is in spite of those members who apostatize. Say you have 1000 members at the end of year 1. Then during year 2, 200 members leave and you gain 500 new members. At the end of year two your membership has reached 1300; showing a growth of 30% in one year. That is how membership growth in the LDS church is counted.

How do you know that? The question is how you count Mormons in any given year, not whether the ones on the rolls actually show up in church (which according to Stack do not) or have since dropped away from the church.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Let me pose something to you. Say you are a cattle farmer, and you have 1000 head. when it comes time to bring them in for the night and you find that 5 of them are missing and you only have 995 in the corral. do you then just only say you have 995 head? No, you don't you still have 1000 head and until you know what happened to them.

I agree with fantome profane. It's a pretty demeaning analogy.

In any case, when you and every other religion take this same approach, many people end up being counted more than once. I have a feeling that if you took the number of members every religion claimed and added them all up, you'd have a number that was larger than the population of the Earth. This would indicate a problem with your method.

The same is with adherents in the LDS church, there is every effort made to re-activate wayward members.

But until you do, there's no reason to "claim" people who haven't given a fig about the LDS Church for decades.

Membership is membership which means at one time they believed the gospel to be true enough to make a baptismal commitment.

Or it means they were children aged 8 or less of parents who were members, according to that source I found.

However, just going with your "baptismal commitment" thing: say a Mormon leaves the church, decides to become a Catholic, gets baptized and confirmed into the Catholic Church, and never bothers to let the LDS Church know. Do you really think that they have a greater commitment to the LDS Church than they do to any other?

most wayward members don't come to church because of sin and they know better but don't want to stop or feel to ashamed to go to church. It has nothing to do with belief. But we are still going to count those who may have lost their way until we know there is no chance of return for them.

Hmm.

Analogy time: just out of school, I decided to join a professional society. After a year, I decided that I hadn't got enough out of it to make it worthwhile to renew, so I let my membership lapse.

The society didn't give up on me - they kept sending me mailings for years after. They're probably still sending mailings to my old address. However, this doesn't make me a member by any stretch of the imagination. I stopped being a member when I stopped having anything to do with the society.

None of the membership demographics include those who have been excommunicated or names removed from the records.

Then LDS membership demographics are not an accurate source of information about the demographics of Mormons.

as for the graph showing growth, this growth is in spite of those members who apostatize. Say you have 1000 members at the end of year 1. Then during year 2, 200 members leave and you gain 500 new members. At the end of year two your membership has reached 1300; showing a growth of 30% in one year. That is how membership growth in the LDS church is counted.

Too bad this is all supposition, since you have no data to back up your assumptions about apostasy rates.

 

[fantome profane]

It is not owning them, nobody "owns" another. the analogy works because it's the same as the one about Christ and his sheep.

People are not sheep either. I find the sheep analogy just as invalid but Jesus was not counting people to make a claim of demographic superiority.

Until they are excommunicated or their records are removed by request, we count them as members because we are held accountable for doing all we can to help those who are in need.

That makes no sense. Even if you feel the need to help these people that does not make these people Mormon.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Isn't this sort of like saying that Brett Favre is still a Packer.

Brett Favre was never a Packer. He's always played for Hancock North Central High School.

 

[Smoke]

Are you claiming that those religions that lose their members to Mormonism are entitled to the same consideration? Are you willing to erase those people from your rolls? It is this kind of juggling of statistics that diminishes credibility, and that was one of Peggy Fletcher Stack's points in her Salt Lake City Tribune article Keeping members a challenge for the LDS church.

I wonder how many people there are who are counted as members of two or more religions and aren't active in either?

For instance, if I'm a baptized Catholic and convert to Mormonism for a while, then get disenchanted and quit going to church altogether, would I still be counted by both the Catholics and the Mormons?

Statistics on baptized members may be accurate as far as they go, but it seems to me that statistics on church attendance would give a far more accurate picture of the number of active adherents to any given church.

 

[Smoke]

Brett Favre was never a Packer.

He couldn't have been a true Packer. Once saved, always saved.

 

[Beaudreaux]

I agree with fantome profane. It's a pretty demeaning analogy.

The cattle analogy aside, I've always found the Christian sheep analogy to be even more offensive. Sheep are monumentally stupid and incapable of surviving in the wild on their own. And Christians liken themselves to sheep????

 

[RamaRaksha]

Getting back to the original thread, I don't see anything that is brilliant in Abrahamic religions, nothing groundbreaking. Ask a child what happens to a bad person, she will say he will go to a bad place and vice versa, these religions are not very complicated.

They descended into cults when they turned god into a proselytizer, only my people can go into heaven, rest go to hell bit.

Add that to god can only be a man, earth is 5,000 years old, no evolution, heaven & hell concepts, begging for mercy from a king god, and we can see the decline. I am a bit surprised though the 77% number seems a bit high.

I am biased of course but Hinduism, Buddhism are groundbreaking a bit. Karma & Rebirth teaches us to be accountable for our actions. In the age when men dominated the world, Hinduism taught that God can be female. It taught Hindus to practice democracy when they let religions like Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and the like to break away from the majority and practice their religion without any threats. The same founders of other religions in Europe and muslim lands were hacked to death by the death squads sent by the church.

 

[sonofskeptish]

Q: Why do you think christianity is on the decline and atheism is on the rise?

Translation:
Why do you think delusion/denial is on the decline, and reality/common sense is on the rise?

A: It's a better world view

 

[Kathryn]

First of all, I want to say that I haven't even read any of the posts on this thread yet, other than the OP. Immediately I was struck by several points (forgive me if I'm repeating others on these):

1. The article is hardly unbiased, since it appeared in "Modern Enlightenment - Embracing Good in a World Without God" which is an atheist publication.

2. The author even admits (and I quote):
"I should point out that I’m no authority on the subject. I have a bachelor’s degree in Philosophy and spend a LOT of time thinking about this stuff, but I’m no more expert than you. I’m just a guy hoping the world will change for the better and who wants to talk about it online."

So forgive me if I'm not blown away by the scholarly integrity (or lack thereof) of the OP's source.

Here's an interesting article from Foreign Policy, which is operated by Slate/Washington Post/Newsweek - hardly what you would call conservative organizations, outlining the growths of various religions worldwide:

Foreign Policy: The List: The World’s Fastest-Growing Religions

Speaking of the US separately, I think it's obvious that traditional, mainstream Christianity is on the decline, though 76% of the population of the US considers themselves Christian. 62% of the population of the US are members of a church. The Roman Catholic Church is the largest single denomination, and the US holds the fourth largest group of Catholics in the world, after only Brazil, Mexico and the Phillipines.

The 2004 survey of religion and politics in the United States[6] identified the Evangelical percentage of the population at 26.3%; while Roman Catholics are 22% and Mainline Protestants make up 16%. In the 2007 Statistical Abstract of the United States, the figures for these same groups are 28.6% (Evangelical), 24.5% (Roman Catholics), and 13.9% (Mainline Protestant.) The latter figures are based on a 2001 study of the self-described religious identification of the adult population for 1990 and 2001 from the Graduate School and University Center at the City University of New York.[7]

Christianity in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians (76%), while non-Christian religions (including Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, and others) collectively make up about 4% of the adult population.[3] Another 15% of the adult population identified as having no religious affiliation.[4] According to the American Religious Identification Survey, religious belief varies considerably across the country: 59% of Americans living in Western states (the "Unchurched Belt") report a belief in God, yet in the South (the "Bible Belt") the figure is as high as 86%.[5][6]

A 2006 CBS News Poll of 899 U.S. adults found that 82% of those surveyed believed in God, while 9% believed in "some other universal spirit or higher power", 8% believed in neither, and 1% were unsure.
A 2004 Newsweek Poll of 1,009 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 82% of those surveyed believed that Jesus was God or the Son of God.
A 2000 Newsweek Poll of 752 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God, while 4% did not and 2% were unsure.
A 1998 Harris Poll of 1,011 U.S. adults found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God.

Religion in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I believe that the reason for the slight, though relevant decline in Christianity in the US has a lot of causes - not all of which are positive or indicative of positive trends. In fact, I would assert that the opposite is true - and that American Christians themselves are largely at fault for the decline.

We've gotten far, far away from the principles of religious freedom that this country was founded on, and moderate Christians are often overshadowed and overwhelmed by the strident voices of the minority of fundamentalists - as is often the case and not only for Christians.

At the same time, we've also gotten far, far away from the principles of limited government that this country was founded on. This has been a bad combination - more and more centralized government and more and more fundamentalist voices.

Now is the time for sincere Christians who are trying to emulate the life of Christ in their own lives, to re-evaluate what our duties are to God, family and country - and to apply those principles in our lives and in our VOTES.

We cannot continue to allow fundamentalists to represent the totality of American Christianity. The problem is that we haven't spoken up as we should have been. This is due in part because when we identify ourselves as Christians, other factions insist on labeling us as right wing fundamentalists - when in reality we span the scope of American types and political parties.

We have not set a good example for our children - who rightly call us hypocrites. Why would they want to be affiliated with American Christianity when we've given them no strong leadership, and weak examples of pseudo-Christianity.

American Christians - accept your share of the blame. Then pull yourself up by your bootstraps (along with me) and educate yourself about the principles of Christianity, starting with Jesus' words, "Love God and love your neighbor as yourself." Apply these principles to your lives, and vote accordingly. Give your children an example of true servant leadership and humility - live the Beatitudes.

3"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of God.
10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.


Take our faith back - Fundamentalists no more represent our Christian faith than do Islamic fundamentalists - or atheist dictators.



Type: Total: US% Evangelical:61,374,72840.1%Mainline Protestant:18,168,07311.9%Orthodox:5,504,2313.6%Roman Catholic:67,820,83344.3%

 

[Beaudreaux]

First of all, I want to say that I haven't even read any of the posts on this thread yet, other than the OP. Immediately I was struck by several points (forgive me if I'm repeating others on these):

1. The article is hardly unbiased, since it appeared in "Modern Enlightenment - Embracing Good in a World Without God" which is an atheist publication.

2. The author even admits (and I quote):
"I should point out that I’m no authority on the subject. I have a bachelor’s degree in Philosophy and spend a LOT of time thinking about this stuff, but I’m no more expert than you. I’m just a guy hoping the world will change for the better and who wants to talk about it online."

So forgive me if I'm not blown away by the scholarly integrity (or lack thereof) of the OP's source.

Hi Kathryn,

Modern Enlightenment is my blog. I wrote that article. It is based on a study done by people who DO know what they're doing. Here is a paragraph from my post that cites the source.

In the Spring of 2009, Trinity College in Hartford, CT published the results of their American Religious Identification Survey. The survey shows that, since 1990, the number of Americans identifying themselves as Christians has dropped from 86 percent to 77 percent. During that same time period, atheists were the only group whose numbers grew in every state, from 8 percent in 1990 to 15% in 2008 nationally. Concomitantly, books promoting a rejection of religion and embracing humanist ideals have been best sellers (The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason, Letter to a Christian Nation, The God Delusion) and local and national atheist organizations have flourished.

I hope that clears things up.

 

[Kathryn]

I never doubted or challenged your STATISTICS. They are everywhere to be found online. In fact, I included in my post similar statistics from other sources.

What I said was that the author of the article quoted (you) can hardly be called objective or unbiased as to the reasons WHY Christianity has taken a slight dip in percentage of the US population.

I stand by that assertion.

 

[Gabethewiking]

First of all, I want to say that I haven't even read any of the posts on this thread yet, other than the OP. Immediately I was struck by several points (forgive me if I'm repeating others on these):

1. The article is hardly unbiased, since it appeared in "Modern Enlightenment - Embracing Good in a World Without God" which is an atheist publication.

2. The author even admits (and I quote):
"I should point out that I’m no authority on the subject. I have a bachelor’s degree in Philosophy and spend a LOT of time thinking about this stuff, but I’m no more expert than you. I’m just a guy hoping the world will change for the better and who wants to talk about it online."

So forgive me if I'm not blown away by the scholarly integrity (or lack thereof) of the OP's source.

Here's an interesting article from Foreign Policy, which is operated by Slate/Washington Post/Newsweek - hardly what you would call conservative organizations, outlining the growths of various religions worldwide:

Foreign Policy: The List: The World’s Fastest-Growing Religions

Speaking of the US separately, I think it's obvious that traditional, mainstream Christianity is on the decline, though 76% of the population of the US considers themselves Christian. 62% of the population of the US are members of a church. The Roman Catholic Church is the largest single denomination, and the US holds the fourth largest group of Catholics in the world, after only Brazil, Mexico and the Phillipines.

The 2004 survey of religion and politics in the United States[6] identified the Evangelical percentage of the population at 26.3%; while Roman Catholics are 22% and Mainline Protestants make up 16%. In the 2007 Statistical Abstract of the United States, the figures for these same groups are 28.6% (Evangelical), 24.5% (Roman Catholics), and 13.9% (Mainline Protestant.) The latter figures are based on a 2001 study of the self-described religious identification of the adult population for 1990 and 2001 from the Graduate School and University Center at the City University of New York.[7]

Christianity in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians (76%), while non-Christian religions (including Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, and others) collectively make up about 4% of the adult population.[3] Another 15% of the adult population identified as having no religious affiliation.[4] According to the American Religious Identification Survey, religious belief varies considerably across the country: 59% of Americans living in Western states (the "Unchurched Belt") report a belief in God, yet in the South (the "Bible Belt") the figure is as high as 86%.[5][6]

A 2006 CBS News Poll of 899 U.S. adults found that 82% of those surveyed believed in God, while 9% believed in "some other universal spirit or higher power", 8% believed in neither, and 1% were unsure.
A 2004 Newsweek Poll of 1,009 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 82% of those surveyed believed that Jesus was God or the Son of God.
A 2000 Newsweek Poll of 752 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God, while 4% did not and 2% were unsure.
A 1998 Harris Poll of 1,011 U.S. adults found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God.

Religion in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I believe that the reason for the slight, though relevant decline in Christianity in the US has a lot of causes - not all of which are positive or indicative of positive trends. In fact, I would assert that the opposite is true - and that American Christians themselves are largely at fault for the decline.

We've gotten far, far away from the principles of religious freedom that this country was founded on, and moderate Christians are often overshadowed and overwhelmed by the strident voices of the minority of fundamentalists - as is often the case and not only for Christians.

At the same time, we've also gotten far, far away from the principles of limited government that this country was founded on. This has been a bad combination - more and more centralized government and more and more fundamentalist voices.

Now is the time for sincere Christians who are trying to emulate the life of Christ in their own lives, to re-evaluate what our duties are to God, family and country - and to apply those principles in our lives and in our VOTES.

We cannot continue to allow fundamentalists to represent the totality of American Christianity. The problem is that we haven't spoken up as we should have been. This is due in part because when we identify ourselves as Christians, other factions insist on labeling us as right wing fundamentalists - when in reality we span the scope of American types and political parties.

We have not set a good example for our children - who rightly call us hypocrites. Why would they want to be affiliated with American Christianity when we've given them no strong leadership, and weak examples of pseudo-Christianity.

American Christians - accept your share of the blame. Then pull yourself up by your bootstraps (along with me) and educate yourself about the principles of Christianity, starting with Jesus' words, "Love God and love your neighbor as yourself." Apply these principles to your lives, and vote accordingly. Give your children an example of true servant leadership and humility - live the Beatitudes.

3"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of God.
10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.


Take our faith back - Fundamentalists no more represent our Christian faith than do Islamic fundamentalists - or atheist dictators.



Type: Total: US% Evangelical:61,374,72840.1%Mainline Protestant:18,168,07311.9%Orthodox:5,504,2313.6%Roman Catholic:67,820,83344.3%

Hi Kathryn.

Could you tell me why the more secular a people are, the better society they have created/live in? The more religion controlls education, hospitals, research, tne more backwards they become. We Americans are famous for our backwards schools 'teaching' Creationism instead of facts whiles Europeans, Australians, Kiwis and Japanese are sitting there with generally a education related to reality.

Why are these societies that accept reality better off then superstitious societies like the U.S, Iraq or Iran? Do you have explanation for this?