Kosmin and Lachman wrote a book that is titled "One Nation Under God." Billy Graham endorses the book, but I do not have any idea why. The authors provide lots of documented research that shows that in the U.S., the primary factors that influence religious beliefs are geography, family, race, ethnicity, gender, and age. Those factors are entirely secular, and do not indicate that God has anything to do with the spread of Christianity in the U.S. It is reasonable to conclude that the Gospel message has always been spread entirely by human effort according to the prevailing inefficient means of communication, transportation, printing and translation of a given time period.
In the first century, God played favorites and made sure that no one who live far away from Palestine would hear the Gospel message. He also made sure genetically that a much higher percentage of women in the U.S. would be Christians than men. Women are more emotional than men are, so it is quite natural that they are more likely to become Christians than men are. If the reverse was the case, it would still be discrimination on God's part. God also made sure genetically that elderly people would be much less willing to change their worldviews than younger people. God is very discriminatory. Discrimination is not a good thing.
It is quite odd that there is not any credible evidence that God has ever personally told one single person about the Gospel message, and yet he supposedly wants Christians to tell people about it. This indicates that the spread of the Gospel message has never actually been of much importance to God.
If the universe is naturalistic, all tangible benefits would be distributed indiscriminately according to the laws of physics without any regard for a person's needs, worldview or requests. If God exists, it is quite odd that he would make it appear to millions of people that he does not exist by mimicking a naturalistic distribution of tangible benefits, especially considering the supposed fact that Jesus went out his way to make sure that people believed that God is able to discriminately distribute tangible benefits.
If the Bible didn't say that God will send believers to heaven, Christians would reject the same quality of evidence they accept now. Why is that? Since they trust the Bible now, they ought to trust it even if the eventual outcome did not promise to reward them with a comfortable eternal life. Christians are not nearly as interested in what the evidence IS as they are interested in what the evidence PROMISES. That is because of their emotional perceived self interest. Christians will only accept an outcome that is favorable to them. The same is true regarding many non-Christian theists.
It certainly wouldn't be as widespread today as it is if it didn't have some major redeeming qualities. (Get it? Redeeming? I kill me.) :sorry1:
